The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
2019 Births by Race (US)
🔊 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
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

For close to a decade it has been reported that Americans under the age of 18 are “majority-minority”, yet non-Hispanic white births continue to constitute a majority of the country’s newborns. The reason for the discrepancy is methodological. The CDC tracks race by that of the mother exclusively, so babies who will be categorized in the census as “two or more races” once they reach adulthood are determined only by mom here.

This could be said to inflate the non-Hispanic white birth share, but the mother’s race is the only one where reliable vital statistics are always available. Treating all multiracial births as non-white statistically erases the white parent’s contribution. By characterizing the children of a white man and an Asian woman and also the children of a black man and a white woman as non-white, the majority-minority future arrives sooner–to media celebration if the NYT mentions it and to angry accusations about conspiracy theories and fragility if anyone on the right does.

Parenthetically, whites on the right and non-whites on the left is coincidental. Just as the graph’s color scheme is random, so are the label placements. No political implications there, no sirree!

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity, Science • Tags: Fertility, Race 
Hide 209 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Lot says:

    Certainly a large share of hispanic-white offspring are phenotypically white, and maybe 8% of hispanic-hispanic births.

    On the other hand, Arab Muslims are supposed to be counted as white in US statistics, though some end up choosing “some other race.”

    I noticed in last year’s report that Indiana had more white births than Georgia, despite Indiana being the 17th state in population, and Georgia 8th. That was again the case in 2018. Ohio also had more white births than Florida, which are the 7th and 3rd largest states.

    Hispanic fertility has fallen from 168% of the NS white rate in 2007 to 121% in 2016. As of 2018, it is now 117%.

    In Puerto Rico, TFR is now 1.0.

    • Thanks: Jane Plain
  2. Black births are in excess of their overall share of the population, that’s surprising? I recall black TFR is similar to white? Could more interracial couples involve back moms?? That would be even more surprising.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @indocon

    Blacks still have higher mortality than other groups, 2-4 times higher for certain ages and locales. It used to be (30-40 gesrs ago) way higher than these figures which are very new.


    Non-Hispanic black teenagers are 37 percent more likely to die than Hispanic and non-Hispanic white teenagers. The death rate for non-Hispanic black teenagers is 64.5 deaths per 100,000 population compared with 47.1 for Hispanic and 47.0 for non-Hispanic white teenagers
     

    But whose children are most likely to survive until their first birthday varies greatly. The infant mortality rate for black women's babies was 10.97 in 2017 – more than twice the rates among white, Asian and Hispanic women, who saw rates of 4.67, 3.78 and 5.1, respectively – and nearly double the overall rate. Among American Indians and Alaska Natives, the infant mortality rate was 9.21.
     

    Young adult and middle-aged African American men living in impoverished urban areas experience about 3 to 4 times the white national death rate or as many as 1,296 more deaths per 100,000 population each year
     

    Replies: @indocon

    , @Intelligent Dasein
    @indocon

    Black TFR is significantly below replacement but is also about 0.2 births higher than white TFR, so the data (which simply counts the number of births) is really not surprising at all.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @indocon

    TFRs for all groups, including Hispanics, are now below replacement. Black rates are higher than white and Asian rates, so this shouldn't be too surprising.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  3. Treating all multiracial births as non-white statistically erases the white parent’s contribution.

    Would it be terribly racist – and thus supremely evil – to treat white-Asian mixes as 3/4 white, white-Hispanic mixes as 1/2 white, and white-black mixes as 1/4 white for statistical purposes? 😉

    In all seriousness, it’s odd when people such as my children are categorized as “nonwhite” – does that mean they are also non-East Asian?

    graph’s color scheme

    The yellow section should be a lot browner than in the past. East Asians today only constitute less than half of Asians in America (roughly a quarter is made up of people from the subcontinent and the other quarter from Southeast Asia).

    Read this piece from 1998 – from the NYT of all places: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/16/magazine/the-beige-and-the-black.html

    Oddly, the U.S. Census Bureau has yet to account properly for the presence of mixed-race Americans. As a result, many of its projections are off target. For example, the bureau has famously predicted that in 2050, whites will make up 52.7 percent of the U.S. population. (In 1990, it was 75.7 percent.) Hispanics will account for 21.1 percent of the population; blacks, 15 percent, and Asians, 10.1 percent. Presumably, 2050 will be white America’s last stand. But this projection is dubious, because it assumes that for the next half-century there will be absolutely no intermarriage among the four major conventionally defined racial groups in the United States: whites, blacks, Hispanics and Asians. Each group is supposed to somehow expand — or decline — in hermetic isolation.

    But according to an analysis of the 1990 U.S. Census data for persons ages 25-34 by Reynolds Farley, a demographer with the Russell Sage Foundation, 31.6 percent of native-born Hispanic husbands and 31.4 percent of native-born Hispanic wives had white spouses. The figures were even higher for Asians: 36 percent for native-born Asian husbands and 45.2 percent for native-born Asian wives. (In fact, Asian wives were as likely to marry white Americans as they were to marry Asian-Americans.) The highest intermarriage rates are those of American Indians. Majorities of American Indian men (52.9 percent) and American Indian women (53.9 percent) married whites rather than American Indians (40.3 percent and 37.2 percent, respectively). And these figures, which themselves document the creolization of America, undoubtedly understate the extent of racial intermarriage that the 2000 Census will reveal…

    Nevertheless, the overall increase in intermarriage means that both multicultural liberals and nativist conservatives have misunderstood the major demographic trends in this country. There is not going to be a nonwhite majority in the 21st century. Rather, there is going to be a mostly white mixed-race majority. The only way to stop this is to force all Hispanic and Asian-Americans from now on to marry within their officially defined groups. And that is not going to happen.

    Thus, the old duality between whites and nonwhites is finally breaking down. But don’t cheer just yet. For what seems to be emerging in the United States is a new dichotomy between blacks and nonblacks. Increasingly, whites, Asians and Hispanics are creating a broad community from which black Americans may be excluded.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @SFG
    @Twinkie

    It's Kauffman's 'whiteshift' argument--new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish--"oh yeah, my grandma's Italian, that's why I love pasta!"

    I can see that from his point of view--he's successful and optimistic (and perhaps secretly a bit on the right-wing side), so why not identify with the dominant culture? The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    On the plus side, most of the famous 'non-white' tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an 'off-white' majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    Replies: @iffen, @Feryl, @Rosie, @Johann Ricke, @t

    , @Jay Fink
    @Twinkie

    A half white/ half hispanic is more white than you think. I used to assume Hispanics were 50% Spanish and 50% Indigenous. I was wrong. There is a lot of variation but most of the genetic reports I have seen of Hispanics are dominated by Southern European DNA, figures like 70% are not uncommon. No wonder the Census considers Hispanic as a sub group under the white umbrella (with a small minority under the black umbrella such as Afro-Cubans).

    So most Hispanics are already well over half white. A baby that is half Hispanic and half ( non-Hispanic) white would be techincally over 75% white, most closer to 85%. Some might not consider Spaniards (or Italians for that matter) to be "white" but that is a whole other debate.

    Replies: @res, @Twinkie, @anonymous

  4. It’s not interracial births but adolescent illegal and legal immigrants.

  5. In America they count jews, Arabs, and all other MENA types as white as well, so that graph is not correct.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @neutral


    In America they count jews, Arabs, and all other MENA types as white as well, so that graph is not correct.
     
    But they count Hispanics, many of whom are definitely white, as non-white.

    MENA types may be non-European but plenty of them are definitely white. And plenty of Jews are white.

    The whole argument is pretty silly because it revolves around nonsensical categorisations, some of which are racial, some geographical, some linguistic.

    Overall the probability is that a lot more than 52% of the births are in fact white.

    Replies: @Feryl

    , @Jay Fink
    @neutral

    Last month during the BLM riots I had a black man in a store raise his fist at me. I was completely minding my own business and he was ready to attack me. "What did you say" he asked. When I said I didn't say anything he gave me a mean look but put his fist down and said "that's right".

    What a ridiculous interaction. Believe me that black guy had no idea I am Jewish. He hated me because I am white. I was raised being told I'm white, everyone perceives me as white and when I look in the mirror I see a white guy. Judaism is an ethnicity just as much as it is a religion but it is not a seperate race.

  6. @indocon
    Black births are in excess of their overall share of the population, that's surprising? I recall black TFR is similar to white? Could more interracial couples involve back moms?? That would be even more surprising.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Intelligent Dasein, @Audacious Epigone

    Blacks still have higher mortality than other groups, 2-4 times higher for certain ages and locales. It used to be (30-40 gesrs ago) way higher than these figures which are very new.

    Non-Hispanic black teenagers are 37 percent more likely to die than Hispanic and non-Hispanic white teenagers. The death rate for non-Hispanic black teenagers is 64.5 deaths per 100,000 population compared with 47.1 for Hispanic and 47.0 for non-Hispanic white teenagers

    But whose children are most likely to survive until their first birthday varies greatly. The infant mortality rate for black women’s babies was 10.97 in 2017 – more than twice the rates among white, Asian and Hispanic women, who saw rates of 4.67, 3.78 and 5.1, respectively – and nearly double the overall rate. Among American Indians and Alaska Natives, the infant mortality rate was 9.21.

    Young adult and middle-aged African American men living in impoverished urban areas experience about 3 to 4 times the white national death rate or as many as 1,296 more deaths per 100,000 population each year

    • Replies: @indocon
    @JohnPlywood

    Does TFR take into account infant mortality?

  7. So is there reliable data on under-18s that doesn’t just go by mother’s race?

    I wonder how the great awokening will affect racial identification in the census. Perhaps a lot more overwhelmingly white people will identify as something else due to white shame/affirmative action benefits. The rise of DNA testing could also have an effect perhaps, tales about native American ancestry being disproven etc.

    This guy estimated what the census results would be with more detailed racial categories like East Asian and Middle Eastern by the way:

    No age breakdown though.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Some Guy

    The explosion of personal genomics testing companies is going to force the issue. The white left is going to try to maintain that race is a social construct, but POCs aren't going to be foolish enough to let that fly.

  8. Interesting info. Thanks!
    However, “erases the contribution of”, just like “denies the existence of”, and also “interrogate the concept”, “problematic”, “made me feel unsafe”, and so on, is all GloboHomo babble.
    Language matters. Language creates reality. Using GloboHomo language helps maintain GloboHomo reality.
    If one is not in the business of maintaining GloboHomo reality, then it’s perhaps best for one to make an effort to avoid whenever possible GloboHomo speech patterns. Even tongue in cheek.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
  9. @Twinkie

    Treating all multiracial births as non-white statistically erases the white parent’s contribution.
     
    Would it be terribly racist - and thus supremely evil - to treat white-Asian mixes as 3/4 white, white-Hispanic mixes as 1/2 white, and white-black mixes as 1/4 white for statistical purposes? ;)

    In all seriousness, it’s odd when people such as my children are categorized as “nonwhite” - does that mean they are also non-East Asian?

    graph’s color scheme
     
    The yellow section should be a lot browner than in the past. East Asians today only constitute less than half of Asians in America (roughly a quarter is made up of people from the subcontinent and the other quarter from Southeast Asia).

    Read this piece from 1998 - from the NYT of all places: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/16/magazine/the-beige-and-the-black.html

    Oddly, the U.S. Census Bureau has yet to account properly for the presence of mixed-race Americans. As a result, many of its projections are off target. For example, the bureau has famously predicted that in 2050, whites will make up 52.7 percent of the U.S. population. (In 1990, it was 75.7 percent.) Hispanics will account for 21.1 percent of the population; blacks, 15 percent, and Asians, 10.1 percent. Presumably, 2050 will be white America's last stand. But this projection is dubious, because it assumes that for the next half-century there will be absolutely no intermarriage among the four major conventionally defined racial groups in the United States: whites, blacks, Hispanics and Asians. Each group is supposed to somehow expand -- or decline -- in hermetic isolation.

    But according to an analysis of the 1990 U.S. Census data for persons ages 25-34 by Reynolds Farley, a demographer with the Russell Sage Foundation, 31.6 percent of native-born Hispanic husbands and 31.4 percent of native-born Hispanic wives had white spouses. The figures were even higher for Asians: 36 percent for native-born Asian husbands and 45.2 percent for native-born Asian wives. (In fact, Asian wives were as likely to marry white Americans as they were to marry Asian-Americans.) The highest intermarriage rates are those of American Indians. Majorities of American Indian men (52.9 percent) and American Indian women (53.9 percent) married whites rather than American Indians (40.3 percent and 37.2 percent, respectively). And these figures, which themselves document the creolization of America, undoubtedly understate the extent of racial intermarriage that the 2000 Census will reveal...

    Nevertheless, the overall increase in intermarriage means that both multicultural liberals and nativist conservatives have misunderstood the major demographic trends in this country. There is not going to be a nonwhite majority in the 21st century. Rather, there is going to be a mostly white mixed-race majority. The only way to stop this is to force all Hispanic and Asian-Americans from now on to marry within their officially defined groups. And that is not going to happen.

    Thus, the old duality between whites and nonwhites is finally breaking down. But don't cheer just yet. For what seems to be emerging in the United States is a new dichotomy between blacks and nonblacks. Increasingly, whites, Asians and Hispanics are creating a broad community from which black Americans may be excluded.
     

    Replies: @SFG, @Jay Fink

    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”

    I can see that from his point of view–he’s successful and optimistic (and perhaps secretly a bit on the right-wing side), so why not identify with the dominant culture? The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an ‘off-white’ majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @SFG

    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America

    There is another America first instinct, and it will be fading in the white population. We will have AE's dissolution, just not along political boundaries.

    , @Feryl
    @SFG


    The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.
     
    So we can look forward to lighter skinned (e.g., more intelligent) and cynical mixed raced people desperately lunging for non-white status in order to both gain wokeness points and advance their careers/social standing. Oh goodee.

    BTW, mixed race people still (still!, 50 years into the broad acceptance of integration and mixed pairings) report higher levels of youthful suicidal ideation. Though I have to wonder how much of this can be put down to light skinned blacks not having the esprit de corps of either pure whites or "real" American blacks (e.g., less than 1/5 white). It turns out that the "high achieving" mulattos may pose the biggest threat to mental, social, and ideological stability as they project their misfit motivated rage onto the less neurotic. I've also said before that Ashkenazi Jews also suffer to some extent from mixed race misfit syndrome, since they can't seem to figure out whether they should identify as European or Middle Eastern.
    , @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    , @Johann Ricke
    @SFG


    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an ‘off-white’ majority is still practicable, IMHO.
     
    I doubt it's really a skin color distinction so much as a tribal one. That's to say, you'll get conquistador-looking Hispanics identifying as brown, and dusky Hispanics identifying as white. They know what they look like. It's just that they see themselves as a part of the tribes they've chosen to stand* with, much as some whites went with the Indians and some Indians went with whites during the Indian Wars. During that bygone era, pervasive anti-Indian discrimination, to say nothing of the relentless white encroachment on Indian lands, stood in the way of many Indians identifying with whites. And yet many Indians did. Today, no such barriers exist. Hispanics can find jobs, date, marry and buy property without any issues with race-based caste barriers. And many will seek out the tribe they identify with, across racial/ethnic lines, regardless of what anyone of any ideological cast has to say about the matter.

    * In ancient times, you'd get this phenomenon as clans on ethnic/racial borders pledged fealty to people who looked conspicuously different from themselves. It occurred because it was frequently people who looked like them who launched the fiercest assaults on them, in the name of consolidating their power. The current Cold Civil War among whites isn't a new phenomenon, but an extension of old hot wars that saw massive bloodshed. Because fundamentally, it comes down to a zero-sum intra-racial struggle for power and perquisites that will seek allies anywhere it can find them, just as in antiquity.

    , @t
    @SFG

    High IQ conservatives tend to overestimate the importance of affirmative action. In the 70s there was affirmative action for blue collar occupations but that's gone it's now only an issue in accidmia. I'd be surprised if there is affirmative action for Half-Hispanics 20 years from there are too many of them and they are to similar to bad white culturally.

    The majority of Hispanics already identify as white and in practice hispanics and asians are more likley to identify with their ethnicity(ie Mexican or Korean) than larger racial categories.

  10. @SFG
    @Twinkie

    It's Kauffman's 'whiteshift' argument--new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish--"oh yeah, my grandma's Italian, that's why I love pasta!"

    I can see that from his point of view--he's successful and optimistic (and perhaps secretly a bit on the right-wing side), so why not identify with the dominant culture? The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    On the plus side, most of the famous 'non-white' tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an 'off-white' majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    Replies: @iffen, @Feryl, @Rosie, @Johann Ricke, @t

    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America

    There is another America first instinct, and it will be fading in the white population. We will have AE’s dissolution, just not along political boundaries.

  11. @neutral
    In America they count jews, Arabs, and all other MENA types as white as well, so that graph is not correct.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Jay Fink

    In America they count jews, Arabs, and all other MENA types as white as well, so that graph is not correct.

    But they count Hispanics, many of whom are definitely white, as non-white.

    MENA types may be non-European but plenty of them are definitely white. And plenty of Jews are white.

    The whole argument is pretty silly because it revolves around nonsensical categorisations, some of which are racial, some geographical, some linguistic.

    Overall the probability is that a lot more than 52% of the births are in fact white.

    • Disagree: The Wild Geese Howard
    • Replies: @Feryl
    @dfordoom


    MENA types may be non-European but plenty of them are definitely white. And plenty of Jews are white.
     
    White and European are not the same thing. In America, Jews in the 1930's-1960's* were socialized to identify with blacks, what with the whole "not of the gentile majority" thing going on. Jewish record company executives rationalized the filthy lucre of mass marketed thug rap "music" by claiming that black discontent against the "white" system (and common decency) was honorable**, needed to be heard, and was worth celebrating by minoritarians and "civil rights" malcontents across the land.

    *Once the 70's happened, Jews were fully "allowed" to do as they wished, end result being that they got much closer to white gentiles (often inter-marrying) to the point that younger Jews find the idea of solidarity with blacks to be laughable......Especially after blacks so failed to take advantage of the new liberties given to them, unlike Jews. What Jewish person under the age of 50 would liken black ghettos to Jewish ones....Oh yeah, Jewish ghettos don't exist anymore in the West.

    **Once Reaganite libertarianism took over (extreme individualism, live in the now rather than in the future, vent your emotions rather than bottle them up, etc.), pop culture became much more nihilistic by the mid 80's (we all knew we were headed towards a dystopia). So venomous crap like thug rap music became popular and commodified.

    Replies: @Lot, @dfordoom

  12. Yes, that black sector is not much bigger, but bigger than one expect from what I’ve read from Steve Sailer a number of times, that black fertility has been way down, same as with white fertility. I didn’t believe it when I read that, and I still don’t.

    My personal experience has been seeing black single Moms (aren’t they all? OK 3/4) with 3 or 4 kids or hearing from them about all their kids. I’ve run into 3 nice, very competent black ladies in my work recently, all of them light-skinned. Two of them had 1 kid each, and the 3rd has no kids (too old to start, unfortunately).

    Now, I’d like some of you Socialists on here to go ahead and explain how Socialism has nothing to do with this dysgenic process. It’s been 55 years now of it, and the results are in plain sight.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Now, I’d like some of you Socialists on here to go ahead and explain how Socialism has nothing to do with this dysgenic process. It’s been 55 years now of it, and the results are in plain sight.
     
    Yes, socialism without countervailing eugenic measures, like, for instance, norplant for welfare, is dysgenic. So what? My mother was on welfare when I was born. She was very grateful and would have been fine with that.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Justvisiting
    @Achmed E. Newman


    black single moms
     
    Here are the numbers:

    https://www.childtrends.org/publications/dramatic-increase-in-percentage-of-births-outside-marriage-among-whites-hispanics-and-women-with-higher-education-levels

    70% of black women with children are unmarried. Of course, the number was for black women 18 and over. The under 18 crowd would probably get you to the the three quarters number.

    That tells you all you need to know about the black "community" and its future prospects.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

  13. Parenthetically, whites on the right and non-whites on the left is coincidental. Just as the graph’s color scheme is random, so are the label placements. No political implications there, no sirree!

    White Christians in the USA are under anti-White demographic attack from the JEW/WASP ruling class of the American Empire and the rancid Republican Party is in on the anti-White attacks.

    The Charles Pewitt write-in campaign for president will explicitly advance and explicitly represent the interests of Whites as Whites and there will be no cringing or capitulating to the howling mobs of anti-White globalizers.

    The Charles Pewitt write-in campaign for president has won the primary to carry the banner of the WHITE CORE AMERICA political party after a lengthy and hard-fought campaign. It was a damn close thing. My public relations firm — Howard Porcupine Public Relations(HPPR) — has suggested that I challenge the horrible treasonites in the rancid Republican Party to a series of debates. Howard Porcupine Public Relations is the best in the business and I hereby challenge any and all stooges in the GOP — Trump, Teddy Cruz, Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell…etc. — to a series of debates on mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration and White Genocide and globalization and anti-White multiculturalism and many other things.

    Watch and listen to Charles Pewitt going after mass legal immigration fanatic Teddy Cruz in 2015 during the GOP 2016 presidential primary. Teddy Cruz is a crummy debater who thinks Ivy League snobbery and pissant antics are better than peppery populist rhetoric and debating style. I’ll rhetorically crush globalizer treasonite Teddy Cruz in a debate.

    I said this about mass immigration and California to Teddy Cruz in 2015:

    And as for immigration, It’s quite simply true that if it wasn’t for mass immigration — the 1965 Immigration Act — the Republicans might not have lost California forever. And it’s also true that without mass immigration we might never have had Obama — and that means we might never have had Obamacare.

    Mass legal immigration is the issue that’s demographically destroying the United States. But you, you support dramatic increases in mass immigration.

    I don’t think you can continue on trying to confuse the American people about the difference between illegal immigration and mass legal immigration — so why do you support mass legal immigration?

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/stupid-old-men/#comment-3619489

    Tweet from 2015:

  14. Just as the graph’s color scheme is random, so are the label placements. No political implications there, no sirree!

    Hey, you don’t have to explain that to us, A.E. We believe you. I just will be too busy to back you up when you need to defend this color scheme to the People’s Cultural Committee. (Gotta do my nails that day.)

    You know I’ve always appreciated your making the graphs easier to read. The PC ones with their various shades of green (some kind of appropriation of a Bill Cosby joke?) make one have to keep going back and forth the legend, and they aren’t even consistent between graphs. On the Audacious Epigone blog, we don’t neeeed no steeeenking legends!

    As Twinkie wrote, though, perhaps the shades don’t truly match. The Oriental ladies, at least from China and Korea, will lighten up toward #FFFFFF, while many of the white ladies with hot bods look like that piece of Hispanic ass I mean pie, after spending time laying out. For me, after some time on the water the other day right when the sun was highest, I could fit right into your feather-Indian sector color.

    As usual, I ask, knowing the likely answer, can’t we separate out the Asian sector into Oriental and .Indian, at least? I mean, if they’ve got Pacific Islander, which is only a tiny proportion of people in the world, they may as well break out these 2 large groups. I understand “they” is not you.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Achmed E. Newman

    The GSS, YouGov, and the CDC are among my most frequented sources. The latter two generally don't break out results beyond "Asian" and with the GSS the samples are small as is. Forgiveness please!

  15. @indocon
    Black births are in excess of their overall share of the population, that's surprising? I recall black TFR is similar to white? Could more interracial couples involve back moms?? That would be even more surprising.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Intelligent Dasein, @Audacious Epigone

    Black TFR is significantly below replacement but is also about 0.2 births higher than white TFR, so the data (which simply counts the number of births) is really not surprising at all.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  16. Feryl says: • Website
    @SFG
    @Twinkie

    It's Kauffman's 'whiteshift' argument--new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish--"oh yeah, my grandma's Italian, that's why I love pasta!"

    I can see that from his point of view--he's successful and optimistic (and perhaps secretly a bit on the right-wing side), so why not identify with the dominant culture? The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    On the plus side, most of the famous 'non-white' tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an 'off-white' majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    Replies: @iffen, @Feryl, @Rosie, @Johann Ricke, @t

    The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    So we can look forward to lighter skinned (e.g., more intelligent) and cynical mixed raced people desperately lunging for non-white status in order to both gain wokeness points and advance their careers/social standing. Oh goodee.

    BTW, mixed race people still (still!, 50 years into the broad acceptance of integration and mixed pairings) report higher levels of youthful suicidal ideation. Though I have to wonder how much of this can be put down to light skinned blacks not having the esprit de corps of either pure whites or “real” American blacks (e.g., less than 1/5 white). It turns out that the “high achieving” mulattos may pose the biggest threat to mental, social, and ideological stability as they project their misfit motivated rage onto the less neurotic. I’ve also said before that Ashkenazi Jews also suffer to some extent from mixed race misfit syndrome, since they can’t seem to figure out whether they should identify as European or Middle Eastern.

  17. Feryl says: • Website
    @dfordoom
    @neutral


    In America they count jews, Arabs, and all other MENA types as white as well, so that graph is not correct.
     
    But they count Hispanics, many of whom are definitely white, as non-white.

    MENA types may be non-European but plenty of them are definitely white. And plenty of Jews are white.

    The whole argument is pretty silly because it revolves around nonsensical categorisations, some of which are racial, some geographical, some linguistic.

    Overall the probability is that a lot more than 52% of the births are in fact white.

    Replies: @Feryl

    MENA types may be non-European but plenty of them are definitely white. And plenty of Jews are white.

    White and European are not the same thing. In America, Jews in the 1930’s-1960’s* were socialized to identify with blacks, what with the whole “not of the gentile majority” thing going on. Jewish record company executives rationalized the filthy lucre of mass marketed thug rap “music” by claiming that black discontent against the “white” system (and common decency) was honorable**, needed to be heard, and was worth celebrating by minoritarians and “civil rights” malcontents across the land.

    *Once the 70’s happened, Jews were fully “allowed” to do as they wished, end result being that they got much closer to white gentiles (often inter-marrying) to the point that younger Jews find the idea of solidarity with blacks to be laughable……Especially after blacks so failed to take advantage of the new liberties given to them, unlike Jews. What Jewish person under the age of 50 would liken black ghettos to Jewish ones….Oh yeah, Jewish ghettos don’t exist anymore in the West.

    **Once Reaganite libertarianism took over (extreme individualism, live in the now rather than in the future, vent your emotions rather than bottle them up, etc.), pop culture became much more nihilistic by the mid 80’s (we all knew we were headed towards a dystopia). So venomous crap like thug rap music became popular and commodified.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Feryl

    Jews have been legally defined as white in the USA since the naturalization act of 1798 required a legal definition of white, because it explicitly limited naturalization to white immigrants.

    The definition has always been Europeans plus near eastern Christians and Jews because both groups appear white and “readily admix” with the native white population.

    Make up your own dumb definition if you want, but nobody is going to use it, and all you’re doing is aping the far left critical race theorists.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Anonymous

    , @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    White and European are not the same thing.
     
    Precisely. Discussions about race that conflate racial categories (like black) with linguistic categories (like Hispanic) and geographical categories (like European) will always end up being pointless.

    You can't have an intelligent discussion on the topic if you haven't even clearly defined what it is you're talking about.

    Terms like white and Asian are so vague as to be meaningless. I'd be very surprised if subcontinental Indians and Koreans consider themselves to be more or less interchangeable.

    What on earth does white mean? It doesn't mean the same as Caucasian so white is not actually a race. It doesn't mean the same thing as European, although some people like to think it does. It's not a meaningful cultural category. It just doesn't mean anything at all.

    I'm not arguing that race doesn't exist. But if you want to talk about race then you have to have coherent ideas about what you're actually talking about. If you're really more concerned with culture than race you'd be better off making that explicit.

    Ethnicities seem to me to be more meaningful than race.

    Maybe it's not possible to have rational discussions on this subject because terms like "race" and "white" just make people irrationally angry, while terms like "Asian" and "Hispanic" and "MENA" are just confusing and misleading.

    A graph or chart that divides people into white, Asian, black and Hispanic is about as useful as a chart that divides animals into "animals that are fierce", "animals that are good to eat", "animals that are cute" and "animals without feathers".

    Replies: @Agathoklis

  18. @Achmed E. Newman
    Yes, that black sector is not much bigger, but bigger than one expect from what I've read from Steve Sailer a number of times, that black fertility has been way down, same as with white fertility. I didn't believe it when I read that, and I still don't.

    My personal experience has been seeing black single Moms (aren't they all? OK 3/4) with 3 or 4 kids or hearing from them about all their kids. I've run into 3 nice, very competent black ladies in my work recently, all of them light-skinned. Two of them had 1 kid each, and the 3rd has no kids (too old to start, unfortunately).

    Now, I'd like some of you Socialists on here to go ahead and explain how Socialism has nothing to do with this dysgenic process. It's been 55 years now of it, and the results are in plain sight.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Justvisiting

    Now, I’d like some of you Socialists on here to go ahead and explain how Socialism has nothing to do with this dysgenic process. It’s been 55 years now of it, and the results are in plain sight.

    Yes, socialism without countervailing eugenic measures, like, for instance, norplant for welfare, is dysgenic. So what? My mother was on welfare when I was born. She was very grateful and would have been fine with that.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rosie

    She would have been fine with what?

  19. @Achmed E. Newman
    Yes, that black sector is not much bigger, but bigger than one expect from what I've read from Steve Sailer a number of times, that black fertility has been way down, same as with white fertility. I didn't believe it when I read that, and I still don't.

    My personal experience has been seeing black single Moms (aren't they all? OK 3/4) with 3 or 4 kids or hearing from them about all their kids. I've run into 3 nice, very competent black ladies in my work recently, all of them light-skinned. Two of them had 1 kid each, and the 3rd has no kids (too old to start, unfortunately).

    Now, I'd like some of you Socialists on here to go ahead and explain how Socialism has nothing to do with this dysgenic process. It's been 55 years now of it, and the results are in plain sight.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Justvisiting

    black single moms

    Here are the numbers:

    https://www.childtrends.org/publications/dramatic-increase-in-percentage-of-births-outside-marriage-among-whites-hispanics-and-women-with-higher-education-levels

    70% of black women with children are unmarried. Of course, the number was for black women 18 and over. The under 18 crowd would probably get you to the the three quarters number.

    That tells you all you need to know about the black “community” and its future prospects.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Justvisiting

    Indeed. Thank you for the numbers, J.V., but I keep a lot of rough numbers in my head from various sources conglomerated. This way, I don't have to look up every single thing on my phone in conversations, like the young people. It's hard to have perspective when you don't keep basic round numbers, representing important information, in your head.

  20. Parenthetically, whites on the right and non-whites on the left is coincidental. Just as the graph’s color scheme is random, so are the label placements. No political implications there, no sirree!

    Shocking.

    If you want to be truly provocative rotate the chart 90 degrees counter clockwise. There would be a block of one color above all other skin tones… Certain posters here would hail you as a conquering hero if you did that…

    PEACE 😇

  21. a significant percentage ( about 30-40%) of children born to asian,hispanic or native american women have a white father

  22. @SFG
    @Twinkie

    It's Kauffman's 'whiteshift' argument--new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish--"oh yeah, my grandma's Italian, that's why I love pasta!"

    I can see that from his point of view--he's successful and optimistic (and perhaps secretly a bit on the right-wing side), so why not identify with the dominant culture? The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    On the plus side, most of the famous 'non-white' tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an 'off-white' majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    Replies: @iffen, @Feryl, @Rosie, @Johann Ricke, @t

    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”

    In other words, it’s a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic

    I don’t know if that’s a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @Rosie


    For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM
     
    Well, we should (and often do) pity young white women who lack the ability to discern between men with prospects and men with no realistic prospects of achieving much ("aspiring" rap star/pro athlete don't count). In America, black males on average have much lower socio-economic status than white or Asian guys. Plus, black males are much more violent on average. A white woman who elopes with a brotha is likely to end up unhappy and broke....And might even end up with loose teeth from a severe beating. Trolls have placed domestic violence statistics (w/racial breakdowns) on college campuses, with predictable results ("that's racist").

    There's also the fact, as I mentioned earlier, that the products of black/white reproduction tend to be the most neurotic and suicidal. Although Ed Dutton thinks that partly due to mentally ill people being more likely to elope outside their race.

    There's a genuine reason to be concerned for the health of white women (and their kids) who choose blacks. And it's frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Thomm, @martin_2

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @Rosie

    Thank you, Rosie. That is a very easily-interpreted chart - a very good way to present all this information.

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @Rosie

    I posted a similar graph & it shows less intermarriage percentage. Though, most ratios are right, except white- Indian/Native American, where it is basically 50/50 for male-female combination, while in this graph wm-naf is almost twice as numerous.

    https://static01.nyt.com/packages/images/newsgraphics/2011/0130-mixed-race/0130-nat-mixed.png

    Replies: @res

    , @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing
     
    Not as a percentage of their respective populations. So, no, not “prone to mixing” - their raw intermarriage numbers are the highest simply because they are the two numerically largest population groups.

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.

    Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.
     
    But I’m guessing the latter, based on this rhetoric.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @Twinkie
    @Rosie

    https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/15153121/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-00-04.png

    Not included in the chart are American Indians whose intermarriage rate is over 50%, the highest.

    Note also that Asian intermarriage rate is even higher than that on the chart, if born in the U.S.

    Replies: @t

    , @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage.
     
    But how many of those "interracial marriages" are actually interracial marriages? They're really just marriages between two different white ethnicities. How is it any different from a Polish-American marrying an Italian-American?

    Of course you will still end up with a single monoculture instead of different cultures, in other words you'll still end up with less actual diversity, but it will be a white monoculture.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @Talha
    @Rosie


    Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.
     
    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Rosie

    That W/A pairings are more common than W/B pairings is remarkable given that the black population is over twice as large as the Asian population is.

  23. 80 years ago, the ratio of white to black people was 9 to 1. Now it is 3.5 to 1 in the latest birth cohort.

  24. Feryl says: • Website
    @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM

    Well, we should (and often do) pity young white women who lack the ability to discern between men with prospects and men with no realistic prospects of achieving much (“aspiring” rap star/pro athlete don’t count). In America, black males on average have much lower socio-economic status than white or Asian guys. Plus, black males are much more violent on average. A white woman who elopes with a brotha is likely to end up unhappy and broke….And might even end up with loose teeth from a severe beating. Trolls have placed domestic violence statistics (w/racial breakdowns) on college campuses, with predictable results (“that’s racist”).

    There’s also the fact, as I mentioned earlier, that the products of black/white reproduction tend to be the most neurotic and suicidal. Although Ed Dutton thinks that partly due to mentally ill people being more likely to elope outside their race.

    There’s a genuine reason to be concerned for the health of white women (and their kids) who choose blacks. And it’s frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Feryl


    And it’s frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.
     
    Given the propaganda to which they are subjected from girlhood, I'd say it's rather encouraging.

    Replies: @Some Guy

    , @Thomm
    @Feryl


    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.
     
    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man's attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.

    Serial killers get love letters from thousands of women. Violent gangsters get laid like tile.

    By contrast, White Tr*shionalists get zero. This is why 40% of the WN community shifted to homosexuality, and then try to pressure the other 60% to join them.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Twinkie

    , @martin_2
    @Feryl

    If a woman is obese, of low intelligence, or very plain, then it might be that all she can hope for is attention from a black man. One can hardly blame them if the alternative is loneliness. It used to annoy me greatly that white women would go with blacks and have children by them, but it never occurred to me until later that I personally would never have given such a woman the time of day.

  25. Anon[375] • Disclaimer says:

    Rosie, I love you and the graphic you showed.

    One interesting thing about that graphic is that it shows just how many interracial couples involve a white person.

    45+15+12+11+3 = 86%

    86% of interracial couples involve a white person.

    You also see some other crazy things. WM/BF couples are a little less than half as common as BM/WF. But HM/BF couples are FOUR TIMES less common than BM/HF. Holy crap.

    • Thanks: Rosie
  26. @SFG
    @Twinkie

    It's Kauffman's 'whiteshift' argument--new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish--"oh yeah, my grandma's Italian, that's why I love pasta!"

    I can see that from his point of view--he's successful and optimistic (and perhaps secretly a bit on the right-wing side), so why not identify with the dominant culture? The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    On the plus side, most of the famous 'non-white' tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an 'off-white' majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    Replies: @iffen, @Feryl, @Rosie, @Johann Ricke, @t

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an ‘off-white’ majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    I doubt it’s really a skin color distinction so much as a tribal one. That’s to say, you’ll get conquistador-looking Hispanics identifying as brown, and dusky Hispanics identifying as white. They know what they look like. It’s just that they see themselves as a part of the tribes they’ve chosen to stand* with, much as some whites went with the Indians and some Indians went with whites during the Indian Wars. During that bygone era, pervasive anti-Indian discrimination, to say nothing of the relentless white encroachment on Indian lands, stood in the way of many Indians identifying with whites. And yet many Indians did. Today, no such barriers exist. Hispanics can find jobs, date, marry and buy property without any issues with race-based caste barriers. And many will seek out the tribe they identify with, across racial/ethnic lines, regardless of what anyone of any ideological cast has to say about the matter.

