A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
iSteve Blog
Why Did We Do This to Ourselves?

Screenshot 2014-07-02 01.48.30

From the National Journal:

School Is Over for the Summer. So Is the Era of Majority White U.S. Public Schools.

When schools reopen this fall, demographic changes will have tipped the balance to nonwhite students.

Why did we do this to ourselves? The best excuse is that American elites did this to America in a fit of absentmindedness.

Christopher Caldwell famously said:

“One moves swiftly and imperceptibly from a world in which affirmative action can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too weak to a world in which it can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too strong.”

But, there is also — and in this case perhaps more significant — the massive dereliction of duty by elites. The more the evidence piles up that they ought to apologize to us, the more they will make it dogma, punishing expressions of skepticism with social, career, and legal penalties, that this was a Great Idea. They went and replaced boring vanilla white bread student bodies with vibrant diversity and we ought to get down on our knees and thank them for it everyday.

Hide 99 Comments

99 Comments to "Why did we do this to ourselves?"

  1. Lloyd Wong says:

    When schools reopen this fall, demographic changes will have tipped the balance to nonwhite students.
    ———————-

    ^^So what? Demographics happen, hard as this is for liberals to believe. In various eras and places of American history, demographics also ousted sturdy WASP stock and replaced them with violent, oft drunken Irish Catholics, but America survived. Populations are not static they change. Get over it liberals. In any event, white people are already safely ensconced in overall white majority schools, or within mixed schools, on tracks that are heavily white. So why all the whining and crying from liberals?

    Christopher Caldwell famously said:
    “One moves swiftly and imperceptibly from a world in which affirmative action can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too weak to a world in which it can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too strong.”
    —————————-
    ^^Indeed, and that may be because the main beneficiaries of Affirmative action are white women.

  2. BurplesonAFB says:

    I believe the question becomes more clear when we specify the “we” who has coup’d “ourselves”

  3. Skyislander says:Website

    Somewhat misleading since whole bunch of Hispanics are white or substantially white.

    As for yellows, they better study very hard and make lots of money and pay lots of taxes to take care of the retiring boomers.

  4. Colmainen says:

    >The more the evidence piles up that they ought to apologize to us

    Apologize and that’s it?

    Nayyyy.

    Either they have to send their sprogs to study with all the vibrants (no transfers allowed for any reason) for 12 years, or drive out the vibrants with force.

    That’s only real ‘apology’ allowable.

  5. M_Young says:

    ” Populations are not static they change. Get over it liberals. ”

    Had we maintained the sensible immigration policy of pre 1965 America, it would not have changed in the same direction, or as dramatically. And the US would be better off for it, and whites in the US would be much better off.

  6. Lloyd Wong says:

    When schools reopen this fall, demographic changes will have tipped the balance to nonwhite students.
    ———————-

    ^^Hardly an earth-shattering crisis. Demographics happen, hard as this is for liberals to believe. In various eras and places of American history, demographics also ousted sturdy WASP stock and replaced them with violent, oft drunken Irish Catholics, but America survived. Populations are not static they change. In any event, white people are already safely ensconced in overall white majority schools, or within mixed schools, on tracks that are heavily white.

    Christopher Caldwell famously said:
    “One moves swiftly and imperceptibly from a world in which affirmative action can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too weak to a world in which it can’t be ended because its beneficiaries are too strong.”
    —————————-
    ^^Indeed, and that may be because the main beneficiaries of Affirmative action are white women.

    They went and replaced boring vanilla white bread student bodies with vibrant diversity and we ought to get down on our knees and thank them for it everyday.
    ———————–
    ^Actually this is only partially the case. There has always been diversity within school districts. The segregated ones had their black, yellow and brown schools and their white schools -from California to Mississippi- all within single districts. Whites benefited nicely at times – pocketing taxes paid by the minorities and fobbing them off with inferior facilities. When desegregation came, numerous segregated schools were closed, faculties fired or downgraded, allowing onies spent and slots once located in those institutions to be transferred to more centralized white control/ Even more bountiful, the 1960s saw more federal funding put in the grasp of white run school boards, including “magnet school” funding where minority numbers were deliberately held DOWN in favor of whites (See Divided We Fall, 2013, by Sarah Garland). Far from “diversity” being a vale of tears, the white educational establishment made out quite handsomely via increased federal funding to education in the 1960s. As Thomas Sowell once famously observed- “the poor are a goldmine” for allegedly “concerned” to exploit for their own self-serving agendas.

    But even within this pattern there were always mixed schools in America. In California for example as far back as the 19th century, Asian, Indian, Black and White kids attended the same schools in some districts. Indeed, it is documented that white teachers often commented favorably on Asian discipline and work, compared to the whites. This was of course before California went on its anti-Asian binge, including mass murder of innocent Chinese by white mobs. Men like Jackie Robinson and hard-nosed football later tough-guy actor Woody Strode are products of an integrated California education system, as is Jesse Owens who won glory for the US at the Olympics. Schools with different ethnicities are nothing new in America, and those with all white groups have themselves produced massive violence, lack of work ethic, low standards etc. As Michael Barone shows on this excellent book (2001) The New Americans, the white Irish themselves produced crime rates exceeding Black Americans in some eras, and had their own negative version of “acting white”- disparaging those Irish students that achieved in school.

  7. Lloyd Wong says:

    PS Owens was out of Ohio State

  8. Somewhat misleading since whole bunch of Hispanics are white or substantially white.

    There are A LOT of Latinos in Atlanta, and I’d say practically all of them are indigenous or mestizo. I’ve met exactly three conquistador-Americans in the past 25 years.

    If anything, I’d say the new arrivals are getting shorter and darker.

  9. M_Young says:

    Lloyd Wong, whites have never been a minority in the US. Even in California, in 1970, “Hispanics” only constituted 12% of the state, and Asians much less than that.

    This is new territory. It is bad territory for whites. It is likely bad territory even for the polity as a whole. There was no reason for it. Whites must now organize to prevent our position from slipping any further than it has to.

  10. fnn says:

    The old WASP ruling elite didn’t put up much of a fight and was replaced:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Authoritarian_Personality#Responses

    …Some observers have criticized what they saw as a strongly politicized agenda to The Authoritarian Personality. Social critic Christopher Lasch[26] argued that by equating mental health with left-wing politics and associating right-wing politics with an invented “authoritarian” pathology, the book’s goal was to eliminate antisemitism by “subjecting the American people to what amounted to collective psychotherapy—by treating them as inmates of an insane asylum.” Similarly, Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek wrote, “It is precisely the kind of group loyalty, respect for tradition, and consciousness of differences central to Jewish identity, however, that Horkheimer and Adorno described as mental illness in Gentiles. These writers adopted what eventually became a favorite Soviet tactic against dissidents: anyone whose political views differed from theirs was insane. […] Christian self-denial, and especially sexual repression, caused hatred of the Jews [according to Adorno et al.].”[27]

    The Authoritarian Personality remains widely cited in the social sciences and continues to inspire research interest today.[28]

  11. syon says:

    Lloyd Wong:”^^So what? Demographics happen, hard as this is for liberals to believe.”

    Incorrect. Demographic change does not just happen. Demographic change occurs because of policy decisions (cf, for example, the decision to not guard America’s borders)

    LW:”In various eras and places of American history, demographics”

    Demographics do not do anything; demographics are the result of policy.

    LW:”also ousted sturdy WASP stock and replaced them with violent, oft drunken Irish Catholics, but America survived.”

    Sure, but was America better off with all those Irish? No.

    LW:”Populations are not static they change.”

    And our current population changes are due to choices that our elites have made for us.

    LW:” Get over it liberals. In any event, white people are already safely ensconced in overall white majority schools, or within mixed schools, on tracks that are heavily white. So why all the whining and crying from liberals?”