    * In ancient times, you’d get this phenomenon as clans on ethnic/racial borders pledged fealty to people who looked conspicuously different from themselves. It occurred because it was frequently people who looked like them who launched the fiercest assaults on them, in the name of consolidating their power. The current Cold Civil War among whites isn’t a new phenomenon, but an extension of old hot wars that saw massive bloodshed. Because fundamentally, it comes down to a zero-sum intra-racial struggle for power and perquisites that will seek allies anywhere it can find them, just as in antiquity.

  27. @Rosie
    @Achmed E. Newman


    Now, I’d like some of you Socialists on here to go ahead and explain how Socialism has nothing to do with this dysgenic process. It’s been 55 years now of it, and the results are in plain sight.
     
    Yes, socialism without countervailing eugenic measures, like, for instance, norplant for welfare, is dysgenic. So what? My mother was on welfare when I was born. She was very grateful and would have been fine with that.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    She would have been fine with what?

  28. @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    Thank you, Rosie. That is a very easily-interpreted chart – a very good way to present all this information.

  29. @Justvisiting
    @Achmed E. Newman


    black single moms
     
    Here are the numbers:

    https://www.childtrends.org/publications/dramatic-increase-in-percentage-of-births-outside-marriage-among-whites-hispanics-and-women-with-higher-education-levels

    70% of black women with children are unmarried. Of course, the number was for black women 18 and over. The under 18 crowd would probably get you to the the three quarters number.

    That tells you all you need to know about the black "community" and its future prospects.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Indeed. Thank you for the numbers, J.V., but I keep a lot of rough numbers in my head from various sources conglomerated. This way, I don’t have to look up every single thing on my phone in conversations, like the young people. It’s hard to have perspective when you don’t keep basic round numbers, representing important information, in your head.

  30. @Feryl
    @Rosie


    For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM
     
    Well, we should (and often do) pity young white women who lack the ability to discern between men with prospects and men with no realistic prospects of achieving much ("aspiring" rap star/pro athlete don't count). In America, black males on average have much lower socio-economic status than white or Asian guys. Plus, black males are much more violent on average. A white woman who elopes with a brotha is likely to end up unhappy and broke....And might even end up with loose teeth from a severe beating. Trolls have placed domestic violence statistics (w/racial breakdowns) on college campuses, with predictable results ("that's racist").

    There's also the fact, as I mentioned earlier, that the products of black/white reproduction tend to be the most neurotic and suicidal. Although Ed Dutton thinks that partly due to mentally ill people being more likely to elope outside their race.

    There's a genuine reason to be concerned for the health of white women (and their kids) who choose blacks. And it's frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Thomm, @martin_2

    And it’s frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.

    Given the propaganda to which they are subjected from girlhood, I’d say it’s rather encouraging.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @Some Guy
    @Rosie

    It's not 7% of all white women though, it's 7% of the women who are in an interracial marriage. Right?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

  31. @Rosie
    @Feryl


    And it’s frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.
     
    Given the propaganda to which they are subjected from girlhood, I'd say it's rather encouraging.

    Replies: @Some Guy

    It’s not 7% of all white women though, it’s 7% of the women who are in an interracial marriage. Right?

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Some Guy

    Judging from the NYT graph, white males are married to white females at 94.7% rate, and white females are married to white males at 95.6% rate.

    https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/29/us/20110130mixedrace.html?ref=us

  32. @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    I posted a similar graph & it shows less intermarriage percentage. Though, most ratios are right, except white- Indian/Native American, where it is basically 50/50 for male-female combination, while in this graph wm-naf is almost twice as numerous.

    • Replies: @res
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Thanks. This looks like the original source.
    https://www.socialexplorer.com/blog/post/social-explorer-data-on-interracial-marriage-in-the-new-york-times-673

    That is a 2011 article using 2009 data. Rosie's graphic uses 2014-2015 Pew data so is a bit more recent.
    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/1-trends-and-patterns-in-intermarriage/

    One interesting observation from your graphic is that the white outmarriage rate almost tripled for both men and women (2.9x and 2.6x respectively) from 1980 to 2009. You can see that by taking the current male and female rates and subtracting the change from the graph to get the 1980 rate per 1000.

    Men 53 - 35 = 18
    Women 44 - 27 = 17

    It would be informative to look at how all of these numbers relate to group population percentages, but I am not sure about the right way to evaluate that.

  33. @Some Guy
    @Rosie

    It's not 7% of all white women though, it's 7% of the women who are in an interracial marriage. Right?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    Judging from the NYT graph, white males are married to white females at 94.7% rate, and white females are married to white males at 95.6% rate.

    https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/29/us/20110130mixedrace.html?ref=us

    • Thanks: Some Guy
  34. I know many will disagree, and some will have rather good arguments & examples from everyday life, but, basically- race is how you look like. Sure, there will always be weird examples of Picohontas Warren & similar absurdists, but except for extreme race purists, many non-African slightly mixed people (say, celebrities like Raquel Welch and that actress Shahi something) are white.

    Of course, with Africans, due to genetics, one drop rule applies….

  35. agree with most observations.

    europeans are already below 50% when you exclude the people who aren’t europeans. jews, middle easterners, and magreb people aren’t europeans. mestizos aren’t europeans. that’s not even taking into account who the fathers are of these european mothers.

    not only are africans at 15% higher than their population at 13%, but lots of the european mothers are just having mulattos. we’re not sure how many. these people will all be counted as africans, so maybe the african share of births is as high as 20%, which squares with my observations on the ground that with people under 30, africans are already 20% of the population, not 13%. anybody familiar with how organizations and groups works know that when africans get to about 15 or 20 percent of the people involved, they start to forcefully assert themselves, and then the entire enterprise has to be reorganized around african interests.

    half the ‘asians’ are indians now. they’re brown, not yellow. but half the yellow mother births are to european men. so it’s getting hard to accurately count what’s going on. these are the only people who seamlessly merge into the larger european culture.

    how many people in the hispanic category are europeans? some, but not many. even guys like Marco Rubio who appear to be plainly european, test out genetically as 15 to 20 percent other. where to draw those lines are not clear, but it’s evident that many of these people are mixed race. i would venture few of them are pure blooded europeans like the Mexican ruling class. there’s plenty of people in California and Texas and Florida with Spanish names who are completely european, but that’s not the majority of them. these mixed race people are the only strivers left who are seeking to enter the european category – that has to be where those intermarriage statistics come from.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @prime noticer


    half the ‘asians’ are indians now.
     
    About a quarter, not half. Another quarter is Southeast Asian, mostly Filipinos and Vietnamese.

    Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans account for about 40% today (from a large super-majority 30 years ago).
  36. “It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument”

    it’s simply not correct. and, without knowing Kaufmann’s politics specifically, i’ll just assume it’s the usual jewish tactics. Sailer’s concept of flight from white is the correct description about what is going on. nobody wants to be associated with the europeans now that America is under new management. originally the shift was towards the government preferences and handouts, now it’s plainly about not being categorized among the colonizers. jews have always automatically made this shift explicitly, but they’re not europeans anyway.

    i do note that somehow they’ve gotten away with not having to answer for how many african slaves they owned – they almost never even have to deflect that charge, as it’s almost never even made except by african nationalists, and 100% of the african slave trade has somehow been shifted onto germanic europeans. everybody else seems blameless. i would argue this is largely due to how lucrative it is to attack germanics. there’s no money to be made for example in suing Latin American countries, businesses, or organizations. despite only 600,000 africans making their way to what would become the US, which was about 5% of the total, core Americans are the main target of all the attacks globally, even the northerners.

    “Black TFR is significantly below replacement”

    i don’t think this is the case at all. not only are ‘pure blooded’ africans still above TFR (they’re about 83% african per the latest biological research), but mulattos are being made are a furious pace, and they’re all subsumed into the african fork on the anthropology tree. the trend is that mulattos become more african each generation moving forward.

  37. Lot says:
    @Feryl
    @dfordoom


    MENA types may be non-European but plenty of them are definitely white. And plenty of Jews are white.
     
    White and European are not the same thing. In America, Jews in the 1930's-1960's* were socialized to identify with blacks, what with the whole "not of the gentile majority" thing going on. Jewish record company executives rationalized the filthy lucre of mass marketed thug rap "music" by claiming that black discontent against the "white" system (and common decency) was honorable**, needed to be heard, and was worth celebrating by minoritarians and "civil rights" malcontents across the land.

    *Once the 70's happened, Jews were fully "allowed" to do as they wished, end result being that they got much closer to white gentiles (often inter-marrying) to the point that younger Jews find the idea of solidarity with blacks to be laughable......Especially after blacks so failed to take advantage of the new liberties given to them, unlike Jews. What Jewish person under the age of 50 would liken black ghettos to Jewish ones....Oh yeah, Jewish ghettos don't exist anymore in the West.

    **Once Reaganite libertarianism took over (extreme individualism, live in the now rather than in the future, vent your emotions rather than bottle them up, etc.), pop culture became much more nihilistic by the mid 80's (we all knew we were headed towards a dystopia). So venomous crap like thug rap music became popular and commodified.

    Replies: @Lot, @dfordoom

    Jews have been legally defined as white in the USA since the naturalization act of 1798 required a legal definition of white, because it explicitly limited naturalization to white immigrants.

    The definition has always been Europeans plus near eastern Christians and Jews because both groups appear white and “readily admix” with the native white population.

    Make up your own dumb definition if you want, but nobody is going to use it, and all you’re doing is aping the far left critical race theorists.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @Lot

    There are sub-groups of whites. American Jews via inter-marriage since the end of WW2 (and esp. since circa 1970) are indeed becoming more genetically and culturally closer to Gentile White Americans. However, they still have far more non-European DNA than legacy white Americans.

    Legal definitions of what constitutes "whiteness" don't invalidate how even among white Europeans (and their descendants living elsewhere), there are distinct sub-groups.

    The 1920's immigration stoppage was heavily motivated by NW European descended whites wishing to stabilize America after it had been subjected to the malign influence of Ashkenazi Jews (communist and social libertine subversion, organized crime) and Italians (anarchism and organized crime). Ron Unz says that both period anecdote and recorded data suggest that in the Ellis Island period, Swedes, Germans, gentile Poles, and the Irish presented fewer problems than Jews and Italians.

    There has never been, nor will there ever be, a sense of long lasting and stable harmony between various groups of "whites"*. Look, even England has had distinct folkways that clashed at various times, and within Germany, the more Slavic eastern part of the country is different than the West.

    *Folks on the modern Right sometimes try to wish away generations of recorded conflict between different white sub-groups. Yet, the Progressive era of reform (including immigration stoppages) was rooted in NW European chauvinism. The idea of allying with Jews against a "common" enemy of non-Caucasians would've seemed demented to people like HP Lovecraft.

    Replies: @Lot

    , @Anonymous
    @Lot

    We have genetic testing now that can easily identify Jewish and other non-European ancestry. Furthermore, there have long been physical anthropological and other methods to identify Jewish ancestry. Far left critical race theorists deny genetics, biology, and traditional physical anthropology altogether.

    You're half-Jewish, so naturally you favor a more inclusive definition of "white" that includes non-European ancestry from the Middle East and won't discriminate against you. But that's just a subjective preference. It's fine and understandable you hold this view, but it's no more valid than a more exclusive definition that excludes non-European ancestry from the Middle East.

  38. @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing

    Not as a percentage of their respective populations. So, no, not “prone to mixing” – their raw intermarriage numbers are the highest simply because they are the two numerically largest population groups.

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.

    Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    But I’m guessing the latter, based on this rhetoric.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    Not as a percentage of their respective populations. So, no, not “prone to mixing” – their raw intermarriage numbers are the highest simply because they are the two numerically largest population groups.

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.
     
    I can see you haven't changed a bit, Twinkles.

    Anyway, the most recent numbers indicate that blacks are 13.4, while Hispanics account for 18.5%. So, there are ~50% more Hispanics than blacks, but HM-WF marriages are almost 3× more common than BM-WF ones.

    Now, tell me Twinkles, are you numerically illiterate, or are you a liar?

    Replies: @Twinkie

  39. @prime noticer
    agree with most observations.

    europeans are already below 50% when you exclude the people who aren't europeans. jews, middle easterners, and magreb people aren't europeans. mestizos aren't europeans. that's not even taking into account who the fathers are of these european mothers.

    not only are africans at 15% higher than their population at 13%, but lots of the european mothers are just having mulattos. we're not sure how many. these people will all be counted as africans, so maybe the african share of births is as high as 20%, which squares with my observations on the ground that with people under 30, africans are already 20% of the population, not 13%. anybody familiar with how organizations and groups works know that when africans get to about 15 or 20 percent of the people involved, they start to forcefully assert themselves, and then the entire enterprise has to be reorganized around african interests.

    half the 'asians' are indians now. they're brown, not yellow. but half the yellow mother births are to european men. so it's getting hard to accurately count what's going on. these are the only people who seamlessly merge into the larger european culture.

    how many people in the hispanic category are europeans? some, but not many. even guys like Marco Rubio who appear to be plainly european, test out genetically as 15 to 20 percent other. where to draw those lines are not clear, but it's evident that many of these people are mixed race. i would venture few of them are pure blooded europeans like the Mexican ruling class. there's plenty of people in California and Texas and Florida with Spanish names who are completely european, but that's not the majority of them. these mixed race people are the only strivers left who are seeking to enter the european category - that has to be where those intermarriage statistics come from.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    half the ‘asians’ are indians now.

    About a quarter, not half. Another quarter is Southeast Asian, mostly Filipinos and Vietnamese.

    Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans account for about 40% today (from a large super-majority 30 years ago).

  40. @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone


    Not included in the chart are American Indians whose intermarriage rate is over 50%, the highest.

    Note also that Asian intermarriage rate is even higher than that on the chart, if born in the U.S.

    • Replies: @t
    @Twinkie

    Here's a chart for the US born broken down with Asians broken down by ethnicity:

    https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/986761107602681857

  41. fertiliy rate among all race/ethnic groups in the USA is below replacement rate , asian women have the lowes fertility at 1.5 , also fertility among native born non-whites is lower than among foreign born whites
    https://cis.org/Report/Immigrant-and-NativeBorn-Fertility-2008-2018

  42. The chart indicates the race of the mother. On a somewhat related note, I noticed that famous black men have a very high reproductive rate, as they span multiple women (both white and black).

    I made this list. The criteria is that the man listed was famous at any time from 1950-2000, and had four or more biological children. A lot of men not listed still had three. The list :

    Elijah Muhammad : 23
    ‘Screamin’ Jay Hawkins : 33+ (perhaps over 60)
    Ray Charles : 12 (!!!)
    Sammy Davis Jr. : 4
    Harry Bellafonte : 4
    James Meredith : 4
    Richard Pryor : 7
    James Brown : 13
    BB King : 15
    Richard Roundtree : 5
    Sidney Poitier : 6
    Fats Domino : 8
    Miles Davis : 4
    Roscoe Orman : 4
    Otis Redding : 4
    Chuck Berry : 4
    Flip Wilson : 5
    Oscar Peterson : 6
    Sam Cooke : 6 (would have had more)
    Louis Farrakhan : 9
    Khalid Abdul Muhammad : 5
    Benjamin Chavis : 8
    Malcolm X : 6 (would have had more)
    MLK : 4 (would have had more)
    Ralph Abernathy : 5
    Jesse Jackson : 6
    Gordon Parks : 4
    Andrew Young : 4
    Willie Brown : 4
    Joe Louis : 6
    Bobo Brazil : 6
    Muhammad Ali : 9
    George Foreman : 10
    Mike Tyson : 8
    Evander Holyfield : 11
    Floyd Mayweather Sr. : 5
    Floyd Mayweather Jr. : 5
    Kimbo Slice : 6
    Joe Jackson : 11
    Jackie Jackson : 4
    Jermaine Jackson : 7
    Stevie Wonder : 9 (!!!)
    Berry Gordy : 8
    Quincy Jones : 7
    James Ingram : 6
    Barry White : 9
    Isaac Hayes : 14
    Bob Marley : 9 (not an American, technically, but still).
    Philip Bailey : 7
    Ramsey Lewis : 7
    Curtis Mayfield : 10
    Jackie Wilson : 9
    Al Green : 6
    Lou Rawls : 4
    Bill Cosby : 5
    Ahmad Rashad : 5
    Montel Williams : 4
    Demond Wilson : 6
    Ben Vereen : 5
    Robert Guillaume : 5
    Lawrence Fishburne : 4
    Larry Holmes : 5
    Ernie Hudson : 4
    Fred Williamson : 6
    Morgan Freeman : 4
    Yaphet Kotto : 6
    Eddie Murphy : 10
    Phillip Michael Thomas : 11
    Denzel Washington : 4
    Cuba Gooding Sr : 4
    Wesley Snipes : 5
    Doug Williams : 8
    OJ Simpson : 5
    Travis Henry : 11
    Calvin Murphy : 14
    Kareem Abdul-Jabbar : 5
    Michael Jordan : 5
    Scottie Pippen : 5
    Karl Malone : 7
    Shaquille O’Neal : 5
    Jason Caffey : 10
    Willie Anderson : 9
    Dwight Howard : 5
    Royce White : 5
    Shawn Kemp : 7
    Emmitt Smith : 4
    William ‘Fridge’ Perry : 4
    Chad Johnson : 4
    Willis McGahee : 9
    Deion Sanders : 5
    MC Hammer : 5
    Bobby Brown : 7
    P Diddy : 6
    Master P : 7
    LL Cool J : 4
    Snoop Dogg : 4
    MC Ren : 5
    Dr. Dre : 6
    Warren G : 4
    Coolio : 10
    Eazy-E : 11
    Kurupt : 6
    Kokane : 8
    DMX : 15
    Ginuwine : 7
    Flavor Flav : 7
    T.I. : 6
    Run DMC : 6
    Swizz Beatz : 5
    Lil Wayne : 4
    Ol’ Dirty Bastard : 4 (would have had more)
    Ghostface Killah : 4
    John Singleton : 7
    Ice Cube : 4
    Steve Harvey : 4
    Eddie Griffin : 9
    Tracy Morgan : 4
    Kanye West : 4

    • Replies: @Too Long Didn't Read
    @Thomm

    Don't you know what


    MORE

    means?

  43. @Feryl
    @Rosie


    For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM
     
    Well, we should (and often do) pity young white women who lack the ability to discern between men with prospects and men with no realistic prospects of achieving much ("aspiring" rap star/pro athlete don't count). In America, black males on average have much lower socio-economic status than white or Asian guys. Plus, black males are much more violent on average. A white woman who elopes with a brotha is likely to end up unhappy and broke....And might even end up with loose teeth from a severe beating. Trolls have placed domestic violence statistics (w/racial breakdowns) on college campuses, with predictable results ("that's racist").

    There's also the fact, as I mentioned earlier, that the products of black/white reproduction tend to be the most neurotic and suicidal. Although Ed Dutton thinks that partly due to mentally ill people being more likely to elope outside their race.

    There's a genuine reason to be concerned for the health of white women (and their kids) who choose blacks. And it's frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Thomm, @martin_2

    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.

    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man’s attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.

    Serial killers get love letters from thousands of women. Violent gangsters get laid like tile.

    By contrast, White Tr*shionalists get zero. This is why 40% of the WN community shifted to homosexuality, and then try to pressure the other 60% to join them.

    • LOL: LondonBob
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Thomm



    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.
     
    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man’s attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.
     
    There's certainly a proportion of women who are attracted to violent men. The question is whether it's the violence that attracts them, or whether they're seeking to be dominated (which is not quite the same thing). Or maybe they're just looking for hyper-masculine men and if they're surrounded by soy boys they end up choosing violent men because that's all they can find.

    Female psychology is complicated.

    I do think it's true that men on the far right don't seem to understand very much about women. That's why they're so angry at women.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @nebulafox, @Justvisiting

    , @Twinkie
    @Thomm

    I get violent thoughts when I read your garbage musings.

    Replies: @Thomm

  44. @Twinkie

    Treating all multiracial births as non-white statistically erases the white parent’s contribution.
     
    Would it be terribly racist - and thus supremely evil - to treat white-Asian mixes as 3/4 white, white-Hispanic mixes as 1/2 white, and white-black mixes as 1/4 white for statistical purposes? ;)

    In all seriousness, it’s odd when people such as my children are categorized as “nonwhite” - does that mean they are also non-East Asian?

    graph’s color scheme
     
    The yellow section should be a lot browner than in the past. East Asians today only constitute less than half of Asians in America (roughly a quarter is made up of people from the subcontinent and the other quarter from Southeast Asia).

    Read this piece from 1998 - from the NYT of all places: https://www.nytimes.com/1998/08/16/magazine/the-beige-and-the-black.html

    Oddly, the U.S. Census Bureau has yet to account properly for the presence of mixed-race Americans. As a result, many of its projections are off target. For example, the bureau has famously predicted that in 2050, whites will make up 52.7 percent of the U.S. population. (In 1990, it was 75.7 percent.) Hispanics will account for 21.1 percent of the population; blacks, 15 percent, and Asians, 10.1 percent. Presumably, 2050 will be white America's last stand. But this projection is dubious, because it assumes that for the next half-century there will be absolutely no intermarriage among the four major conventionally defined racial groups in the United States: whites, blacks, Hispanics and Asians. Each group is supposed to somehow expand -- or decline -- in hermetic isolation.

    But according to an analysis of the 1990 U.S. Census data for persons ages 25-34 by Reynolds Farley, a demographer with the Russell Sage Foundation, 31.6 percent of native-born Hispanic husbands and 31.4 percent of native-born Hispanic wives had white spouses. The figures were even higher for Asians: 36 percent for native-born Asian husbands and 45.2 percent for native-born Asian wives. (In fact, Asian wives were as likely to marry white Americans as they were to marry Asian-Americans.) The highest intermarriage rates are those of American Indians. Majorities of American Indian men (52.9 percent) and American Indian women (53.9 percent) married whites rather than American Indians (40.3 percent and 37.2 percent, respectively). And these figures, which themselves document the creolization of America, undoubtedly understate the extent of racial intermarriage that the 2000 Census will reveal...

    Nevertheless, the overall increase in intermarriage means that both multicultural liberals and nativist conservatives have misunderstood the major demographic trends in this country. There is not going to be a nonwhite majority in the 21st century. Rather, there is going to be a mostly white mixed-race majority. The only way to stop this is to force all Hispanic and Asian-Americans from now on to marry within their officially defined groups. And that is not going to happen.

    Thus, the old duality between whites and nonwhites is finally breaking down. But don't cheer just yet. For what seems to be emerging in the United States is a new dichotomy between blacks and nonblacks. Increasingly, whites, Asians and Hispanics are creating a broad community from which black Americans may be excluded.
     

    Replies: @SFG, @Jay Fink

    A half white/ half hispanic is more white than you think. I used to assume Hispanics were 50% Spanish and 50% Indigenous. I was wrong. There is a lot of variation but most of the genetic reports I have seen of Hispanics are dominated by Southern European DNA, figures like 70% are not uncommon. No wonder the Census considers Hispanic as a sub group under the white umbrella (with a small minority under the black umbrella such as Afro-Cubans).

    So most Hispanics are already well over half white. A baby that is half Hispanic and half ( non-Hispanic) white would be techincally over 75% white, most closer to 85%. Some might not consider Spaniards (or Italians for that matter) to be “white” but that is a whole other debate.

    • Replies: @res
    @Jay Fink


    There is a lot of variation but most of the genetic reports I have seen of Hispanics are dominated by Southern European DNA, figures like 70% are not uncommon.
     
    Be careful of selection bias here. Based on this graphic I think the bulk of Hispanics are in something like the 40-65% range. Though there is a significant fraction of very genetically white "Hispanics."

    https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0002929719303386-gr2.jpg

    Caption:

    Figure 2. The First Two Principal Components of Genetically Inferred Ancestry and HARE Assignments for Individuals, whose SIRE Is Non-missing and Consistent across Records

    Colored points represent individuals whose HARE agrees with SIRE. Black points highlight individuals whose genetically inferred ancestry strongly disagrees with SIRE; subsequently HARE for these individuals is set to missing. All other MVP participants are denoted in gray. The gold triangle indicates a hypothetical individual whose HARE could be non-Hispanic European, Hispanic, or missing, depending on her SIRE. Shown are non-Hispanic white (A), non-Hispanic black (B), Hispanic (C), and non-Hispanic Asian (D).
     
    Full paper at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929719303386
    , @Twinkie
    @Jay Fink

    It was in jest. Don’t take it too seriously.

    However, I would speculate with some confidence that white-Asian mixes have cognitive profiles closer to the white average than white-Hispanic mixes, as the two pairings have different demographic profiles on average.

    Replies: @t

    , @anonymous
    @Jay Fink

    It goes to show that it is not over yet for the Republican Party. If the future 25% Hispanic demographic can be absorbed through intermarriage into the white category and policies are pursued that appeal to Hispanics and lower income whites then Republicans can still be the ruling political party of the future and America can remain racially cohesive. But it will first require boomers to retire from public life. People like Sailer are grossed out by the idea of absorbing Hispanics and do not like the idea of national healthcare.

  45. @neutral
    In America they count jews, Arabs, and all other MENA types as white as well, so that graph is not correct.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Jay Fink

    Last month during the BLM riots I had a black man in a store raise his fist at me. I was completely minding my own business and he was ready to attack me. “What did you say” he asked. When I said I didn’t say anything he gave me a mean look but put his fist down and said “that’s right”.

    What a ridiculous interaction. Believe me that black guy had no idea I am Jewish. He hated me because I am white. I was raised being told I’m white, everyone perceives me as white and when I look in the mirror I see a white guy. Judaism is an ethnicity just as much as it is a religion but it is not a seperate race.

  46. Even if this is accurate, the number of anti-white whites is not insignificant and already has us functioning as a minority.

  47. @Lot
    @Feryl

    Jews have been legally defined as white in the USA since the naturalization act of 1798 required a legal definition of white, because it explicitly limited naturalization to white immigrants.

    The definition has always been Europeans plus near eastern Christians and Jews because both groups appear white and “readily admix” with the native white population.

    Make up your own dumb definition if you want, but nobody is going to use it, and all you’re doing is aping the far left critical race theorists.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Anonymous

    There are sub-groups of whites. American Jews via inter-marriage since the end of WW2 (and esp. since circa 1970) are indeed becoming more genetically and culturally closer to Gentile White Americans. However, they still have far more non-European DNA than legacy white Americans.

    Legal definitions of what constitutes “whiteness” don’t invalidate how even among white Europeans (and their descendants living elsewhere), there are distinct sub-groups.

    The 1920’s immigration stoppage was heavily motivated by NW European descended whites wishing to stabilize America after it had been subjected to the malign influence of Ashkenazi Jews (communist and social libertine subversion, organized crime) and Italians (anarchism and organized crime). Ron Unz says that both period anecdote and recorded data suggest that in the Ellis Island period, Swedes, Germans, gentile Poles, and the Irish presented fewer problems than Jews and Italians.

    There has never been, nor will there ever be, a sense of long lasting and stable harmony between various groups of “whites”*. Look, even England has had distinct folkways that clashed at various times, and within Germany, the more Slavic eastern part of the country is different than the West.

    *Folks on the modern Right sometimes try to wish away generations of recorded conflict between different white sub-groups. Yet, the Progressive era of reform (including immigration stoppages) was rooted in NW European chauvinism. The idea of allying with Jews against a “common” enemy of non-Caucasians would’ve seemed demented to people like HP Lovecraft.

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Feryl

    “ Folks on the modern Right sometimes try to wish away generations of recorded conflict between different white sub-groups. ”

    Why not? The English and Scottish warred for centuries, then they stopped. Same with the English and French.

    Until the 20th century, the worst war for Germans was the 30 years war, which wasn’t between ethnic subgroups.

    https://i.pinimg.com/736x/f7/09/d1/f709d1ff87eb2f25ded84084ccabd723--affiliation--years.jpg

    “ However, they still have far more non-European DNA than legacy white Americans.”

    Depends who the other white Americans are. The ancestors of SJs and AJs arrived in Europe while the Huns and Bulgars were still in Asia.

    “rooted in NW European chauvinism.”

    That’s now extinct.

  48. @Feryl
    @Rosie


    For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM
     
    Well, we should (and often do) pity young white women who lack the ability to discern between men with prospects and men with no realistic prospects of achieving much ("aspiring" rap star/pro athlete don't count). In America, black males on average have much lower socio-economic status than white or Asian guys. Plus, black males are much more violent on average. A white woman who elopes with a brotha is likely to end up unhappy and broke....And might even end up with loose teeth from a severe beating. Trolls have placed domestic violence statistics (w/racial breakdowns) on college campuses, with predictable results ("that's racist").

    There's also the fact, as I mentioned earlier, that the products of black/white reproduction tend to be the most neurotic and suicidal. Although Ed Dutton thinks that partly due to mentally ill people being more likely to elope outside their race.

    There's a genuine reason to be concerned for the health of white women (and their kids) who choose blacks. And it's frightening to think that at least 7% of white women do not have the judgement to stay away from black males.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Thomm, @martin_2

    If a woman is obese, of low intelligence, or very plain, then it might be that all she can hope for is attention from a black man. One can hardly blame them if the alternative is loneliness. It used to annoy me greatly that white women would go with blacks and have children by them, but it never occurred to me until later that I personally would never have given such a woman the time of day.

    • Agree: LondonBob, Justvisiting
  49. @Feryl
    @dfordoom


    MENA types may be non-European but plenty of them are definitely white. And plenty of Jews are white.
     
    White and European are not the same thing. In America, Jews in the 1930's-1960's* were socialized to identify with blacks, what with the whole "not of the gentile majority" thing going on. Jewish record company executives rationalized the filthy lucre of mass marketed thug rap "music" by claiming that black discontent against the "white" system (and common decency) was honorable**, needed to be heard, and was worth celebrating by minoritarians and "civil rights" malcontents across the land.

    *Once the 70's happened, Jews were fully "allowed" to do as they wished, end result being that they got much closer to white gentiles (often inter-marrying) to the point that younger Jews find the idea of solidarity with blacks to be laughable......Especially after blacks so failed to take advantage of the new liberties given to them, unlike Jews. What Jewish person under the age of 50 would liken black ghettos to Jewish ones....Oh yeah, Jewish ghettos don't exist anymore in the West.

    **Once Reaganite libertarianism took over (extreme individualism, live in the now rather than in the future, vent your emotions rather than bottle them up, etc.), pop culture became much more nihilistic by the mid 80's (we all knew we were headed towards a dystopia). So venomous crap like thug rap music became popular and commodified.

    Replies: @Lot, @dfordoom

    White and European are not the same thing.

    Precisely. Discussions about race that conflate racial categories (like black) with linguistic categories (like Hispanic) and geographical categories (like European) will always end up being pointless.

    You can’t have an intelligent discussion on the topic if you haven’t even clearly defined what it is you’re talking about.

    Terms like white and Asian are so vague as to be meaningless. I’d be very surprised if subcontinental Indians and Koreans consider themselves to be more or less interchangeable.

    What on earth does white mean? It doesn’t mean the same as Caucasian so white is not actually a race. It doesn’t mean the same thing as European, although some people like to think it does. It’s not a meaningful cultural category. It just doesn’t mean anything at all.

    I’m not arguing that race doesn’t exist. But if you want to talk about race then you have to have coherent ideas about what you’re actually talking about. If you’re really more concerned with culture than race you’d be better off making that explicit.

    Ethnicities seem to me to be more meaningful than race.

    Maybe it’s not possible to have rational discussions on this subject because terms like “race” and “white” just make people irrationally angry, while terms like “Asian” and “Hispanic” and “MENA” are just confusing and misleading.

    A graph or chart that divides people into white, Asian, black and Hispanic is about as useful as a chart that divides animals into “animals that are fierce”, “animals that are good to eat”, “animals that are cute” and “animals without feathers”.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
    @dfordoom

    I sort of agree. The only meaningful categories are ethnic categories. If an ethnic group in the US has maintained ethnic markers; primarily language, then they should seek to maintain that ethnicity. For example, a relatively fluent Greek-speaking Greek American should seek another Greek-speaking Greek or Greek American to perpetuate the ethnos. However, an American with German ancestry but no ability to converse in German just goes into the vague American ethnic category. To an outsider it does not really matter if the American category is white, yellow or blue they are just Americans who are primarily just empty vessels which are filled with whatever ideas corporates or other organisations want to sell to them. Then they then try to imperiously export this to the rest of world.

  50. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Rosie

    I posted a similar graph & it shows less intermarriage percentage. Though, most ratios are right, except white- Indian/Native American, where it is basically 50/50 for male-female combination, while in this graph wm-naf is almost twice as numerous.

    https://static01.nyt.com/packages/images/newsgraphics/2011/0130-mixed-race/0130-nat-mixed.png

    Replies: @res

    Thanks. This looks like the original source.
    https://www.socialexplorer.com/blog/post/social-explorer-data-on-interracial-marriage-in-the-new-york-times-673

    That is a 2011 article using 2009 data. Rosie’s graphic uses 2014-2015 Pew data so is a bit more recent.
    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/1-trends-and-patterns-in-intermarriage/

    One interesting observation from your graphic is that the white outmarriage rate almost tripled for both men and women (2.9x and 2.6x respectively) from 1980 to 2009. You can see that by taking the current male and female rates and subtracting the change from the graph to get the 1980 rate per 1000.

    Men 53 – 35 = 18
    Women 44 – 27 = 17

    It would be informative to look at how all of these numbers relate to group population percentages, but I am not sure about the right way to evaluate that.

  51. @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage.

    But how many of those “interracial marriages” are actually interracial marriages? They’re really just marriages between two different white ethnicities. How is it any different from a Polish-American marrying an Italian-American?

    Of course you will still end up with a single monoculture instead of different cultures, in other words you’ll still end up with less actual diversity, but it will be a white monoculture.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    But how many of those “interracial marriages” are actually interracial marriages? They’re really just marriages between two different white ethnicities.
     
    I don't think so. Heavily European Mexicans and Central Americans don't come here. They do fine in their own countries. It's the mostly indio peasants who come here.
  52. @Jay Fink
    @Twinkie

    A half white/ half hispanic is more white than you think. I used to assume Hispanics were 50% Spanish and 50% Indigenous. I was wrong. There is a lot of variation but most of the genetic reports I have seen of Hispanics are dominated by Southern European DNA, figures like 70% are not uncommon. No wonder the Census considers Hispanic as a sub group under the white umbrella (with a small minority under the black umbrella such as Afro-Cubans).

    So most Hispanics are already well over half white. A baby that is half Hispanic and half ( non-Hispanic) white would be techincally over 75% white, most closer to 85%. Some might not consider Spaniards (or Italians for that matter) to be "white" but that is a whole other debate.

    Replies: @res, @Twinkie, @anonymous

    There is a lot of variation but most of the genetic reports I have seen of Hispanics are dominated by Southern European DNA, figures like 70% are not uncommon.

    Be careful of selection bias here. Based on this graphic I think the bulk of Hispanics are in something like the 40-65% range. Though there is a significant fraction of very genetically white “Hispanics.”

    Caption:

    Figure 2. The First Two Principal Components of Genetically Inferred Ancestry and HARE Assignments for Individuals, whose SIRE Is Non-missing and Consistent across Records

    Colored points represent individuals whose HARE agrees with SIRE. Black points highlight individuals whose genetically inferred ancestry strongly disagrees with SIRE; subsequently HARE for these individuals is set to missing. All other MVP participants are denoted in gray. The gold triangle indicates a hypothetical individual whose HARE could be non-Hispanic European, Hispanic, or missing, depending on her SIRE. Shown are non-Hispanic white (A), non-Hispanic black (B), Hispanic (C), and non-Hispanic Asian (D).

    Full paper at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929719303386

    • Thanks: Jay Fink
  53. @Feryl
    @Lot

    There are sub-groups of whites. American Jews via inter-marriage since the end of WW2 (and esp. since circa 1970) are indeed becoming more genetically and culturally closer to Gentile White Americans. However, they still have far more non-European DNA than legacy white Americans.

    Legal definitions of what constitutes "whiteness" don't invalidate how even among white Europeans (and their descendants living elsewhere), there are distinct sub-groups.

    The 1920's immigration stoppage was heavily motivated by NW European descended whites wishing to stabilize America after it had been subjected to the malign influence of Ashkenazi Jews (communist and social libertine subversion, organized crime) and Italians (anarchism and organized crime). Ron Unz says that both period anecdote and recorded data suggest that in the Ellis Island period, Swedes, Germans, gentile Poles, and the Irish presented fewer problems than Jews and Italians.

    There has never been, nor will there ever be, a sense of long lasting and stable harmony between various groups of "whites"*. Look, even England has had distinct folkways that clashed at various times, and within Germany, the more Slavic eastern part of the country is different than the West.

    *Folks on the modern Right sometimes try to wish away generations of recorded conflict between different white sub-groups. Yet, the Progressive era of reform (including immigration stoppages) was rooted in NW European chauvinism. The idea of allying with Jews against a "common" enemy of non-Caucasians would've seemed demented to people like HP Lovecraft.

    Replies: @Lot

    “ Folks on the modern Right sometimes try to wish away generations of recorded conflict between different white sub-groups. ”

    Why not? The English and Scottish warred for centuries, then they stopped. Same with the English and French.

    Until the 20th century, the worst war for Germans was the 30 years war, which wasn’t between ethnic subgroups.

    “ However, they still have far more non-European DNA than legacy white Americans.”

    Depends who the other white Americans are. The ancestors of SJs and AJs arrived in Europe while the Huns and Bulgars were still in Asia.

    “rooted in NW European chauvinism.”

    That’s now extinct.

  54. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing
     
    Not as a percentage of their respective populations. So, no, not “prone to mixing” - their raw intermarriage numbers are the highest simply because they are the two numerically largest population groups.

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.

    Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.
     
    But I’m guessing the latter, based on this rhetoric.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Not as a percentage of their respective populations. So, no, not “prone to mixing” – their raw intermarriage numbers are the highest simply because they are the two numerically largest population groups.

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.

    I can see you haven’t changed a bit, Twinkles.

    Anyway, the most recent numbers indicate that blacks are 13.4, while Hispanics account for 18.5%. So, there are ~50% more Hispanics than blacks, but HM-WF marriages are almost 3× more common than BM-WF ones.

    Now, tell me Twinkles, are you numerically illiterate, or are you a liar?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    Now, tell me Twinkles, are you numerically illiterate, or are you a liar?
     
    Do you not understand the difference between per capita and raw numbers?

    If there are 100 million whites and 10% intermarry, that’s 10 million. If there are 10 million Asians and 30% intermarry, that’s “only” 3 million. Obviously there would be 3 times as many out-married whites. But that also means 90 million whites marry other whites while only 7 million Asians marry other Asians, meaning almost 13 times as many W-W marriages as A-A marriages. If anything, this is Asian genocide in the U.S. ;)

    If you want to compare tendencies (“prone to...”), you compare it on a per capita basis within each group. Using your “logic” would mean that whites are the most criminal of all races in the U.S. since they commit a majority of crimes in the U.S. But we all know that’s not the case since blacks, on a per capita basis, commit the most crimes.

    This is elementary school math/statistics, and I am sad that you don’t get this and instead accuse me of lying. And to think that you homeschool your children... I feel badly for your alleged children.

    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult. You don’t see me addressing you as “Dumb Whore,” do you? Let’s not be juvenile.

    Replies: @Rosie

  55. @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage.
     
    But how many of those "interracial marriages" are actually interracial marriages? They're really just marriages between two different white ethnicities. How is it any different from a Polish-American marrying an Italian-American?

    Of course you will still end up with a single monoculture instead of different cultures, in other words you'll still end up with less actual diversity, but it will be a white monoculture.

    Replies: @Rosie

    But how many of those “interracial marriages” are actually interracial marriages? They’re really just marriages between two different white ethnicities.

    I don’t think so. Heavily European Mexicans and Central Americans don’t come here. They do fine in their own countries. It’s the mostly indio peasants who come here.

  56. @dfordoom
    @Feryl


    White and European are not the same thing.
     
    Precisely. Discussions about race that conflate racial categories (like black) with linguistic categories (like Hispanic) and geographical categories (like European) will always end up being pointless.

    You can't have an intelligent discussion on the topic if you haven't even clearly defined what it is you're talking about.

    Terms like white and Asian are so vague as to be meaningless. I'd be very surprised if subcontinental Indians and Koreans consider themselves to be more or less interchangeable.

    What on earth does white mean? It doesn't mean the same as Caucasian so white is not actually a race. It doesn't mean the same thing as European, although some people like to think it does. It's not a meaningful cultural category. It just doesn't mean anything at all.

    I'm not arguing that race doesn't exist. But if you want to talk about race then you have to have coherent ideas about what you're actually talking about. If you're really more concerned with culture than race you'd be better off making that explicit.

    Ethnicities seem to me to be more meaningful than race.

    Maybe it's not possible to have rational discussions on this subject because terms like "race" and "white" just make people irrationally angry, while terms like "Asian" and "Hispanic" and "MENA" are just confusing and misleading.

    A graph or chart that divides people into white, Asian, black and Hispanic is about as useful as a chart that divides animals into "animals that are fierce", "animals that are good to eat", "animals that are cute" and "animals without feathers".

    Replies: @Agathoklis

    I sort of agree. The only meaningful categories are ethnic categories. If an ethnic group in the US has maintained ethnic markers; primarily language, then they should seek to maintain that ethnicity. For example, a relatively fluent Greek-speaking Greek American should seek another Greek-speaking Greek or Greek American to perpetuate the ethnos. However, an American with German ancestry but no ability to converse in German just goes into the vague American ethnic category. To an outsider it does not really matter if the American category is white, yellow or blue they are just Americans who are primarily just empty vessels which are filled with whatever ideas corporates or other organisations want to sell to them. Then they then try to imperiously export this to the rest of world.

  57. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    Not as a percentage of their respective populations. So, no, not “prone to mixing” – their raw intermarriage numbers are the highest simply because they are the two numerically largest population groups.

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.
     
    I can see you haven't changed a bit, Twinkles.

    Anyway, the most recent numbers indicate that blacks are 13.4, while Hispanics account for 18.5%. So, there are ~50% more Hispanics than blacks, but HM-WF marriages are almost 3× more common than BM-WF ones.

    Now, tell me Twinkles, are you numerically illiterate, or are you a liar?

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Now, tell me Twinkles, are you numerically illiterate, or are you a liar?

    Do you not understand the difference between per capita and raw numbers?

    If there are 100 million whites and 10% intermarry, that’s 10 million. If there are 10 million Asians and 30% intermarry, that’s “only” 3 million. Obviously there would be 3 times as many out-married whites. But that also means 90 million whites marry other whites while only 7 million Asians marry other Asians, meaning almost 13 times as many W-W marriages as A-A marriages. If anything, this is Asian genocide in the U.S. 😉

    If you want to compare tendencies (“prone to…”), you compare it on a per capita basis within each group. Using your “logic” would mean that whites are the most criminal of all races in the U.S. since they commit a majority of crimes in the U.S. But we all know that’s not the case since blacks, on a per capita basis, commit the most crimes.

    This is elementary school math/statistics, and I am sad that you don’t get this and instead accuse me of lying. And to think that you homeschool your children… I feel badly for your alleged children.

    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult. You don’t see me addressing you as “Dumb Whore,” do you? Let’s not be juvenile.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult. You don’t see me addressing you as “Dumb Whore,” do you? Let’s not be juvenile.
     
    I'll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I'll be civil to you. You said to me, totally unprovoked, the following:

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.
     
    Unless and until you change your attitude, you have no standing to make demands on anyone.

    Now, to the merits.

    If there are 100 million whites and 10% intermarry, that’s 10 million. If there are 10 million Asians and 30% intermarry, that’s “only” 3 million. Obviously there would be 3 times as many out-married whites. But that also means 90 million whites marry other whites while only 7 million Asians marry other Asians, meaning almost 13 times as many W-W marriages as A-A marriages. If anything, this is Asian genocide in the U.S.
     
    You have outdone yourself here, Twinkles. I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry, contra the Rushtonian claim that White women particularly like black men because they're "more masculine."

    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants and Asian media are openly celebrating the coming non-Asian majority and the end of Asian privilege.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @anon

  58. @Thomm
    The chart indicates the race of the mother. On a somewhat related note, I noticed that famous black men have a very high reproductive rate, as they span multiple women (both white and black).

    I made this list. The criteria is that the man listed was famous at any time from 1950-2000, and had four or more biological children. A lot of men not listed still had three. The list :

    Elijah Muhammad : 23
    ‘Screamin’ Jay Hawkins : 33+ (perhaps over 60)
    Ray Charles : 12 (!!!)
    Sammy Davis Jr. : 4
    Harry Bellafonte : 4
    James Meredith : 4
    Richard Pryor : 7
    James Brown : 13
    BB King : 15
    Richard Roundtree : 5
    Sidney Poitier : 6
    Fats Domino : 8
    Miles Davis : 4
    Roscoe Orman : 4
    Otis Redding : 4
    Chuck Berry : 4
    Flip Wilson : 5
    Oscar Peterson : 6
    Sam Cooke : 6 (would have had more)
    Louis Farrakhan : 9
    Khalid Abdul Muhammad : 5
    Benjamin Chavis : 8
    Malcolm X : 6 (would have had more)
    MLK : 4 (would have had more)
    Ralph Abernathy : 5
    Jesse Jackson : 6
    Gordon Parks : 4
    Andrew Young : 4
    Willie Brown : 4
    Joe Louis : 6
    Bobo Brazil : 6
    Muhammad Ali : 9
    George Foreman : 10
    Mike Tyson : 8
    Evander Holyfield : 11
    Floyd Mayweather Sr. : 5
    Floyd Mayweather Jr. : 5
    Kimbo Slice : 6
    Joe Jackson : 11
    Jackie Jackson : 4
    Jermaine Jackson : 7
    Stevie Wonder : 9 (!!!)
    Berry Gordy : 8
    Quincy Jones : 7
    James Ingram : 6
    Barry White : 9
    Isaac Hayes : 14
    Bob Marley : 9 (not an American, technically, but still).
    Philip Bailey : 7
    Ramsey Lewis : 7
    Curtis Mayfield : 10
    Jackie Wilson : 9
    Al Green : 6
    Lou Rawls : 4
    Bill Cosby : 5
    Ahmad Rashad : 5
    Montel Williams : 4
    Demond Wilson : 6
    Ben Vereen : 5
    Robert Guillaume : 5
    Lawrence Fishburne : 4
    Larry Holmes : 5
    Ernie Hudson : 4
    Fred Williamson : 6
    Morgan Freeman : 4
    Yaphet Kotto : 6
    Eddie Murphy : 10
    Phillip Michael Thomas : 11
    Denzel Washington : 4
    Cuba Gooding Sr : 4
    Wesley Snipes : 5
    Doug Williams : 8
    OJ Simpson : 5
    Travis Henry : 11
    Calvin Murphy : 14
    Kareem Abdul-Jabbar : 5
    Michael Jordan : 5
    Scottie Pippen : 5
    Karl Malone : 7
    Shaquille O’Neal : 5
    Jason Caffey : 10
    Willie Anderson : 9
    Dwight Howard : 5
    Royce White : 5
    Shawn Kemp : 7
    Emmitt Smith : 4
    William ‘Fridge’ Perry : 4
    Chad Johnson : 4
    Willis McGahee : 9
    Deion Sanders : 5
    MC Hammer : 5
    Bobby Brown : 7
    P Diddy : 6
    Master P : 7
    LL Cool J : 4
    Snoop Dogg : 4
    MC Ren : 5
    Dr. Dre : 6
    Warren G : 4
    Coolio : 10
    Eazy-E : 11
    Kurupt : 6
    Kokane : 8
    DMX : 15
    Ginuwine : 7
    Flavor Flav : 7
    T.I. : 6
    Run DMC : 6
    Swizz Beatz : 5
    Lil Wayne : 4
    Ol’ Dirty Bastard : 4 (would have had more)
    Ghostface Killah : 4
    John Singleton : 7
    Ice Cube : 4
    Steve Harvey : 4
    Eddie Griffin : 9
    Tracy Morgan : 4
    Kanye West : 4

    Replies: @Too Long Didn't Read

    Don’t you know what

    [MORE]

    MORE

    means?

  59. Some other interesting bits from Pew:

    Among cohabiting couples:

    Metro vs. non-Metro

    Trends for blacks and whites

    Asians by education

  60. Anybody who’s part-black is black. Anybody who’s part-anything else can be white.

    It’s not complicated.

    • Agree: Lowe
    • Disagree: Rosie
  61. @Thomm
    @Feryl


    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.
     
    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man's attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.

    Serial killers get love letters from thousands of women. Violent gangsters get laid like tile.

    By contrast, White Tr*shionalists get zero. This is why 40% of the WN community shifted to homosexuality, and then try to pressure the other 60% to join them.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Twinkie

    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.

    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man’s attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.

    There’s certainly a proportion of women who are attracted to violent men. The question is whether it’s the violence that attracts them, or whether they’re seeking to be dominated (which is not quite the same thing). Or maybe they’re just looking for hyper-masculine men and if they’re surrounded by soy boys they end up choosing violent men because that’s all they can find.

    Female psychology is complicated.

    I do think it’s true that men on the far right don’t seem to understand very much about women. That’s why they’re so angry at women.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @dfordoom

    Women like selective violence. They like men who can kick ass and dominate others, but can humor them and are kind to their children.

    Blacks are much more likely to be unselectively violent - not only fight with other men, but also beat their women and children. Nobody likes that - not even black women.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    , @nebulafox
    @dfordoom

    There's a fine line between wanting a dominant man and wanting a violent one that is obvious to non-psychopaths. The minority of women in the underclass who genuinely want violent men typically have other characteristics that make them radioactive relationship material. Part of being an adult man is recognizing that not needing a woman is the first, crucial step to becoming attractive to them.

    And it cuts both ways. Why would you want to bother with a white chick who brings an attitude of "entertain me, peasant" to the first date when you have other options? Not going Whiskey: developed world men my age have tons of problems. But let's not pretend today's dysfunctional courtship scene is solely our fault, or that at least early in life, women have their fantasies catered to a lot more by biological realities and society alike.

    Replies: @Justvisiting

    , @Justvisiting
    @dfordoom


    Female psychology is complicated.
     
    Actually it is not.

    You just need to know the rules.

    The vast majority of women are _very_ predictable.
  62. @Thomm
    @Feryl


    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.
     
    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man's attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.

    Serial killers get love letters from thousands of women. Violent gangsters get laid like tile.

    By contrast, White Tr*shionalists get zero. This is why 40% of the WN community shifted to homosexuality, and then try to pressure the other 60% to join them.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Twinkie

    I get violent thoughts when I read your garbage musings.

    • Replies: @Thomm
    @Twinkie


    I get violent thoughts when I read your garbage musings.
     
    Hey, if you are clueless about women, that is your problem. You were trained to be a 'Beta provider', which is the normal training your culture inculcates in men.

    Violent men get a huge amount of sexual attention from women. This goes all the way up to the most extreme violence, such as being a serial killer. This is no secret, and has been explained on blogs like Heartiste dozens of times. See dfordoom's comment, which is entirely correct. This is just female psychology 101.

    Btw, regarding your 'violent thoughts'*, I can't take you seriously enough to return the favor. As I instructed you before, 'Twinkie' is about as far from a masculine name as one could choose. Even 'Small Banana' would be an improvement. As would 'Ho ho' or 'Cadbury Creme Egg'.

    Of all the guys here, you are among the least capable of pulling off any ‘tough guy’ schtick, so I would recommend you don’t provide so much easy fuel for ridicule.

    Lastly, a medical professional enamored with processed food full of HFCS to the extent of choosing such a handle is another problem, and exposes the perverse incentives of our system (i.e. make people chronically unhealthy so they go to the hospital more). What about the Hippocratic Oath?


    Twinkie to Rosie :


    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult.
     
    Heh. Super thin-skinned, are we? I suppose you don't like it when Truth calls you 'Vladimir' either, even though that is an astronomical improvement over 'Twinkie', particularly in the masculinity department.

    I never thought anyone could make Rosie be in the right, but in your argument with her, more of her points are correct, than yours are.

    *Unless you mean 'violent thoughts' towards yourself. This, too, is a normal reaction by a beta provider when being exposed to unpleasant truths about female psychology that you devoted your whole life to being in denial of.

    Heh heh heh heh

  63. @Jay Fink
    @Twinkie

    A half white/ half hispanic is more white than you think. I used to assume Hispanics were 50% Spanish and 50% Indigenous. I was wrong. There is a lot of variation but most of the genetic reports I have seen of Hispanics are dominated by Southern European DNA, figures like 70% are not uncommon. No wonder the Census considers Hispanic as a sub group under the white umbrella (with a small minority under the black umbrella such as Afro-Cubans).

    So most Hispanics are already well over half white. A baby that is half Hispanic and half ( non-Hispanic) white would be techincally over 75% white, most closer to 85%. Some might not consider Spaniards (or Italians for that matter) to be "white" but that is a whole other debate.

    Replies: @res, @Twinkie, @anonymous

    It was in jest. Don’t take it too seriously.

    However, I would speculate with some confidence that white-Asian mixes have cognitive profiles closer to the white average than white-Hispanic mixes, as the two pairings have different demographic profiles on average.

    • Replies: @t
    @Twinkie

    I'd bet that white-Asians have higher IQs but white-Hispanics are closer to the white average. I can't find in 10 minutes on google but I saw a study that showed white-hispanic kids are very similar to whites on average. The incomes of mixed marriages indicate that same.


    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/02/sdt-2012-rise-of-intermarriage-10.png


    Edited to add: I now see you already linked to this chart sorry.

  64. Anonymous[908] • Disclaimer says:
    @Lot
    @Feryl

    Jews have been legally defined as white in the USA since the naturalization act of 1798 required a legal definition of white, because it explicitly limited naturalization to white immigrants.

    The definition has always been Europeans plus near eastern Christians and Jews because both groups appear white and “readily admix” with the native white population.

    Make up your own dumb definition if you want, but nobody is going to use it, and all you’re doing is aping the far left critical race theorists.

    Replies: @Feryl, @Anonymous

    We have genetic testing now that can easily identify Jewish and other non-European ancestry. Furthermore, there have long been physical anthropological and other methods to identify Jewish ancestry. Far left critical race theorists deny genetics, biology, and traditional physical anthropology altogether.

    You’re half-Jewish, so naturally you favor a more inclusive definition of “white” that includes non-European ancestry from the Middle East and won’t discriminate against you. But that’s just a subjective preference. It’s fine and understandable you hold this view, but it’s no more valid than a more exclusive definition that excludes non-European ancestry from the Middle East.

  65. @dfordoom
    @Thomm



    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.
     
    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man’s attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.
     
    There's certainly a proportion of women who are attracted to violent men. The question is whether it's the violence that attracts them, or whether they're seeking to be dominated (which is not quite the same thing). Or maybe they're just looking for hyper-masculine men and if they're surrounded by soy boys they end up choosing violent men because that's all they can find.

    Female psychology is complicated.

    I do think it's true that men on the far right don't seem to understand very much about women. That's why they're so angry at women.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @nebulafox, @Justvisiting

    Women like selective violence. They like men who can kick ass and dominate others, but can humor them and are kind to their children.

    Blacks are much more likely to be unselectively violent – not only fight with other men, but also beat their women and children. Nobody likes that – not even black women.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    Women like selective violence. They like men who can kick ass and dominate others, but can humor them and are kind to their children.
     
    That's basically true. But you can't discount the fact (distasteful or embarrassing as it may be to some) that there's a not insignificant number of women who enjoy stuff like rough sex and even S&M play.

    And I'm not picking on women here. There are plenty of men who have equally embarrassing sexual quirks.

    The problem for women today is that if they date white soy boys they're probably going to be lucky to get any sex at all, much less the kind of sex they crave.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  66. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    Now, tell me Twinkles, are you numerically illiterate, or are you a liar?
     
    Do you not understand the difference between per capita and raw numbers?

    If there are 100 million whites and 10% intermarry, that’s 10 million. If there are 10 million Asians and 30% intermarry, that’s “only” 3 million. Obviously there would be 3 times as many out-married whites. But that also means 90 million whites marry other whites while only 7 million Asians marry other Asians, meaning almost 13 times as many W-W marriages as A-A marriages. If anything, this is Asian genocide in the U.S. ;)

    If you want to compare tendencies (“prone to...”), you compare it on a per capita basis within each group. Using your “logic” would mean that whites are the most criminal of all races in the U.S. since they commit a majority of crimes in the U.S. But we all know that’s not the case since blacks, on a per capita basis, commit the most crimes.

    This is elementary school math/statistics, and I am sad that you don’t get this and instead accuse me of lying. And to think that you homeschool your children... I feel badly for your alleged children.

    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult. You don’t see me addressing you as “Dumb Whore,” do you? Let’s not be juvenile.

    Replies: @Rosie

    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult. You don’t see me addressing you as “Dumb Whore,” do you? Let’s not be juvenile.

    I’ll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I’ll be civil to you. You said to me, totally unprovoked, the following:

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.

    Unless and until you change your attitude, you have no standing to make demands on anyone.

    Now, to the merits.

    If there are 100 million whites and 10% intermarry, that’s 10 million. If there are 10 million Asians and 30% intermarry, that’s “only” 3 million. Obviously there would be 3 times as many out-married whites. But that also means 90 million whites marry other whites while only 7 million Asians marry other Asians, meaning almost 13 times as many W-W marriages as A-A marriages. If anything, this is Asian genocide in the U.S.

    You have outdone yourself here, Twinkles. I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry, contra the Rushtonian claim that White women particularly like black men because they’re “more masculine.”

    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants and Asian media are openly celebrating the coming non-Asian majority and the end of Asian privilege.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    I’ll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I’ll be civil to you.
     
    Are you asking me to address you as “Dumb Whore”? I decline.

    I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry
     
    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.

    *Indeed, Hispanics are more likely to intermarry with non-whites than Asians.

    I might also add that the respective intermarriage rates are segmented by class (W-H marriages are lower profile than W-A marriages).

    If you wanted to be accurate, and not be deceptive, what you should have written is that, among intermarried couples, white-Hispanic ones are the most numerous, instead or words such as “prone to” or “likely to.”


    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants
     
    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others - they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie, @dfordoom

    , @anon
    @Rosie

    Unless and until you change your attitude, you have no standing to make demands on anyone.

    Oh, lol @ this irony.

    I guess Rosie is confusing Twinkie with Mr. Rosie now.

    Replies: @Rosie

  67. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult. You don’t see me addressing you as “Dumb Whore,” do you? Let’s not be juvenile.
     
    I'll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I'll be civil to you. You said to me, totally unprovoked, the following:

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.
     
    Unless and until you change your attitude, you have no standing to make demands on anyone.

    Now, to the merits.

    If there are 100 million whites and 10% intermarry, that’s 10 million. If there are 10 million Asians and 30% intermarry, that’s “only” 3 million. Obviously there would be 3 times as many out-married whites. But that also means 90 million whites marry other whites while only 7 million Asians marry other Asians, meaning almost 13 times as many W-W marriages as A-A marriages. If anything, this is Asian genocide in the U.S.
     
    You have outdone yourself here, Twinkles. I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry, contra the Rushtonian claim that White women particularly like black men because they're "more masculine."

    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants and Asian media are openly celebrating the coming non-Asian majority and the end of Asian privilege.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @anon

    I’ll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I’ll be civil to you.

    Are you asking me to address you as “Dumb Whore”? I decline.

    I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry

    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.

    *Indeed, Hispanics are more likely to intermarry with non-whites than Asians.

    I might also add that the respective intermarriage rates are segmented by class (W-H marriages are lower profile than W-A marriages).

    If you wanted to be accurate, and not be deceptive, what you should have written is that, among intermarried couples, white-Hispanic ones are the most numerous, instead or words such as “prone to” or “likely to.”

    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants

    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others – they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Twinkie


    instead or words such as “prone to” or “likely to.”
     
    Meant “instead of.”

    their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman
     
    Meant 2018.
    , @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.
     
    Can someone please explain to this retard that the point is that Hispanic men are statisticaally overrepresented, and black men underrepresented, among non-White spouses of intermarried White women? I seem to be unable to get it through his very thick skull.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    , @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others – they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!
     
    A fertility rate of 0.98 really is frighteningly low. While I'm not convinced that declining population is necessarily a bad thing, population decline as fast as that is definitely not survivable.

    Obviously East Asian fertility is affected by many of the same things as white fertility in the West - urbanisation, consumerism, mass education, high rates of tertiary education - but there must be something else that has caused fertility to drop even lower (much lower) than white fertility. Do you have any personal theories as to the reason for the truly spectacular nature of East Asian fertility collapse?

    Replies: @Twinkie

  68. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    I’ll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I’ll be civil to you.
     
    Are you asking me to address you as “Dumb Whore”? I decline.

    I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry
     
    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.

    *Indeed, Hispanics are more likely to intermarry with non-whites than Asians.

    I might also add that the respective intermarriage rates are segmented by class (W-H marriages are lower profile than W-A marriages).

    If you wanted to be accurate, and not be deceptive, what you should have written is that, among intermarried couples, white-Hispanic ones are the most numerous, instead or words such as “prone to” or “likely to.”


    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants
     
    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others - they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie, @dfordoom

    instead or words such as “prone to” or “likely to.”

    Meant “instead of.”

    their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman

    Meant 2018.

  69. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    I’ll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I’ll be civil to you.
     
    Are you asking me to address you as “Dumb Whore”? I decline.

    I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry
     
    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.

    *Indeed, Hispanics are more likely to intermarry with non-whites than Asians.

    I might also add that the respective intermarriage rates are segmented by class (W-H marriages are lower profile than W-A marriages).

    If you wanted to be accurate, and not be deceptive, what you should have written is that, among intermarried couples, white-Hispanic ones are the most numerous, instead or words such as “prone to” or “likely to.”


    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants
     
    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others - they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie, @dfordoom

    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.

    Can someone please explain to this retard that the point is that Hispanic men are statisticaally overrepresented, and black men underrepresented, among non-White spouses of intermarried White women? I seem to be unable to get it through his very thick skull.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    the point is that Hispanic men are statisticaally overrepresented, and black men underrepresented, among non-White spouses of intermarried White women?
     
    I’m not arguing that part, ye woman of low intelligence and loose morality. I’m arguing this part of what you wrote is wrong:

    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry.
     
    Stop trying to shift and backtrack.

    Replies: @Rosie

  70. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.
     
    Can someone please explain to this retard that the point is that Hispanic men are statisticaally overrepresented, and black men underrepresented, among non-White spouses of intermarried White women? I seem to be unable to get it through his very thick skull.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    the point is that Hispanic men are statisticaally overrepresented, and black men underrepresented, among non-White spouses of intermarried White women?

    I’m not arguing that part, ye woman of low intelligence and loose morality. I’m arguing this part of what you wrote is wrong:

    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry.

    Stop trying to shift and backtrack.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    I’m not arguing that part,
     
    Good.

    Stop trying to shift and backtrack.
     
    Somehow, Twinkles, ye midwit troll and pompous divider of White people, noone other than you failed to grasp fom the context that by "prone to mixing" I meant prone to mixing with each other. Hence, Hispanics are a serious assimilation threat.

    It matters not in the least whether Whites are more likely than other groups to intermarry or not. Here's what matters:

    If nothing is done, within a few generations, Asia will still be full of Asians, Africa will still be full of Africans. Whites will be gone.

    Or are you going to start denying the Law of Competitive Exclusion again?

    Replies: @Twinkie

  71. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    the point is that Hispanic men are statisticaally overrepresented, and black men underrepresented, among non-White spouses of intermarried White women?
     
    I’m not arguing that part, ye woman of low intelligence and loose morality. I’m arguing this part of what you wrote is wrong:

    it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry.
     
    Stop trying to shift and backtrack.

    Replies: @Rosie

    I’m not arguing that part,

    Good.

    Stop trying to shift and backtrack.

    Somehow, Twinkles, ye midwit troll and pompous divider of White people, noone other than you failed to grasp fom the context that by “prone to mixing” I meant prone to mixing with each other. Hence, Hispanics are a serious assimilation threat.

    It matters not in the least whether Whites are more likely than other groups to intermarry or not. Here’s what matters:

    If nothing is done, within a few generations, Asia will still be full of Asians, Africa will still be full of Africans. Whites will be gone.

    Or are you going to start denying the Law of Competitive Exclusion again?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    divider of White people
     
    Hey now, don’t call my kids names!

    that by “prone to mixing” I meant prone to mixing with each other.
     
    You wrote “most prone to,” which I demonstrated is untrue. You know what “most” means, right? Moreover, you wrote “This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry.” Oh, really? Then why is it that Asians - with zero European ancestry - have higher intermarriage rates with whites than Hispanics do?

    In reality, this has little to do with the putative European ancestry of Hispanics in the U.S., but with the fact that Hispanics are the most numerous minority.

    Most adults here know that blacks are a disfavored marriage partner demographic - you are not doing anything bright here by stating it. The only people who subscribe to the opposite idea seem to be some of your fellow white nationalists who appear to be secret black supremacists and who hold you, a white female, in a greater contempt than I ever did. And you accuse ME of “dividing white people”? Pah!

    As much as I make fun of your silliness, I am not your enemy. My children are just as endangered by the BLM and the coming ideological black supremacy as your children are. If, God forbid, there’s were to be another civil war in this country, I am going to be fighting for my AND your children. You can’t see that, because you need to blame someone for your lot in life, much of which seems to be due to your parents’ and your choices.

    If nothing is done, within a few generations, Asia will still be full of Asians, Africa will still be full of Africans. Whites will be gone.
     
    Predictive demographics is a notoriously inaccurate art, but your deranged prediction is even less accurate than that. Setting aside Europe (you know, where whites originate), 90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here - and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Rosie

  72. @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Talha


    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.
     
    Did you just imply that Rosie is a genetic reject? That’s Thomm’s shtick, man!

    Replies: @Talha

    , @Rosie
    @Talha


    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.
     
    That was an uncharacteristically shitty thing to say on your part, Talha.

    Replies: @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

  73. @Twinkie
    @dfordoom

    Women like selective violence. They like men who can kick ass and dominate others, but can humor them and are kind to their children.

    Blacks are much more likely to be unselectively violent - not only fight with other men, but also beat their women and children. Nobody likes that - not even black women.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Women like selective violence. They like men who can kick ass and dominate others, but can humor them and are kind to their children.

    That’s basically true. But you can’t discount the fact (distasteful or embarrassing as it may be to some) that there’s a not insignificant number of women who enjoy stuff like rough sex and even S&M play.

    And I’m not picking on women here. There are plenty of men who have equally embarrassing sexual quirks.

    The problem for women today is that if they date white soy boys they’re probably going to be lucky to get any sex at all, much less the kind of sex they crave.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @dfordoom


    there’s a not insignificant number of women who enjoy stuff like rough sex and even S&M play.
     
    Oh, golly. Look, there are women who like to play-act rape. That doesn’t mean they actually like to be raped. Likewise, just because they like a little roughness or domination, doesn’t mean they like to be punched or kicked for real or have their children be abused.

    Women overwhelmingly prefer high status males as partners. A vast majority of black men in this country are low status, as they are in every non-black society.

    Don’t generalize a few black football players and entertainers pairing with white women. The average black-white pairing is decidedly lower economic and educational profile.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/02/sdt-2012-rise-of-intermarriage-02.png

    https://www.washington.edu/news/blog/study-mixed-race-couples-with-black-partners-more-likely-to-live-in-poor-neighborhoods/

    Study: Mixed-race couples with black partners more likely to live in poor neighborhoods
     

    Replies: @dfordoom

  74. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    I’m not arguing that part,
     
    Good.

    Stop trying to shift and backtrack.
     
    Somehow, Twinkles, ye midwit troll and pompous divider of White people, noone other than you failed to grasp fom the context that by "prone to mixing" I meant prone to mixing with each other. Hence, Hispanics are a serious assimilation threat.

    It matters not in the least whether Whites are more likely than other groups to intermarry or not. Here's what matters:

    If nothing is done, within a few generations, Asia will still be full of Asians, Africa will still be full of Africans. Whites will be gone.

    Or are you going to start denying the Law of Competitive Exclusion again?

    Replies: @Twinkie

    divider of White people

    Hey now, don’t call my kids names!

    that by “prone to mixing” I meant prone to mixing with each other.

    You wrote “most prone to,” which I demonstrated is untrue. You know what “most” means, right? Moreover, you wrote “This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry.” Oh, really? Then why is it that Asians – with zero European ancestry – have higher intermarriage rates with whites than Hispanics do?

    In reality, this has little to do with the putative European ancestry of Hispanics in the U.S., but with the fact that Hispanics are the most numerous minority.

    Most adults here know that blacks are a disfavored marriage partner demographic – you are not doing anything bright here by stating it. The only people who subscribe to the opposite idea seem to be some of your fellow white nationalists who appear to be secret black supremacists and who hold you, a white female, in a greater contempt than I ever did. And you accuse ME of “dividing white people”? Pah!

    As much as I make fun of your silliness, I am not your enemy. My children are just as endangered by the BLM and the coming ideological black supremacy as your children are. If, God forbid, there’s were to be another civil war in this country, I am going to be fighting for my AND your children. You can’t see that, because you need to blame someone for your lot in life, much of which seems to be due to your parents’ and your choices.

    If nothing is done, within a few generations, Asia will still be full of Asians, Africa will still be full of Africans. Whites will be gone.

    Predictive demographics is a notoriously inaccurate art, but your deranged prediction is even less accurate than that. Setting aside Europe (you know, where whites originate), 90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here – and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here – and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.
     
    Agreed.
    , @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    Most adults here know that blacks are a disfavored marriage partner demographic – you are not doing anything bright here by stating it.
     
    Lol.

    I am not your enemy.
     
    Yes,, you are.

    Setting aside Europe (you know, where whites originate),
     
    Which is also being overrun by immigrants.

    90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here –
     
    The fact that you minimize the existential peril of the White race for your own selfish purposes is precisely why you are my enemy.

    and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.
     
    I couldn't care less about whether your children do or do not identify culturally as White. They aren't White. We are not replaceable.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  75. @Talha
    @Rosie


    Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.
     
    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie

    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.

    Did you just imply that Rosie is a genetic reject? That’s Thomm’s shtick, man!

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Twinkie

    No. She she seems to be passing along her genes just fine, better than most.

    I’m talking about the situation she described where pure whites are increasingly getting replaced by mixed-whites in a strictly competitive environment.

    I don’t know how else to call that, but I’m fairly certain men play a huge share in it. Relinquishing or ceding religious culture (a primary tool in giving one a selective edge) to women brings about an imbalance and doesn’t seem to be a great idea:
    https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/52c2df7ae4b0d215dded86fd/1458805855734-WPNLTJMVXRTCFICC98M2/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kD80soPtcvHH3Jkl6NVGKupZw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWQUxwkmyExglNqGp0IvTJZUJFbgE-7XRK3dMEBRBhUpzyvTQ5gS0GSqJw0f99DIjGrufU9mXTBEQPh0GaA2Kv5oH80LuPxII_Db0H9ppRghE/image-asset.png

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  76. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    I’ll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I’ll be civil to you.
     
    Are you asking me to address you as “Dumb Whore”? I decline.

    I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry
     
    You still don’t get it. That is due to the Hispanic population being nearly three times as great as Asian population in the U.S. On a per capita basis, Hispanics are slightly less likely to intermarry (with whites or others*) as Asians.

    *Indeed, Hispanics are more likely to intermarry with non-whites than Asians.

    I might also add that the respective intermarriage rates are segmented by class (W-H marriages are lower profile than W-A marriages).

    If you wanted to be accurate, and not be deceptive, what you should have written is that, among intermarried couples, white-Hispanic ones are the most numerous, instead or words such as “prone to” or “likely to.”


    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants
     
    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others - they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie, @dfordoom

    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others – they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!

    A fertility rate of 0.98 really is frighteningly low. While I’m not convinced that declining population is necessarily a bad thing, population decline as fast as that is definitely not survivable.

    Obviously East Asian fertility is affected by many of the same things as white fertility in the West – urbanisation, consumerism, mass education, high rates of tertiary education – but there must be something else that has caused fertility to drop even lower (much lower) than white fertility. Do you have any personal theories as to the reason for the truly spectacular nature of East Asian fertility collapse?

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @dfordoom


    Obviously East Asian fertility is affected by many of the same things as white fertility in the West – urbanisation, consumerism, mass education, high rates of tertiary education – but there must be something else that has caused fertility to drop even lower (much lower) than white fertility. Do you have any personal theories as to the reason for the truly spectacular nature of East Asian fertility collapse?
     
    Lack of vibrant, high fertility immigrants? ;)

    Well, I could speculate, but it would be just that, a speculation. I’ll give it a shot. First is education for women. South Korea has the highest college entrance rate (c. 80%) in the industrialized world, and their women attend university at higher rates than men do. Most young South Korean women want a career and, if married, only 0-1 child.

    Second, the private cost of education is burdensome. Although public education is free or nearly free and university education is very low cost, the private household spending on education is the highest rate in the world. So children are deemed extremely expensive.

    Third, social atomization. South Koreans have taken to the online world with a vengeance (“the highest rate of broadband internet penetration in the world!”), and this has radically changed a society that was even in the recent past quite communitarian. As you can imagine, this is not conducive to a fertile family life.