    What liberals are you referring to?

  12. syon says:

    fnn:”The old WASP ruling elite didn’t put up much of a fight and was replaced:”

    No, the WASP elite made common cause with the Jewish elite.

  13. Uniter says:

    It’s “divide and rule,” Steve. As old as the Roman Empire, and probably a lot older.

    What the so-called “elites” don’t realize that that after they get done destroying America and the West, there won’t be much left to rule and there won’t be much wealth to steal.

  14. The Z Blog says:Website

    I’m fond of saying that we have become a different type of Iran: http://tinyurl.com/ojbhd8m

    Put a cult in charge and very weird outcomes are inevitable.

  15. syon says:

    LW:”But even within this pattern there were always mixed schools in America. In California for example as far back as the 19th century, Asian, Indian, Black and White kids attended the same schools in some districts. Indeed, it is documented that white teachers often commented favorably on Asian discipline and work, compared to the whites.”

    Which means what?Why should I want Asians in America, regardless of how well behaved they are?

    LW:”This was of course before California went on its anti-Asian binge, including mass murder of innocent Chinese by white mobs. ”

    And, of course, that violence would never have occurred if Asians had never been allowed to immigrate to the USA in the first place.

    LW:”Men like Jackie Robinson and hard-nosed football later tough-guy actor Woody Strode are products of an integrated California education system, as is Jesse Owens who won glory for the US at the Olympics.”

    And this means……

    LW:” Schools with different ethnicities are nothing new in America, and those with all white groups have themselves produced massive violence, lack of work ethic, low standards etc.”

    This being the case, why should we import more violent, low-achieving people from Latin America? We have plenty of violent, low-achieving people already.

    LW:”As Michael Barone shows on this excellent book (2001) The New Americans,”

    A truly awful book. Barone simply cannot get past Ellis Island Nostalgia.

    LW:” the white Irish themselves produced crime rates exceeding Black Americans in some eras, and had their own negative version of “acting white”- disparaging those Irish students that achieved in school.”

    Further evidence for how America would have been better off without the Catholic Irish.

  16. Jojo says:

    Loyd….is ethnic change ‘just happening’ in China?

    …Didn’t think so.

    Sure, there was always a light sprinkling of minorities in various regions of America, but the simple fact is, it was always a white, European, western country. There are lots of attempts to overstate the impact of minorities, but it’s bunk.

  17. El Duke says:

    Even if the majority of public school students are non white, the vast majority of white students go to schools that are mostly white. Urban districts have a severe shortage of white students to add diversity to their schools.

    In my suburban district, the racial population isn’t far from public schools in the 1950′s. Unless you count Asians as diversity. There are exceptions, but after tracking, they round to zero.

    The nation’s elites have given up caring, because they are insulated from any negative consequences.

  18. Jefferson says:

    “Somewhat misleading since whole bunch of Hispanics are white or substantially white.”

    I doubt that very much since the vast majority of Hispanics entering the U.S come from Latin America’s poorest lower classes. And White people do not make up a significantly sizable percentage of Latin America’s poorest citizens.

    How many Hispanic maids and Hispanic nannies do you see that look like Cate Blanchett for example ? The Hispanic maids I see cleaning the rooms at The Holiday Inn for example tend to be of the dark skin type.

  19. Rob says:

    It is precisely the kind of group loyalty, respect for tradition, and consciousness of differences central to Jewish identity, however, that Horkheimer and Adorno described as mental illness in Gentiles.

    Noticing race regarded as mental illness in England?

  20. fnn says:

    …the WASP elite made common cause with the Jewish elite.

    Not Hamilton Fish V or Kingman Brewster, Sr:

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2009/08/paul-gottfried-hates-wasp-people.html

    …Brewster [Sr.], described by one acquaintance as “a crustacean McKinleyite Republican,” entertained many members of Congress at his Catoctin retreat. [. . .] Brewster’s politics, however, were too extreme to be openly expressed in the mainstream GOP. His anti-Communism was so rabid and sweeping that his son remembered that “if I were considerate enough to visit him in Washington with a friend whose parents were somehow associated with the Roosevelt administration, it was natural that he should refer quite regularly to my ‘Communist friends.’” [. . .] Brewster’s political opinions and his business contacts with Germany led the FBI to start a file on him. While various information testified that he admired the Nazi system and claimed to have met personally with Hitler on visits to Germany, the FBI’s investigation revealed little aside from the fact that “BREWSTER possessed a great hatred for Jews and regarded them with suspicion at all times.”

    Brewster’s views on race and religion were perhaps most fully expressed in the works of his good friend the eugenicist Lothrop Stoddard, who believed that Anglo-Saxon civilization and America’s ancestral purity were under threat from inferior races. Stoddard was, like Brewster, a Harvard Law School graduate and sometime resident of Brookline, Massachusetts. (Brookline was, not coincidentally, the location of the nation’s first country club.) Stoddard’s works included evocative titles such as The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy and The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace of the Under-Man.

    American society, according to Brewster and Stoddard, was a racial aristocracy under threat [. . .] Many upper-class East Coast gentlemen shared the view that snobbery and racial exclusion were necessary to preserve their elite culture, even if they stopped short of Stoddard’s conclusion that “race cleansing is the obvious starting-point for race betterment.” Although Brewster’s virulent racial opinions were welcome in polite society, most of his peers expressed themselves in more decorous terms. [. . .] The son detested his father’s fascism and ultraconservatism, and so kept some distance. [. . .]

    Kingman Sr.s paranoid racism, extreme anticommunism, and unbridled hatred of Franklin Roosevelt reflected an entire class’s inability to cope with drastic change.

    Some members of Kingman Jr.’s generation adopted the reactionary outlook of their fathers. Others turned against their class and toward communism and other radical philosophies. But Brewster and his cohorts in the liberal establishment would seek to change in order to preserve, in FDR’s well-known formulation.

  21. Unknown says:

    Incompetence, misguidedness, a sinister hidden agenda, who knows? In most places public education has become a sinkhole. It’s one of those things that weigh heavily against family formation for white couples. They have to pay ridiculous real estate taxes to support a system they can’t use then have to pay out of pocket for some other arrangement for their own children. Oftentimes people are forced to move a few times just because of the education issue, as well as limiting family size since some feel they can’t afford more. Whites pay through the nose for everything as well as subsidizing the ever more massive and expanding non-white population.

  22. Cloudcastler says:

    “I doubt that very much since the vast majority of Hispanics entering the U.S come from Latin America’s poorest lower classes.”

    Don’t worry. Fred Reed assures us that they are geniuses on the cusp of a Renaissanchez.

  23. nano says:

    As distorting the supply and demand of labor in their favor has made the 1% vastly richer since 1965 I’d say prima facie active betrayal is far more likely a motive.

    1) where a policy greatly benefits a minority and disbenefits a majority but where the benefit to individuals of the minority is much larger than the disbenefit to the individuals of the majority then that policy will get more pressure from the minority than the majority

    2) in a well-functioning democracy the inertia of the majority should prevent the policy however in a democracy where political funding becomes critical then policies that benefit well-funded minorities will predominate

    3) this doesn’t just apply to immigration, once a political system decays to the point where policy is decided by well-funded minorities in their own interest then almost every decision will be a bad one from the point of view of the country as a whole.

  24. Hank says:

    You’re right mr Lloyd Wong, whites overall juat dont perform when compared to asians. They also are prone to barbarity against their ethnic betters.

    It’s why white people immigrate in such large numbers to better run asian nations, while back in their home countries they are brought down by the Irish who are no different from blacks.

  25. “Don’t worry. Fred Reed assures us that they are geniuses on the cusp of a Renaissanchez.”