    What this demonstrates is that, even absent mass immigration, advanced societies are highly prone to demographic contraction and other associated ills. Don’t get me wrong - I strenuously oppose immigration - but I think mass immigration exacerbates rather than cause these issues.

    Of further note, South Korea now has an “international marriage” rate of 16% or so. In rural areas (where farmers have trouble attracting wives), that rate is about 35% - many such wives are mail order brides from Vietnam and other poorer countries. Over 40% of such marriages end in divorce and 20% of the offspring of such marriages are absent from the education system. So South Korea is beginning to have their own ethnic demographic issues.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Johann Ricke

  77. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    divider of White people
     
    Hey now, don’t call my kids names!

    that by “prone to mixing” I meant prone to mixing with each other.
     
    You wrote “most prone to,” which I demonstrated is untrue. You know what “most” means, right? Moreover, you wrote “This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry.” Oh, really? Then why is it that Asians - with zero European ancestry - have higher intermarriage rates with whites than Hispanics do?

    In reality, this has little to do with the putative European ancestry of Hispanics in the U.S., but with the fact that Hispanics are the most numerous minority.

    Most adults here know that blacks are a disfavored marriage partner demographic - you are not doing anything bright here by stating it. The only people who subscribe to the opposite idea seem to be some of your fellow white nationalists who appear to be secret black supremacists and who hold you, a white female, in a greater contempt than I ever did. And you accuse ME of “dividing white people”? Pah!

    As much as I make fun of your silliness, I am not your enemy. My children are just as endangered by the BLM and the coming ideological black supremacy as your children are. If, God forbid, there’s were to be another civil war in this country, I am going to be fighting for my AND your children. You can’t see that, because you need to blame someone for your lot in life, much of which seems to be due to your parents’ and your choices.

    If nothing is done, within a few generations, Asia will still be full of Asians, Africa will still be full of Africans. Whites will be gone.
     
    Predictive demographics is a notoriously inaccurate art, but your deranged prediction is even less accurate than that. Setting aside Europe (you know, where whites originate), 90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here - and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Rosie

    90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here – and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.

    Agreed.

  78. @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    Women like selective violence. They like men who can kick ass and dominate others, but can humor them and are kind to their children.
     
    That's basically true. But you can't discount the fact (distasteful or embarrassing as it may be to some) that there's a not insignificant number of women who enjoy stuff like rough sex and even S&M play.

    And I'm not picking on women here. There are plenty of men who have equally embarrassing sexual quirks.

    The problem for women today is that if they date white soy boys they're probably going to be lucky to get any sex at all, much less the kind of sex they crave.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    there’s a not insignificant number of women who enjoy stuff like rough sex and even S&M play.

    Oh, golly. Look, there are women who like to play-act rape. That doesn’t mean they actually like to be raped. Likewise, just because they like a little roughness or domination, doesn’t mean they like to be punched or kicked for real or have their children be abused.

    Women overwhelmingly prefer high status males as partners. A vast majority of black men in this country are low status, as they are in every non-black society.

    Don’t generalize a few black football players and entertainers pairing with white women. The average black-white pairing is decidedly lower economic and educational profile.

    https://www.washington.edu/news/blog/study-mixed-race-couples-with-black-partners-more-likely-to-live-in-poor-neighborhoods/

    Study: Mixed-race couples with black partners more likely to live in poor neighborhoods

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    Oh, golly. Look, there are women who like to play-act rape. That doesn’t mean they actually like to be raped. Likewise, just because they like a little roughness or domination, doesn’t mean they like to be punched or kicked for real or have their children be abused.
     
    Oh absolutely, I agree. My point is that women with certain sexual tastes (or emotional needs) can very easily make disastrously bad choices. Instead of ending up with some kinky bedroom fun they can end up with an out-of-control thug. But sexuality is a powerful drive and can lead both women and men to make bad choices.

    It's possible that women who get involved with violent criminals, jailbirds and ghetto hoodlums may be women whose sexual drives have led them to make such very poor choices. And maybe their disgust with white soy boys contributes to those poor choices.
  79. @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    It’s true. East Asians don’t contract out their genocide to others – they do it on their own, e.g. South Korean population is projected to halve within a few decades (their 2008 fertility was 0.98 per woman).

    Looks like East Asians (here or there) will disappear a lot sooner than whites in America. East Asian genocide!
     
    A fertility rate of 0.98 really is frighteningly low. While I'm not convinced that declining population is necessarily a bad thing, population decline as fast as that is definitely not survivable.

    Obviously East Asian fertility is affected by many of the same things as white fertility in the West - urbanisation, consumerism, mass education, high rates of tertiary education - but there must be something else that has caused fertility to drop even lower (much lower) than white fertility. Do you have any personal theories as to the reason for the truly spectacular nature of East Asian fertility collapse?

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Obviously East Asian fertility is affected by many of the same things as white fertility in the West – urbanisation, consumerism, mass education, high rates of tertiary education – but there must be something else that has caused fertility to drop even lower (much lower) than white fertility. Do you have any personal theories as to the reason for the truly spectacular nature of East Asian fertility collapse?

    Lack of vibrant, high fertility immigrants? 😉

    Well, I could speculate, but it would be just that, a speculation. I’ll give it a shot. First is education for women. South Korea has the highest college entrance rate (c. 80%) in the industrialized world, and their women attend university at higher rates than men do. Most young South Korean women want a career and, if married, only 0-1 child.

    Second, the private cost of education is burdensome. Although public education is free or nearly free and university education is very low cost, the private household spending on education is the highest rate in the world. So children are deemed extremely expensive.

    Third, social atomization. South Koreans have taken to the online world with a vengeance (“the highest rate of broadband internet penetration in the world!”), and this has radically changed a society that was even in the recent past quite communitarian. As you can imagine, this is not conducive to a fertile family life.

    What this demonstrates is that, even absent mass immigration, advanced societies are highly prone to demographic contraction and other associated ills. Don’t get me wrong – I strenuously oppose immigration – but I think mass immigration exacerbates rather than cause these issues.

    Of further note, South Korea now has an “international marriage” rate of 16% or so. In rural areas (where farmers have trouble attracting wives), that rate is about 35% – many such wives are mail order brides from Vietnam and other poorer countries. Over 40% of such marriages end in divorce and 20% of the offspring of such marriages are absent from the education system. So South Korea is beginning to have their own ethnic demographic issues.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    What this demonstrates is that, even absent mass immigration, advanced societies are highly prone to demographic contraction and other associated ills. Don’t get me wrong – I strenuously oppose immigration – but I think mass immigration exacerbates rather than cause these issues.
     
    I couldn't agree more.

    Focusing too narrowly on immigration can blind us to the nature of the real, underlying, social problems that are destroying us.

    Social media and too much tertiary education are both catastrophic.
    , @Johann Ricke
    @Twinkie


    Of further note, South Korea now has an “international marriage” rate of 16% or so. In rural areas (where farmers have trouble attracting wives), that rate is about 35% – many such wives are mail order brides from Vietnam and other poorer countries. Over 40% of such marriages end in divorce and 20% of the offspring of such marriages are absent from the education system. So South Korea is beginning to have their own ethnic demographic issues.
     
    It's hard to tell how meaningful this foreign divorce number is, given that the overall number of divorces per year is roughly 1/2 the number of marriages:

    http://kostat.go.kr/portal/eng/pressReleases/8/11/index.board?bmode=read&bSeq=&aSeq=382800&pageNo=1&rowNum=10&navCount=10&currPg=&searchInfo=&sTarget=title&sTxt=


    - In 2019, the number of marriages was 239.2 thousand, which decreased by 7.2% (-18.5 thousand) from 2018.

    - In 2019, the number of divorces was 110.8 thousand, which increased by 2.0% (2.1 thousand) from 2018.

    - The number of marriages with foreign spouses increased by 4.2% from 2018. The number of divorces with foreign
    spouses decreased by 3.4% from 2018.
     

    Replies: @Twinkie

  80. @dfordoom
    @Thomm



    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.
     
    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man’s attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.
     
    There's certainly a proportion of women who are attracted to violent men. The question is whether it's the violence that attracts them, or whether they're seeking to be dominated (which is not quite the same thing). Or maybe they're just looking for hyper-masculine men and if they're surrounded by soy boys they end up choosing violent men because that's all they can find.

    Female psychology is complicated.

    I do think it's true that men on the far right don't seem to understand very much about women. That's why they're so angry at women.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @nebulafox, @Justvisiting

    There’s a fine line between wanting a dominant man and wanting a violent one that is obvious to non-psychopaths. The minority of women in the underclass who genuinely want violent men typically have other characteristics that make them radioactive relationship material. Part of being an adult man is recognizing that not needing a woman is the first, crucial step to becoming attractive to them.

    And it cuts both ways. Why would you want to bother with a white chick who brings an attitude of “entertain me, peasant” to the first date when you have other options? Not going Whiskey: developed world men my age have tons of problems. But let’s not pretend today’s dysfunctional courtship scene is solely our fault, or that at least early in life, women have their fantasies catered to a lot more by biological realities and society alike.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
    @nebulafox


    white chick who brings an attitude of “entertain me, peasant” to the first date
     
    I had a few blind dates like that when I was young.

    At the first hint of that I would walk away without a word--just gone...

    Replies: @nebulafox

  81. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.
     
    Did you just imply that Rosie is a genetic reject? That’s Thomm’s shtick, man!

    Replies: @Talha

    No. She she seems to be passing along her genes just fine, better than most.

    I’m talking about the situation she described where pure whites are increasingly getting replaced by mixed-whites in a strictly competitive environment.

    I don’t know how else to call that, but I’m fairly certain men play a huge share in it. Relinquishing or ceding religious culture (a primary tool in giving one a selective edge) to women brings about an imbalance and doesn’t seem to be a great idea:

    Peace.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Talha


    the situation she described where pure whites are increasingly getting replaced by mixed-whites in a strictly competitive environment.
     
    She overstates the case - 90% of whites in America marry other whites. She does so, because she likes to peddle “white genocide” - I think some people here call that doom masturbation. It’s a way for explaining why she doesn’t have a maid, can’t lose weight, is nor married to a sexy musician, and experiences moments of low marital quality (constantly has to negotiate things with her husband), etc.

    Replies: @Talha

  82. @Talha
    @Twinkie

    No. She she seems to be passing along her genes just fine, better than most.

    I’m talking about the situation she described where pure whites are increasingly getting replaced by mixed-whites in a strictly competitive environment.

    I don’t know how else to call that, but I’m fairly certain men play a huge share in it. Relinquishing or ceding religious culture (a primary tool in giving one a selective edge) to women brings about an imbalance and doesn’t seem to be a great idea:
    https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/52c2df7ae4b0d215dded86fd/1458805855734-WPNLTJMVXRTCFICC98M2/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kD80soPtcvHH3Jkl6NVGKupZw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWQUxwkmyExglNqGp0IvTJZUJFbgE-7XRK3dMEBRBhUpzyvTQ5gS0GSqJw0f99DIjGrufU9mXTBEQPh0GaA2Kv5oH80LuPxII_Db0H9ppRghE/image-asset.png

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    the situation she described where pure whites are increasingly getting replaced by mixed-whites in a strictly competitive environment.

    She overstates the case – 90% of whites in America marry other whites. She does so, because she likes to peddle “white genocide” – I think some people here call that doom masturbation. It’s a way for explaining why she doesn’t have a maid, can’t lose weight, is nor married to a sexy musician, and experiences moments of low marital quality (constantly has to negotiate things with her husband), etc.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Twinkie

    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Talha, @Rosie

  83. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    the situation she described where pure whites are increasingly getting replaced by mixed-whites in a strictly competitive environment.
     
    She overstates the case - 90% of whites in America marry other whites. She does so, because she likes to peddle “white genocide” - I think some people here call that doom masturbation. It’s a way for explaining why she doesn’t have a maid, can’t lose weight, is nor married to a sexy musician, and experiences moments of low marital quality (constantly has to negotiate things with her husband), etc.

    Replies: @Talha

    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Talha

    On racial purity...I don’t think these guys were thinking much of racial purity:
    https://www.twitter.com/OakGwove/status/1274422678569525251

    There is something about the idea of racial purity today that has this underlying message of; “please sirs, we just want to be left alone.”

    Replies: @RSDB

    , @Rosie
    @Talha


    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.
     
    And yet, there are no White people in India. Everyone is a shade of brown.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

  84. @Talha
    @Twinkie

    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Talha, @Rosie

    On racial purity…I don’t think these guys were thinking much of racial purity:

    There is something about the idea of racial purity today that has this underlying message of; “please sirs, we just want to be left alone.”

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @Talha

    In Heinlein's novels there is something called the Howard Society (I think) which consists of a number of "Howard Families", endowed by a man unsurprisingly named Howard, and which promotes eugenic marriage among long-lived families. I don't see why some sort of parallel could not exist in this case if there is enough actual desire for such a thing.

    Replies: @Talha

  85. @Twinkie
    @dfordoom


    there’s a not insignificant number of women who enjoy stuff like rough sex and even S&M play.
     
    Oh, golly. Look, there are women who like to play-act rape. That doesn’t mean they actually like to be raped. Likewise, just because they like a little roughness or domination, doesn’t mean they like to be punched or kicked for real or have their children be abused.

    Women overwhelmingly prefer high status males as partners. A vast majority of black men in this country are low status, as they are in every non-black society.

    Don’t generalize a few black football players and entertainers pairing with white women. The average black-white pairing is decidedly lower economic and educational profile.

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2012/02/sdt-2012-rise-of-intermarriage-02.png

    https://www.washington.edu/news/blog/study-mixed-race-couples-with-black-partners-more-likely-to-live-in-poor-neighborhoods/

    Study: Mixed-race couples with black partners more likely to live in poor neighborhoods
     

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Oh, golly. Look, there are women who like to play-act rape. That doesn’t mean they actually like to be raped. Likewise, just because they like a little roughness or domination, doesn’t mean they like to be punched or kicked for real or have their children be abused.

    Oh absolutely, I agree. My point is that women with certain sexual tastes (or emotional needs) can very easily make disastrously bad choices. Instead of ending up with some kinky bedroom fun they can end up with an out-of-control thug. But sexuality is a powerful drive and can lead both women and men to make bad choices.

    It’s possible that women who get involved with violent criminals, jailbirds and ghetto hoodlums may be women whose sexual drives have led them to make such very poor choices. And maybe their disgust with white soy boys contributes to those poor choices.

  86. anonymous[224] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jay Fink
    @Twinkie

    A half white/ half hispanic is more white than you think. I used to assume Hispanics were 50% Spanish and 50% Indigenous. I was wrong. There is a lot of variation but most of the genetic reports I have seen of Hispanics are dominated by Southern European DNA, figures like 70% are not uncommon. No wonder the Census considers Hispanic as a sub group under the white umbrella (with a small minority under the black umbrella such as Afro-Cubans).

    So most Hispanics are already well over half white. A baby that is half Hispanic and half ( non-Hispanic) white would be techincally over 75% white, most closer to 85%. Some might not consider Spaniards (or Italians for that matter) to be "white" but that is a whole other debate.

    Replies: @res, @Twinkie, @anonymous

    It goes to show that it is not over yet for the Republican Party. If the future 25% Hispanic demographic can be absorbed through intermarriage into the white category and policies are pursued that appeal to Hispanics and lower income whites then Republicans can still be the ruling political party of the future and America can remain racially cohesive. But it will first require boomers to retire from public life. People like Sailer are grossed out by the idea of absorbing Hispanics and do not like the idea of national healthcare.

  87. @Twinkie
    @dfordoom


    Obviously East Asian fertility is affected by many of the same things as white fertility in the West – urbanisation, consumerism, mass education, high rates of tertiary education – but there must be something else that has caused fertility to drop even lower (much lower) than white fertility. Do you have any personal theories as to the reason for the truly spectacular nature of East Asian fertility collapse?
     
    Lack of vibrant, high fertility immigrants? ;)

    Well, I could speculate, but it would be just that, a speculation. I’ll give it a shot. First is education for women. South Korea has the highest college entrance rate (c. 80%) in the industrialized world, and their women attend university at higher rates than men do. Most young South Korean women want a career and, if married, only 0-1 child.

    Second, the private cost of education is burdensome. Although public education is free or nearly free and university education is very low cost, the private household spending on education is the highest rate in the world. So children are deemed extremely expensive.

    Third, social atomization. South Koreans have taken to the online world with a vengeance (“the highest rate of broadband internet penetration in the world!”), and this has radically changed a society that was even in the recent past quite communitarian. As you can imagine, this is not conducive to a fertile family life.

    What this demonstrates is that, even absent mass immigration, advanced societies are highly prone to demographic contraction and other associated ills. Don’t get me wrong - I strenuously oppose immigration - but I think mass immigration exacerbates rather than cause these issues.

    Of further note, South Korea now has an “international marriage” rate of 16% or so. In rural areas (where farmers have trouble attracting wives), that rate is about 35% - many such wives are mail order brides from Vietnam and other poorer countries. Over 40% of such marriages end in divorce and 20% of the offspring of such marriages are absent from the education system. So South Korea is beginning to have their own ethnic demographic issues.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Johann Ricke

    What this demonstrates is that, even absent mass immigration, advanced societies are highly prone to demographic contraction and other associated ills. Don’t get me wrong – I strenuously oppose immigration – but I think mass immigration exacerbates rather than cause these issues.

    I couldn’t agree more.

    Focusing too narrowly on immigration can blind us to the nature of the real, underlying, social problems that are destroying us.

    Social media and too much tertiary education are both catastrophic.

  88. @Talha
    @Rosie


    Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.
     
    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Rosie

    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.

    That was an uncharacteristically shitty thing to say on your part, Talha.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Rosie

    That is because you are taking this as a personal comment. As I explained to Twinkie, it was not; it was simply an assessment of the situation you described.

    You see, I'm not black-pilled about whites. The same God who created whites (and others) as part of His signs, has no reason not to keep them around:
    "And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the differences in your languages and colors. Verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." (30:22)

    Plus, there is a hadith in an authentic collection which - if accurately transmitted - shows people of your background have nothing to fear - you may well outnumber everyone else in the end:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acvi_Nn_EaM

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Rosie

    Is it incorrect, though? Fitness in this context is measured by reproduction, a prerequisite of which is survival to reproductive age. The 'supremacist' idea that "inferior races" are breeding too much and "superior races" are breeding too little is nothing more than subjective preferences being couched in sciency language.

  89. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    divider of White people
     
    Hey now, don’t call my kids names!

    that by “prone to mixing” I meant prone to mixing with each other.
     
    You wrote “most prone to,” which I demonstrated is untrue. You know what “most” means, right? Moreover, you wrote “This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry.” Oh, really? Then why is it that Asians - with zero European ancestry - have higher intermarriage rates with whites than Hispanics do?

    In reality, this has little to do with the putative European ancestry of Hispanics in the U.S., but with the fact that Hispanics are the most numerous minority.

    Most adults here know that blacks are a disfavored marriage partner demographic - you are not doing anything bright here by stating it. The only people who subscribe to the opposite idea seem to be some of your fellow white nationalists who appear to be secret black supremacists and who hold you, a white female, in a greater contempt than I ever did. And you accuse ME of “dividing white people”? Pah!

    As much as I make fun of your silliness, I am not your enemy. My children are just as endangered by the BLM and the coming ideological black supremacy as your children are. If, God forbid, there’s were to be another civil war in this country, I am going to be fighting for my AND your children. You can’t see that, because you need to blame someone for your lot in life, much of which seems to be due to your parents’ and your choices.

    If nothing is done, within a few generations, Asia will still be full of Asians, Africa will still be full of Africans. Whites will be gone.
     
    Predictive demographics is a notoriously inaccurate art, but your deranged prediction is even less accurate than that. Setting aside Europe (you know, where whites originate), 90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here - and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Rosie

    Most adults here know that blacks are a disfavored marriage partner demographic – you are not doing anything bright here by stating it.

    Lol.

    I am not your enemy.

    Yes,, you are.

    Setting aside Europe (you know, where whites originate),

    Which is also being overrun by immigrants.

    90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here –

    The fact that you minimize the existential peril of the White race for your own selfish purposes is precisely why you are my enemy.

    and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.

    I couldn’t care less about whether your children do or do not identify culturally as White. They aren’t White. We are not replaceable.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie

    What you engage in is called “circular reasoning” and it is a sign of self-absorbed immaturity and low intelligence. That’s why you have trouble getting assent from others.

    Sadly, you are that troll Thomm’s best evidence for his assertion.

    Replies: @Rosie

  90. @Talha
    @Twinkie

    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Talha, @Rosie

    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.

    And yet, there are no White people in India. Everyone is a shade of brown.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    Everyone is a shade of brown.
     
    I guess this means Greeks and southern Italians are also nonwhites.
    , @Talha
    @Rosie


    And yet, there are no White people in India.
     
    Depends on what you call "India" - there are plenty of these kinds of people in parts of Pakistan (which is historic India) - see below MORE tag.

    I mentioned before, when I was a young boy in Karachi, I had a crush on my best friend's sister who had me smitten with her blond/brown hair and hazel eyes.

    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures. Historically, conquerors had no problems mixing their line with local females - this is true whether you go to Alexander who had 40 of his captains marry local Persian noble-women to Arabs/Berbers in Spain to Mongols/Huns in Eastern Europe to Conquistadors in the New World.

    It is interesting that the Nazis, with their ideas about racial purity, sprung up in the aftermath of a defeated Germany from WW1 - not one that won.

    You see, patriarchal cultures concern themselves with preservation of their patrilineal lines, they aren't really all that concerned about some concept of racial purity - this is a very new idea. If you told Vikings not to grab and cart off Arab women on their attacks on the Andalusian coast because they were genetically impure, they'd laugh at you.

    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man's choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it - that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can't marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father? The only One Who can interdict the union at that point is God Himself.

    I mean this is all well and good, of course, for the white nationalist break-off country some people want and I certainly don't mind them creating one or what they do internally with their laws, but t seems obvious any notion of a serious patriarchy in that territory would be dead on arrival.

    Peace.

    https://i0.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/redhaired-aghan-pahuten-redhair.jpg
    https://i2.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/afghanman_arte.jpg
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/32/bb/0832bbbd6069a63dbf11a801de2f3b40.jpg
    https://live.staticflickr.com/5012/5532898748_583c14f860_o.jpg

    Replies: @dfordoom, @nebulafox, @Rosie

  91. @dfordoom
    @Thomm



    Plus, black males are much more violent on average.
     
    You say that as though this characteristic reduces a man’s attractiveness to women (for casual sex, at least). I can assure you, the exact opposite is true. This is just female psychology 101.
     
    There's certainly a proportion of women who are attracted to violent men. The question is whether it's the violence that attracts them, or whether they're seeking to be dominated (which is not quite the same thing). Or maybe they're just looking for hyper-masculine men and if they're surrounded by soy boys they end up choosing violent men because that's all they can find.

    Female psychology is complicated.

    I do think it's true that men on the far right don't seem to understand very much about women. That's why they're so angry at women.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @nebulafox, @Justvisiting

    Female psychology is complicated.

    Actually it is not.

    You just need to know the rules.

    The vast majority of women are _very_ predictable.

  92. @nebulafox
    @dfordoom

    There's a fine line between wanting a dominant man and wanting a violent one that is obvious to non-psychopaths. The minority of women in the underclass who genuinely want violent men typically have other characteristics that make them radioactive relationship material. Part of being an adult man is recognizing that not needing a woman is the first, crucial step to becoming attractive to them.

    And it cuts both ways. Why would you want to bother with a white chick who brings an attitude of "entertain me, peasant" to the first date when you have other options? Not going Whiskey: developed world men my age have tons of problems. But let's not pretend today's dysfunctional courtship scene is solely our fault, or that at least early in life, women have their fantasies catered to a lot more by biological realities and society alike.

    Replies: @Justvisiting

    white chick who brings an attitude of “entertain me, peasant” to the first date

    I had a few blind dates like that when I was young.

    At the first hint of that I would walk away without a word–just gone…

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Justvisiting

    At the time, I lacked even the social skills necessary even to handle "unscripted" stuff like a woman being attracted to me and making a move-to the point of her attempting to make out with me or to understand what her inviting me to her room meant, in some cases-so you can probably guess I didn't pick up on more subtle signals like this. But looking back in retrospect with the ability to read emotions I've gained, it is astonishing to note how many chicks my age seemed to believe that their mere presence was something that non-elite guys should be crying with joy to have. Not all women were like this, not by a long shot, but enough of them were to note it.

    (Yes, yes, needless to say, I missed out on a LOT of opportunities to get laid. I’m the type of guy who'd much rather go for a long mountain trek or curl up with a nice book with my SO than go on the prowl in the club or on Tinder, so these days I don’t regret that near as much as missed chances in other areas. But it was just one more unavoidable confirmation of failure in my mind back when my life was out of control, at rock bottom, and of course, completely lacking female company.)

    The women who were like this were always distinctly average or one deviation away from it. Neither bombshells nor ugly/fat women ever brought this attitude to the table: I cannot recall an unpleasant outing with women at the top or at the bottom of the dating market, interestingly enough, even if we didn't hit it off at all. Online dating is a huge part of this, I suspect.

  93. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    Most adults here know that blacks are a disfavored marriage partner demographic – you are not doing anything bright here by stating it.
     
    Lol.

    I am not your enemy.
     
    Yes,, you are.

    Setting aside Europe (you know, where whites originate),
     
    Which is also being overrun by immigrants.

    90% of American whites are marrying other whites. Far from “disappearing,” there is going to be a white plurality for generations here –
     
    The fact that you minimize the existential peril of the White race for your own selfish purposes is precisely why you are my enemy.

    and that’s not counting “white-ish” people like my children who ethnically, culturally identify as white.
     
    I couldn't care less about whether your children do or do not identify culturally as White. They aren't White. We are not replaceable.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    What you engage in is called “circular reasoning” and it is a sign of self-absorbed immaturity and low intelligence. That’s why you have trouble getting assent from others.

    Sadly, you are that troll Thomm’s best evidence for his assertion.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    you have trouble getting assent from others.
     
    Liar.

    I guess this means Greeks and southern Italians are also nonwhites.
     
    Deconstructing Whiteness, I see. Thanks for showing your true (ahem) colors. Civic nationalism always collapses into full-blown race denialism and hostility to White self-preservation.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  94. @Rosie
    @Talha


    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.
     
    And yet, there are no White people in India. Everyone is a shade of brown.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

    Everyone is a shade of brown.

    I guess this means Greeks and southern Italians are also nonwhites.

  95. @Twinkie
    @Rosie

    What you engage in is called “circular reasoning” and it is a sign of self-absorbed immaturity and low intelligence. That’s why you have trouble getting assent from others.

    Sadly, you are that troll Thomm’s best evidence for his assertion.

    Replies: @Rosie

    you have trouble getting assent from others.

    Liar.

    I guess this means Greeks and southern Italians are also nonwhites.

    Deconstructing Whiteness, I see. Thanks for showing your true (ahem) colors. Civic nationalism always collapses into full-blown race denialism and hostility to White self-preservation.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    Deconstructing Whiteness, I see. Thanks for showing your true (ahem) colors. Civic nationalism always collapses into full-blown race denialism and hostility to White self-preservation.
     
    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics. But that’s par for the course for someone who moves goal posts and definitions as convenience dictates.

    “Hostility to white* self-preservation”? That would be hilarious to my wife, my in-laws, most of my friends, etc. and, yes, my HALF-white children. I likely have more whites I love and care about (and who in turn love me) than you do.

    *Don’t be like stupid blacks and capitalize a color. If you desperately want capitalization for your race category, use a geographical/proper adjective, European.


    Liar
     
    What are you, five? And a poorly-behaved five at that?

    Replies: @Rosie

  96. @JohnPlywood
    @indocon

    Blacks still have higher mortality than other groups, 2-4 times higher for certain ages and locales. It used to be (30-40 gesrs ago) way higher than these figures which are very new.


    Non-Hispanic black teenagers are 37 percent more likely to die than Hispanic and non-Hispanic white teenagers. The death rate for non-Hispanic black teenagers is 64.5 deaths per 100,000 population compared with 47.1 for Hispanic and 47.0 for non-Hispanic white teenagers
     

    But whose children are most likely to survive until their first birthday varies greatly. The infant mortality rate for black women's babies was 10.97 in 2017 – more than twice the rates among white, Asian and Hispanic women, who saw rates of 4.67, 3.78 and 5.1, respectively – and nearly double the overall rate. Among American Indians and Alaska Natives, the infant mortality rate was 9.21.
     

    Young adult and middle-aged African American men living in impoverished urban areas experience about 3 to 4 times the white national death rate or as many as 1,296 more deaths per 100,000 population each year
     

    Replies: @indocon

    Does TFR take into account infant mortality?

  97. @Rosie
    @Talha


    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.
     
    That was an uncharacteristically shitty thing to say on your part, Talha.

    Replies: @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    That is because you are taking this as a personal comment. As I explained to Twinkie, it was not; it was simply an assessment of the situation you described.

    You see, I’m not black-pilled about whites. The same God who created whites (and others) as part of His signs, has no reason not to keep them around:
    “And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the differences in your languages and colors. Verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge.” (30:22)

    Plus, there is a hadith in an authentic collection which – if accurately transmitted – shows people of your background have nothing to fear – you may well outnumber everyone else in the end:

    Peace.

    • Thanks: Rosie
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Talha

    Hey, now, if you don’t buy into “white genocide,” you are her enemy... but then again, you are also a brown-skinned guy in a white country. You won’t do well under Kommissar Rosie’s whip hand either way.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @iffen

  98. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    you have trouble getting assent from others.
     
    Liar.

    I guess this means Greeks and southern Italians are also nonwhites.
     
    Deconstructing Whiteness, I see. Thanks for showing your true (ahem) colors. Civic nationalism always collapses into full-blown race denialism and hostility to White self-preservation.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Deconstructing Whiteness, I see. Thanks for showing your true (ahem) colors. Civic nationalism always collapses into full-blown race denialism and hostility to White self-preservation.

    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics. But that’s par for the course for someone who moves goal posts and definitions as convenience dictates.

    “Hostility to white* self-preservation”? That would be hilarious to my wife, my in-laws, most of my friends, etc. and, yes, my HALF-white children. I likely have more whites I love and care about (and who in turn love me) than you do.

    *Don’t be like stupid blacks and capitalize a color. If you desperately want capitalization for your race category, use a geographical/proper adjective, European.

    Liar

    What are you, five? And a poorly-behaved five at that?

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics.
     
    Yes, Twinkles, I know you think I'm not supposed to care that Sigmund Freud is going to get his wish: "No more towheads."

    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/73/86/87/7386873f5ca941ce81aab08c0a9aa66d.jpg

    “Hostility to white* self-preservation”? That would be hilarious to my wife, my in-laws, most of my friends, etc. and, yes, my HALF-white children. I likely have more whites I love and care about (and who in turn love me) than you do
     
    Typical equivocation from you, Twinkles, as if caring about individual Whites precludes indifference to our fate as a group.

    You insult the intelligence of unz readers.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  99. @Talha
    @Rosie

    That is because you are taking this as a personal comment. As I explained to Twinkie, it was not; it was simply an assessment of the situation you described.

    You see, I'm not black-pilled about whites. The same God who created whites (and others) as part of His signs, has no reason not to keep them around:
    "And among His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the differences in your languages and colors. Verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." (30:22)

    Plus, there is a hadith in an authentic collection which - if accurately transmitted - shows people of your background have nothing to fear - you may well outnumber everyone else in the end:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acvi_Nn_EaM

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Hey, now, if you don’t buy into “white genocide,” you are her enemy… but then again, you are also a brown-skinned guy in a white country. You won’t do well under Kommissar Rosie’s whip hand either way.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    You have to wonder what these types make of Bosniaks as much as Palestinian or Chinese (traditionally Southeast Asian diaspora, but increasingly mainland) Christians.

    I'm worried I come off as too flippant about anti-white sentiment among the perennially aggrieved Diverse. I'm not: Zemir Begic's fate should show pretty clearly that the BLM types will come after you no matter what your background is. But the notion of "peaceful ethnic separation" sends me into irrational convulsions of paranoia, no matter who spouts them.

    , @iffen
    @Twinkie

    but then again, you are also a brown-skinned guy in a white country.

    Not to mention that Nordic Princess that he bride captured.

    Replies: @Rosie

  100. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    Deconstructing Whiteness, I see. Thanks for showing your true (ahem) colors. Civic nationalism always collapses into full-blown race denialism and hostility to White self-preservation.
     
    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics. But that’s par for the course for someone who moves goal posts and definitions as convenience dictates.

    “Hostility to white* self-preservation”? That would be hilarious to my wife, my in-laws, most of my friends, etc. and, yes, my HALF-white children. I likely have more whites I love and care about (and who in turn love me) than you do.

    *Don’t be like stupid blacks and capitalize a color. If you desperately want capitalization for your race category, use a geographical/proper adjective, European.


    Liar
     
    What are you, five? And a poorly-behaved five at that?

    Replies: @Rosie

    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics.

    Yes, Twinkles, I know you think I’m not supposed to care that Sigmund Freud is going to get his wish: “No more towheads.”

    “Hostility to white* self-preservation”? That would be hilarious to my wife, my in-laws, most of my friends, etc. and, yes, my HALF-white children. I likely have more whites I love and care about (and who in turn love me) than you do

    Typical equivocation from you, Twinkles, as if caring about individual Whites precludes indifference to our fate as a group.

    You insult the intelligence of unz readers.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    You insult the intelligence of unz readers.
     
    Don’t be deluded. You don’t represent the Unz readers.

    I just insult your stupidity.
  101. i see most of the discussion is still just sidetracked into a big, stupid, never ending discussion about who is ‘white’. a tangent that will derail every discussion every time.

    this is why i simply use european. and completely dropped the other word from my vocabulary. i never use it. and i encourage everybody to do the same. this immediately and permanently avoids the number 1 biggest issue with the discussion that prevents any other forward progress and turns every interaction into a tangent about who is in and who is out.

    look at a map of europe. are the people from inside those boundaries? then they are euorpeans. they are the in-group. is somebody from outside those boundaries? then they are not europeans. they are the out-group.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @prime noticer


    look at a map of europe. are the people from inside those boundaries? then they are euorpeans. they are the in-group. is somebody from outside those boundaries? then they are not europeans. they are the out-group.
     
    The question concerns those who have some ancestors from inside and others from outside those boundaries.

    I'm not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many? It probably depends somewhat on the genetic distance of the non-White ancestor(s) from Europeans.

    Twinkles thinks White people will still exist even when everyone is a shade of brown because our descendants will still have some European genes or because they listen to classical music and don't like BLM or something.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @iffen

  102. Rosie and Twinkie please don’t fight, life could be worse.

    • LOL: Yahya K., Twinkie
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Blinky Bill

    Only one of us thinks she is in a fight. I just find her mildly amusing and mostly pathetic, and humor her a little.

    She thinks I’m her enemy. If I really were, it’d be like a grown man ragdolling a boy in a fight.

    In reality, she desperately needs me to be “an enemy,” so she can validate her vision of herself as a victim. She wants other whites to buy into the idea of a white genocide, so that she can be included in some sort of a community that she sorely appears to lack in real life.

    The sad thing is, if it came down to it, I’d stand between her children and a BLM mob, with a rifle. But she can’t see that. She can’t acknowledge that. That would crush her warped ideas about me, about her, and about who really wants to harm her and her kids. Who the real good guys and bad guys are.

    So instead, she yells, “Liar!” and lashes out like a rabid dog.

    Replies: @RSDB, @dfordoom

  103. @Blinky Bill
    Rosie and Twinkie please don't fight, life could be worse.

    https://youtu.be/ctdEtOu0N0U

    https://youtu.be/x_c8p5SX7To

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Only one of us thinks she is in a fight. I just find her mildly amusing and mostly pathetic, and humor her a little.

    She thinks I’m her enemy. If I really were, it’d be like a grown man ragdolling a boy in a fight.

    In reality, she desperately needs me to be “an enemy,” so she can validate her vision of herself as a victim. She wants other whites to buy into the idea of a white genocide, so that she can be included in some sort of a community that she sorely appears to lack in real life.

    The sad thing is, if it came down to it, I’d stand between her children and a BLM mob, with a rifle. But she can’t see that. She can’t acknowledge that. That would crush her warped ideas about me, about her, and about who really wants to harm her and her kids. Who the real good guys and bad guys are.

    So instead, she yells, “Liar!” and lashes out like a rabid dog.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @Twinkie


    The sad thing is, if it came down to it, I’d stand between her children and a BLM mob, with a rifle.
     
    I think in a situation where a mob is coming after a group of children you (and most of us) would probably be on the side of the children even in the (admittedly unlikely at present) scenario of some sort of white mob coming after black children.
    , @dfordoom
    @Twinkie


    In reality, she desperately needs me to be “an enemy,” so she can validate her vision of herself as a victim. She wants other whites to buy into the idea of a white genocide, so that she can be included in some sort of a community that she sorely appears to lack in real life.
     