    Aw, don’t be so hard on ol’ Fred. He’s blind in one eye and although he won’t say so, he’s probably dependent on Violeta for an awful lot. Not to mention the occasional roll in the hay if and when he can get his hands on some Viagra.

  26. Skyislander says:Website

    “I doubt that very much since the vast majority of Hispanics entering the U.S come from Latin America’s poorest lower classes.”

    Yes, many are not white. But many are at least noticeably part white.

  27. lol, more Frankfurt School-invoking commenters.

    you’ll notice, guys, that Steve isn’t very interested in Horkheimer and Adorno, precisely because they were a symptom rather than a cause

  28. Skyislander says:Website

    “Why Did We Do This to Ourselves?”

    It certainly wasn’t me as I’m the only true race-ist.

  29. iSteveFan says:

    I see this demographic replacement as no different from others in the past. It is an attempt by rulers to water down the local population to make it easier to subjugate. Off the top of my head, here are four examples:

    1) The occupying English brought in Scotch settlers to water down the locals in Ireland.
    2) The occupying Ottomans brought in the ousted Jews of Spain to water down the locals in Greece.
    3) The occupying Soviets brought in ethnic Russians to water down the locals in the Baltic states.
    4) The occupying Chinese are bringing in ethnic Han to water down the locals in Tibet.

    The main difference with the post 1965 situation in the US is that this demographic change has occurred without a foreign occupier in charge. Of course many at iSteve probably believe the new elites are essentially foreign at worst, or at best, don’t really relate to the locals.

    However, just like the above four examples led to animosity, tension and even violence, the puppet masters have bequeathed to America a violent future.

  30. Mr. Blank says:

    Had we maintained the sensible immigration policy of pre 1965 America, it would not have changed in the same direction, or as dramatically. And the US would be better off for it, and whites in the US would be much better off.

    Why limit it to whites? Blacks would be a hell of a lot better off, too.

  31. JustSomebody says:

    It happened in one relentless step after another.
    WW1 and WW2 were disasters for white countries but an absolute boon for non white countries, not only did their population boom, they also gained moral argument that they were equal if not better than whites.
    Emanuel Celler was pushing for decades to lift the US immigration restrictions, this was primarily to get jews to enter America from Eastern Europe, I doubt that he really wanted America to become a non white country from this.
    Eventually this was passed in 1965, at the same time the whole civil rights movement ended a politically white dominated country and also ended the possibility to openly state that they wanted to keep the country white.
    After 1965 since non whites could enter the same as whites, and since their numbers are ever increasing and since whites have been forbidden to say anything about race and a white country – this was the only way it could end.

  32. Jefferson says:

    “Yes, many are not white. But many are at least noticeably part white”

    George Zimmerman and Barack Obama are also noticeably part White. Noticeably part White is still considered Nonwhite for affirmative action purposes.

  33. Craig says:

    Once we had the unquestionable assumption in place that all human groups are fungible, how was this *not* supposed to happen in an immigrant-friendly society? Even if certain elites had concerns about demographic transformation after 1965, how were they supposed to articulate them? The only kind of critique the regnant ideology allows is the neoconservative one: stricter emphasis on learning English, greater effort to inculcate nationalism, promotion of “no-nonsense” ed reform nostrums, etc.

    “All Men Are Created Equal” was one of the most spiritually admirable things ever written, and a doomsday device hidden underneath bulletproof glass in the nation’s capital. For Max Weber, the defining trait of modernity is an inexorable spirit of rationalization, and applied to the Declaration of Independence that means you start out with Concord and end up with Rio.

  34. Skyislander says:

    “WW1 and WW2 were disasters for white countries but an absolute boon for non white countries, not only did their population boom, they also gained moral argument that they were equal if not better than whites.”

    Disasters don’t lead to loss of confidence and righteousness. Not necessarily. It’s all about who controls the power over the grand narrative.

    Stalin caused a disaster during the Great Famine that killed up to 10 million across the USSR. But Soviets controlled the police, schools, and media. So, new generation of Russians grew up revering Stalin and supporting the USSR.

    Mao killed tens of millions during the Great Leap. But few yrs later in the Cultural Revolution, tens of millions of young Chinese were wild about him. Cultural Revolution was hell, but Mao is still revered, and Chinese still trust the commie party. Why? The party still controls the institutions; they control the narrative.

    The Zionist Nakba–ethnic cleansing of Palestinians–was horrible, but Jews feel no shame. If anything, they’re brimming with ever greater pride in Israel that is becoming more rightwing.

    The American Civil War had whites killing whites. It was a great tragedy, but northern whites felt no shame for waging war on fellow white brethren. Northern whites controlled the nation narrative of Lincoln as the redemptive leader.

    Also, population loss is no problem as long as people have lots of babies. There have been one disaster after another in Africa–due to famine, war, oppression, genocide, etc–, but Africans just keep having kids and their numbers are increasing.

    The Thirty Years War was devastating to Europe, but Europeans didn’t lose faith in Christianity and just had more babies. Soon enough, the population rebounded.

    WWI was no great problem. Germany went through hell after the war but was making a great comeback in the 30s.
    Hitler brought forth WWII, but Europe was never as rich and as productive as in the post-WWII period. Europe rose from WWII like a phoenix.

    But the control of the narrative fell to anti-Europeans who gained control of the institutions.
    That is what destroyed the confidence of Europeans in themselves. But then, white Americans lost confidence too even though US played a key role in defeating Nazi Germany and in supporting the Third World against European imperialists after WWII. Who controls the narrative in the US?
    From 1860s to 1960s, less than 2000 blacks were lynched–which means lynching was rare–, but the media would have us believe that all blacks in the South were living in abject fear from KKK with rope. It’s a total fantasy.

    ——————–

    Mao killed tens of millions but is revered.

    It was hardly Bush’s fault what happened in Katrina, but he was made out to be the worst man of the 21st century.

    It’s all about who controls the media and institutions.

    Most people are sheep.

  35. Juan says:

    “But many are at least noticeably part white.”

    How’s that working out?

  36. Anonymous says:

    “Why did we do this to ourselves?”

    Why did the Protestants let so many Catholics into the country?

    Immigrants do a great job of filling substandard real estate and paying rents that would normally not be paid for substandard real estate.

    Hospital medical staffs in New York City seem to be mostly immigrants and maybe first generation Americans. Building and facility staff was mostly multigenerational (ny NYC standards) native born Americans. So you have to wonder what medical care in the US would be like without immigrants.

  37. Why did we do this to ourselves? | Reaction Times says:Website

    […] Source: Steve Sailer […]

  38. Anthony says:

    Regarding white kids being in majority-white schools: Urban and suburban parents of various races send their kids to majority white schools at significant cost through various combinations of delaying child-bearing, having fewer kids than they’d prefer to, buying into pricey neighborhoods/school districts, having longer commute times, having smaller apartments/houses, driving/busing their kids across town instead of having them go to their neighborhood school, or paying private school tuition. If you’re school integration guru Richard Kahlenberg and you can afford a 3,100 square foot house in Bethesda, then yes, you’re pretty insulated from all of this. But most of the people sending their kids to those majority-white schools can’t and aren’t. Just looking at the end result that most white kids are in majority-white schools and concluding that they’re insulated from these demographic trends ignores the expensive mechanisms for how they got to be in those schools.

  39. Lurker says:

    Funny to see comments like Wong’s at iSteve, almost nostalgic. I suppose at this new venue we can expect to see that sort of nonsense all over again.

    I didn’t read much of his comment, his presentation was a hopeless, disordered shambles, a mess. Our cognitive betters eh?

  40. Whiskey says:Website

    Steve, “Why Did We Do This to Ourselves?”

    Answer: Because Elites had to have a replacement for Christianity, and White guys were too Dilbert and Wally boring. That’s it in a nutshell.