    Sadly that pretty much describes white nationalism. It's mostly a mixture of paranoia and whining self-pity.

    And my comment is not directed at Rosie personally. I'm talking about white nationalism and the alt-right in general.
  104. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics.
     
    Yes, Twinkles, I know you think I'm not supposed to care that Sigmund Freud is going to get his wish: "No more towheads."

    https://i.pinimg.com/236x/73/86/87/7386873f5ca941ce81aab08c0a9aa66d.jpg

    “Hostility to white* self-preservation”? That would be hilarious to my wife, my in-laws, most of my friends, etc. and, yes, my HALF-white children. I likely have more whites I love and care about (and who in turn love me) than you do
     
    Typical equivocation from you, Twinkles, as if caring about individual Whites precludes indifference to our fate as a group.

    You insult the intelligence of unz readers.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    You insult the intelligence of unz readers.

    Don’t be deluded. You don’t represent the Unz readers.

    I just insult your stupidity.

  105. @Twinkie
    @Thomm

    I get violent thoughts when I read your garbage musings.

    Replies: @Thomm

    I get violent thoughts when I read your garbage musings.

    Hey, if you are clueless about women, that is your problem. You were trained to be a ‘Beta provider’, which is the normal training your culture inculcates in men.

    Violent men get a huge amount of sexual attention from women. This goes all the way up to the most extreme violence, such as being a serial killer. This is no secret, and has been explained on blogs like Heartiste dozens of times. See dfordoom’s comment, which is entirely correct. This is just female psychology 101.

    Btw, regarding your ‘violent thoughts’*, I can’t take you seriously enough to return the favor. As I instructed you before, ‘Twinkie’ is about as far from a masculine name as one could choose. Even ‘Small Banana’ would be an improvement. As would ‘Ho ho’ or ‘Cadbury Creme Egg’.

    Of all the guys here, you are among the least capable of pulling off any ‘tough guy’ schtick, so I would recommend you don’t provide so much easy fuel for ridicule.

    Lastly, a medical professional enamored with processed food full of HFCS to the extent of choosing such a handle is another problem, and exposes the perverse incentives of our system (i.e. make people chronically unhealthy so they go to the hospital more). What about the Hippocratic Oath?

    Twinkie to Rosie :

    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult.

    Heh. Super thin-skinned, are we? I suppose you don’t like it when Truth calls you ‘Vladimir’ either, even though that is an astronomical improvement over ‘Twinkie’, particularly in the masculinity department.

    I never thought anyone could make Rosie be in the right, but in your argument with her, more of her points are correct, than yours are.

    *Unless you mean ‘violent thoughts’ towards yourself. This, too, is a normal reaction by a beta provider when being exposed to unpleasant truths about female psychology that you devoted your whole life to being in denial of.

    Heh heh heh heh

    • LOL: Yahya K.
  106. @prime noticer
    i see most of the discussion is still just sidetracked into a big, stupid, never ending discussion about who is 'white'. a tangent that will derail every discussion every time.

    this is why i simply use european. and completely dropped the other word from my vocabulary. i never use it. and i encourage everybody to do the same. this immediately and permanently avoids the number 1 biggest issue with the discussion that prevents any other forward progress and turns every interaction into a tangent about who is in and who is out.

    look at a map of europe. are the people from inside those boundaries? then they are euorpeans. they are the in-group. is somebody from outside those boundaries? then they are not europeans. they are the out-group.

    Replies: @Rosie

    look at a map of europe. are the people from inside those boundaries? then they are euorpeans. they are the in-group. is somebody from outside those boundaries? then they are not europeans. they are the out-group.

    The question concerns those who have some ancestors from inside and others from outside those boundaries.

    I’m not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many? It probably depends somewhat on the genetic distance of the non-White ancestor(s) from Europeans.

    Twinkles thinks White people will still exist even when everyone is a shade of brown because our descendants will still have some European genes or because they listen to classical music and don’t like BLM or something.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    Twinkles thinks White people will still exist even when everyone is a shade of brown
     
    You don’t even read what I write. I specifically included an article from 1998 that disavowed the “everyone will be a shade of brown” future and predicted “the beige and the black.”

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @iffen
    @Rosie

    I’m not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many?

    I just got my DNA results and I am 1% Bantu. If I change my mind about White Nationalism, can I still join the club?

    Replies: @Rosie, @Talha

  107. @Talha
    @Talha

    On racial purity...I don’t think these guys were thinking much of racial purity:
    https://www.twitter.com/OakGwove/status/1274422678569525251

    There is something about the idea of racial purity today that has this underlying message of; “please sirs, we just want to be left alone.”

    Replies: @RSDB

    In Heinlein’s novels there is something called the Howard Society (I think) which consists of a number of “Howard Families”, endowed by a man unsurprisingly named Howard, and which promotes eugenic marriage among long-lived families. I don’t see why some sort of parallel could not exist in this case if there is enough actual desire for such a thing.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @RSDB


    which promotes eugenic marriage among long-lived families
     
    And Dune had the Bene Gesserit involving themselves in the lines of the various houses to produce the Kwisatz Haderach. But see my response to Rosie. The problem is never those who voluntarily want to do this...what do you do with those that do not?

    If I teach my boys that they should never marry a girl with red hair and a bunch of other people do the same and the kids all listen - OK, that's just people making a voluntary choice based upon the values/culture that they have been raised with. Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?

    Peace.

    Replies: @RSDB

  108. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    As for this “Twinkles” bit, I’d appreciate it if you could use my actual handle like an adult. You don’t see me addressing you as “Dumb Whore,” do you? Let’s not be juvenile.
     
    I'll tell you what, Twinkles, when you start being civil to me, I'll be civil to you. You said to me, totally unprovoked, the following:

    I can’t tell if you can’t do math or are trying to deceive.
     
    Unless and until you change your attitude, you have no standing to make demands on anyone.

    Now, to the merits.

    If there are 100 million whites and 10% intermarry, that’s 10 million. If there are 10 million Asians and 30% intermarry, that’s “only” 3 million. Obviously there would be 3 times as many out-married whites. But that also means 90 million whites marry other whites while only 7 million Asians marry other Asians, meaning almost 13 times as many W-W marriages as A-A marriages. If anything, this is Asian genocide in the U.S.
     
    You have outdone yourself here, Twinkles. I literally never, ever said that Whites or Hispanics are especially prone to intermarriage. What I said is that they are particularly likely to marry each other when they do in fact intermarry, contra the Rushtonian claim that White women particularly like black men because they're "more masculine."

    As far as Asian genocide goes, get back to me when ALL Asian nations are being overrun by immigrants and Asian media are openly celebrating the coming non-Asian majority and the end of Asian privilege.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @anon

    Unless and until you change your attitude, you have no standing to make demands on anyone.

    Oh, lol @ this irony.

    I guess Rosie is confusing Twinkie with Mr. Rosie now.

    • LOL: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Rosie
    @anon


    I guess Rosie is confusing Twinkie with Mr. Rosie now.
     
    Noone could ever do that. First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place under God, and would never call a woman married for 20 years a "whore."

    1 Corinthians 6:11

    And then there's the fact that Rosie is neither a sophist nor a liar.

    Replies: @anon, @Twinkie

  109. @Twinkie
    @Blinky Bill

    Only one of us thinks she is in a fight. I just find her mildly amusing and mostly pathetic, and humor her a little.

    She thinks I’m her enemy. If I really were, it’d be like a grown man ragdolling a boy in a fight.

    In reality, she desperately needs me to be “an enemy,” so she can validate her vision of herself as a victim. She wants other whites to buy into the idea of a white genocide, so that she can be included in some sort of a community that she sorely appears to lack in real life.

    The sad thing is, if it came down to it, I’d stand between her children and a BLM mob, with a rifle. But she can’t see that. She can’t acknowledge that. That would crush her warped ideas about me, about her, and about who really wants to harm her and her kids. Who the real good guys and bad guys are.

    So instead, she yells, “Liar!” and lashes out like a rabid dog.

    Replies: @RSDB, @dfordoom

    The sad thing is, if it came down to it, I’d stand between her children and a BLM mob, with a rifle.

    I think in a situation where a mob is coming after a group of children you (and most of us) would probably be on the side of the children even in the (admittedly unlikely at present) scenario of some sort of white mob coming after black children.

  110. Estimated genetic ancestry on based on blacks being 80% African 20% European, hispanics being 10% African 45% Amerindian and 45% European, Asians being 80% Asian and 20% European, White being 100% European, and Native Americans being 50% Amerindian and 50% European.

    Asian 5%
    European 66%
    African 15%
    Amerindian 11%

    • Replies: @anon
    @t

    hispanics being 10% African 45% Amerindian and 45% European,

    Dude that's not even true for Mexico. Do you know how big Latin America is?

  111. t says:
    @SFG
    @Twinkie

    It's Kauffman's 'whiteshift' argument--new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish--"oh yeah, my grandma's Italian, that's why I love pasta!"

    I can see that from his point of view--he's successful and optimistic (and perhaps secretly a bit on the right-wing side), so why not identify with the dominant culture? The problem is that the affirmative action rules and woke culture encourage people to find as many minority groups as possible to belong to.

    On the plus side, most of the famous 'non-white' tsunami is actually Hispanic, so pulling off enough of the paler ones to maintain an 'off-white' majority is still practicable, IMHO.

    Replies: @iffen, @Feryl, @Rosie, @Johann Ricke, @t

    High IQ conservatives tend to overestimate the importance of affirmative action. In the 70s there was affirmative action for blue collar occupations but that’s gone it’s now only an issue in accidmia. I’d be surprised if there is affirmative action for Half-Hispanics 20 years from there are too many of them and they are to similar to bad white culturally.

    The majority of Hispanics already identify as white and in practice hispanics and asians are more likley to identify with their ethnicity(ie Mexican or Korean) than larger racial categories.

  112. @Rosie
    @Talha


    As long as some German Shepherds are breeding with other German Shepherds, that breed will be around. Some German Shepherds breeding with Rottweilers or Dobermans or Malamutes will not change that fact.
     
    And yet, there are no White people in India. Everyone is a shade of brown.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

    And yet, there are no White people in India.

    Depends on what you call “India” – there are plenty of these kinds of people in parts of Pakistan (which is historic India) – see below MORE tag.

    I mentioned before, when I was a young boy in Karachi, I had a crush on my best friend’s sister who had me smitten with her blond/brown hair and hazel eyes.

    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures. Historically, conquerors had no problems mixing their line with local females – this is true whether you go to Alexander who had 40 of his captains marry local Persian noble-women to Arabs/Berbers in Spain to Mongols/Huns in Eastern Europe to Conquistadors in the New World.

    It is interesting that the Nazis, with their ideas about racial purity, sprung up in the aftermath of a defeated Germany from WW1 – not one that won.

    You see, patriarchal cultures concern themselves with preservation of their patrilineal lines, they aren’t really all that concerned about some concept of racial purity – this is a very new idea. If you told Vikings not to grab and cart off Arab women on their attacks on the Andalusian coast because they were genetically impure, they’d laugh at you.

    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man’s choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it – that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can’t marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father? The only One Who can interdict the union at that point is God Himself.

    I mean this is all well and good, of course, for the white nationalist break-off country some people want and I certainly don’t mind them creating one or what they do internally with their laws, but t seems obvious any notion of a serious patriarchy in that territory would be dead on arrival.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Talha


    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man’s choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it – that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can’t marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father?
     
    Yes, very good point.

    My concern about obsessions with racial purity and increasing the fertility rate is that the solutions to these problems would almost certainly involve a degree of totalitarianism. To me that's too high a price to pay.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @nebulafox
    @Talha

    Nazi ideas about racial purity were not new in the German speaking world, but if you told an observer in 1913 that between Germany and Russia, one would become a Marxist state and the other a fascist one after a civilizational calamity, they would have guessed the opposite of what happened. Tsarist Russia had plenty of proto-fascist movements that toward the prewar period held a lot more appeal among the masses than the autocracy did, and Germany was home to the world's largest legal Marxist party.

    Relatively Judeophile Germany attempting to exterminate European Jewry three decades later should show how quickly culture can change if there's an underlying impetus for it. Normally, culture changes very slowly, but there are periods in human history where it accelerates and a society becomes unrecognizable 30 years later. We are possibly living in one of those periods.

    (It's very significant that the only place the Kristallnacht pogrom was received with enthusiasm was Vienna: a lot of Hitler's thinking on race can be traced back to the Austrian German's fear of being submerged by inferior races, and a lot of the Austrian Nazis who returned to Vienna in 1938 tended to match his psychological profile. Note that a lot of German commanders in Yugoslavia during the war were Austrian, and this was key in the ethnic games they played. The Japanese played similar ethnic favoritism in Malaysia and Singapore, but they weren't as familiar with the local conflicts as the Austrian Wehrmacht and SS commanders were-dynamics that other Germans tended to be completely ignorant of.

    Also, more proof of the whole "Hitler was a revolutionary, not a reactionary" argument: Hitler *detested* the Hapsburg monarchy. Part of that was an old-time emphasis on religion over newer, "modern" racial ideas: they put social values in a Catholic framework and gave the Church a prime role in society, but were also genuinely tolerant of religious minorities, be they Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, or even Muslims toward the end. Some of the racialist stuff was making inroads toward the final decade in the Austrian high command, though, with Franz Ferdinand-tragically-being the main force against it.)

    Replies: @RSDB, @Twinkie

    , @Rosie
    @Talha


    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures.
     
    I'm not accusing you of this Talha, but it is very common for anti-Whites to question a man's masculinity if he concerns himself with the wellbeing and future prospects of their own kind. Indeed, susceptibility to such taunting and manipulation may well be the fatal weakness that brings down the White man for good.

    In any event, your take on patriarchy and its role in furthering (or more likely, not) the survival and flourishing of the White race is very interesting, indeed, and so much the better that it comes from a person who is almost certainly immune to the charge of being a "feminist" (whatever the hell that even means anymore).

    Replies: @Talha

  113. @RSDB
    @Talha

    In Heinlein's novels there is something called the Howard Society (I think) which consists of a number of "Howard Families", endowed by a man unsurprisingly named Howard, and which promotes eugenic marriage among long-lived families. I don't see why some sort of parallel could not exist in this case if there is enough actual desire for such a thing.

    Replies: @Talha

    which promotes eugenic marriage among long-lived families

    And Dune had the Bene Gesserit involving themselves in the lines of the various houses to produce the Kwisatz Haderach. But see my response to Rosie. The problem is never those who voluntarily want to do this…what do you do with those that do not?

    If I teach my boys that they should never marry a girl with red hair and a bunch of other people do the same and the kids all listen – OK, that’s just people making a voluntary choice based upon the values/culture that they have been raised with. Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @Talha

    Well, I know Chesterton's comment on the subject:


    The one objection to scientific marriage which is worthy of final attention is simply that such a thing could only be imposed on unthinkable slaves and cowards. I do not know whether the scientific marriage-mongers are right (as they say) or wrong (as Mr. Wells says) in saying that medical supervision would produce strong and healthy men. I am only certain that if it did, the first act of the strong and healthy men would be to smash the medical supervision.
     

    Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?
     
    Well, there's always disinheritance, though I don't think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays as when Cedric the Saxon used it to control Ivanhoe's marriage in Ivanhoe. Given that they were both characters in a romantic novel it didn't work out too well then either, though it did mean Ivanhoe was referred to as the "Disinherited Knight" for the first half of the novel.

    I think the Howard Families maintained a fund they used to encourage marriages they deemed suitable; here is an excerpt describing how this was supposed to work: http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1070

    On March 17, 1874, Ira Johnson, medical student, sat in the law offices of Deems, Wingate, Alden, & Deems and listened to an unusual proposition. At last he interrupted the senior partner. "Just a moment! Do I understand that you are trying to hire me to marry one of these women?"
    The lawyer looked shocked. "Please, Mr. Johnson. Not at all"
    "Well, it certainly sounded like it."
    "No, no, such a contract would be void, against public policy. We are simply informing you, as administrators of a trust, that should it come about that you do marry one of the young ladies on this list it would then be our pleasant duty to endow each child of such a union according to the scale here set forth. But there would be no Contract with us involved, nor is there any 'proposition' being made to you and we certainly do not urge any course of action on you. We are simply informing you of certain facts."
     
    I'm not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it's at least interesting.

    Replies: @Kratoklastes, @Talha

  114. @Twinkie
    @Blinky Bill

    Only one of us thinks she is in a fight. I just find her mildly amusing and mostly pathetic, and humor her a little.

    She thinks I’m her enemy. If I really were, it’d be like a grown man ragdolling a boy in a fight.

    In reality, she desperately needs me to be “an enemy,” so she can validate her vision of herself as a victim. She wants other whites to buy into the idea of a white genocide, so that she can be included in some sort of a community that she sorely appears to lack in real life.

    The sad thing is, if it came down to it, I’d stand between her children and a BLM mob, with a rifle. But she can’t see that. She can’t acknowledge that. That would crush her warped ideas about me, about her, and about who really wants to harm her and her kids. Who the real good guys and bad guys are.

    So instead, she yells, “Liar!” and lashes out like a rabid dog.

    Replies: @RSDB, @dfordoom

    In reality, she desperately needs me to be “an enemy,” so she can validate her vision of herself as a victim. She wants other whites to buy into the idea of a white genocide, so that she can be included in some sort of a community that she sorely appears to lack in real life.

    Sadly that pretty much describes white nationalism. It’s mostly a mixture of paranoia and whining self-pity.

    And my comment is not directed at Rosie personally. I’m talking about white nationalism and the alt-right in general.

  115. @Twinkie
    @Rosie

    https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/15153121/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-00-04.png

    Not included in the chart are American Indians whose intermarriage rate is over 50%, the highest.

    Note also that Asian intermarriage rate is even higher than that on the chart, if born in the U.S.

    Replies: @t

    Here’s a chart for the US born broken down with Asians broken down by ethnicity:

    • Thanks: Twinkie
  116. @Talha
    @Rosie


    And yet, there are no White people in India.
     
    Depends on what you call "India" - there are plenty of these kinds of people in parts of Pakistan (which is historic India) - see below MORE tag.

    I mentioned before, when I was a young boy in Karachi, I had a crush on my best friend's sister who had me smitten with her blond/brown hair and hazel eyes.

    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures. Historically, conquerors had no problems mixing their line with local females - this is true whether you go to Alexander who had 40 of his captains marry local Persian noble-women to Arabs/Berbers in Spain to Mongols/Huns in Eastern Europe to Conquistadors in the New World.

    It is interesting that the Nazis, with their ideas about racial purity, sprung up in the aftermath of a defeated Germany from WW1 - not one that won.

    You see, patriarchal cultures concern themselves with preservation of their patrilineal lines, they aren't really all that concerned about some concept of racial purity - this is a very new idea. If you told Vikings not to grab and cart off Arab women on their attacks on the Andalusian coast because they were genetically impure, they'd laugh at you.

    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man's choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it - that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can't marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father? The only One Who can interdict the union at that point is God Himself.

    I mean this is all well and good, of course, for the white nationalist break-off country some people want and I certainly don't mind them creating one or what they do internally with their laws, but t seems obvious any notion of a serious patriarchy in that territory would be dead on arrival.

    Peace.

    https://i0.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/redhaired-aghan-pahuten-redhair.jpg
    https://i2.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/afghanman_arte.jpg
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/32/bb/0832bbbd6069a63dbf11a801de2f3b40.jpg
    https://live.staticflickr.com/5012/5532898748_583c14f860_o.jpg

    Replies: @dfordoom, @nebulafox, @Rosie

    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man’s choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it – that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can’t marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father?

    Yes, very good point.

    My concern about obsessions with racial purity and increasing the fertility rate is that the solutions to these problems would almost certainly involve a degree of totalitarianism. To me that’s too high a price to pay.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    My concern about obsessions with racial purity and increasing the fertility rate is that the solutions to these problems would almost certainly involve a degree of totalitarianism. To me that’s too high a price to pay.
     
    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @dfordoom

  117. t says:
    @Twinkie
    @Jay Fink

    It was in jest. Don’t take it too seriously.

    However, I would speculate with some confidence that white-Asian mixes have cognitive profiles closer to the white average than white-Hispanic mixes, as the two pairings have different demographic profiles on average.

    Replies: @t

    I’d bet that white-Asians have higher IQs but white-Hispanics are closer to the white average. I can’t find in 10 minutes on google but I saw a study that showed white-hispanic kids are very similar to whites on average. The incomes of mixed marriages indicate that same.

    Edited to add: I now see you already linked to this chart sorry.

  118. @Twinkie
    @Talha

    Hey, now, if you don’t buy into “white genocide,” you are her enemy... but then again, you are also a brown-skinned guy in a white country. You won’t do well under Kommissar Rosie’s whip hand either way.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @iffen

    You have to wonder what these types make of Bosniaks as much as Palestinian or Chinese (traditionally Southeast Asian diaspora, but increasingly mainland) Christians.

    I’m worried I come off as too flippant about anti-white sentiment among the perennially aggrieved Diverse. I’m not: Zemir Begic’s fate should show pretty clearly that the BLM types will come after you no matter what your background is. But the notion of “peaceful ethnic separation” sends me into irrational convulsions of paranoia, no matter who spouts them.

  119. @Talha
    @RSDB


    which promotes eugenic marriage among long-lived families
     
    And Dune had the Bene Gesserit involving themselves in the lines of the various houses to produce the Kwisatz Haderach. But see my response to Rosie. The problem is never those who voluntarily want to do this...what do you do with those that do not?

    If I teach my boys that they should never marry a girl with red hair and a bunch of other people do the same and the kids all listen - OK, that's just people making a voluntary choice based upon the values/culture that they have been raised with. Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?

    Peace.

    Replies: @RSDB

    Well, I know Chesterton’s comment on the subject:

    The one objection to scientific marriage which is worthy of final attention is simply that such a thing could only be imposed on unthinkable slaves and cowards. I do not know whether the scientific marriage-mongers are right (as they say) or wrong (as Mr. Wells says) in saying that medical supervision would produce strong and healthy men. I am only certain that if it did, the first act of the strong and healthy men would be to smash the medical supervision.

    Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?

    Well, there’s always disinheritance, though I don’t think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays as when Cedric the Saxon used it to control Ivanhoe’s marriage in Ivanhoe. Given that they were both characters in a romantic novel it didn’t work out too well then either, though it did mean Ivanhoe was referred to as the “Disinherited Knight” for the first half of the novel.

    I think the Howard Families maintained a fund they used to encourage marriages they deemed suitable; here is an excerpt describing how this was supposed to work: http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1070

    [MORE]

    On March 17, 1874, Ira Johnson, medical student, sat in the law offices of Deems, Wingate, Alden, & Deems and listened to an unusual proposition. At last he interrupted the senior partner. “Just a moment! Do I understand that you are trying to hire me to marry one of these women?”
    The lawyer looked shocked. “Please, Mr. Johnson. Not at all”
    “Well, it certainly sounded like it.”
    “No, no, such a contract would be void, against public policy. We are simply informing you, as administrators of a trust, that should it come about that you do marry one of the young ladies on this list it would then be our pleasant duty to endow each child of such a union according to the scale here set forth. But there would be no Contract with us involved, nor is there any ‘proposition’ being made to you and we certainly do not urge any course of action on you. We are simply informing you of certain facts.”

    I’m not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it’s at least interesting.

    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    @RSDB


    Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?
     
    Poor old G.K.: for a man who had a clue (as evidenced by "The Secret People"), he seems to have committed a lapse of judgement on the Ginger Question.

    If your kid is enamoured with a ginger, it's pretty straightforward: you're morally obliged to kill your kid, lament for your poor parenting, and try as best you can to make amends. (Expiation is simply impossible if the ginger also has freckles).

    As to the ginger object of his affections: pretty sure that there's still a bounty on those blood-nutted abominations.

    Still, you might want to check with the local authorities - it would be a terrible shame to scalp the corpse and then trudge all the way to the Bounty Office, then find that the Bounty Office is not a real thing.
    , @Talha
    @RSDB


    though I don’t think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays...I’m not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it’s at least interesting.
     
    Well, that's the point. What if they still don't care? Very easy hypothetical question; you are a white-nationalist, you live in Whitekanda, in Whitekanda whites are not allowed to marry any other races nor are other races allowed to settle in its territory. Your son travels overseas for business, meets a great woman from X non-white ethnicity, hits it off and says he has found the love of his life. He gets married to her and wants to bring her back to Whitekanda. You see the woman makes him very happy and loves him dearly. Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?

    This is not a theoretical question in the Muslim world - in fact, I discussed with my boys over dinner about how we - as Muslims - do indeed have discriminatory policies about marriage and it is not a game. For instance, Muslim men cannot marry a Hindu or atheist or Buddhist woman. In certain Muslim-majority countries, you can go to court to get such marriages annulled. I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I'm all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that's because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry - he is a man, he decides that in conjunction with the girl's father. As a father and a man, I respect this in principle...and would NOT interfere EXCEPT where the sacred law is concerned and obliges me to. If she converts, cool - then that is a choice she makes and changes her status and all is good.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Twinkie, @RSDB

  120. @Talha
    @Rosie


    And yet, there are no White people in India.
     
    Depends on what you call "India" - there are plenty of these kinds of people in parts of Pakistan (which is historic India) - see below MORE tag.

    I mentioned before, when I was a young boy in Karachi, I had a crush on my best friend's sister who had me smitten with her blond/brown hair and hazel eyes.

    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures. Historically, conquerors had no problems mixing their line with local females - this is true whether you go to Alexander who had 40 of his captains marry local Persian noble-women to Arabs/Berbers in Spain to Mongols/Huns in Eastern Europe to Conquistadors in the New World.

    It is interesting that the Nazis, with their ideas about racial purity, sprung up in the aftermath of a defeated Germany from WW1 - not one that won.

    You see, patriarchal cultures concern themselves with preservation of their patrilineal lines, they aren't really all that concerned about some concept of racial purity - this is a very new idea. If you told Vikings not to grab and cart off Arab women on their attacks on the Andalusian coast because they were genetically impure, they'd laugh at you.

    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man's choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it - that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can't marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father? The only One Who can interdict the union at that point is God Himself.

    I mean this is all well and good, of course, for the white nationalist break-off country some people want and I certainly don't mind them creating one or what they do internally with their laws, but t seems obvious any notion of a serious patriarchy in that territory would be dead on arrival.

    Peace.

    https://i0.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/redhaired-aghan-pahuten-redhair.jpg
    https://i2.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/afghanman_arte.jpg
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/32/bb/0832bbbd6069a63dbf11a801de2f3b40.jpg
    https://live.staticflickr.com/5012/5532898748_583c14f860_o.jpg

    Replies: @dfordoom, @nebulafox, @Rosie

    Nazi ideas about racial purity were not new in the German speaking world, but if you told an observer in 1913 that between Germany and Russia, one would become a Marxist state and the other a fascist one after a civilizational calamity, they would have guessed the opposite of what happened. Tsarist Russia had plenty of proto-fascist movements that toward the prewar period held a lot more appeal among the masses than the autocracy did, and Germany was home to the world’s largest legal Marxist party.

    Relatively Judeophile Germany attempting to exterminate European Jewry three decades later should show how quickly culture can change if there’s an underlying impetus for it. Normally, culture changes very slowly, but there are periods in human history where it accelerates and a society becomes unrecognizable 30 years later. We are possibly living in one of those periods.

    (It’s very significant that the only place the Kristallnacht pogrom was received with enthusiasm was Vienna: a lot of Hitler’s thinking on race can be traced back to the Austrian German’s fear of being submerged by inferior races, and a lot of the Austrian Nazis who returned to Vienna in 1938 tended to match his psychological profile. Note that a lot of German commanders in Yugoslavia during the war were Austrian, and this was key in the ethnic games they played. The Japanese played similar ethnic favoritism in Malaysia and Singapore, but they weren’t as familiar with the local conflicts as the Austrian Wehrmacht and SS commanders were-dynamics that other Germans tended to be completely ignorant of.

    Also, more proof of the whole “Hitler was a revolutionary, not a reactionary” argument: Hitler *detested* the Hapsburg monarchy. Part of that was an old-time emphasis on religion over newer, “modern” racial ideas: they put social values in a Catholic framework and gave the Church a prime role in society, but were also genuinely tolerant of religious minorities, be they Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, or even Muslims toward the end. Some of the racialist stuff was making inroads toward the final decade in the Austrian high command, though, with Franz Ferdinand-tragically-being the main force against it.)

    • Thanks: Talha
    • Replies: @RSDB
    @nebulafox


    if you told an observer in 1913 that between Germany and Russia, one would become a Marxist state and the other a fascist one after a civilizational calamity, they would have
     
    asked you what "fascism" was in all probability.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    , @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    Also, more proof of the whole “Hitler was a revolutionary, not a reactionary” argument: Hitler *detested* the Hapsburg monarchy. Part of that was an old-time emphasis on religion over newer, “modern” racial ideas: they put social values in a Catholic framework and gave the Church a prime role in society, but were also genuinely tolerant of religious minorities, be they Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, or even Muslims toward the end. Some of the racialist stuff was making inroads toward the final decade in the Austrian high command, though, with Franz Ferdinand-tragically-being the main force against it.)
     
    Destruction of the Hapsburg monarchy is one of the great calamities of modern European history, the consequences of which still reverberate to the present day.

    Replies: @nebulafox

  121. @nebulafox
    @Talha

    Nazi ideas about racial purity were not new in the German speaking world, but if you told an observer in 1913 that between Germany and Russia, one would become a Marxist state and the other a fascist one after a civilizational calamity, they would have guessed the opposite of what happened. Tsarist Russia had plenty of proto-fascist movements that toward the prewar period held a lot more appeal among the masses than the autocracy did, and Germany was home to the world's largest legal Marxist party.

    Relatively Judeophile Germany attempting to exterminate European Jewry three decades later should show how quickly culture can change if there's an underlying impetus for it. Normally, culture changes very slowly, but there are periods in human history where it accelerates and a society becomes unrecognizable 30 years later. We are possibly living in one of those periods.

    (It's very significant that the only place the Kristallnacht pogrom was received with enthusiasm was Vienna: a lot of Hitler's thinking on race can be traced back to the Austrian German's fear of being submerged by inferior races, and a lot of the Austrian Nazis who returned to Vienna in 1938 tended to match his psychological profile. Note that a lot of German commanders in Yugoslavia during the war were Austrian, and this was key in the ethnic games they played. The Japanese played similar ethnic favoritism in Malaysia and Singapore, but they weren't as familiar with the local conflicts as the Austrian Wehrmacht and SS commanders were-dynamics that other Germans tended to be completely ignorant of.

    Also, more proof of the whole "Hitler was a revolutionary, not a reactionary" argument: Hitler *detested* the Hapsburg monarchy. Part of that was an old-time emphasis on religion over newer, "modern" racial ideas: they put social values in a Catholic framework and gave the Church a prime role in society, but were also genuinely tolerant of religious minorities, be they Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, or even Muslims toward the end. Some of the racialist stuff was making inroads toward the final decade in the Austrian high command, though, with Franz Ferdinand-tragically-being the main force against it.)

    Replies: @RSDB, @Twinkie

    if you told an observer in 1913 that between Germany and Russia, one would become a Marxist state and the other a fascist one after a civilizational calamity, they would have

    asked you what “fascism” was in all probability.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @RSDB

    >asked you what “fascism” was in all probability.

    Assume you explained to them, or just said "far-right" vs. "far-left".

    The point is, in 1912, nobody would have guessed that Russia would turn out far-left and Germany as far-right. Even the Communists didn't anticipate coming to power in Russia rather than Germany or some other more developed nation. This animated a lot of Lenin's thinking in the early days of the USSR: he thought the revolution was right around the corner in Germany, and Poland (a country despised by leftists and rightists alike in both Germany and Russia/USSR) was the bridge he needed to cross to get there.

    Replies: @RSDB

  122. Treating all multiracial births as non-white statistically erases the white parent’s contribution

    For the longest time, a bunch of US State legislatures averred that one drop is all it takes to “erase[] the white parent’s contribution“.

    Given that even the most well-intentioned white women might end up mating with a clandestine one-dropper, and that a few other white women mate with vibrants by preference… that 52% is almost certainly under 50%. Ruh-roh

    Until realtime racial genotyping is possible, hospitals need to get coloured comparison strips (like the ones that are used to test people’s pee) to check newborns’ skintone – so that they can make the birth certificate more accurate[1]. Male kiddies who fail the one-drop test should be disqualified from ever buying TruckNutz or Confederate memorabilia.

    [1] Obviously there’s only ever a need to test the skintone of a baby with a white mother: babies born to non PureWhite mothers have Dat Ol’ Debbil (duskiness) by default. (In case anyone suggested that my idea for skintone-matching was because I would pass for PureWhite: nope, coz my Mum is 50% spear-chucker)

  123. @RSDB
    @nebulafox


    if you told an observer in 1913 that between Germany and Russia, one would become a Marxist state and the other a fascist one after a civilizational calamity, they would have
     
    asked you what "fascism" was in all probability.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    >asked you what “fascism” was in all probability.

    Assume you explained to them, or just said “far-right” vs. “far-left”.

    The point is, in 1912, nobody would have guessed that Russia would turn out far-left and Germany as far-right. Even the Communists didn’t anticipate coming to power in Russia rather than Germany or some other more developed nation. This animated a lot of Lenin’s thinking in the early days of the USSR: he thought the revolution was right around the corner in Germany, and Poland (a country despised by leftists and rightists alike in both Germany and Russia/USSR) was the bridge he needed to cross to get there.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @nebulafox

    Russia was already famous for producing nihilist and other far-left revolutionaries, while it was a saying about Germany that "there will never be a revolution in Germany, for revolution has been strictly prohibited", or something along those lines.

    Germany also already had a sort of paternalistic government that could be described with some contortion of the meaning of words as "national socialism".


    Even the Communists
     
    Ah, you should have said your 1913 interlocutor was a Marxist theorist: of course the socialist revolution will follow the fullest development of the capitalist system!

    Here is an old comment I made about that (my first comment under RSDB, incidentally): https://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/a-trump-doctrine-america-first/#comment-1660021


    Yes, everybody thought for a while Germany would be the center of whatever new socialism emerged. Per Marxist theory, iirc, the revolution should have happened in Germany or England or America, the most thoroughly industrialized countries. But, as I said earlier, Marxist theory is wrong.
     
    Also I think explaining what fascism meant might be a little involved. As it happens, this was the subject of my first comment ever on the Unz Review: https://www.unz.com/plee/trump-we-wish-the-problem-was-fascism/#comment-1617043

    I see what you mean, though, and you're not wrong at all-- only history is always more complicated than it appears.

    Replies: @nebulafox

  124. @anon
    @Rosie

    Unless and until you change your attitude, you have no standing to make demands on anyone.

    Oh, lol @ this irony.

    I guess Rosie is confusing Twinkie with Mr. Rosie now.

    Replies: @Rosie

    I guess Rosie is confusing Twinkie with Mr. Rosie now.

    Noone could ever do that. First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place under God, and would never call a woman married for 20 years a “whore.”

    1 Corinthians 6:11

    And then there’s the fact that Rosie is neither a sophist nor a liar.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Rosie

    . First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place

    Lol, exactly my point.

    And then there’s the fact that Rosie is neither a sophist nor a liar.

    Woo, more irony! In fact, you are both.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    would never call a woman married for 20 years a “whore.”
     
    I never did either. I merely repeated what you triumphantly narrated earlier - that you were promiscuous.

    If you truly repented your past sins, I’d consider that truly a triumph of the goodness and mercy of God and a great success for you. Alas, you are on record as stating otherwise.

    But we’ve been down this road before - you are someone who makes up her own theology as her emotional needs dictate. There cannot be redemption without reconciliation, which by definition requires an admission of guilt and a genuine remorse (or al least an imperfect contrition).

    Mr. Rosie
     
    My sincere sympathies to him. He’s probably wondering where you are.

    Replies: @Rosie

  125. @nebulafox
    @RSDB

    >asked you what “fascism” was in all probability.

    Assume you explained to them, or just said "far-right" vs. "far-left".

    The point is, in 1912, nobody would have guessed that Russia would turn out far-left and Germany as far-right. Even the Communists didn't anticipate coming to power in Russia rather than Germany or some other more developed nation. This animated a lot of Lenin's thinking in the early days of the USSR: he thought the revolution was right around the corner in Germany, and Poland (a country despised by leftists and rightists alike in both Germany and Russia/USSR) was the bridge he needed to cross to get there.

    Replies: @RSDB

    Russia was already famous for producing nihilist and other far-left revolutionaries, while it was a saying about Germany that “there will never be a revolution in Germany, for revolution has been strictly prohibited”, or something along those lines.

    Germany also already had a sort of paternalistic government that could be described with some contortion of the meaning of words as “national socialism”.

    Even the Communists

    Ah, you should have said your 1913 interlocutor was a Marxist theorist: of course the socialist revolution will follow the fullest development of the capitalist system!

    Here is an old comment I made about that (my first comment under RSDB, incidentally): https://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/a-trump-doctrine-america-first/#comment-1660021

    Yes, everybody thought for a while Germany would be the center of whatever new socialism emerged. Per Marxist theory, iirc, the revolution should have happened in Germany or England or America, the most thoroughly industrialized countries. But, as I said earlier, Marxist theory is wrong.

    Also I think explaining what fascism meant might be a little involved. As it happens, this was the subject of my first comment ever on the Unz Review: https://www.unz.com/plee/trump-we-wish-the-problem-was-fascism/#comment-1617043

    I see what you mean, though, and you’re not wrong at all– only history is always more complicated than it appears.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @RSDB

    Yes, but many of Russia's left-wing revolutionaries were on the verge of self-destruction in the immediate prewar period. The Tsarist secret police under Pyotr Durnovo was extremely effective at knowing how to goad political extremists into infighting and paranoid meltdowns. But the autocracy was unable to make any practical use of that. I don't think the Bolsheviks would have come to power if WWI never happened-they themselves were less quick than the classically reactionary Durnovo to see what WWI potentially meant for the Overton Window. But the Tsarist regime was going to have to either change or die. The fact that Tsarist Russia was rapidly industrializing was upping the pressure on this, not taking it away.

    Germany... I've never quite bought into the notion German "submissiveness" as much as some people: 1848, 1919, and of course, the revolutionaries against revolution on the far-right were not politically submissive in the slightest, and in terms of intellectual radicalism, Germany had no equal. But I do get your point. The German mind to this day accords unusual levels of respect to sobriety, stability, and order, no matter how much the memory of the Nazis has altered its manifestations politically. Nazism accorded with this: the bulk of the Nazi movement by the early 1930s consisted of people with a directionless but strong craving for order and morality, in contrast to the displaced ex-soldiers it started out with. It took landing in prison for Hitler to realize that hostile takeovers were going to get nowhere in his culture unless he was a general.

    >Ah, you should have said your 1913 interlocutor was a Marxist theorist: of course the socialist revolution will follow the fullest development of the capitalist system!

    You didn't have to be a Marxist theorist because normal middle class people did something shocking back then: they read books and critically thought about them. :)

    Replies: @RSDB

  126. @Justvisiting
    @nebulafox


    white chick who brings an attitude of “entertain me, peasant” to the first date
     
    I had a few blind dates like that when I was young.

    At the first hint of that I would walk away without a word--just gone...

    Replies: @nebulafox

    At the time, I lacked even the social skills necessary even to handle “unscripted” stuff like a woman being attracted to me and making a move-to the point of her attempting to make out with me or to understand what her inviting me to her room meant, in some cases-so you can probably guess I didn’t pick up on more subtle signals like this. But looking back in retrospect with the ability to read emotions I’ve gained, it is astonishing to note how many chicks my age seemed to believe that their mere presence was something that non-elite guys should be crying with joy to have. Not all women were like this, not by a long shot, but enough of them were to note it.

    (Yes, yes, needless to say, I missed out on a LOT of opportunities to get laid. I’m the type of guy who’d much rather go for a long mountain trek or curl up with a nice book with my SO than go on the prowl in the club or on Tinder, so these days I don’t regret that near as much as missed chances in other areas. But it was just one more unavoidable confirmation of failure in my mind back when my life was out of control, at rock bottom, and of course, completely lacking female company.)

    The women who were like this were always distinctly average or one deviation away from it. Neither bombshells nor ugly/fat women ever brought this attitude to the table: I cannot recall an unpleasant outing with women at the top or at the bottom of the dating market, interestingly enough, even if we didn’t hit it off at all. Online dating is a huge part of this, I suspect.

  127. @RSDB
    @nebulafox

    Russia was already famous for producing nihilist and other far-left revolutionaries, while it was a saying about Germany that "there will never be a revolution in Germany, for revolution has been strictly prohibited", or something along those lines.

    Germany also already had a sort of paternalistic government that could be described with some contortion of the meaning of words as "national socialism".


    Even the Communists
     
    Ah, you should have said your 1913 interlocutor was a Marxist theorist: of course the socialist revolution will follow the fullest development of the capitalist system!

    Here is an old comment I made about that (my first comment under RSDB, incidentally): https://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/a-trump-doctrine-america-first/#comment-1660021


    Yes, everybody thought for a while Germany would be the center of whatever new socialism emerged. Per Marxist theory, iirc, the revolution should have happened in Germany or England or America, the most thoroughly industrialized countries. But, as I said earlier, Marxist theory is wrong.
     
    Also I think explaining what fascism meant might be a little involved. As it happens, this was the subject of my first comment ever on the Unz Review: https://www.unz.com/plee/trump-we-wish-the-problem-was-fascism/#comment-1617043

    I see what you mean, though, and you're not wrong at all-- only history is always more complicated than it appears.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    Yes, but many of Russia’s left-wing revolutionaries were on the verge of self-destruction in the immediate prewar period. The Tsarist secret police under Pyotr Durnovo was extremely effective at knowing how to goad political extremists into infighting and paranoid meltdowns. But the autocracy was unable to make any practical use of that. I don’t think the Bolsheviks would have come to power if WWI never happened-they themselves were less quick than the classically reactionary Durnovo to see what WWI potentially meant for the Overton Window. But the Tsarist regime was going to have to either change or die. The fact that Tsarist Russia was rapidly industrializing was upping the pressure on this, not taking it away.

    Germany… I’ve never quite bought into the notion German “submissiveness” as much as some people: 1848, 1919, and of course, the revolutionaries against revolution on the far-right were not politically submissive in the slightest, and in terms of intellectual radicalism, Germany had no equal. But I do get your point. The German mind to this day accords unusual levels of respect to sobriety, stability, and order, no matter how much the memory of the Nazis has altered its manifestations politically. Nazism accorded with this: the bulk of the Nazi movement by the early 1930s consisted of people with a directionless but strong craving for order and morality, in contrast to the displaced ex-soldiers it started out with. It took landing in prison for Hitler to realize that hostile takeovers were going to get nowhere in his culture unless he was a general.

    >Ah, you should have said your 1913 interlocutor was a Marxist theorist: of course the socialist revolution will follow the fullest development of the capitalist system!

    You didn’t have to be a Marxist theorist because normal middle class people did something shocking back then: they read books and critically thought about them. 🙂

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @nebulafox


    You didn’t have to be a Marxist theorist because normal middle class people did something shocking back then: they read books and critically thought about them. 🙂
     
    And arrived all at the same wrong conclusion that socialism (succeeded eventually by true communism) would inevitably follow the full development of the capitalist/industrial system? "Critical thinking" must have been rather a limited thing in those days. ( :) of course)

    But I do get your point.
     
    It was a point not primarily about the racial personality traits of the German people but about the way their society was perceived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As you point out, this perception did have some merit.

    I don’t think the Bolsheviks would have come to power if WWI never happened
     
    I think you would be hard put to it to find anyone who disagrees with this.
  128. @nebulafox
    @RSDB

    Yes, but many of Russia's left-wing revolutionaries were on the verge of self-destruction in the immediate prewar period. The Tsarist secret police under Pyotr Durnovo was extremely effective at knowing how to goad political extremists into infighting and paranoid meltdowns. But the autocracy was unable to make any practical use of that. I don't think the Bolsheviks would have come to power if WWI never happened-they themselves were less quick than the classically reactionary Durnovo to see what WWI potentially meant for the Overton Window. But the Tsarist regime was going to have to either change or die. The fact that Tsarist Russia was rapidly industrializing was upping the pressure on this, not taking it away.

    Germany... I've never quite bought into the notion German "submissiveness" as much as some people: 1848, 1919, and of course, the revolutionaries against revolution on the far-right were not politically submissive in the slightest, and in terms of intellectual radicalism, Germany had no equal. But I do get your point. The German mind to this day accords unusual levels of respect to sobriety, stability, and order, no matter how much the memory of the Nazis has altered its manifestations politically. Nazism accorded with this: the bulk of the Nazi movement by the early 1930s consisted of people with a directionless but strong craving for order and morality, in contrast to the displaced ex-soldiers it started out with. It took landing in prison for Hitler to realize that hostile takeovers were going to get nowhere in his culture unless he was a general.

    >Ah, you should have said your 1913 interlocutor was a Marxist theorist: of course the socialist revolution will follow the fullest development of the capitalist system!

    You didn't have to be a Marxist theorist because normal middle class people did something shocking back then: they read books and critically thought about them. :)

    Replies: @RSDB

    You didn’t have to be a Marxist theorist because normal middle class people did something shocking back then: they read books and critically thought about them. 🙂

    And arrived all at the same wrong conclusion that socialism (succeeded eventually by true communism) would inevitably follow the full development of the capitalist/industrial system? “Critical thinking” must have been rather a limited thing in those days. ( 🙂 of course)

    But I do get your point.

    It was a point not primarily about the racial personality traits of the German people but about the way their society was perceived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As you point out, this perception did have some merit.

    I don’t think the Bolsheviks would have come to power if WWI never happened

    I think you would be hard put to it to find anyone who disagrees with this.

  129. @Talha
    @Rosie


    And yet, there are no White people in India.
     
    Depends on what you call "India" - there are plenty of these kinds of people in parts of Pakistan (which is historic India) - see below MORE tag.

    I mentioned before, when I was a young boy in Karachi, I had a crush on my best friend's sister who had me smitten with her blond/brown hair and hazel eyes.

    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures. Historically, conquerors had no problems mixing their line with local females - this is true whether you go to Alexander who had 40 of his captains marry local Persian noble-women to Arabs/Berbers in Spain to Mongols/Huns in Eastern Europe to Conquistadors in the New World.

    It is interesting that the Nazis, with their ideas about racial purity, sprung up in the aftermath of a defeated Germany from WW1 - not one that won.

    You see, patriarchal cultures concern themselves with preservation of their patrilineal lines, they aren't really all that concerned about some concept of racial purity - this is a very new idea. If you told Vikings not to grab and cart off Arab women on their attacks on the Andalusian coast because they were genetically impure, they'd laugh at you.

    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man's choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it - that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can't marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father? The only One Who can interdict the union at that point is God Himself.

    I mean this is all well and good, of course, for the white nationalist break-off country some people want and I certainly don't mind them creating one or what they do internally with their laws, but t seems obvious any notion of a serious patriarchy in that territory would be dead on arrival.

    Peace.

    https://i0.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/redhaired-aghan-pahuten-redhair.jpg
    https://i2.wp.com/whatthedoost.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/afghanman_arte.jpg
    https://i.pinimg.com/originals/08/32/bb/0832bbbd6069a63dbf11a801de2f3b40.jpg
    https://live.staticflickr.com/5012/5532898748_583c14f860_o.jpg

    Replies: @dfordoom, @nebulafox, @Rosie

    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures.

    I’m not accusing you of this Talha, but it is very common for anti-Whites to question a man’s masculinity if he concerns himself with the wellbeing and future prospects of their own kind. Indeed, susceptibility to such taunting and manipulation may well be the fatal weakness that brings down the White man for good.

    In any event, your take on patriarchy and its role in furthering (or more likely, not) the survival and flourishing of the White race is very interesting, indeed, and so much the better that it comes from a person who is almost certainly immune to the charge of being a “feminist” (whatever the hell that even means anymore).

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Rosie


    but it is very common for anti-Whites to question a man’s masculinity if he concerns himself with the wellbeing and future prospects of their own kind.
     
    Yeah - I'm certainly not anti-white. In fact, if you read the rules of zakat and charity in the sacred law, you find that it is considered more praiseworthy to give it to one's own needy relatives and extended family instead of strangers. The reason being that you are accomplishing two tasks with this; 1) helping the poor and 2) keeping good ties with blood relations (or what are called "those joined by the womb" in Islamic terminology).

    I personally have no problem with whites preferring to marry their own and in fact think it is a good idea for them to mix it up once in a while and marry first or second cousins just to restart a level healthy kinship networks again.

    We have plenty of Bosnians in our community and they prefer to marry their daughters within their own community (generally skipping over even Albanians!!!) and it's not seen as anything bizarre or racist or anything; cultural compatibility helps maintain a stronger marriage bond and is a very reasonable and legitimate concern.

    Indeed, susceptibility to such taunting and manipulation may well be the fatal weakness that brings down the White man for good.
     
    That's not really my angle. I'm trying to explain that when you plan on putting into practice a policy of racial purity - that leads to certain facts on the ground. There are laws that need to be drafted. The rights of certain individuals will have to be restricted. You are taking away a man's choice of open mate selection. Patriarchal societies do not like governments getting in the way of those kinds of decisions.

    It's a bit akin to encroaching gun-control; you are taking away a man's right to make the necessary decisions he feels are best for him and the defense of his family. Patriarchal societies also don't like governments interfering in that decision as well.

    flourishing of the White race
     
    I personally don't see them flourishing without some level of a return of a serious (not joke or LARPer) patriarchy; time will tell.

    A note I posted on another thread:

    I was at a small barbecue today with a handful of brothers. One of the core brothers in the community is a convert from (mostly) Polish (and mixed European background) and another is Senegalese – the rest are mostly Desi with a few Bosnians and Arabs thrown in for good measure.

    The Polish brother has three kids (mashaAllah) and I was asking him if he plans to have more, to which he replied in the affirmative. He definitely wants to try to have another son so that he has two boys and two girls.

    What’s interesting is when we were exploring what his chances would be in having settled with a family being what he is in his thirties had he not converted. He admitted, if he was one of the lucky few, he might be married with two kids. In his extended family; siblings, cousins, etc. there is only one other couple that had twins and they are done (understandably since twins are a tough package to deal with). His family line is literally about to disappear within a generation.

    He further told me – since he did some research on his family name and background and what not – that apparently there aren’t that many of the them in the US and the rest are settled mostly around the Czech Republic. He knows full well that he is likely establishing a patrilineal line. He said; I’m hoping in a few generations, my last name is as common as any other Muslim last name – that when people hear somebody with my last name, they say, “Oh yeah, that must be a Muslim”. This is full progenitor/founder mode and inshaAllah it will happen and his bloodline will survive the Great Culling.
     
    I was literally discussing with him how he should draft a family sigil. He is not the only one who sees what is happening, I have come across multiple white converts that are very cognizant of the fact that they are establishing the surviving progenitor lines among their families. Whites aren't going anywhere only certain types of whites are - and honestly, there is only so much you can do for some people who will fight you tooth and nail for the right to abort their own babies by the millions annually.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

  130. @dfordoom
    @Talha


    To get racial purity, you would have to institute laws by which you would restrict a man’s choice in the woman he wants to bear his children. There is no other way to guarantee it – that is why miscegenation laws existed in some states, to prevent those that would break the law of their own volition. Let me ask you, what self-respecting man would let a pencil-neck in a government office decide that he can’t marry a woman when he and the woman have consented and he has the approval of her father?
     
    Yes, very good point.

    My concern about obsessions with racial purity and increasing the fertility rate is that the solutions to these problems would almost certainly involve a degree of totalitarianism. To me that's too high a price to pay.

    Replies: @Rosie

    My concern about obsessions with racial purity and increasing the fertility rate is that the solutions to these problems would almost certainly involve a degree of totalitarianism. To me that’s too high a price to pay.

    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.
     
    Hence your constant hankering for “white genocide” - it justifies your personal vision of totalitarianism. Thankfully, extremely few people buy what you are selling - who’d want to be ruled by you?

    You know what intelligent people do? They imagine a world in which their priors are wrong. They try falsifying their own conclusions.

    I used to be pro-immigration and pro-free trade. Then I kept seeing the evidence that this was bad for ordinary Americans. I support neither today.

    Try it.
    , @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.
     
    OK, two questions. Do you think that in the interests of avoiding white extinction it would be OK to take away from women the right to decide how many children they will have?

    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

    Because if you really want high white fertility and white racial purity that's the price.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Rosie

  131. @RSDB
    @Talha

    Well, I know Chesterton's comment on the subject:


    The one objection to scientific marriage which is worthy of final attention is simply that such a thing could only be imposed on unthinkable slaves and cowards. I do not know whether the scientific marriage-mongers are right (as they say) or wrong (as Mr. Wells says) in saying that medical supervision would produce strong and healthy men. I am only certain that if it did, the first act of the strong and healthy men would be to smash the medical supervision.
     

    Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?
     
    Well, there's always disinheritance, though I don't think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays as when Cedric the Saxon used it to control Ivanhoe's marriage in Ivanhoe. Given that they were both characters in a romantic novel it didn't work out too well then either, though it did mean Ivanhoe was referred to as the "Disinherited Knight" for the first half of the novel.

    I think the Howard Families maintained a fund they used to encourage marriages they deemed suitable; here is an excerpt describing how this was supposed to work: http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1070

    On March 17, 1874, Ira Johnson, medical student, sat in the law offices of Deems, Wingate, Alden, & Deems and listened to an unusual proposition. At last he interrupted the senior partner. "Just a moment! Do I understand that you are trying to hire me to marry one of these women?"
    The lawyer looked shocked. "Please, Mr. Johnson. Not at all"
    "Well, it certainly sounded like it."
    "No, no, such a contract would be void, against public policy. We are simply informing you, as administrators of a trust, that should it come about that you do marry one of the young ladies on this list it would then be our pleasant duty to endow each child of such a union according to the scale here set forth. But there would be no Contract with us involved, nor is there any 'proposition' being made to you and we certainly do not urge any course of action on you. We are simply informing you of certain facts."
     
    I'm not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it's at least interesting.

    Replies: @Kratoklastes, @Talha

    Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?

    Poor old G.K.: for a man who had a clue (as evidenced by “The Secret People”), he seems to have committed a lapse of judgement on the Ginger Question.

    If your kid is enamoured with a ginger, it’s pretty straightforward: you’re morally obliged to kill your kid, lament for your poor parenting, and try as best you can to make amends. (Expiation is simply impossible if the ginger also has freckles).

    As to the ginger object of his affections: pretty sure that there’s still a bounty on those blood-nutted abominations.

    Still, you might want to check with the local authorities – it would be a terrible shame to scalp the corpse and then trudge all the way to the Bounty Office, then find that the Bounty Office is not a real thing.

  132. @t
    Estimated genetic ancestry on based on blacks being 80% African 20% European, hispanics being 10% African 45% Amerindian and 45% European, Asians being 80% Asian and 20% European, White being 100% European, and Native Americans being 50% Amerindian and 50% European.

    Asian 5%
    European 66%
    African 15%
    Amerindian 11%

    Replies: @anon

    hispanics being 10% African 45% Amerindian and 45% European,

    Dude that’s not even true for Mexico. Do you know how big Latin America is?

  133. @Rosie
    @prime noticer


    look at a map of europe. are the people from inside those boundaries? then they are euorpeans. they are the in-group. is somebody from outside those boundaries? then they are not europeans. they are the out-group.
     
    The question concerns those who have some ancestors from inside and others from outside those boundaries.

    I'm not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many? It probably depends somewhat on the genetic distance of the non-White ancestor(s) from Europeans.

    Twinkles thinks White people will still exist even when everyone is a shade of brown because our descendants will still have some European genes or because they listen to classical music and don't like BLM or something.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @iffen

    Twinkles thinks White people will still exist even when everyone is a shade of brown

    You don’t even read what I write. I specifically included an article from 1998 that disavowed the “everyone will be a shade of brown” future and predicted “the beige and the black.”

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    You don’t even read what I write.
     
    Yes, for example:

    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics.
     
    IOW, White people will still exist no matter what color they are.

    Get your story straight, Twinkles. You'd be better off embracing full-blown race denialism rather than attempting to have it both ways.


    Hence your constant hankering for “white genocide” – it justifies your personal vision of totalitarianism.
     
    Yawn. Tiresome psychobabble AKA ad hominem (and ignorant) speculations about my motives.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  134. @Rosie
    @anon


    I guess Rosie is confusing Twinkie with Mr. Rosie now.
     
    Noone could ever do that. First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place under God, and would never call a woman married for 20 years a "whore."

    1 Corinthians 6:11

    And then there's the fact that Rosie is neither a sophist nor a liar.

    Replies: @anon, @Twinkie

    . First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place

    Lol, exactly my point.

    And then there’s the fact that Rosie is neither a sophist nor a liar.

    Woo, more irony! In fact, you are both.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @anon


    Woo, more irony! In fact, you are both.
     
    I meant, Mr. Rosie, not that it matters. Any time I say something you believe to be either false or fallacious, you are welcome to point it out. Of course, then you'd have to actually defend your allegation, which you know you cannot do. Hence, the unsubstantiated insults.

    . First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place

    Lol, exactly my point.
     
    I notice you left out the bit about "under God." This, of course, is precisely the sort of thing intellectually honest people never do.
  135. @nebulafox
    @Talha

    Nazi ideas about racial purity were not new in the German speaking world, but if you told an observer in 1913 that between Germany and Russia, one would become a Marxist state and the other a fascist one after a civilizational calamity, they would have guessed the opposite of what happened. Tsarist Russia had plenty of proto-fascist movements that toward the prewar period held a lot more appeal among the masses than the autocracy did, and Germany was home to the world's largest legal Marxist party.

    Relatively Judeophile Germany attempting to exterminate European Jewry three decades later should show how quickly culture can change if there's an underlying impetus for it. Normally, culture changes very slowly, but there are periods in human history where it accelerates and a society becomes unrecognizable 30 years later. We are possibly living in one of those periods.

    (It's very significant that the only place the Kristallnacht pogrom was received with enthusiasm was Vienna: a lot of Hitler's thinking on race can be traced back to the Austrian German's fear of being submerged by inferior races, and a lot of the Austrian Nazis who returned to Vienna in 1938 tended to match his psychological profile. Note that a lot of German commanders in Yugoslavia during the war were Austrian, and this was key in the ethnic games they played. The Japanese played similar ethnic favoritism in Malaysia and Singapore, but they weren't as familiar with the local conflicts as the Austrian Wehrmacht and SS commanders were-dynamics that other Germans tended to be completely ignorant of.

    Also, more proof of the whole "Hitler was a revolutionary, not a reactionary" argument: Hitler *detested* the Hapsburg monarchy. Part of that was an old-time emphasis on religion over newer, "modern" racial ideas: they put social values in a Catholic framework and gave the Church a prime role in society, but were also genuinely tolerant of religious minorities, be they Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, or even Muslims toward the end. Some of the racialist stuff was making inroads toward the final decade in the Austrian high command, though, with Franz Ferdinand-tragically-being the main force against it.)

    Replies: @RSDB, @Twinkie

    Also, more proof of the whole “Hitler was a revolutionary, not a reactionary” argument: Hitler *detested* the Hapsburg monarchy. Part of that was an old-time emphasis on religion over newer, “modern” racial ideas: they put social values in a Catholic framework and gave the Church a prime role in society, but were also genuinely tolerant of religious minorities, be they Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, or even Muslims toward the end. Some of the racialist stuff was making inroads toward the final decade in the Austrian high command, though, with Franz Ferdinand-tragically-being the main force against it.)

    Destruction of the Hapsburg monarchy is one of the great calamities of modern European history, the consequences of which still reverberate to the present day.

    • Agree: AP, RSDB, dfordoom, nebulafox
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    I need not elaborate on why it was so disastrous, but it also wasn't premeditated, IMO. Imperial Austria had a lot of problems, but nothing I've read suggests it was inherently doomed to collapse in 1913: that's projecting a lot of post-1919 events backward. Austria-Hungary was modernizing rapidly-Austrian Bosnia was far better off than Serbia in every metric-and there was none of the constant sense of living on top of a volcano or endemic political violence that one experienced in Tsarist Russia as it modernized.

    I think Franz Ferdinand had it right on the money: the monarchy's best chance of survival was federalizing power, breaking the grip of rural Magyar elites, and granting the Slavic peoples the same coequal status the Magyars had. "The United States of Austria"... calculated in a way to revolve around loyalty to the house. And in something that would not shock you in the slightest, with your knowledge of insurgencies, that's part of why the Black Hand wanted him dead.

  136. @anon
    @Rosie

    . First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place

    Lol, exactly my point.

    And then there’s the fact that Rosie is neither a sophist nor a liar.

    Woo, more irony! In fact, you are both.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Woo, more irony! In fact, you are both.

    I meant, Mr. Rosie, not that it matters. Any time I say something you believe to be either false or fallacious, you are welcome to point it out. Of course, then you’d have to actually defend your allegation, which you know you cannot do. Hence, the unsubstantiated insults.

    . First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place

    Lol, exactly my point.

    I notice you left out the bit about “under God.” This, of course, is precisely the sort of thing intellectually honest people never do.

  137. @Twinkie
    @dfordoom


    Obviously East Asian fertility is affected by many of the same things as white fertility in the West – urbanisation, consumerism, mass education, high rates of tertiary education – but there must be something else that has caused fertility to drop even lower (much lower) than white fertility. Do you have any personal theories as to the reason for the truly spectacular nature of East Asian fertility collapse?
     
    Lack of vibrant, high fertility immigrants? ;)

    Well, I could speculate, but it would be just that, a speculation. I’ll give it a shot. First is education for women. South Korea has the highest college entrance rate (c. 80%) in the industrialized world, and their women attend university at higher rates than men do. Most young South Korean women want a career and, if married, only 0-1 child.

    Second, the private cost of education is burdensome. Although public education is free or nearly free and university education is very low cost, the private household spending on education is the highest rate in the world. So children are deemed extremely expensive.

    Third, social atomization. South Koreans have taken to the online world with a vengeance (“the highest rate of broadband internet penetration in the world!”), and this has radically changed a society that was even in the recent past quite communitarian. As you can imagine, this is not conducive to a fertile family life.

    What this demonstrates is that, even absent mass immigration, advanced societies are highly prone to demographic contraction and other associated ills. Don’t get me wrong - I strenuously oppose immigration - but I think mass immigration exacerbates rather than cause these issues.

    Of further note, South Korea now has an “international marriage” rate of 16% or so. In rural areas (where farmers have trouble attracting wives), that rate is about 35% - many such wives are mail order brides from Vietnam and other poorer countries. Over 40% of such marriages end in divorce and 20% of the offspring of such marriages are absent from the education system. So South Korea is beginning to have their own ethnic demographic issues.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Johann Ricke

    Of further note, South Korea now has an “international marriage” rate of 16% or so. In rural areas (where farmers have trouble attracting wives), that rate is about 35% – many such wives are mail order brides from Vietnam and other poorer countries. Over 40% of such marriages end in divorce and 20% of the offspring of such marriages are absent from the education system. So South Korea is beginning to have their own ethnic demographic issues.

    It’s hard to tell how meaningful this foreign divorce number is, given that the overall number of divorces per year is roughly 1/2 the number of marriages:

    http://kostat.go.kr/portal/eng/pressReleases/8/11/index.board?bmode=read&bSeq=&aSeq=382800&pageNo=1&rowNum=10&navCount=10&currPg=&searchInfo=&sTarget=title&sTxt=

    – In 2019, the number of marriages was 239.2 thousand, which decreased by 7.2% (-18.5 thousand) from 2018.

    – In 2019, the number of divorces was 110.8 thousand, which increased by 2.0% (2.1 thousand) from 2018.

    – The number of marriages with foreign spouses increased by 4.2% from 2018. The number of divorces with foreign
    spouses decreased by 3.4% from 2018.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Johann Ricke

    “International marriages” in South Korea are becoming more assortative than in the past.* Whereas 20 years ago, they were in the main for rural males, today a majority of customers is urban males. Foreign girls themselves do not wish to live in rural areas, even in a richer country. Nonetheless, the males are still overwhelmingly those of lower socioeconomic-economic profile and are older.

    *Also slightly confounding the issue is that those who are marrying their equals from other developed countries, though a much smaller fraction, is growing tremendously.

  138. @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    My concern about obsessions with racial purity and increasing the fertility rate is that the solutions to these problems would almost certainly involve a degree of totalitarianism. To me that’s too high a price to pay.
     
    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @dfordoom

    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.

    Hence your constant hankering for “white genocide” – it justifies your personal vision of totalitarianism. Thankfully, extremely few people buy what you are selling – who’d want to be ruled by you?

    You know what intelligent people do? They imagine a world in which their priors are wrong. They try falsifying their own conclusions.

    I used to be pro-immigration and pro-free trade. Then I kept seeing the evidence that this was bad for ordinary Americans. I support neither today.

    Try it.

  139. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    Twinkles thinks White people will still exist even when everyone is a shade of brown
     
    You don’t even read what I write. I specifically included an article from 1998 that disavowed the “everyone will be a shade of brown” future and predicted “the beige and the black.”

    Replies: @Rosie

    You don’t even read what I write.

    Yes, for example:

    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics.

    IOW, White people will still exist no matter what color they are.

    Get your story straight, Twinkles. You’d be better off embracing full-blown race denialism rather than attempting to have it both ways.

    Hence your constant hankering for “white genocide” – it justifies your personal vision of totalitarianism.

    Yawn. Tiresome psychobabble AKA ad hominem (and ignorant) speculations about my motives.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    White people will still exist no matter what color they are.

    Get your story straight, Twinkles. You’d be better off embracing full-blown race denialism rather than attempting to have it both ways.
     
    Race is, biologically-speaking, nothing more than genetic clustering. Your own personal color preferences have nothing to do with it. And that genetic clustering doesn’t fit neatly with the global skin color distribution:

    https://www.scienceabc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/map_of_skin_color_distribution.gif

    By your logic, either Southern/Balkan Europeans aren’t white or Northeast Asians (or better yet the Inuits) are also white - neither of which is true.

    ad hominem
     
    Says the woman who’s main mode of argument she can’t refute is shouting “Liar.”

    Replies: @Rosie

  140. @Rosie
    @anon


    I guess Rosie is confusing Twinkie with Mr. Rosie now.
     
    Noone could ever do that. First of all, Mr. Rosie is a Christian man who knows his place under God, and would never call a woman married for 20 years a "whore."

    1 Corinthians 6:11

    And then there's the fact that Rosie is neither a sophist nor a liar.

    Replies: @anon, @Twinkie

    would never call a woman married for 20 years a “whore.”

    I never did either. I merely repeated what you triumphantly narrated earlier – that you were promiscuous.

    If you truly repented your past sins, I’d consider that truly a triumph of the goodness and mercy of God and a great success for you. Alas, you are on record as stating otherwise.

    But we’ve been down this road before – you are someone who makes up her own theology as her emotional needs dictate. There cannot be redemption without reconciliation, which by definition requires an admission of guilt and a genuine remorse (or al least an imperfect contrition).

    Mr. Rosie

    My sincere sympathies to him. He’s probably wondering where you are.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    Alas, you are on record as stating otherwise.
     
    Liar.

    But we’ve been down this road before – you are someone who makes up her own theology as her emotional needs dictate.
     
    Au contraire. My theology is strictly by the book. You deny the Gospel because it gets in the way of your despicable propensity to label and condemn others.
  141. @Johann Ricke
    @Twinkie


    Of further note, South Korea now has an “international marriage” rate of 16% or so. In rural areas (where farmers have trouble attracting wives), that rate is about 35% – many such wives are mail order brides from Vietnam and other poorer countries. Over 40% of such marriages end in divorce and 20% of the offspring of such marriages are absent from the education system. So South Korea is beginning to have their own ethnic demographic issues.
     
    It's hard to tell how meaningful this foreign divorce number is, given that the overall number of divorces per year is roughly 1/2 the number of marriages:

    http://kostat.go.kr/portal/eng/pressReleases/8/11/index.board?bmode=read&bSeq=&aSeq=382800&pageNo=1&rowNum=10&navCount=10&currPg=&searchInfo=&sTarget=title&sTxt=


    - In 2019, the number of marriages was 239.2 thousand, which decreased by 7.2% (-18.5 thousand) from 2018.

    - In 2019, the number of divorces was 110.8 thousand, which increased by 2.0% (2.1 thousand) from 2018.

    - The number of marriages with foreign spouses increased by 4.2% from 2018. The number of divorces with foreign
    spouses decreased by 3.4% from 2018.
     

    Replies: @Twinkie

    “International marriages” in South Korea are becoming more assortative than in the past.* Whereas 20 years ago, they were in the main for rural males, today a majority of customers is urban males. Foreign girls themselves do not wish to live in rural areas, even in a richer country. Nonetheless, the males are still overwhelmingly those of lower socioeconomic-economic profile and are older.

    *Also slightly confounding the issue is that those who are marrying their equals from other developed countries, though a much smaller fraction, is growing tremendously.

  142. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    would never call a woman married for 20 years a “whore.”
     
    I never did either. I merely repeated what you triumphantly narrated earlier - that you were promiscuous.

    If you truly repented your past sins, I’d consider that truly a triumph of the goodness and mercy of God and a great success for you. Alas, you are on record as stating otherwise.

    But we’ve been down this road before - you are someone who makes up her own theology as her emotional needs dictate. There cannot be redemption without reconciliation, which by definition requires an admission of guilt and a genuine remorse (or al least an imperfect contrition).

    Mr. Rosie
     
    My sincere sympathies to him. He’s probably wondering where you are.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Alas, you are on record as stating otherwise.

    Liar.

    But we’ve been down this road before – you are someone who makes up her own theology as her emotional needs dictate.

    Au contraire. My theology is strictly by the book. You deny the Gospel because it gets in the way of your despicable propensity to label and condemn others.

  143. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    You don’t even read what I write.
     
    Yes, for example:

    No dummy, I was making fun of YOUR deconstruction of “whiteness,” which you define as visible color spectrum rather than ancestry/genetics.
     
    IOW, White people will still exist no matter what color they are.

    Get your story straight, Twinkles. You'd be better off embracing full-blown race denialism rather than attempting to have it both ways.


    Hence your constant hankering for “white genocide” – it justifies your personal vision of totalitarianism.
     
    Yawn. Tiresome psychobabble AKA ad hominem (and ignorant) speculations about my motives.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    White people will still exist no matter what color they are.

    Get your story straight, Twinkles. You’d be better off embracing full-blown race denialism rather than attempting to have it both ways.

    Race is, biologically-speaking, nothing more than genetic clustering. Your own personal color preferences have nothing to do with it. And that genetic clustering doesn’t fit neatly with the global skin color distribution:

    By your logic, either Southern/Balkan Europeans aren’t white or Northeast Asians (or better yet the Inuits) are also white – neither of which is true.

    ad hominem

    Says the woman who’s main mode of argument she can’t refute is shouting “Liar.”

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    Says the woman who’s main mode of argument she can’t refute is shouting “Liar.”
     
    A lie is a false statement, not an argument, irrefutable or otherwise. If this isn't clear, consult a dictionary.

    The problem here, Twinkles, is that I can observe your lying behavior. You, on the other hand, are not privy to my true motives for this or that. Indeed, you made up your claim that White survival is a mere pretext for a totalitarian impulse entirely out of thin air.

    Anyway, keep it up Twinkles. Everything you say further demonstrates that you are hostile to White self-preservation. Everything you say amounts to this: Don't do anything to save your race from extinction, White men. It would inconvenience me, and my convenience is more important than your survival ("color preferences").

    Replies: @Twinkie

  144. @RSDB
    @Talha

    Well, I know Chesterton's comment on the subject:


    The one objection to scientific marriage which is worthy of final attention is simply that such a thing could only be imposed on unthinkable slaves and cowards. I do not know whether the scientific marriage-mongers are right (as they say) or wrong (as Mr. Wells says) in saying that medical supervision would produce strong and healthy men. I am only certain that if it did, the first act of the strong and healthy men would be to smash the medical supervision.
     

    Now, what happens if one of my sons wants to marry a redhead; what options do I have legally, what options does society grant me to prevent that from happening?
     
    Well, there's always disinheritance, though I don't think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays as when Cedric the Saxon used it to control Ivanhoe's marriage in Ivanhoe. Given that they were both characters in a romantic novel it didn't work out too well then either, though it did mean Ivanhoe was referred to as the "Disinherited Knight" for the first half of the novel.

    I think the Howard Families maintained a fund they used to encourage marriages they deemed suitable; here is an excerpt describing how this was supposed to work: http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1070

    On March 17, 1874, Ira Johnson, medical student, sat in the law offices of Deems, Wingate, Alden, & Deems and listened to an unusual proposition. At last he interrupted the senior partner. "Just a moment! Do I understand that you are trying to hire me to marry one of these women?"
    The lawyer looked shocked. "Please, Mr. Johnson. Not at all"
    "Well, it certainly sounded like it."
    "No, no, such a contract would be void, against public policy. We are simply informing you, as administrators of a trust, that should it come about that you do marry one of the young ladies on this list it would then be our pleasant duty to endow each child of such a union according to the scale here set forth. But there would be no Contract with us involved, nor is there any 'proposition' being made to you and we certainly do not urge any course of action on you. We are simply informing you of certain facts."
     
    I'm not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it's at least interesting.

    Replies: @Kratoklastes, @Talha

    though I don’t think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays…I’m not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it’s at least interesting.