    The religious belief is obvious. Christianity itself aspires to universalism and the brotherhood of man. Post Christianity Volk Marxism that our elites gobbled up simply extends that to the logical conclusion. In our case, we had Martin Luther King, whose obvious courage and charisma ended up hastening that NAM-worship, and White-despising. Particularly since the media hid his rather Larry Flynt (another brave man but one devoid of charisma) and Jimmy Swaggart like (a man neither brave nor charismatic) aspects of King’s behavior. I just about spit out my breakfast when seeing the full page ad in the Financial Times for Rolex’s “Icon Series.” Eric Clapton, Ike, Paul Newman, Steve McQueen, Mohammed Ali? Check. Martin Luther King with a Rolex looking like the one Ike wore? What in the name of God’s Drum Major for Justice was going on? Answer: King was like Swaggart or Flynt just braver and more charismatic. A man lacking those qualities would not have been worshiped.

    The other part is, White guys are both boring and dangerous. Dangerous because they upend old social orders, aristocracies, settled hierarchies, and drive women to fury since women want all these things: the better to suss out the natural Alpha male. Not end up with Mr. Darcy only to find out his estate has been nationalized and Darcy is unsuited to the industrial age. White guys are also boring and far more likely to not give a pimp-slap beat-down or engage in a late-night shootout; both things that give the ladies the tingles. White guys are finally far more vulnerable to plastics and estrogen in the environment, getting more feminized relative to men of other races not cursed higher IQ thus less testosterone.

    White guys are therefore the natural enemy of White women, being boring and unsexy, lacking in volatile violence, and creating technology that upends the natural Alpha from his perch and puts a Zuck or Jobs or Ellison or Bill Gates (the single most unsexy man alive) into the driver’s seat.

    Having Whites replaced by a sea of baby-sitting requiring NAMs is a White woman’s heaven. NAMs to worship in replacement of the troublesome Jesus, baby sitting jobs in social work and education forever, and White guys getting theirs, dammit!

    What’s not to love for women and elites?

    Jared Taylor is unconvinced about conspiracies, I am too. This happened all over the West, around the same time (birth control pills and plastics becoming prevalent in the 1960′s prosperity). It seems organic, most White women HATE HATE HATE half or more of White guys; hence diversity.

    Certainly our future seems destined to be one of endless violence, vast suppression of the ongoing anti-White jihad by NAMs, and best case Balkan Wars breakups, worst case Syria/Iraq for generations.

  41. ben tillman says:

    Indeed, and that may be because the main beneficiaries of Affirmative action are white women.

    That’s one of the stupidest canards we hear around here.

    Actually this is only partially the case. There has always been diversity within school districts. The segregated ones had their black, yellow and brown schools and their white schools -from California to Mississippi- all within single districts. Whites benefited nicely at times – pocketing taxes paid by the minorities and fobbing them off with inferior facilities.

    You need to reign in your fevered imagination. The tax flow ALWAYS went from White to non-White. When Blacks and Whites were about equal parts of the South Carolina population 90 years ago, Whites paid 93% of the taxes. They were funding the White schools and the Black schools.

  42. deltaco says:

    The reproduction rates of the existing classes. A few generations ago multiple kid families were normal. They get less so every year. My grandparents families probably averaged 5 kids. My generation maybe 1 and 1/2, if that.

    The interests of the landlord classes requires mass immigration. Ideally there’d be a billion people in the US. More money, more voters, etc.

    Someone has to be to blame for the squalor – whitey.

  43. iSteveFan says:

    Emanuel Celler was pushing for decades to lift the US immigration restrictions, this was primarily to get jews to enter America from Eastern Europe, I doubt that he really wanted America to become a non white country from this.

    What I find disheartening is hearing certain ethnic groups complain about not being allowed to immigrate into the USA in large enough numbers, and then attacking the WASPs for this slight. If the WASPs were so bad, then why did they want to immigrate here in the first place? What was wrong with the rest of the New World?

    Couldn’t Mexico, Brazil or Argentina have taken in as many, if not more, than the USA did? But apparently those immigrants did not want to go to Mexico, Brazil or Argentina. They wanted to come to the Anglo New World. Yet they complain about WASPs and do their best to diminish the importance of the the these nations’ (US, Can, Aus) success to their English founding. Instead they chalk up the success of the Anglo New World to winning some sort of geographical lottery or outright theft. But Latin New World nations have in many cases superior geographical features, and were taken from the locals in much the same way.

    As a first gen guy whose dad sought out the Anglo world, it saddens us both to see the English heritage being driven out because certain ethnic groups have too much pride to admit the English really were special.

  44. Your Fantasy says:

    White children are NOT insulated from diversity.

    I hardly ever see all white groups of children here…it’s like 4 non-whites with 1 white child. It’s horrendous.

    Furthermore, even if a school has a sizeable asian population…that’s even worse because the male white children will marry asians and they will be Absorbed.

  45. Old fogey says:

    “Why did it happen?” Let’s just blame Ted Kennedy and his ilk and revert to the openly Euro-centric bias we had before the 1960s to compensate for recent events along our southern border.

    In the late 1950s I did a historical research project that involved study of the census reports from the 1920s through the 1940s. At that time, the government asked everyone to specify from which country their ancestors had come. As English-speakers such as the English, the Irish, and the Scots gave different answers to that question, Germany came first. Nowadays, of course, no one in the federal government cares from which country my ancestors or your ancestors came from.

  46. The sad truth is that its pretty much only the old-line WASPs, and the assimilated Northern European Protestants – who care about “White People”. The Irish and other Catholics behave just as intelligently as you’d expect – look at Governments in Ireland, Spain, Italy, etc. And most of them, seem to think if the USA goes belly up they’ll just go back to the “old country”. After all, they’ve only been in the USA for 100 years or more.

    As for the Jews, blacks, and others, they are on the other side. As Obama’s mentor once stated ” God Damn America”. No doubt the AA’s will all happily go back to Africa when the USA goes belly up, proud that they finally got all white people back. Or live under their new foreign overlords.

    Yep Steve, “we” did it to “ourselves”. But who is this “we” kemo-sabe?

  47. deltaco says:

    “Why did we do this to ourselves? The best excuse is that American elites did this to America in a fit of absentmindedness.”

    We do live in a democracy, at least in theory. I can see why the Democrats wanted this. I would have thought the Republicans would have taken care of their constituents but for some reason they seem to hate them. And the dumb hillbilly’s whine about abortion and gay marriage while their country is sold out from under them.

  48. iSteveFan says:

    July 2, 2014 at 8:27 pm

    I see this demographic replacement as no different from others in the past. It is an attempt by rulers to water down the local population to make it easier to subjugate. Off the top of my head, here are four examples:

    1) The occupying English brought in Scotch settlers to water down the locals in Ireland.
    2) The occupying Ottomans brought in the ousted Jews of Spain to water down the locals in Greece.
    3) The occupying Soviets brought in ethnic Russians to water down the locals in the Baltic states.
    4) The occupying Chinese are bringing in ethnic Han to water down the locals in Tibet.

    The main difference with the post 1965 situation in the US is that this demographic change has occurred without a foreign occupier in charge. Of course many at iSteve probably believe the new elites are essentially foreign at worst, or at best, don’t really relate to the locals.

    However, just like the above four examples led to animosity, tension and even violence, the puppet masters have bequeathed to America a violent future.
    ”””””””””””””””””’

    ya the Indonesians tried it in borneo
    they got eaten
    it is sometimes good to have men with some balls around

  49. yea if one of you smart dudes on this sort of thing would do a bit of research i’m sure you can write a nice piece on exactly how it happened.

    I have seen an all white town turn into a ghetto in three years that is not absentminded nor an accident it is intentional with the minorities black coming from many hours drive away from big city ghettos in Washington dc

  50. Immigration from southern/Eastern Europe and Ireland was more disastrous than you might think. It pushed down wages, created immense amount of urban corruption and patronage, and displaced native-born Americans from many East Coast cities. It’s easy to take a romantic view of previous waves of immigrants, but realistically they created huge problems for America.

    On net, America probably is worse off for allowing large scale immigration from outside England, Germany, and Scandanavia.

  51. anonymous says:

    Off-Topic, but relevant to human biodiversity, immigration, and populations genetics:

    “Extinct human cousin gave Tibetans advantage at high elevation”, ScienceDaily, July 2, 2014:

    “Tibetans were able to adapt to high altitudes thanks to a gene picked up when their ancestors mated with… Denisovans,” a mysterious human relative that went extinct 40,000-50,000 years ago…

    This is the first time a gene from another species of human has been shown unequivocally to have helped modern humans adapt to their environment

    The variant or allele found in Tibetans raises hemoglobin… avoiding the side-effects seen in most people who relocate to elevations above 13,000 feet.” (emphasis added)

  52. nano says:

    “Regarding white kids being in majority-white schools…ignores the expensive mechanisms for how they got to be in those schools.”

    Yes. A big part of the drop in fertility has been the increasing expense involved in avoiding the worst schools as the number of worst schools kept increasing.

  53. @Skyislander – it is not just about “controlling the narrative”. Millions of Russians and Chinese benefitted directly from the mass killings. The Cultural Revolution turned a bunch of poorly educated teen-agers into leaders with the power to make literal life or death decisions about the grown-ups around them. Stalin elevated an entire class of people into the elite by killing all of the old elite. There are certainly many people who are benefitting from America’s transformation into Northern Brazil.

  54. Cloudcastler says:

    ‘How’s that working out?’

    I don’t know about California, but in my experience, Mexers are 100x preferable to Negroes.

  55. deltaco says:

    Americans have been taught to hate their poor. Perhaps the white ones more than any other. (They don’t have excuses.) If you had anything to offer, why aren’t you rich? You aren’t rich and so you must suck. Everyone thinking like this. Our country is a big poker table. Pony up or get me a drink. That’s the golden calf.

  56. anonymous says:

    “Why did we do this to ourselves?”

    But it’s not just is. It’s almost the entire West. So the explanation needs to account for that.

    I’d give three factors the edge. Women getting the vote, TV, and the sense that we live in a time of technological magic and wealth in which all things are possible if we care enough. It’s not women having the vote per se that’s the problem. Many, many women make fine voting citizens. It’s just that it pushed the politics of democracies just enough to the “emotive” side that it makes it real difficult to act in our own interests. Our interests seem to get intertwined with the emotional well-being of the entire world. We can’t “husband our resources”, and so on. We can’t stand up for ourselves without being seen as big meanies. TV amplifies this. Pictures of a sad face have us trying to solve insolvable problems all over the globe. Now if you try to stand up for yourself, women seeing the picture will easily be led to vote against you, you big meanie. If women (and a lot of men) didn’t have the sense of magical wealth that seems to make all things possible, they might worry more about their own interests and circumstances (places where women have the vote but are not well off do not seem to have this problem).

  57. Bill says:

    @Lloyd Wong

    Come on now, Lloyd. Last time I was in Dublin there were a lot more Chinese living and doing business there than there were Irish in Beijing. That says something, and you know it.

    I like and admire Chinese, but in comparison to Irish they fall short in several important ways themselves:

    1. Irish cities and restaurants are cleaner

    2. Irish houses are more spacious and more comfortable

    3. Irish are more polite in public

    4. Irish children behave better in public (this despite the fact that there are a lot of them)

    5. Ireland is quieter

    6. Ireland is not plagued with toxic waste sites.

    etc.

    I think the Chinese living there would agree with me.

    BTW, Chinese tea is better, the food is tastier, and the nightlife far more exciting. The women are thinner, too. Culturally, China has a lot more to offer (but it also includes some of the lowest-class kitsch I’ve seen anywhere).

    Finally, I’d even hazard to guess that it’s safer to be drunk and lost in a Dublin neighborhood than in Beijing. Ireland’s violent crime rate is about a quarter of America’s today. So much for the “violent Irish” stereotype…

    Independence has been a blessing for the Irish people, and they haven’t wasted it.

    Hopefully, we Americans will regain independence some day ourselves.

  58. JI says:

    Great quote by Caldwell, will remember that one.

    I think right now is a perfect time to send a message to future presidents and the other elites by charging Obama and Bush with deliberate dereliction of their duty to protect the nation, followed by a trial and some kind of old school punishment (e.g., tar and feathering).

  59. anonymous says:

    A multitude of reasons, Steve. As other commenters have said a great deal of the culpability must be laid at the so called ‘civil rights’ revolution of the 1960s which really was the biggest trauma the states suffered in theor history. Bigger than the civil war.
    The ‘moral orthodoxy’ laid down in that era has become all powerful and all consuming and has ony strengthened since then. Basically whites and white men in particular have no moral legitimacy in the USA.
    Also never but never underestimate the power of political vanity. For a politician to be regarded as ‘smart’ by The Economist magazine is the highest possible accolade and affirmation. Hence the ln going economic and political disaster. And alsp don’t forget Democrat attempts to perpetual political power by importing a new electorate. What else matters to politicians than absolute power?

  60. Orthodox says:

    Who is this we? I think some Huntington guy wrote a book about that……

    I wouldn’t be worried if there was a we, but there doesn’t seem to be any we. If we were a we, the demographic situation opens up our options. If we had our own banks, companies, security forces and worked to subvert the federal government such that it was powerless to punish us (nothing nefarious, just use Moneyball to figure out which government positions are most important and focus the group effort on controlling them such that the Feds never devote much energy to pursuing us), we could slowly regentrify the country.

  61. iSteveFan says:

    The reproduction rates of the existing classes. A few generations ago multiple kid families were normal. They get less so every year. My grandparents families probably averaged 5 kids. My generation maybe 1 and 1/2, if that.

    The interests of the landlord classes requires mass immigration. Ideally there’d be a billion people in the US. More money, more voters, etc.

    There is no doubt that whites are having fewer kids today. But back in 1965, when the disastrous immigration reform passed, whites had just come off the post war baby boom. So there was no excuse that we needed immigrants to pick up the slack. In retrospect I wonder if the arrival of so many immigrants actually helped end the baby boom and retard white birth rates.

    The late Lawrence Auster wrote this in regards to immigration and native birth rates:

    Immigration does not “replenish” a country’s population, it replaces it. American history is instructive on this point. Between 1790 and 1830, a period in which the total number of immigrants was about 385,000, or under 10,000 per year, the U.S. population increased by an astonishing nine million (from 3.9 million in 1790 to 12.9 million in 1830). This tripling was due mainly to the natural increase of the 1790 population, not to immigration. As population expert Francis A. Walker noted in a famous essay published in 1891, this very high native birthrate dropped subsequent to the upward turn of immigration after 1830 and the even sharper increase of immigration after 1840. The reason for this, Walker argued, was that immigrants lowered living standards, wage levels, and working conditions, which resulted in reduced prospects for the native population, which made having large families less attractive. Immigration thus caused a drop in the native birthrate, replacing those lost native births with immigrants.(12) The same effect of mass immigration on wages and working conditions is clearly in operation today, along with the same effect on the native birthrate.

  62. ….

    We did this to ourselves because, both here and abroad, enough white individuals shifted to prefer to believe than to know.

    Don’t you think that sums it up quite Nietzschely?

  63. Dave Pinsen says:Website

    What about the current surge of unaccompanied, illegal alien, minors, particular the Obama administration’s distribution of them to cities like Murrieta, CA? What is the game plan here?