    Well, that’s the point. What if they still don’t care? Very easy hypothetical question; you are a white-nationalist, you live in Whitekanda, in Whitekanda whites are not allowed to marry any other races nor are other races allowed to settle in its territory. Your son travels overseas for business, meets a great woman from X non-white ethnicity, hits it off and says he has found the love of his life. He gets married to her and wants to bring her back to Whitekanda. You see the woman makes him very happy and loves him dearly. Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?

    This is not a theoretical question in the Muslim world – in fact, I discussed with my boys over dinner about how we – as Muslims – do indeed have discriminatory policies about marriage and it is not a game. For instance, Muslim men cannot marry a Hindu or atheist or Buddhist woman. In certain Muslim-majority countries, you can go to court to get such marriages annulled. I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that’s because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry – he is a man, he decides that in conjunction with the girl’s father. As a father and a man, I respect this in principle…and would NOT interfere EXCEPT where the sacred law is concerned and obliges me to. If she converts, cool – then that is a choice she makes and changes her status and all is good.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Talha


    Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?
     
    You didn't ask me, but FWIW, I would tell him to stay where he is. Disloyal children are not entitled to demand loyalty when they have shown none.
    , @Twinkie
    @Talha


    I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that’s because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God
     
    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?

    That’d be the Christian answer. It would be my answer.

    As a practical matter, I think people move others more than abstract principles or theologies do. I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.

    Replies: @Talha, @RSDB

    , @RSDB
    @Talha


    Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?
     
    Based on what I've seen so far I doubt you can get any five white nationalists to agree on any five policies, so I'm not too enthusiastic about getting an answer to this one. It's a good question.

    Still, Rosie's idea was to preserve the existence, not of a white nation, but of any number of white bloodlines (don't ask me how these bloodlines are going to be vetted-- let's assume this problem has been solved) and it seems to me this requires a lot less effort. There are Parsis in India-- Wikipedia (not sure how reliable this is, but never mind) tells me that according to genetic evidence the last significant admixture of Parsis with Indians (Gujaratis incidentally) took place 1200 years ago:

    A study published in Genome Biology based on high density SNP data has shown that the Parsis are genetically closer to Iranian populations than to their South Asian neighbours. They also share the highest number of haplotypes with present-day Iranians; the admixture of the Parsis with Indian populations was estimated have occurred approximately 1,200 years ago.
     
    Granted, they had the influence of a religion, which I would think seems to be necessary, but they also started with a much smaller "pure" population. It seems to me if you do not have enough of an impetus behind you to do this sort of thing on a voluntary basis you certainly do not have the impetus to do it on a society-wide compulsory basis.

    You brought up the American South which is an interesting example. Certainly in that case the law did not exist to preserve the existence of the white population though.

    I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry
     
    Yes, I think this is important, as I wrote above. Not sure how much people are actually going to care otherwise.

    Though in the case of the continued existence of white people on Earth, by most normal ideas of whiteness, I don't really think there is much of a danger if this disappearing in the near term even if nobody cares at all.

    I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage
     
    What do you do if they "marry" (according to their conception of things-- presumably in your perception and the perception of the Muslim state the marriage doesn't actually exist) and cohabit anyway? Are you going to have them locked up? Stoned? Fined? Children placed in protective custody?

    Thinking about Pakistan specifically, I don't know too much about Pakistani marriage law; I never heard of Pakistan denying entry to non-Islamically married couples who are foreign nationals (which could probably be arranged in the situation you cited) but I suppose it might be the case or some people might want it to be the case. Pakistani law will specifically not automatically dissolve marriages in case of [t]he renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a faith other than Islam (and see https://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3f1c632.html) which I find interesting.

    Also, how can they divorce if they're not married?

    Anyway, since you and Rosie live in the US and neither the Caliphate of Chicago nor the República Blanca de las Americas these are largely academic questions. As I see it they are more relevant to your case because you have an abiding metaphysical interest whereas Rosie's interest is primarily pragmatic given a desire for a certain material thing, that is, the presence of people with a particular genetic profile.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

  145. @Twinkie
    @Rosie


    White people will still exist no matter what color they are.

    Get your story straight, Twinkles. You’d be better off embracing full-blown race denialism rather than attempting to have it both ways.
     
    Race is, biologically-speaking, nothing more than genetic clustering. Your own personal color preferences have nothing to do with it. And that genetic clustering doesn’t fit neatly with the global skin color distribution:

    https://www.scienceabc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/map_of_skin_color_distribution.gif

    By your logic, either Southern/Balkan Europeans aren’t white or Northeast Asians (or better yet the Inuits) are also white - neither of which is true.

    ad hominem
     
    Says the woman who’s main mode of argument she can’t refute is shouting “Liar.”

    Replies: @Rosie

    Says the woman who’s main mode of argument she can’t refute is shouting “Liar.”

    A lie is a false statement, not an argument, irrefutable or otherwise. If this isn’t clear, consult a dictionary.

    The problem here, Twinkles, is that I can observe your lying behavior. You, on the other hand, are not privy to my true motives for this or that. Indeed, you made up your claim that White survival is a mere pretext for a totalitarian impulse entirely out of thin air.

    Anyway, keep it up Twinkles. Everything you say further demonstrates that you are hostile to White self-preservation. Everything you say amounts to this: Don’t do anything to save your race from extinction, White men. It would inconvenience me, and my convenience is more important than your survival (“color preferences”).

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Rosie

    And the other half of your argumentation is resorting to straw men.

    Again, my sympathies to Mr. Rosie. Perhaps I was wrong and he isn’t wondering where you are. He’s glad you are arguing with another man.

  146. @Talha
    @RSDB


    though I don’t think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays...I’m not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it’s at least interesting.
     
    Well, that's the point. What if they still don't care? Very easy hypothetical question; you are a white-nationalist, you live in Whitekanda, in Whitekanda whites are not allowed to marry any other races nor are other races allowed to settle in its territory. Your son travels overseas for business, meets a great woman from X non-white ethnicity, hits it off and says he has found the love of his life. He gets married to her and wants to bring her back to Whitekanda. You see the woman makes him very happy and loves him dearly. Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?

    This is not a theoretical question in the Muslim world - in fact, I discussed with my boys over dinner about how we - as Muslims - do indeed have discriminatory policies about marriage and it is not a game. For instance, Muslim men cannot marry a Hindu or atheist or Buddhist woman. In certain Muslim-majority countries, you can go to court to get such marriages annulled. I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I'm all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that's because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry - he is a man, he decides that in conjunction with the girl's father. As a father and a man, I respect this in principle...and would NOT interfere EXCEPT where the sacred law is concerned and obliges me to. If she converts, cool - then that is a choice she makes and changes her status and all is good.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Twinkie, @RSDB

    Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?

    You didn’t ask me, but FWIW, I would tell him to stay where he is. Disloyal children are not entitled to demand loyalty when they have shown none.

    • Thanks: Talha
  147. @Talha
    @RSDB


    though I don’t think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays...I’m not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it’s at least interesting.
     
    Well, that's the point. What if they still don't care? Very easy hypothetical question; you are a white-nationalist, you live in Whitekanda, in Whitekanda whites are not allowed to marry any other races nor are other races allowed to settle in its territory. Your son travels overseas for business, meets a great woman from X non-white ethnicity, hits it off and says he has found the love of his life. He gets married to her and wants to bring her back to Whitekanda. You see the woman makes him very happy and loves him dearly. Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?

    This is not a theoretical question in the Muslim world - in fact, I discussed with my boys over dinner about how we - as Muslims - do indeed have discriminatory policies about marriage and it is not a game. For instance, Muslim men cannot marry a Hindu or atheist or Buddhist woman. In certain Muslim-majority countries, you can go to court to get such marriages annulled. I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I'm all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that's because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry - he is a man, he decides that in conjunction with the girl's father. As a father and a man, I respect this in principle...and would NOT interfere EXCEPT where the sacred law is concerned and obliges me to. If she converts, cool - then that is a choice she makes and changes her status and all is good.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Twinkie, @RSDB

    I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that’s because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God

    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?

    That’d be the Christian answer. It would be my answer.

    As a practical matter, I think people move others more than abstract principles or theologies do. I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Twinkie


    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?
     
    In a country like the US - definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no. Context is important; the wisdom in one context may not be applicable in another. Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.

    I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.
     
    This is a big factor in the differences of approach between men and women with regards to religion.

    Peace.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Twinkie

    , @RSDB
    @Twinkie


    As a practical matter, I think people move others more than abstract principles or theologies do. I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.
     
    Out of curiosity: dead people* or living people? You must have lived in a good parish. Not that there aren't evidently saintly human beings in the Church at present, both religious and lay, but there are certainly a lot of less prepossessing people as well.

    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?
     
    Well, this was the course taken as far as I can tell by St Monica.

    It might be the case that the marriage couldn't be regularized in any case; if for instance the son had left his first wife for someone else, or if it was a gay marriage.

    I suppose the Christian thing to do in this case would still be to treat these people with love-- only I think in specific cases treating one's son's gay partner, for instance, as a member of the family coequal with one's other son's wife might be toxic in some circumstances.

    Apropos of not much, Irish socialist Jim Larkin once refused to appear on the same stage with a man, Ernest Marklew, who had divorced his wife, but then the man wasn't a member of his family, and I suppose it was the injury done to the man's wife which rankled in an age which cared a great deal about the treatment of women. I think even then this was considered a little odd.

    I apologize for the vulgarity of the situations I proposed but I think that the possibility of such things is inherent in the question.

    I wrote most of this reply before I saw your example. Certainly in cases where the marriage is contracted licitly and especially where the non-Catholic partner pledges to raise the children in the Catholic faith, which is more than the current minimum requirement** under canon law, there is no reason at all to snub the new spouse in any way.

    *Saints, I mean.


    **As a matter of opinion, I think I prefer the rule here under the 1917 code which made a promise by the non-Catholic partner explicitly necessary. If it were me in this case and my wife were to refuse this promise I would wonder constantly whether I was really doing "all in my power" (to quote the current code). And if my wife and I were exercising strong contrary influences on the child I can't imagine it would make for a good upbringing.
  148. @Rosie
    @Twinkie


    Says the woman who’s main mode of argument she can’t refute is shouting “Liar.”
     
    A lie is a false statement, not an argument, irrefutable or otherwise. If this isn't clear, consult a dictionary.

    The problem here, Twinkles, is that I can observe your lying behavior. You, on the other hand, are not privy to my true motives for this or that. Indeed, you made up your claim that White survival is a mere pretext for a totalitarian impulse entirely out of thin air.

    Anyway, keep it up Twinkles. Everything you say further demonstrates that you are hostile to White self-preservation. Everything you say amounts to this: Don't do anything to save your race from extinction, White men. It would inconvenience me, and my convenience is more important than your survival ("color preferences").

    Replies: @Twinkie

    And the other half of your argumentation is resorting to straw men.

    Again, my sympathies to Mr. Rosie. Perhaps I was wrong and he isn’t wondering where you are. He’s glad you are arguing with another man.

  149. @Rosie
    @Talha


    The issue as I see it is that a preoccupation with racial purity seems to be something that appears in a civilization on the backfoot and likely with a loss of patriarchal structures.
     
    I'm not accusing you of this Talha, but it is very common for anti-Whites to question a man's masculinity if he concerns himself with the wellbeing and future prospects of their own kind. Indeed, susceptibility to such taunting and manipulation may well be the fatal weakness that brings down the White man for good.

    In any event, your take on patriarchy and its role in furthering (or more likely, not) the survival and flourishing of the White race is very interesting, indeed, and so much the better that it comes from a person who is almost certainly immune to the charge of being a "feminist" (whatever the hell that even means anymore).

    Replies: @Talha

    but it is very common for anti-Whites to question a man’s masculinity if he concerns himself with the wellbeing and future prospects of their own kind.

    Yeah – I’m certainly not anti-white. In fact, if you read the rules of zakat and charity in the sacred law, you find that it is considered more praiseworthy to give it to one’s own needy relatives and extended family instead of strangers. The reason being that you are accomplishing two tasks with this; 1) helping the poor and 2) keeping good ties with blood relations (or what are called “those joined by the womb” in Islamic terminology).

    I personally have no problem with whites preferring to marry their own and in fact think it is a good idea for them to mix it up once in a while and marry first or second cousins just to restart a level healthy kinship networks again.

    We have plenty of Bosnians in our community and they prefer to marry their daughters within their own community (generally skipping over even Albanians!!!) and it’s not seen as anything bizarre or racist or anything; cultural compatibility helps maintain a stronger marriage bond and is a very reasonable and legitimate concern.

    Indeed, susceptibility to such taunting and manipulation may well be the fatal weakness that brings down the White man for good.

    That’s not really my angle. I’m trying to explain that when you plan on putting into practice a policy of racial purity – that leads to certain facts on the ground. There are laws that need to be drafted. The rights of certain individuals will have to be restricted. You are taking away a man’s choice of open mate selection. Patriarchal societies do not like governments getting in the way of those kinds of decisions.

    It’s a bit akin to encroaching gun-control; you are taking away a man’s right to make the necessary decisions he feels are best for him and the defense of his family. Patriarchal societies also don’t like governments interfering in that decision as well.

    flourishing of the White race

    I personally don’t see them flourishing without some level of a return of a serious (not joke or LARPer) patriarchy; time will tell.

    A note I posted on another thread:

    I was at a small barbecue today with a handful of brothers. One of the core brothers in the community is a convert from (mostly) Polish (and mixed European background) and another is Senegalese – the rest are mostly Desi with a few Bosnians and Arabs thrown in for good measure.

    The Polish brother has three kids (mashaAllah) and I was asking him if he plans to have more, to which he replied in the affirmative. He definitely wants to try to have another son so that he has two boys and two girls.

    What’s interesting is when we were exploring what his chances would be in having settled with a family being what he is in his thirties had he not converted. He admitted, if he was one of the lucky few, he might be married with two kids. In his extended family; siblings, cousins, etc. there is only one other couple that had twins and they are done (understandably since twins are a tough package to deal with). His family line is literally about to disappear within a generation.

    He further told me – since he did some research on his family name and background and what not – that apparently there aren’t that many of the them in the US and the rest are settled mostly around the Czech Republic. He knows full well that he is likely establishing a patrilineal line. He said; I’m hoping in a few generations, my last name is as common as any other Muslim last name – that when people hear somebody with my last name, they say, “Oh yeah, that must be a Muslim”. This is full progenitor/founder mode and inshaAllah it will happen and his bloodline will survive the Great Culling.

    I was literally discussing with him how he should draft a family sigil. He is not the only one who sees what is happening, I have come across multiple white converts that are very cognizant of the fact that they are establishing the surviving progenitor lines among their families. Whites aren’t going anywhere only certain types of whites are – and honestly, there is only so much you can do for some people who will fight you tooth and nail for the right to abort their own babies by the millions annually.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Talha


    I personally don’t see them flourishing without some level of a return of a serious (not joke or LARPer) patriarchy; time will tell.
     
    If Whites perish, I suspect it will be a result of secularism and YOLOism, not lack of patriarchy, benevolent or otherwise.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    Tangentially, according to the GSS the broad racial distribution of self-identifying Muslims in the US is one-third white, one-third black, and one-third Asian.

  150. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that’s because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God
     
    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?

    That’d be the Christian answer. It would be my answer.

    As a practical matter, I think people move others more than abstract principles or theologies do. I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.

    Replies: @Talha, @RSDB

    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?

    In a country like the US – definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no. Context is important; the wisdom in one context may not be applicable in another. Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.

    I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.

    This is a big factor in the differences of approach between men and women with regards to religion.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Talha

    In Singapore and Malaysia, Malay men are free to marry inter-religiously as long as the chick says she believes in God: nobody bothers to dig deeper. Women can't unless the guy converts. This blatant hypocrisy is a source of considerable annoyance amongst the young mainly because the Singaporean Malay version of the "Talented Tenth" is predominantly female, and the mostly Chinese guys they interact with in the university/workplace like their booze and pork an awful lot. There are a fair amount of sham conversions: I'm not sure how they handle the kids.

    I'll let someone else talk about South Asia, but in Southeast Asia, Islam is so fundamentally intertwined with ethnically "Malay" (and just as importantly: "not Chinese") identity that you can't escape questions of race and how that ties into de facto societal segregation. Even the Muslim Indians here do business in Malay, not Tamil or some other Indic language.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

    , @Twinkie
    @Talha


    In a country like the US – definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no.
     
    This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism. If "Muslim-majority" countries didn't allow it, why should the U.S., a Christian-majority country, allow Muslim intermarriage or immigration? This seems to suggest that, far from participating in the marketplace of faith, you believe that Muslims should engage in colonialization - protecting the domestic market, but engaging in aggressive export in other countries.

    Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.
     
    To me, this is not an issue of lenience. On the level of principle, there is this idea that one's child marrying a good, kind, decent, honorable, and chaste person, regardless of religion, is a good end in itself (this is not to say that you cannot have a religious preference).

    After all, God does work in mysterious ways. My parish recently welcomed a middle-aged father into the Catholic Church. He married a Catholic woman (in what is called a marriage of "Disparity of Cult"). The only religious pledge he made was that he would allow his wife to educate the children in the Catholic faith. He honored this pledge and sent his children to my parish school. Years and years later, moved by the faith of his wife and that of his children, he converted.

    So, far from being one of lenience, a situation such as this strikes me as an opportunity for conversion. Shouldn't a confident religious faith - one that is sure of the truthfulness of itself - welcome such opportunities?

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Talha

  151. @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    My concern about obsessions with racial purity and increasing the fertility rate is that the solutions to these problems would almost certainly involve a degree of totalitarianism. To me that’s too high a price to pay.
     
    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @dfordoom

    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.

    OK, two questions. Do you think that in the interests of avoiding white extinction it would be OK to take away from women the right to decide how many children they will have?

    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

    Because if you really want high white fertility and white racial purity that’s the price.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @dfordoom


    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

     

    Racial purity would require that neither men or women would be allowed to pick their spouse. It would lead to the intolerable situation of seeing someone arrested for wanting to be with the person they love.

    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though. The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own. The welfare state also often acts as a magnet pulling in nonwhite immigrants. Not only do they want to hop on the welfare gravy train but welfare enables them to stay here. In the late nineteenth century up to half of all immigrants here ended up going back home because they couldn't make it here. Now they not only don't have to go home if they can't support themselves but refugee programs are often set up to provide free transportation for even more of them to come here. Many of these refugee resettlement programs are funded by the government.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Twinkie

    , @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    OK, two questions. Do you think that in the interests of avoiding white extinction it would be OK to take away from women the right to decide how many children they will have?
     
    Yes.



    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?
     
    Yes.

    I'm not interested in accepting White extinction in order to preserve individual liberty for brown people.

    Because if you really want high white fertility and white racial purity that’s the price.
     
    I'm not convinced of that.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  152. @Talha
    @RSDB


    though I don’t think this is quite as strong a sanction nowadays...I’m not entirely sure of the legality of this set-up, but it’s at least interesting.
     
    Well, that's the point. What if they still don't care? Very easy hypothetical question; you are a white-nationalist, you live in Whitekanda, in Whitekanda whites are not allowed to marry any other races nor are other races allowed to settle in its territory. Your son travels overseas for business, meets a great woman from X non-white ethnicity, hits it off and says he has found the love of his life. He gets married to her and wants to bring her back to Whitekanda. You see the woman makes him very happy and loves him dearly. Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?

    This is not a theoretical question in the Muslim world - in fact, I discussed with my boys over dinner about how we - as Muslims - do indeed have discriminatory policies about marriage and it is not a game. For instance, Muslim men cannot marry a Hindu or atheist or Buddhist woman. In certain Muslim-majority countries, you can go to court to get such marriages annulled. I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I'm all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that's because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry - he is a man, he decides that in conjunction with the girl's father. As a father and a man, I respect this in principle...and would NOT interfere EXCEPT where the sacred law is concerned and obliges me to. If she converts, cool - then that is a choice she makes and changes her status and all is good.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Twinkie, @RSDB

    Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?

    Based on what I’ve seen so far I doubt you can get any five white nationalists to agree on any five policies, so I’m not too enthusiastic about getting an answer to this one. It’s a good question.

    Still, Rosie’s idea was to preserve the existence, not of a white nation, but of any number of white bloodlines (don’t ask me how these bloodlines are going to be vetted– let’s assume this problem has been solved) and it seems to me this requires a lot less effort. There are Parsis in India– Wikipedia (not sure how reliable this is, but never mind) tells me that according to genetic evidence the last significant admixture of Parsis with Indians (Gujaratis incidentally) took place 1200 years ago:

    A study published in Genome Biology based on high density SNP data has shown that the Parsis are genetically closer to Iranian populations than to their South Asian neighbours. They also share the highest number of haplotypes with present-day Iranians; the admixture of the Parsis with Indian populations was estimated have occurred approximately 1,200 years ago.

    Granted, they had the influence of a religion, which I would think seems to be necessary, but they also started with a much smaller “pure” population. It seems to me if you do not have enough of an impetus behind you to do this sort of thing on a voluntary basis you certainly do not have the impetus to do it on a society-wide compulsory basis.

    You brought up the American South which is an interesting example. Certainly in that case the law did not exist to preserve the existence of the white population though.

    I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry

    Yes, I think this is important, as I wrote above. Not sure how much people are actually going to care otherwise.

    Though in the case of the continued existence of white people on Earth, by most normal ideas of whiteness, I don’t really think there is much of a danger if this disappearing in the near term even if nobody cares at all.

    I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage

    What do you do if they “marry” (according to their conception of things– presumably in your perception and the perception of the Muslim state the marriage doesn’t actually exist) and cohabit anyway? Are you going to have them locked up? Stoned? Fined? Children placed in protective custody?

    Thinking about Pakistan specifically, I don’t know too much about Pakistani marriage law; I never heard of Pakistan denying entry to non-Islamically married couples who are foreign nationals (which could probably be arranged in the situation you cited) but I suppose it might be the case or some people might want it to be the case. Pakistani law will specifically not automatically dissolve marriages in case of [t]he renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a faith other than Islam (and see https://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3f1c632.html) which I find interesting.

    Also, how can they divorce if they’re not married?

    Anyway, since you and Rosie live in the US and neither the Caliphate of Chicago nor the República Blanca de las Americas these are largely academic questions. As I see it they are more relevant to your case because you have an abiding metaphysical interest whereas Rosie’s interest is primarily pragmatic given a desire for a certain material thing, that is, the presence of people with a particular genetic profile.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @RSDB

    That was both funny and logical, a joy to read. Thank you (I ran out of buttons).

    , @Talha
    @RSDB


    There are Parsis in India
     
    And dying off. They basically have picked one of the worst ways to tie religion to ethnic identity:
    "While most other ethnic groups in India are growing at a fast pace, the number of Parsis has been dwindling so fast, at 10 to 15 per cent a decade, that the Indian Government and community leaders have agreed on a plan to increase birth-rates.

    Four years ago, the Parsi community in Mumbai was facing extinction....Unlike other religions, including Christianity and Islam, the Parsi community doesn't practice the conversion of people from other faiths into Zoroastrianism.

    And under traditional Parsi laws, lineage passes through fathers but not mothers.

    That means kids of Parsi women who marry non-Parsis are not considered Parsis.

    Purists now fear that the pure Parsi bloodlines will be eliminated in a few generations."
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-16/parsis-in-india-bid-to-save-dwindling-population/8891660

    and cohabit anyway? Are you going to have them locked up?
     
    Sure, or fine, etc. It doesn't have to be them, only the Muslim who is violating the sacred law, the other person didn't to anything wrong according to their law.

    You made a good point that this marriage is basically a legal fiction in Islam and a Muslim man cannot "marry" a Hindu woman any more than he can "marry" his refrigerator. So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play. To annul the marriage, I was talking about the situation

    You fine the guy or put him into jail and tell him to knock it off. He does it again, you do it again and increase the punishment.

    Pakistani law will specifically not automatically dissolve marriages in case of [t]he renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a faith other than Islam (and see https://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3f1c632.html) which I find interesting.
     
    I could see a provision that - technically - if she became either a Jew or Christian, then the marriage is still valid versus if she became a Hindu or atheist. I'd have to ask someone about this particular case.

    Also, how can they divorce if they’re not married?
     
    Legally annul and see above.

    Caliphate of Chicago
     
    LOOOOOL!!! Sultanate of the Great Lakes!

    As I see it they are more relevant to your case because you have an abiding metaphysical interest
     
    Indeed. See the video I posted to Twinkie's comment featuring inter-religious mating attitudes among the various religious groups profiled. I think people in general are more accepting of discrimination based on the beliefs of an individual versus something they cannot change about themselves. I would to see a similar video on race. The first question they asked was; would you date outside your religion? The ratios were:
    Atheists: 94%, yes - 6%, no
    Jews: 89%, yes - 11%, no
    Christians: 72%, yes - 28%, no
    Muslims: 28%, yes - 72%, no

    What if they put a bunch of whites, blacks, browns, yellows and reds together and asked; would you date outside your race? Remember, a NO is a hard no, and that is not the same is someone saying, "I prefer to date within my own race?" What do you think the numbers would be? My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.

    Also...would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?
    https://twitter.com/ambrghostxo/status/1284689784741470208

    Peace.

    Replies: @RSDB

  153. @Talha
    @Twinkie


    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?
     
    In a country like the US - definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no. Context is important; the wisdom in one context may not be applicable in another. Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.

    I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.
     
    This is a big factor in the differences of approach between men and women with regards to religion.

    Peace.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Twinkie

    In Singapore and Malaysia, Malay men are free to marry inter-religiously as long as the chick says she believes in God: nobody bothers to dig deeper. Women can’t unless the guy converts. This blatant hypocrisy is a source of considerable annoyance amongst the young mainly because the Singaporean Malay version of the “Talented Tenth” is predominantly female, and the mostly Chinese guys they interact with in the university/workplace like their booze and pork an awful lot. There are a fair amount of sham conversions: I’m not sure how they handle the kids.

    I’ll let someone else talk about South Asia, but in Southeast Asia, Islam is so fundamentally intertwined with ethnically “Malay” (and just as importantly: “not Chinese”) identity that you can’t escape questions of race and how that ties into de facto societal segregation. Even the Muslim Indians here do business in Malay, not Tamil or some other Indic language.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    This blatant hypocrisy
     
    And that's exactly what it is.
    , @Talha
    @nebulafox


    This blatant hypocrisy
     
    It's not, it is very explicitly declared in source texts - there isn't any ambiguity. The sacred law is very clear about one set of rules for males and another for females; that's not a bug, that is a feature. Like the fact that women are obligated to cover their hair, but men are not...or that men are obligated to go to the mosque for Friday prayers, but women are not.

    There are a fair amount of sham conversions: I’m not sure how they handle the kids.

     

    This kind of thing happens in the West as well. Guys that aren't big on the religion, but convert officially anyway in order to marry a Muslim woman. In a Muslim majority country, this gives the kids a much better chance to grow up as Muslims. I mean, if the father was not so hot on his own religion enough to not care about publicly converting, then he will at least not get in the way of their being raised Muslim.

    in Southeast Asia, Islam is so fundamentally intertwined with ethnically “Malay” (and just as importantly: “not Chinese”) identity that you can’t escape questions of race
     
    Yes, Malaysia and the way "Malay" has been defined legally is quite strange. I would not couple Islam with any ethnic identity as a legal definition and I think this will change eventually once more Chinese become Muslim and demand changes:
    Chinese Muslims converts are baulking at taking Malay or Arabic names upon embracing Islam, claiming the discriminatory practice forces them to abandon their culture and traditions.

    Several Chinese Muslims in Malaysia are fighting for the right to keep their original names, in defiance of the convention of replacing their surname with ‘Abdullah’, in a bid to keep their culture alive.

    “I will not change my ethnicity. I was born Chinese and I will die Chinese, I will not become Malay. I did not want to change my name to show that Islam is a universal religion for all nations, not just for the Arabs or Malays only,” the Malaysian Chinese Muslim Association (MACMA) Malacca president Lim Jooi Soon told the BBC in a recent interview.
    https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2015/06/24/ethnic-chinese-embrace-islam-but-keep-names-to-resist-becoming-malay/921193

    Peace.
  154. @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    Also, more proof of the whole “Hitler was a revolutionary, not a reactionary” argument: Hitler *detested* the Hapsburg monarchy. Part of that was an old-time emphasis on religion over newer, “modern” racial ideas: they put social values in a Catholic framework and gave the Church a prime role in society, but were also genuinely tolerant of religious minorities, be they Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, or even Muslims toward the end. Some of the racialist stuff was making inroads toward the final decade in the Austrian high command, though, with Franz Ferdinand-tragically-being the main force against it.)
     
    Destruction of the Hapsburg monarchy is one of the great calamities of modern European history, the consequences of which still reverberate to the present day.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    I need not elaborate on why it was so disastrous, but it also wasn’t premeditated, IMO. Imperial Austria had a lot of problems, but nothing I’ve read suggests it was inherently doomed to collapse in 1913: that’s projecting a lot of post-1919 events backward. Austria-Hungary was modernizing rapidly-Austrian Bosnia was far better off than Serbia in every metric-and there was none of the constant sense of living on top of a volcano or endemic political violence that one experienced in Tsarist Russia as it modernized.

    I think Franz Ferdinand had it right on the money: the monarchy’s best chance of survival was federalizing power, breaking the grip of rural Magyar elites, and granting the Slavic peoples the same coequal status the Magyars had. “The United States of Austria”… calculated in a way to revolve around loyalty to the house. And in something that would not shock you in the slightest, with your knowledge of insurgencies, that’s part of why the Black Hand wanted him dead.

    • Agree: Twinkie
  155. @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.
     
    OK, two questions. Do you think that in the interests of avoiding white extinction it would be OK to take away from women the right to decide how many children they will have?

    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

    Because if you really want high white fertility and white racial purity that's the price.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Rosie

    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

    Racial purity would require that neither men or women would be allowed to pick their spouse. It would lead to the intolerable situation of seeing someone arrested for wanting to be with the person they love.

    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though. The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own. The welfare state also often acts as a magnet pulling in nonwhite immigrants. Not only do they want to hop on the welfare gravy train but welfare enables them to stay here. In the late nineteenth century up to half of all immigrants here ended up going back home because they couldn’t make it here. Now they not only don’t have to go home if they can’t support themselves but refugee programs are often set up to provide free transportation for even more of them to come here. Many of these refugee resettlement programs are funded by the government.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Mark G.


    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though. The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own. The welfare state also often acts as a magnet pulling in nonwhite immigrants. Not only do they want to hop on the welfare gravy train but welfare enables them to stay here.
     
    You're right, of course, but this is not inherent to the welfare state. It is rather a function of state malfeasance in refusing to limit welfare to it's intended beneficiaries: the citizenry.
    , @dfordoom
    @Mark G.


    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though.
     
    You could, but without totalitarianism those methods would be very very unlikely to work.

    The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own.
     
    Getting rid of the welfare state would create more problems than it would solve. Only libertarians believe that getting rid of the welfare state would be a magical solution, but then libertarians have no understanding of the real world. They think that libertarianism would work because they read a book by a libertarian that said it would work. They're more detached from reality than even the most hardcore marxists of the past.
    , @Twinkie
    @Mark G.


    The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own.
     
    Only if, by "nonwhites," you meant blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians.

    Asians (esp. American-born Asians) have the lowest entitlement usage rate in the U.S., lower than those of whites.

  156. @nebulafox
    @Talha

    In Singapore and Malaysia, Malay men are free to marry inter-religiously as long as the chick says she believes in God: nobody bothers to dig deeper. Women can't unless the guy converts. This blatant hypocrisy is a source of considerable annoyance amongst the young mainly because the Singaporean Malay version of the "Talented Tenth" is predominantly female, and the mostly Chinese guys they interact with in the university/workplace like their booze and pork an awful lot. There are a fair amount of sham conversions: I'm not sure how they handle the kids.

    I'll let someone else talk about South Asia, but in Southeast Asia, Islam is so fundamentally intertwined with ethnically "Malay" (and just as importantly: "not Chinese") identity that you can't escape questions of race and how that ties into de facto societal segregation. Even the Muslim Indians here do business in Malay, not Tamil or some other Indic language.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

    This blatant hypocrisy

    And that’s exactly what it is.

  157. @Talha
    @Twinkie


    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?
     
    In a country like the US - definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no. Context is important; the wisdom in one context may not be applicable in another. Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.

    I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.
     
    This is a big factor in the differences of approach between men and women with regards to religion.

    Peace.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Twinkie

    In a country like the US – definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no.

    This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism. If “Muslim-majority” countries didn’t allow it, why should the U.S., a Christian-majority country, allow Muslim intermarriage or immigration? This seems to suggest that, far from participating in the marketplace of faith, you believe that Muslims should engage in colonialization – protecting the domestic market, but engaging in aggressive export in other countries.

    Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.

    To me, this is not an issue of lenience. On the level of principle, there is this idea that one’s child marrying a good, kind, decent, honorable, and chaste person, regardless of religion, is a good end in itself (this is not to say that you cannot have a religious preference).

    After all, God does work in mysterious ways. My parish recently welcomed a middle-aged father into the Catholic Church. He married a Catholic woman (in what is called a marriage of “Disparity of Cult”). The only religious pledge he made was that he would allow his wife to educate the children in the Catholic faith. He honored this pledge and sent his children to my parish school. Years and years later, moved by the faith of his wife and that of his children, he converted.

    So, far from being one of lenience, a situation such as this strikes me as an opportunity for conversion. Shouldn’t a confident religious faith – one that is sure of the truthfulness of itself – welcome such opportunities?

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    >This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism.

    That's basically what it is, and this cannot be untied from how in much of the world religion is still intricately tied into your racial/communal identity. The example of Malaysia is the most prominent in my mind for obvious reasons, but you can use Yugoslavia or India or Lebanon or Iraq. Or Germany and England back in the 1600s. It truly, profoundly sucks.

    Not that it doesn't happen anyway... there are Kurds who are seriously exploring Zoroastrianism after experiencing ISIS, as well as younger Iranians interested in their ancestral faith...

    > The only religious pledge he made was that he would allow his wife to educate the children in the Catholic faith. He honored this pledge and sent his children to my parish school. Years and years later, moved by the faith of his wife and that of his children, he converted.

    My grandfather did this in order to marry my grandmother back when this was still a relatively Big Deal in American society. His parents were deeply displeased and treated my grandmother coolly at first, from what I can vaguely infer: his side of the family had a long religious tradition going back to their arrival in America. Got it legally notarized that all children would be brought up Catholic. When the family went to church, he'd just stand in the back while my grandmother kept the flock of kids in line.

    He converted at the tail end of his life, to the complete astonishment of his children: he was quite attached to his old faith and, apart from being set in his ways, it had a strong impact on his beliefs and personality for most of his life. Guess it wore on him.

    Replies: @RSDB

    , @Talha
    @Twinkie


    This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism.
     
    Because you misunderstood my answer. I was answering from a personal perspective. As a father who is dealing with a child rebelling against the sacred law in that manner. The context determines the wisdom one applies in both situations. In one situation (the US - where one is surrounded by a society where nobody else cares about these restrictions), it may well be a better approach in the long term to fix the situation to be lenient, open, etc. However, in another context - namely a Muslim majority country that has established these norms and the majority follow them, it may well be a better approach to be stern to pressure the child to change their direction and set a general deterrent example for others thinking of doing the same.

    In general, we're doing better than others on this front thus far so there's not really a need to change the game plan if it is generally working:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDXB5tgMO6o

    why should the U.S., a Christian-majority country, allow Muslim intermarriage or immigration?
     
    They are free to do whatever they want - majority rules. In fact, I wish they would stop Muslim men from marrying non-Muslim women (even Jews and Christians that they are allowed to); it is highly discouraged by the ulema and has caused quite a bit of problems, especially because the child grows up confused and without any sense of religion and (in case of divorce) we've seen that the father can be shut out.

    protecting the domestic market, but engaging in aggressive export in other countries.
     
    I don't mind this to be honest.

    If you wanted to go to the mat with me - let's say - and insist you have one hand tied behind your back. OK - that's on you, I have no need to do you a favor and also tie my hand behind mine. NOW, if you were to insist that you want to use both hands as I did and THEN I complained of unfairness, then that would simply be hypocritical of me and not respectable. But I'm not insisting that secular (post-Christian) Western countries drop these kinds of defenses - they are. They had these discussions together a while back, mostly due to how miserable a time they had in sectarian wars among themselves. Muslims were not involved at all in these discussions. I guarantee you that some of the loudest voices to shout you down if you tried to institute the kinds of policies would be Christians themselves and that's an internal conversation your community needs to have.