    If Obama just wanted to import more future Democrats, he could have had these illegals dumped off in Los Angeles, or New York City, or Miami without stoking this kind of resistance. Is stoking the resistance the point? Maybe in hopes that anti-illegal protestors will do something violent, which can then be used to delegitimize the immigration restriction movement?

  64. Wilkey says:

    It wasn’t “we” doing it to “ourselves” – it was someone else doing it to us. Consider the history.

    In the late 1970sm the overwhelmingly Democratic Texas legislature passed a law banning the children of illegal immigrants from public schools. In 1982, that law was overturned by a leftist Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision cobbled together from 4 or 5 different concurring opinions. Despite its narrow victory, Plyler v. Doe remains “the law of the land.”

    In 1986 our congress and president, for the alleged price of 1.3 million amnesty recipients (who would be required to pay backtaxes), gave us a bill they claimed would secure the border. It gave amnesty to twice that many, the backtaxes provision was repealed, and it didn’t secure the border.

    In 1994 California voters passed, overwhelmingly, a state law that was intended to stop illegal immigration. It was killed by a single lower court judge, and never heard from again.

    In 2006, I voted for a state senator who campaigned claiming to oppose illegal immigration. He won the election, immediately switched to being pro-amnesty, and is still in the state senate.

    In 2010 and 2012, Marco Rubio, Jeff Flake, Orrin Hatch, and John McCain all ran their senate elections claiming to oppose amnesty. All four of them voted for the 2013 amnesty, and three of them were actually in the Gang of Eight.

    In other words, we didn’t do it to ourselves. To the extent voters have cared about immigration, we have been lied to and ignored: we’ve been lied to by our politicians, and our democratic will has been ignored by unelected judges pursuing their own agendas.

    How does someone who cares about excessive immigration go about doing anything about it? How do you select a politician when so many of them law? How do you work to pass local immigration laws when judges so easily overturn them?

    The other problem has been the era of plenty, the era of welfare, and the era of birth control. Pre-WW2, pre-Great Society and pre-birth control, food was not so plentiful, sex meant babies, and men actually had to work to provide for themselves and their families. All of these changes have conspired to make men and women less concerned about the flood of immigrants, legal and illegal, crossing our borders. There are millions of men who don’t even bother with jobs. They don’t worry about not being able to afford families because they can avoid having families while still having sex. And food is so plentiful that no one ever starves to death.

  65. Someguy says:

    Things change. Always have. Always will.

  66. meh says:

    syon says:
    July 2, 2014 at 6:40 pm

    fnn:”The old WASP ruling elite didn’t put up much of a fight and was replaced:”

    No, the WASP elite made common cause with the Jewish elite.

    Wrong. Token individual WASPs may have made common cause, but WASPs as a class were replaced. Please count how many Protestants are on the Supreme Court for instance: zero. It’s all post-1860 Jews and Catholics for the most part in most key institutions, with genuine old stock Americans steadily decreasing in numbers and influence. This myth of WASP Puritan shenanigans is one of the more putrid lies spread by Mendacious Moldbug and his “neo-reactionary” fanboys.

    The 1960s/70s cultural revolution is part of the final coup that culturally displaced the WASP in the USA, the participation of some WASPs in this process should not conceal this fact. Hell, watch Caddy Shack if you can’t figure out what actually happened. You aren’t making “common cause” with the actual rulers if your class/ethnic group is constantly mocked and denigrated in the common “culture”. “Common cause” implies you have some actual power and influence which is not in evidence.

  67. George says:

    While not identical the history of the Gracchi opposition to early “slave power” during Roman history might interest you:

    Much public land had been divided among large landholders and speculators who further expanded their estates by driving peasants off their farms. While their old lands were being worked by slaves, the peasants were often forced into idleness in Rome where they had to subsist on handouts due to a scarcity of paid work.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gracchi#Background

    Like the Kennedy’s, although perhaps relating them is a stretch, both Gracchi brothers were assassinated.

    Again from Wikipedia:

    “According to Oswald Spengler, the characteristic mistake of the Gracchan age was to believe in the possibility of the reversibility of history”

    ““I found that things became a lot easier when I no longer expected to win.”” – Leonard Cohen

  68. I’m glad the USA is becoming less white. Whites are reproducing less because they’re less attractive. Give me a svelte Asian woman, a nut brown Latina, a long-limbed Black woman.

    Although women of different groups get nose jobs, thinking they’re making themselves look whiter, there’s one physical look they can’t change — a look that determines attractiveness to many men: namely, ankles. White women have a much higher proportion of cankles. It’s not just Hillary — even Madonna and Miley Cyrus have cankles. It’s why Miley usually performs wearing ankle boots.

    To me, a WASA ( white anglo-saxon agnostic) male, the typical educated white woman is boring, self-absorbed, doughy and insipid. Small wonder her typical husband daydreams of non-white women.

  69. syon says:

    meh:”Wrong. Token individual WASPs may have made common cause, but WASPs as a class were replaced.”

    Hardly. Elite WASPS are doing quite well.

    meh:” Please count how many Protestants are on the Supreme Court for instance: zero.”

    A manifestation of anti-abortion politics. Anti-abortion Protestants are stupid and go to second and third tier law schools. Anti-abortion Catholics are smart and go to top tier law schools.Hence, Republicans choose Catholics for their Supreme Court nominees.

    meh:” It’s all post-1860 Jews and Catholics for the most part in most key institutions, with genuine old stock Americans steadily decreasing in numbers and influence.”

    Statistics?Here are some on the Forbes 400:

    2009 (%) 2010 (%) 2012 (%)
    Northwestern European 51.75 50.5 51
    Jewish 35.5 35.5 35
    Italian 3.5 4.25 4.25
    East Asian 2.0 2.0 2.25
    Middle Eastern 2.25 2.5 1.75
    Greek 1.5 1.75 1.5
    Eastern European 1.5 1.75 1.75
    South Asian 1.25 1.0 1.5
    Hispanic 0.5 0.5 0.75

    Black 0.0 0.25 0.25 0.25

    (http://racehist.blogspot.com/2013/04/2012-forbes-400-by-ethnic-origins.html)

    It’s imperfect (Catholic Irish and Germans qualify, for example), but one can use Northwest European as a proxy for WASPs. Using this metric, WASPs seem to be dong rather well. At the very least, they are doing much, much better than Southern and Eastern European Gentiles.

    meh:”This myth of WASP Puritan shenanigans is one of the more putrid lies spread by Mendacious Moldbug and his “neo-reactionary” fanboys.”

    Did I mention Moldbug? The man’s a loon.

    meh:”The 1960s/70s cultural revolution is part of the final coup that culturally displaced the WASP in the USA, the participation of some WASPs in this process should not conceal this fact.”

    Elite WASP participation was vital. Indeed, this marks the final nail in the coffin of the Jewish-Catholic alliance and the emergence of the elite WASP-elite Jew condominium that has dominated the USA since the ’60s.

    meh:”Hell, watch Caddy Shack if you can’t figure out what actually happened. You aren’t making “common cause” with the actual rulers if your class/ethnic group is constantly mocked and denigrated in the common “culture”. “Common cause” implies you have some actual power and influence which is not in evidence.”

    CADDY SHACK was, perhaps, the ultimate expression of Jewish WASP country club envy.

  70. syon says:

    cloudcastler:”I don’t know about California, but in my experience, Mexers are 100x preferable to Negroes.”

    A very low bar.

  71. Ron Mexico says:

    Skyislander said From 1860s to 1960s, less than 2000 blacks were lynched–which means lynching was rare–, but the media would have us believe that all blacks in the South were living in abject fear from KKK with rope. It’s a total fantasy.

    Research says The Tuskegee Institute has recorded 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites being lynched between 1882 and 1968 with the annual peak occurring in the late 1800s.[2]

    Democrat terrorists killed more Americans than bin Laden and 19 allahu akbars. Controlling the narrative, indeed.

  72. Three possibility culprits:
    * (Post-)Christianity
    * Judaism
    * The bourgeoisie (“colorblind capitalism”)

    Actually I think all three have significantly contributed but I haven’t come across any very compelling account of the respective impact of each factor.

  73. Brutusale says:

    Dave Pinsen, New York, LA and Miami already have enough future Democrats, so there’s no need to send them there. The government is doing the same thing with these illegals that they’re doing with Section 8 moms, exporting these feral Democrats to the suburbs silly enough to have a surfeit of rental property. My town does a census every year, and we’ve gone from 5% minority in 2007 to 24% last year. Luckily, about 40% of them are Asian!

    And yes, stoking the resentment is the point, living in The Bubble as they do and truly believing that right-thinking folks have no problem with the alien invasion. They want as many Tea Party types foaming at the mouth as possible appearing on the nightly news. But in my town, I already see the fractures forming between the clueless SWPLs and these new, vibrant residents. They see the schools’ test scores decline (from #42 district on the state-wide MCAS test in 2010 to #120 last year) and the crime increase (property crime has increased each year for the past 5 years).

    Locally as well as nationally, we have to wonder when people are going to start to get a clue.

  74. Noumenon72 says:

    syon, I can’t parse “Jewish WASP country club envy.” Who is envying who?

  75. Anonymous says:

    American elites did this to America in a fit of absentmindedness ….. But, there is also — and in this case perhaps more significant — the massive dereliction of duty by elites.

    They did it – and are doing it – very consciously and deliberately.

  76. Rohan Swee says:

    Bill: Independence has been a blessing for the Irish people, and they haven’t wasted it.

    Last I heard Ireland, like England, was importing vibrants hand over fist and exporting indigenes at an accelerating pace. Not to mention bending over for the bankers a few years back.

    So if they’re not any dumber than other whites they’re not any wiser, either. (But yeah, it’s probably still a nicer place to settle down than China. For now.)

  77. nano says:

    “Independence has been a blessing for the Irish people, and they haven’t wasted it.”

    The native Irish are being replaced very rapidly.

    It seems to me the incredible rate of immigration the EU elites instituted in the last 10-14 years to replace their native populations means the people driving it know America is going to collapse and want to make sure the example is too late to serve as a warning for the EU countries.

  78. iSteveFan says:

    Research says The Tuskegee Institute has recorded 3,446 blacks and 1,297 whites being lynched between 1882 and 1968 with the annual peak occurring in the late 1800s.[2]

    Democrat terrorists killed more Americans than bin Laden and 19 allahu akbars. Controlling the narrative, indeed.

    Who says the people doing the lynching were terrorists? I would think most lynchings involved the locals carrying out extra judicial justice on people who were probably guilty. I am not saying it is right, but I am pointing out that many of those lynchings did not involve some poor soul being killed randomly. The local pervert who was caught fondling a child was probably lynched in some places. I imagine a good deal of the whites who were lynched fit that category. As I said, it might not be right, but it probably cut down on certain crimes if the perps knew the locals would take matters into their own hands. I wonder if black-on-white crime rates were lower back then given the threat of the lynch mob.

  79. Svigor says:

    Under the auspices of the moral imperative of reciprocity, I say we deport the diversity, starting with Mr. Wong. China doesn’t reciprocate our generous immigration policies. We should reciprocate theirs, and send Wong packing. Then we should reciprocate Mexico’s immigration policies, and send all the Mexicans packing. Etc., etc., etc.

  80. Jefferson says:

    “I don’t know about California, but in my experience, Mexers are 100x preferable to Negroes.”

    If Mexicans are such a pleasant people, why don’t upper middle class and wealthy Whites want to live around Mexicans ?

    The only Whites that live in neighborhoods with a high percentage of Mexicans, are lower working class Whites who can not financially afford to do White flight.

  81. Svigor says:

    I see this demographic replacement as no different from others in the past. It is an attempt by rulers to water down the local population to make it easier to subjugate. Off the top of my head, here are four examples:

    5) The occupying Israelis are bringing in Jews to water down the locals in Palestine.

    the puppet masters have bequeathed to America a violent future.

    Indeed. It’s obviously criminal negligence, at least.

    “All Men Are Created Equal” was one of the most spiritually admirable things ever written, and a doomsday device hidden underneath bulletproof glass in the nation’s capital. For Max Weber, the defining trait of modernity is an inexorable spirit of rationalization, and applied to the Declaration of Independence that means you start out with Concord and end up with Rio.

    Come now. The same document calls the Indians “savages” and speaks of their depradations as cause for revolution.

    Immigration from southern/Eastern Europe and Ireland was more disastrous than you might think. It pushed down wages, created immense amount of urban corruption and patronage, and displaced native-born Americans from many East Coast cities. It’s easy to take a romantic view of previous waves of immigrants, but realistically they created huge problems for America.

    On net, America probably is worse off for allowing large scale immigration from outside England, Germany, and Scandanavia.

    Most important, it created a constituency for multiculturalism.

    But it’s not just is. It’s almost the entire West. So the explanation needs to account for that.

    Differences of degree are easy to grasp for the neuro-typical. America’s situation is much, much worse than the rest of the west. Ergo, we need much, much more explanation to account for America’s situation. Since your explanations are common throughout the west, they are insufficient to explain America’s problem.

  82. “We did this to ourselves because, both here and abroad, enough white individuals shifted to prefer to believe than to know.”

    Thanks to a mass media, the most powerful force in history, telling the people what to believe. No, they don’t fool the smartest ones, but then they don’t need to. They just fool most people, and that’s more than enough.

  83. Svigor says:

    Mendacious Moldbug

    LOL. Do even his “fanboys” read all the way through his posts? He could probably pull a Lenny Bruce in every final paragraph and cackle “hahahaha It was the Jews! Burn the churches!” and no one would ever know.

    I’m glad the USA is becoming less white.

    It’s the warmth of the immigrant toward us that makes me sanguine about immigration.

    That statement is equivalent to:

    “I’m glad the people I’m robbing are dead.” But when it’s the entire class of people worth robbing?

    Bandits don’t think too far ahead.

  84. Ron Mexico says:

    Who says the people doing the lynching were terrorists? I would think most lynchings involved the locals carrying out extra judicial justice on people who were probably guilty.

    Perhaps out West, not in the South and the North (post Great Migration). The terrorism served to regain Democrat control (Redeemers) and reinforce Jim Crow.

  85. Anonymoose says:

    Does it make people feel less racist to throw the Irish under the bus? The Irish settled places other than the Northeast seaboard- the Midwest, far West and southern coastal cities. In the southeast, Catholics (judging by surnames mostly Irish, French, with a smattering of Italians/Germans) seem better off than WASPs, with the exception of the Episcopalian country club set.

    Does Ireland today have a high crime rate? Don’t think so.

  86. Top says:

    There is one theory that I don’t hear discussed much but which is very apparent to me in a “multi-cultural” (yawn!!) country. It’s what I call the negative energy ethnic/racial effect. It works something like this. You have a country of mostly group A (let’s say WASPs for example). But there is also a group Bs in the minority (Irish let’s say) – close but not the same to group A. And there may be a few Z (blacks say), but Z is so small, racially removed, and powerless it’s considered out of “real” political play. Let’s forget Z for now. Anyway, B feels slighted. Of all things on this Earth, and all things mysterious about mankind this one thing is certain – group B feels slighted. This is the nature of man.

    For the most part you could have a certain equilibrium if nothing changes – maybe. Anyway group B’s members will in the back of their mind devote a certain amount of energy into believing that they should have more power than they have. This – energy – is real and it has real effects. As a matter of fact I find this energy is the key energy in the societies of the West as they are evolving today. The society then starts taking a form based on this energy. For example group B may form their own parallel organizations (“human-rights”) or they may drive political agendas (minorities are almost always “left” wing or even communist), or they may get into fist fights, or they may form rebel groups. The energy spent by the average group B member in this conflict will be higher than the average group A energy – history shows that much pretty consistently. BTW… Europe spent forever trying to work out these type of energies over the centuries – until they finally had the good sense to physically separate groups.

    USA is really currently the bad guy in this (for Euros anyway) and will be the downfall of the West. The reason USA is the bad guy is that it allowed groups C, D, E, etc… to come in and not construct mechanisms that could defuse this negative ethnic/racial energy – or to give them an outlet. The whole strategy became to sweep everything under the carpet through untested strategies where group A bet the farm that groups B, C, D, E, and F were honest. I admire that about group A – I really do – but it was stupid! Humanity is not there and there is no empirical data to suggest otherwise. Group A’s human rights charter merely became the other groups’ population expansion strategies via a simple strategy of “more immigration”.

    But another phenomenon happened – as the genetic groups started becoming I, J, K – they started to use more advanced strategies not just against group A but against B, C, and D also. The ethnic/racial energy from these later groups is different and has different forms. But it is there and it is real and it is in the back of the minds of these groups – much stronger than what group B felt. By now the fight is no longer group A versus group B, but something else completely.

    One group’s strategy (guess which one) became to vocalize that if Group A and Group B cannot live together it’s only because there are not enough groups in the same small space – so we need Groups A – Groups Z living together in that small space. Someone once called propaganda like that the “Big Lie”.

    Summary:
    The negative ethnic/racial energy will always be there.
    Different groups use different strategies.
    Some groups lose, some win.
    The game never stops.

  87. Anon says:

    @Dave Pinsen

    Triage them. Take the cutest, most healthy and adopt them out to Whites. Reunite 1/3, of them with American relatives and deport the whole family. The remainder? Rename a portion of Gitmo. Bay Side. Send them there to be sent back to the countries of origin, or pay some of the Stans to take them.

  88. ChrisB says:

    @Skyislander

    “Somewhat misleading since whole bunch of Hispanics are white or substantially white.

    As for yellows, they better study very hard and make lots of money and pay lots of taxes to take care of the retiring boomers.”

    Sure, but neither of these groups are “us”: white Europeans. And no offence to other groups, but I like white Europeans, my kind of people.

  89. anonymous says:

    Why did we do this? Who is “we”?

    The modern Western Welfare Democracy claims they guarantee security to all. No need to look after your interests. The government is here to help and they are professionals. You really wouldn’t want to worry about something so complicated and sophisticated. If you tried to do something, well, you wouldn’t know how to spend your money right.

    Welfare Democracy: To everyone a promise of everything!

  90. Cloudcastler says:

    cloudcastler:”I don’t know about California, but in my experience, Mexers are 100x preferable to Negroes.”

    “A very low bar.”

    Not really. While too many Mexicans can be a problem, most Mexicans are saints and angels compared to the ghastly Negroes.

  91. Hacienda says:

    88 posts and 88 reasons. Each of which have at least some worth.

    I’ll chip in possibly the biggest one. USA is world’s biggest nuclear armed power by far. And it’s the only country to have used nuclear bombs.

    Discuss amongst yourselves.

  92. Jefferson says:

    “Not really. While too many Mexicans can be a problem, most Mexicans are saints and angels compared to the ghastly Negroes.”

    Are Mexican drug cartel members saints and angels compared to Negroes ? Are the Surenos and Nortenos saints and angels compared to Negroes ?

    If Mexicans were such a wonderful people than the per capita murder rate in Mexico would be similar to that of Japan and Germany for example, but it’s not.

  93. TRiess says:

    Top said “The negative ethnic/racial energy will always be there… The game never stops.”

    You’re assuming technology will always stay the same.

    China’s going to bring offspring genetic engineering to the world in a few decades.

    Liberals look forward to a day when “we’re all going to be brown” due to global mixing, but they have it backwards… more of the world is going to have the genetics of blue-eyed, blonde nordics than if the Nazis had won WW2. It’s going to be a nightmare for liberals.

  94. anonymous says:

    Two additional ideas, maybe others have said the same:

    * Education imparting the notion that citizens of the West no longer had anything serious to worry about; that they were in a protected society in a position of complete superiority; that anything thinkable was doable (this was the atomic age, the rock-and-roll age, the age of the Pill); that decisions about such things as immigration were all a matter of moral choice only and that all options had no long-term cost. Citizens of the West were like rich, idle grandchildren of rapidly declining once great fortunes, unable to comprehend that their situation wasn’t going to, by some sort of act of nature, last forever. Regression to the wretched.

    * The rise of institutional government with increasing little connection to its citizens. All governments are institutional, but the original US notion seems to have had something of the idea of a government with citizen participation. This didn’t seem to survive WW2, the Cold War, and the rise of professional advertising and marketing.

  95. anonymous says:

    Kevin MacDonald has a current book review at VDARE where, among other things, he posits an answer to this question this way:

    “Under ecologically adverse circumstances like the Ice Ages, adaptations are directed more at coping with the adverse physical environment than at competing with other groups. In such an environment, there would be less pressure for selection for extended kinship networks and highly collectivist groups. Ethnocentrism would be of no importance at all in combating the physical environment.

    Europeans are therefore less ethnocentric than other groups—which makes them susceptible to being subverted by groups with a strong sense of in-group solidarity. Individualist cultures show relatively little emotional attachment to in-groups. Personal goals are paramount, and socialization emphasizes the importance of self-reliance, independence, individual responsibility, and “finding yourself.”

    Individualists have more positive attitudes toward strangers and out-group members. They are also more likely to behave in a pro-social, altruistic manner to strangers. People in individualist cultures are less aware of in-group/out-group boundaries and thus do not have highly negative attitudes toward out-group members. They often disagree with in-group policy, show little emotional commitment or loyalty to in-groups, and do not have a sense of common fate with other in-group members.

    Opposition to out-groups occurs in individualist societies, but the opposition is more “rational” in the sense that there is less of a tendency to suppose that all of the out-group members are culpable. Individualists form mild attachments to many groups, while collectivists have an intense attachment and identification to a few in-groups (see Harry Triandis, Individualism and Collectivism).”

    This leads to lowered group-identification and more emphasis on abstract morality:

    “In individualist cultures… there is a tendency to moral universalism where morality is defined not as what is good for the individual or the group, but as an abstract moral ideal…”

    He clearly thinks these traits are ultimately genetic:

    “My view is that there is a strong empirical basis for this suite of traits, and that ultimately these traits, particularly moral idealism and science, are the psychological manifestation of individualism as a response to selection pressures in the far north.”

  96. Steve Sailer says:Website

    @anonymous

    “They are also more likely to behave in a pro-social, altruistic manner to strangers.”

    A lot of clannish societies have rules of hospitality that protect strangers passing through.

  97. anonymous says:

    “A lot of clannish societies have rules of hospitality that protect strangers passing through.”

    Do the same rules apply to “new-arrivals” as “passer-throughers”? And do they have those rules because they need them, that is, otherwise things wouldn’t work out so good for strangers?

  98. Steve Sailer says:Website

    @anonymous

    “Do the same rules apply to “new-arrivals” as “passer-throughers”?”

    The essence of the host-guest relationship in cultures of hospitality is that the guest leaves.

  99. Current Commenter says:

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


Remember My Information 

Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
Subscribe to All iSteve Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Not What Tom Jefferson Had in Mind
ABC's Epic Steel-cage Smackdown
What the facts tell us about a taboo subject
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?