    Let's take a look at Greece for example. On the books, Greek Orthodoxy is still the official religion and proselytization is forbidden by law (whether they actually care enough to enforce it is another matter):
    "Anyone engaging in proselytization shall be liable to imprisonment and a fine of between 1,000 and 50,000 drachmas; he shall, moreover, be subject to police supervision for a period of between six months and one year to be fixed by the court when convicting the offender."
    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-and-religion/article/proselytization-in-greece-criminal-offense-vs-religious-persuasion-and-equality/ED76B64A3DCA81EB541C09628CD3EA42

    there is this idea that one’s child marrying a good, kind, decent, honorable, and chaste person, regardless of religion, is a good end in itself
     
    That sounds nice, but the sacred law explicitly prohibits it without ambiguity. This is where the difference between Christianity and Islam arises; Christianity doesn't have these kinds of explicit prohibitions or obligations...and things change over time. What you just stated is similar to what I have heard as statements arguing for the validity of same-sex marriage from leftist-Christian types.

    After all, God does work in mysterious ways.
     
    No doubt.

    So, far from being one of lenience, a situation such as this strikes me as an opportunity for conversion.
     
    And I would agree with your approach in the context of a place like the US.

    Shouldn’t a confident religious faith – one that is sure of the truthfulness of itself – welcome such opportunities?
     
    This is a cost-benefit analysis with regards to avoiding the slippery slope.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  158. @RSDB
    @Talha


    Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?
     
    Based on what I've seen so far I doubt you can get any five white nationalists to agree on any five policies, so I'm not too enthusiastic about getting an answer to this one. It's a good question.

    Still, Rosie's idea was to preserve the existence, not of a white nation, but of any number of white bloodlines (don't ask me how these bloodlines are going to be vetted-- let's assume this problem has been solved) and it seems to me this requires a lot less effort. There are Parsis in India-- Wikipedia (not sure how reliable this is, but never mind) tells me that according to genetic evidence the last significant admixture of Parsis with Indians (Gujaratis incidentally) took place 1200 years ago:

    A study published in Genome Biology based on high density SNP data has shown that the Parsis are genetically closer to Iranian populations than to their South Asian neighbours. They also share the highest number of haplotypes with present-day Iranians; the admixture of the Parsis with Indian populations was estimated have occurred approximately 1,200 years ago.
     
    Granted, they had the influence of a religion, which I would think seems to be necessary, but they also started with a much smaller "pure" population. It seems to me if you do not have enough of an impetus behind you to do this sort of thing on a voluntary basis you certainly do not have the impetus to do it on a society-wide compulsory basis.

    You brought up the American South which is an interesting example. Certainly in that case the law did not exist to preserve the existence of the white population though.

    I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry
     
    Yes, I think this is important, as I wrote above. Not sure how much people are actually going to care otherwise.

    Though in the case of the continued existence of white people on Earth, by most normal ideas of whiteness, I don't really think there is much of a danger if this disappearing in the near term even if nobody cares at all.

    I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage
     
    What do you do if they "marry" (according to their conception of things-- presumably in your perception and the perception of the Muslim state the marriage doesn't actually exist) and cohabit anyway? Are you going to have them locked up? Stoned? Fined? Children placed in protective custody?

    Thinking about Pakistan specifically, I don't know too much about Pakistani marriage law; I never heard of Pakistan denying entry to non-Islamically married couples who are foreign nationals (which could probably be arranged in the situation you cited) but I suppose it might be the case or some people might want it to be the case. Pakistani law will specifically not automatically dissolve marriages in case of [t]he renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a faith other than Islam (and see https://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3f1c632.html) which I find interesting.

    Also, how can they divorce if they're not married?

    Anyway, since you and Rosie live in the US and neither the Caliphate of Chicago nor the República Blanca de las Americas these are largely academic questions. As I see it they are more relevant to your case because you have an abiding metaphysical interest whereas Rosie's interest is primarily pragmatic given a desire for a certain material thing, that is, the presence of people with a particular genetic profile.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

    That was both funny and logical, a joy to read. Thank you (I ran out of buttons).

    • Thanks: RSDB
  159. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    I fully support something like that; if my son(s) went against the sacred law and married some Hindu girl, then I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage, but that’s because I believe I am carrying out the commands of God
     
    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?

    That’d be the Christian answer. It would be my answer.

    As a practical matter, I think people move others more than abstract principles or theologies do. I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.

    Replies: @Talha, @RSDB

    As a practical matter, I think people move others more than abstract principles or theologies do. I converted to Catholicism for the latter reason mostly, but my wife did so largely for the former reason.

    Out of curiosity: dead people* or living people? You must have lived in a good parish. Not that there aren’t evidently saintly human beings in the Church at present, both religious and lay, but there are certainly a lot of less prepossessing people as well.

    Wouldn’t God be happier if you welcomed the daughter-in-law into your family and, through your example of love and sacrifice, showed her the truth of your ways and moved her heart into converting?

    Well, this was the course taken as far as I can tell by St Monica.

    It might be the case that the marriage couldn’t be regularized in any case; if for instance the son had left his first wife for someone else, or if it was a gay marriage.

    I suppose the Christian thing to do in this case would still be to treat these people with love– only I think in specific cases treating one’s son’s gay partner, for instance, as a member of the family coequal with one’s other son’s wife might be toxic in some circumstances.

    Apropos of not much, Irish socialist Jim Larkin once refused to appear on the same stage with a man, Ernest Marklew, who had divorced his wife, but then the man wasn’t a member of his family, and I suppose it was the injury done to the man’s wife which rankled in an age which cared a great deal about the treatment of women. I think even then this was considered a little odd.

    I apologize for the vulgarity of the situations I proposed but I think that the possibility of such things is inherent in the question.

    I wrote most of this reply before I saw your example. Certainly in cases where the marriage is contracted licitly and especially where the non-Catholic partner pledges to raise the children in the Catholic faith, which is more than the current minimum requirement** under canon law, there is no reason at all to snub the new spouse in any way.

    *Saints, I mean.

    [MORE]

    **As a matter of opinion, I think I prefer the rule here under the 1917 code which made a promise by the non-Catholic partner explicitly necessary. If it were me in this case and my wife were to refuse this promise I would wonder constantly whether I was really doing “all in my power” (to quote the current code). And if my wife and I were exercising strong contrary influences on the child I can’t imagine it would make for a good upbringing.

  160. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    In a country like the US – definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no.
     
    This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism. If "Muslim-majority" countries didn't allow it, why should the U.S., a Christian-majority country, allow Muslim intermarriage or immigration? This seems to suggest that, far from participating in the marketplace of faith, you believe that Muslims should engage in colonialization - protecting the domestic market, but engaging in aggressive export in other countries.

    Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.
     
    To me, this is not an issue of lenience. On the level of principle, there is this idea that one's child marrying a good, kind, decent, honorable, and chaste person, regardless of religion, is a good end in itself (this is not to say that you cannot have a religious preference).

    After all, God does work in mysterious ways. My parish recently welcomed a middle-aged father into the Catholic Church. He married a Catholic woman (in what is called a marriage of "Disparity of Cult"). The only religious pledge he made was that he would allow his wife to educate the children in the Catholic faith. He honored this pledge and sent his children to my parish school. Years and years later, moved by the faith of his wife and that of his children, he converted.

    So, far from being one of lenience, a situation such as this strikes me as an opportunity for conversion. Shouldn't a confident religious faith - one that is sure of the truthfulness of itself - welcome such opportunities?

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Talha

    >This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism.

    That’s basically what it is, and this cannot be untied from how in much of the world religion is still intricately tied into your racial/communal identity. The example of Malaysia is the most prominent in my mind for obvious reasons, but you can use Yugoslavia or India or Lebanon or Iraq. Or Germany and England back in the 1600s. It truly, profoundly sucks.

    Not that it doesn’t happen anyway… there are Kurds who are seriously exploring Zoroastrianism after experiencing ISIS, as well as younger Iranians interested in their ancestral faith…

    > The only religious pledge he made was that he would allow his wife to educate the children in the Catholic faith. He honored this pledge and sent his children to my parish school. Years and years later, moved by the faith of his wife and that of his children, he converted.

    My grandfather did this in order to marry my grandmother back when this was still a relatively Big Deal in American society. His parents were deeply displeased and treated my grandmother coolly at first, from what I can vaguely infer: his side of the family had a long religious tradition going back to their arrival in America. Got it legally notarized that all children would be brought up Catholic. When the family went to church, he’d just stand in the back while my grandmother kept the flock of kids in line.

    He converted at the tail end of his life, to the complete astonishment of his children: he was quite attached to his old faith and, apart from being set in his ways, it had a strong impact on his beliefs and personality for most of his life. Guess it wore on him.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @nebulafox


    India
     
    Some of the specific cases are very strange. For example, in Ceylon (not India, I know) you can be a Hindu Tamil or a Christian Tamil or an atheist Tamil but if you are Muslim you become a Moor, even though practically all the Moors speak Tamil. However, in India proper you can very easily be a Tamil Muslim, like famous composer A.R. Rahman.

    Replies: @nebulafox

  161. @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    To my thinking, White extinction is too high a price to pay for your freedoms.
     
    OK, two questions. Do you think that in the interests of avoiding white extinction it would be OK to take away from women the right to decide how many children they will have?

    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

    Because if you really want high white fertility and white racial purity that's the price.

    Replies: @Mark G., @Rosie

    OK, two questions. Do you think that in the interests of avoiding white extinction it would be OK to take away from women the right to decide how many children they will have?

    Yes.

    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

    Yes.

    I’m not interested in accepting White extinction in order to preserve individual liberty for brown people.

    Because if you really want high white fertility and white racial purity that’s the price.

    I’m not convinced of that.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Rosie


    I’m not interested in accepting White extinction in order to preserve individual liberty for brown people.
     
    But it would be white people (including white women) whose freedoms would be taken away.

    How many white women do you seriously think would be OK with that?

    And if we're talking about taking away a woman's right to choose her own husband, isn't that getting perilously close to arranged marriages (which I believe you have in the past condemned as forced prostitution)? The only difference is that instead of parents making the decision for a woman the decision would be made by a bureaucrat.

    How many white women do you seriously think would be OK with having to apply to the government for permission to marry? And having to present her racial purity documents to the government before permission was granted?

    I'd also be interested to hear what punishments you'd have in mind for white women who broke the racial purity laws.
  162. @Twinkie
    @Talha

    Hey, now, if you don’t buy into “white genocide,” you are her enemy... but then again, you are also a brown-skinned guy in a white country. You won’t do well under Kommissar Rosie’s whip hand either way.

    Replies: @nebulafox, @iffen

    but then again, you are also a brown-skinned guy in a white country.

    Not to mention that Nordic Princess that he bride captured.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @iffen


    Not to mention that Nordic Princess that he bride captured.
     
    Iffen, didn't you accuse me of using straw-man arguments in the past?

    Replies: @iffen

  163. @Mark G.
    @dfordoom


    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

     

    Racial purity would require that neither men or women would be allowed to pick their spouse. It would lead to the intolerable situation of seeing someone arrested for wanting to be with the person they love.

    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though. The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own. The welfare state also often acts as a magnet pulling in nonwhite immigrants. Not only do they want to hop on the welfare gravy train but welfare enables them to stay here. In the late nineteenth century up to half of all immigrants here ended up going back home because they couldn't make it here. Now they not only don't have to go home if they can't support themselves but refugee programs are often set up to provide free transportation for even more of them to come here. Many of these refugee resettlement programs are funded by the government.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Twinkie

    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though. The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own. The welfare state also often acts as a magnet pulling in nonwhite immigrants. Not only do they want to hop on the welfare gravy train but welfare enables them to stay here.

    You’re right, of course, but this is not inherent to the welfare state. It is rather a function of state malfeasance in refusing to limit welfare to it’s intended beneficiaries: the citizenry.

  164. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    but then again, you are also a brown-skinned guy in a white country.

    Not to mention that Nordic Princess that he bride captured.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Not to mention that Nordic Princess that he bride captured.

    Iffen, didn’t you accuse me of using straw-man arguments in the past?

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Rosie

    Iffen, didn’t you accuse me of using straw-man arguments in the past?

    I think that I did, but I don't remember the particulars.

    Anyway, his bride is not made of straw, she's a real Nordic Princess.

  165. @Rosie
    @prime noticer


    look at a map of europe. are the people from inside those boundaries? then they are euorpeans. they are the in-group. is somebody from outside those boundaries? then they are not europeans. they are the out-group.
     
    The question concerns those who have some ancestors from inside and others from outside those boundaries.

    I'm not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many? It probably depends somewhat on the genetic distance of the non-White ancestor(s) from Europeans.

    Twinkles thinks White people will still exist even when everyone is a shade of brown because our descendants will still have some European genes or because they listen to classical music and don't like BLM or something.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @iffen

    I’m not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many?

    I just got my DNA results and I am 1% Bantu. If I change my mind about White Nationalism, can I still join the club?

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @iffen


    I just got my DNA results and I am 1% Bantu. If I change my mind about White Nationalism, can I still join the club?
     
    I'd need to see pics.
    , @Talha
    @iffen

    Are you serious or just joking around? I know a lady who looks completely European and she did a test and had 1% East African. Of course she had some Mediterranean in her so maybe there was a black concubine or something a long time ago.

    Peace.

    Replies: @iffen

  166. @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    >This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism.

    That's basically what it is, and this cannot be untied from how in much of the world religion is still intricately tied into your racial/communal identity. The example of Malaysia is the most prominent in my mind for obvious reasons, but you can use Yugoslavia or India or Lebanon or Iraq. Or Germany and England back in the 1600s. It truly, profoundly sucks.

    Not that it doesn't happen anyway... there are Kurds who are seriously exploring Zoroastrianism after experiencing ISIS, as well as younger Iranians interested in their ancestral faith...

    > The only religious pledge he made was that he would allow his wife to educate the children in the Catholic faith. He honored this pledge and sent his children to my parish school. Years and years later, moved by the faith of his wife and that of his children, he converted.

    My grandfather did this in order to marry my grandmother back when this was still a relatively Big Deal in American society. His parents were deeply displeased and treated my grandmother coolly at first, from what I can vaguely infer: his side of the family had a long religious tradition going back to their arrival in America. Got it legally notarized that all children would be brought up Catholic. When the family went to church, he'd just stand in the back while my grandmother kept the flock of kids in line.

    He converted at the tail end of his life, to the complete astonishment of his children: he was quite attached to his old faith and, apart from being set in his ways, it had a strong impact on his beliefs and personality for most of his life. Guess it wore on him.

    Replies: @RSDB

    India

    Some of the specific cases are very strange. For example, in Ceylon (not India, I know) you can be a Hindu Tamil or a Christian Tamil or an atheist Tamil but if you are Muslim you become a Moor, even though practically all the Moors speak Tamil. However, in India proper you can very easily be a Tamil Muslim, like famous composer A.R. Rahman.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @RSDB

    Tamil Muslims run all the 24 hour greasy spoon joints you'll see in Malaysia and Singapore. Lot of people in Malaysia in particular who have tech skills work remote jobs in London, and that means weird eating hours.

    I just reminded myself to go eat and get a caffeine hit... I'm looking at a late night...

    Replies: @RSDB

  167. @RSDB
    @nebulafox


    India
     
    Some of the specific cases are very strange. For example, in Ceylon (not India, I know) you can be a Hindu Tamil or a Christian Tamil or an atheist Tamil but if you are Muslim you become a Moor, even though practically all the Moors speak Tamil. However, in India proper you can very easily be a Tamil Muslim, like famous composer A.R. Rahman.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    Tamil Muslims run all the 24 hour greasy spoon joints you’ll see in Malaysia and Singapore. Lot of people in Malaysia in particular who have tech skills work remote jobs in London, and that means weird eating hours.

    I just reminded myself to go eat and get a caffeine hit… I’m looking at a late night…

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @nebulafox

    SL Muslim food has two high spots and they are biriyani and falooda. They also own ice cream parlors, some of which are OK, and at some of which you can get falooda.

    American ice cream parlors, when you can find them these days, are second to none though. I'm told Russians make good ice cream too. When I had a late night in school my preferred brain food was an ice-cream sundae washed down by lots of coffee. Ideally this would be fresh coffee but reality does not always come up to ideal in a cheap diner. Anyway, good luck.

  168. @Rosie
    @iffen


    Not to mention that Nordic Princess that he bride captured.
     
    Iffen, didn't you accuse me of using straw-man arguments in the past?

    Replies: @iffen

    Iffen, didn’t you accuse me of using straw-man arguments in the past?

    I think that I did, but I don’t remember the particulars.

    Anyway, his bride is not made of straw, she’s a real Nordic Princess.

    • LOL: Twinkie
  169. @iffen
    @Rosie

    I’m not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many?

    I just got my DNA results and I am 1% Bantu. If I change my mind about White Nationalism, can I still join the club?

    Replies: @Rosie, @Talha

    I just got my DNA results and I am 1% Bantu. If I change my mind about White Nationalism, can I still join the club?

    I’d need to see pics.

  170. @nebulafox
    @RSDB

    Tamil Muslims run all the 24 hour greasy spoon joints you'll see in Malaysia and Singapore. Lot of people in Malaysia in particular who have tech skills work remote jobs in London, and that means weird eating hours.

    I just reminded myself to go eat and get a caffeine hit... I'm looking at a late night...

    Replies: @RSDB

    SL Muslim food has two high spots and they are biriyani and falooda. They also own ice cream parlors, some of which are OK, and at some of which you can get falooda.

    American ice cream parlors, when you can find them these days, are second to none though. I’m told Russians make good ice cream too. When I had a late night in school my preferred brain food was an ice-cream sundae washed down by lots of coffee. Ideally this would be fresh coffee but reality does not always come up to ideal in a cheap diner. Anyway, good luck.

  171. @Talha
    @Rosie


    but it is very common for anti-Whites to question a man’s masculinity if he concerns himself with the wellbeing and future prospects of their own kind.
     
    Yeah - I'm certainly not anti-white. In fact, if you read the rules of zakat and charity in the sacred law, you find that it is considered more praiseworthy to give it to one's own needy relatives and extended family instead of strangers. The reason being that you are accomplishing two tasks with this; 1) helping the poor and 2) keeping good ties with blood relations (or what are called "those joined by the womb" in Islamic terminology).

    I personally have no problem with whites preferring to marry their own and in fact think it is a good idea for them to mix it up once in a while and marry first or second cousins just to restart a level healthy kinship networks again.

    We have plenty of Bosnians in our community and they prefer to marry their daughters within their own community (generally skipping over even Albanians!!!) and it's not seen as anything bizarre or racist or anything; cultural compatibility helps maintain a stronger marriage bond and is a very reasonable and legitimate concern.

    Indeed, susceptibility to such taunting and manipulation may well be the fatal weakness that brings down the White man for good.
     
    That's not really my angle. I'm trying to explain that when you plan on putting into practice a policy of racial purity - that leads to certain facts on the ground. There are laws that need to be drafted. The rights of certain individuals will have to be restricted. You are taking away a man's choice of open mate selection. Patriarchal societies do not like governments getting in the way of those kinds of decisions.

    It's a bit akin to encroaching gun-control; you are taking away a man's right to make the necessary decisions he feels are best for him and the defense of his family. Patriarchal societies also don't like governments interfering in that decision as well.

    flourishing of the White race
     
    I personally don't see them flourishing without some level of a return of a serious (not joke or LARPer) patriarchy; time will tell.

    A note I posted on another thread:

    I was at a small barbecue today with a handful of brothers. One of the core brothers in the community is a convert from (mostly) Polish (and mixed European background) and another is Senegalese – the rest are mostly Desi with a few Bosnians and Arabs thrown in for good measure.

    The Polish brother has three kids (mashaAllah) and I was asking him if he plans to have more, to which he replied in the affirmative. He definitely wants to try to have another son so that he has two boys and two girls.

    What’s interesting is when we were exploring what his chances would be in having settled with a family being what he is in his thirties had he not converted. He admitted, if he was one of the lucky few, he might be married with two kids. In his extended family; siblings, cousins, etc. there is only one other couple that had twins and they are done (understandably since twins are a tough package to deal with). His family line is literally about to disappear within a generation.

    He further told me – since he did some research on his family name and background and what not – that apparently there aren’t that many of the them in the US and the rest are settled mostly around the Czech Republic. He knows full well that he is likely establishing a patrilineal line. He said; I’m hoping in a few generations, my last name is as common as any other Muslim last name – that when people hear somebody with my last name, they say, “Oh yeah, that must be a Muslim”. This is full progenitor/founder mode and inshaAllah it will happen and his bloodline will survive the Great Culling.
     
    I was literally discussing with him how he should draft a family sigil. He is not the only one who sees what is happening, I have come across multiple white converts that are very cognizant of the fact that they are establishing the surviving progenitor lines among their families. Whites aren't going anywhere only certain types of whites are - and honestly, there is only so much you can do for some people who will fight you tooth and nail for the right to abort their own babies by the millions annually.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

    I personally don’t see them flourishing without some level of a return of a serious (not joke or LARPer) patriarchy; time will tell.

    If Whites perish, I suspect it will be a result of secularism and YOLOism, not lack of patriarchy, benevolent or otherwise.

    • Agree: Talha
  172. @iffen
    @Rosie

    I’m not a one-dropper, but how many drops are too many?

    I just got my DNA results and I am 1% Bantu. If I change my mind about White Nationalism, can I still join the club?

    Replies: @Rosie, @Talha

    Are you serious or just joking around? I know a lady who looks completely European and she did a test and had 1% East African. Of course she had some Mediterranean in her so maybe there was a black concubine or something a long time ago.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Talha

    No, I'm serious. I don't know what it means. A non-Cau in the woodpile 20 generations ago? ?

    Replies: @Talha

  173. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    In a country like the US – definitely. In a Muslim-majority country, no.
     
    This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism. If "Muslim-majority" countries didn't allow it, why should the U.S., a Christian-majority country, allow Muslim intermarriage or immigration? This seems to suggest that, far from participating in the marketplace of faith, you believe that Muslims should engage in colonialization - protecting the domestic market, but engaging in aggressive export in other countries.

    Being lenient in one context is not preferable in another.
     
    To me, this is not an issue of lenience. On the level of principle, there is this idea that one's child marrying a good, kind, decent, honorable, and chaste person, regardless of religion, is a good end in itself (this is not to say that you cannot have a religious preference).

    After all, God does work in mysterious ways. My parish recently welcomed a middle-aged father into the Catholic Church. He married a Catholic woman (in what is called a marriage of "Disparity of Cult"). The only religious pledge he made was that he would allow his wife to educate the children in the Catholic faith. He honored this pledge and sent his children to my parish school. Years and years later, moved by the faith of his wife and that of his children, he converted.

    So, far from being one of lenience, a situation such as this strikes me as an opportunity for conversion. Shouldn't a confident religious faith - one that is sure of the truthfulness of itself - welcome such opportunities?

    Replies: @nebulafox, @Talha

    This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism.

    Because you misunderstood my answer. I was answering from a personal perspective. As a father who is dealing with a child rebelling against the sacred law in that manner. The context determines the wisdom one applies in both situations. In one situation (the US – where one is surrounded by a society where nobody else cares about these restrictions), it may well be a better approach in the long term to fix the situation to be lenient, open, etc. However, in another context – namely a Muslim majority country that has established these norms and the majority follow them, it may well be a better approach to be stern to pressure the child to change their direction and set a general deterrent example for others thinking of doing the same.

    In general, we’re doing better than others on this front thus far so there’s not really a need to change the game plan if it is generally working:

    why should the U.S., a Christian-majority country, allow Muslim intermarriage or immigration?

    They are free to do whatever they want – majority rules. In fact, I wish they would stop Muslim men from marrying non-Muslim women (even Jews and Christians that they are allowed to); it is highly discouraged by the ulema and has caused quite a bit of problems, especially because the child grows up confused and without any sense of religion and (in case of divorce) we’ve seen that the father can be shut out.

    protecting the domestic market, but engaging in aggressive export in other countries.

    I don’t mind this to be honest.

    If you wanted to go to the mat with me – let’s say – and insist you have one hand tied behind your back. OK – that’s on you, I have no need to do you a favor and also tie my hand behind mine. NOW, if you were to insist that you want to use both hands as I did and THEN I complained of unfairness, then that would simply be hypocritical of me and not respectable. But I’m not insisting that secular (post-Christian) Western countries drop these kinds of defenses – they are. They had these discussions together a while back, mostly due to how miserable a time they had in sectarian wars among themselves. Muslims were not involved at all in these discussions. I guarantee you that some of the loudest voices to shout you down if you tried to institute the kinds of policies would be Christians themselves and that’s an internal conversation your community needs to have.

    Let’s take a look at Greece for example. On the books, Greek Orthodoxy is still the official religion and proselytization is forbidden by law (whether they actually care enough to enforce it is another matter):
    “Anyone engaging in proselytization shall be liable to imprisonment and a fine of between 1,000 and 50,000 drachmas; he shall, moreover, be subject to police supervision for a period of between six months and one year to be fixed by the court when convicting the offender.”
    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-and-religion/article/proselytization-in-greece-criminal-offense-vs-religious-persuasion-and-equality/ED76B64A3DCA81EB541C09628CD3EA42

    there is this idea that one’s child marrying a good, kind, decent, honorable, and chaste person, regardless of religion, is a good end in itself

    That sounds nice, but the sacred law explicitly prohibits it without ambiguity. This is where the difference between Christianity and Islam arises; Christianity doesn’t have these kinds of explicit prohibitions or obligations…and things change over time. What you just stated is similar to what I have heard as statements arguing for the validity of same-sex marriage from leftist-Christian types.

    After all, God does work in mysterious ways.

    No doubt.

    So, far from being one of lenience, a situation such as this strikes me as an opportunity for conversion.

    And I would agree with your approach in the context of a place like the US.

    Shouldn’t a confident religious faith – one that is sure of the truthfulness of itself – welcome such opportunities?

    This is a cost-benefit analysis with regards to avoiding the slippery slope.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Talha


    Because you misunderstood my answer.
     
    I think I understood your answer perfectly well.

    They are free to do whatever they want – majority rules.
     
    No, I am afraid you don't understand one of the basic tenets of this country - protection of minority rights from the tyranny of the majority (more on that below). We are supposed to be a representative republic, not a democracy of mob-rule. The Founding Fathers specifically did not want Athenian-style democracy in which those outside of power could be arbitrarily persecuted.

    post-Christian
     
    The United States is not post-Christian just yet. I am sure you'd like it to be, but it's not. A large majority still identify as Christian.

    On the books, Greek Orthodoxy
     
    The Eastern Orthodox are a small minority in this country, which is Western Christian (Catholic and Protestant) in the majority, so it's disingenuous to use it in the context of this discussion.

    the slippery slope.
     
    What slippery slope? You can use "the slippery slope" argument with everything - interracial/international marriages (you are in one, aren't you?), disparities of cult, etc. We are supposed to have legal equality for all in this country, including ethnic (as well as political) minorities. Radicals have "re-interpreted" this to mean that even those ethnic groups that underperform must be made equal in outcomes. Is equality under the law "a slippery slope" to this kind of radical egalitarianism of "equal outcomes"?

    Traditional Christianity is pretty clear on homosexuality, let alone homosexual "marriage." For that matter, everywhere there were votes on the legalization of homosexual marriage - including California (!) - people spoke pretty clearly, and were overridden by machinations of a hostile elite.

    Setting aside these "procedural" concerns, anyone who is remotely intelligent knows the difference between an issue of conscience and biology. A man (or a daughter-in-law, in this case) can change his heart in an instant and embrace God, but a homosexual partner cannot change his biological sex. Equating the two situations and adopting the argument of those who want to destroy Christianity through false analogies puts you decisively on the side of anti-Christian coalition in this country (which of course Muslims seem to be these days).

    Replies: @Talha

  174. Your forgetting the 5 million legal & illegal alien children brought into the USA each decade. The USA under the age of 16 is majority non white.

  175. @nebulafox
    @Talha

    In Singapore and Malaysia, Malay men are free to marry inter-religiously as long as the chick says she believes in God: nobody bothers to dig deeper. Women can't unless the guy converts. This blatant hypocrisy is a source of considerable annoyance amongst the young mainly because the Singaporean Malay version of the "Talented Tenth" is predominantly female, and the mostly Chinese guys they interact with in the university/workplace like their booze and pork an awful lot. There are a fair amount of sham conversions: I'm not sure how they handle the kids.

    I'll let someone else talk about South Asia, but in Southeast Asia, Islam is so fundamentally intertwined with ethnically "Malay" (and just as importantly: "not Chinese") identity that you can't escape questions of race and how that ties into de facto societal segregation. Even the Muslim Indians here do business in Malay, not Tamil or some other Indic language.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

    This blatant hypocrisy

    It’s not, it is very explicitly declared in source texts – there isn’t any ambiguity. The sacred law is very clear about one set of rules for males and another for females; that’s not a bug, that is a feature. Like the fact that women are obligated to cover their hair, but men are not…or that men are obligated to go to the mosque for Friday prayers, but women are not.

    There are a fair amount of sham conversions: I’m not sure how they handle the kids.

    This kind of thing happens in the West as well. Guys that aren’t big on the religion, but convert officially anyway in order to marry a Muslim woman. In a Muslim majority country, this gives the kids a much better chance to grow up as Muslims. I mean, if the father was not so hot on his own religion enough to not care about publicly converting, then he will at least not get in the way of their being raised Muslim.

    in Southeast Asia, Islam is so fundamentally intertwined with ethnically “Malay” (and just as importantly: “not Chinese”) identity that you can’t escape questions of race

    Yes, Malaysia and the way “Malay” has been defined legally is quite strange. I would not couple Islam with any ethnic identity as a legal definition and I think this will change eventually once more Chinese become Muslim and demand changes:
    Chinese Muslims converts are baulking at taking Malay or Arabic names upon embracing Islam, claiming the discriminatory practice forces them to abandon their culture and traditions.

    Several Chinese Muslims in Malaysia are fighting for the right to keep their original names, in defiance of the convention of replacing their surname with ‘Abdullah’, in a bid to keep their culture alive.

    “I will not change my ethnicity. I was born Chinese and I will die Chinese, I will not become Malay. I did not want to change my name to show that Islam is a universal religion for all nations, not just for the Arabs or Malays only,” the Malaysian Chinese Muslim Association (MACMA) Malacca president Lim Jooi Soon told the BBC in a recent interview.
    https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2015/06/24/ethnic-chinese-embrace-islam-but-keep-names-to-resist-becoming-malay/921193

    Peace.

  176. @RSDB
    @Talha


    Will you side with the state to demand he divorce her to be able to return home?
     
    Based on what I've seen so far I doubt you can get any five white nationalists to agree on any five policies, so I'm not too enthusiastic about getting an answer to this one. It's a good question.

    Still, Rosie's idea was to preserve the existence, not of a white nation, but of any number of white bloodlines (don't ask me how these bloodlines are going to be vetted-- let's assume this problem has been solved) and it seems to me this requires a lot less effort. There are Parsis in India-- Wikipedia (not sure how reliable this is, but never mind) tells me that according to genetic evidence the last significant admixture of Parsis with Indians (Gujaratis incidentally) took place 1200 years ago:

    A study published in Genome Biology based on high density SNP data has shown that the Parsis are genetically closer to Iranian populations than to their South Asian neighbours. They also share the highest number of haplotypes with present-day Iranians; the admixture of the Parsis with Indian populations was estimated have occurred approximately 1,200 years ago.
     
    Granted, they had the influence of a religion, which I would think seems to be necessary, but they also started with a much smaller "pure" population. It seems to me if you do not have enough of an impetus behind you to do this sort of thing on a voluntary basis you certainly do not have the impetus to do it on a society-wide compulsory basis.

    You brought up the American South which is an interesting example. Certainly in that case the law did not exist to preserve the existence of the white population though.

    I believe I am carrying out the commands of God, not because I feel like interfering in the sort of girl my son wants to marry
     
    Yes, I think this is important, as I wrote above. Not sure how much people are actually going to care otherwise.

    Though in the case of the continued existence of white people on Earth, by most normal ideas of whiteness, I don't really think there is much of a danger if this disappearing in the near term even if nobody cares at all.

    I’m all for blocking them entry until they divorce or legally interdicting their marriage
     
    What do you do if they "marry" (according to their conception of things-- presumably in your perception and the perception of the Muslim state the marriage doesn't actually exist) and cohabit anyway? Are you going to have them locked up? Stoned? Fined? Children placed in protective custody?

    Thinking about Pakistan specifically, I don't know too much about Pakistani marriage law; I never heard of Pakistan denying entry to non-Islamically married couples who are foreign nationals (which could probably be arranged in the situation you cited) but I suppose it might be the case or some people might want it to be the case. Pakistani law will specifically not automatically dissolve marriages in case of [t]he renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a faith other than Islam (and see https://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3f1c632.html) which I find interesting.

    Also, how can they divorce if they're not married?

    Anyway, since you and Rosie live in the US and neither the Caliphate of Chicago nor the República Blanca de las Americas these are largely academic questions. As I see it they are more relevant to your case because you have an abiding metaphysical interest whereas Rosie's interest is primarily pragmatic given a desire for a certain material thing, that is, the presence of people with a particular genetic profile.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Talha

    There are Parsis in India

    And dying off. They basically have picked one of the worst ways to tie religion to ethnic identity:
    “While most other ethnic groups in India are growing at a fast pace, the number of Parsis has been dwindling so fast, at 10 to 15 per cent a decade, that the Indian Government and community leaders have agreed on a plan to increase birth-rates.

    Four years ago, the Parsi community in Mumbai was facing extinction….Unlike other religions, including Christianity and Islam, the Parsi community doesn’t practice the conversion of people from other faiths into Zoroastrianism.

    And under traditional Parsi laws, lineage passes through fathers but not mothers.

    That means kids of Parsi women who marry non-Parsis are not considered Parsis.

    Purists now fear that the pure Parsi bloodlines will be eliminated in a few generations.”
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-16/parsis-in-india-bid-to-save-dwindling-population/8891660

    and cohabit anyway? Are you going to have them locked up?

    Sure, or fine, etc. It doesn’t have to be them, only the Muslim who is violating the sacred law, the other person didn’t to anything wrong according to their law.

    You made a good point that this marriage is basically a legal fiction in Islam and a Muslim man cannot “marry” a Hindu woman any more than he can “marry” his refrigerator. So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play. To annul the marriage, I was talking about the situation

    You fine the guy or put him into jail and tell him to knock it off. He does it again, you do it again and increase the punishment.

    Pakistani law will specifically not automatically dissolve marriages in case of [t]he renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a faith other than Islam (and see https://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3f1c632.html) which I find interesting.

    I could see a provision that – technically – if she became either a Jew or Christian, then the marriage is still valid versus if she became a Hindu or atheist. I’d have to ask someone about this particular case.

    Also, how can they divorce if they’re not married?

    Legally annul and see above.

    Caliphate of Chicago

    LOOOOOL!!! Sultanate of the Great Lakes!

    As I see it they are more relevant to your case because you have an abiding metaphysical interest

    Indeed. See the video I posted to Twinkie’s comment featuring inter-religious mating attitudes among the various religious groups profiled. I think people in general are more accepting of discrimination based on the beliefs of an individual versus something they cannot change about themselves. I would to see a similar video on race. The first question they asked was; would you date outside your religion? The ratios were:
    Atheists: 94%, yes – 6%, no
    Jews: 89%, yes – 11%, no
    Christians: 72%, yes – 28%, no
    Muslims: 28%, yes – 72%, no

    What if they put a bunch of whites, blacks, browns, yellows and reds together and asked; would you date outside your race? Remember, a NO is a hard no, and that is not the same is someone saying, “I prefer to date within my own race?” What do you think the numbers would be? My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.

    Also…would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @Talha


    And dying off.
     
    They are dying off because they choose not to have children; if Rosie 1.0's strategy gives her an equivalent 1200-year run I think her 1100-year old ghost (barring radical life extension) can hand off the torch of White Preservation or whatever to Rosie 2.0 with a sense of grateful accomplishment. I don't claim to control the future 1200 years in advance, do you?

    I’d have to ask someone about this particular case.
     
    Please do; the law seems to discuss her being a deist or atheist since it separates her renunciation of the Muslim religion from her adoption of another one.

    So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play.
     
    Most Muslim cities (like most other cities) have old and venerable red-light districts so it seems there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another. If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.

    My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.
     
    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can't it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.

    Also…would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?
     
    Since we were discussing the Howard society we need a new rule with a snazzy acronym for these cases.

    WWLLD

    What would Lazarus Long do?

    I think in one book this involves going back in time several centuries and marrying his mother. Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there's that.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz2pTtSmBkA

    Rekha's character is however a Muslim so her position could presumably eventually be regularized. Not bloody likely though.

    Replies: @Talha, @Twinkie, @Talha

  177. @Talha
    @Twinkie


    This strikes me as a religious equivalent of mercantilism.
     
    Because you misunderstood my answer. I was answering from a personal perspective. As a father who is dealing with a child rebelling against the sacred law in that manner. The context determines the wisdom one applies in both situations. In one situation (the US - where one is surrounded by a society where nobody else cares about these restrictions), it may well be a better approach in the long term to fix the situation to be lenient, open, etc. However, in another context - namely a Muslim majority country that has established these norms and the majority follow them, it may well be a better approach to be stern to pressure the child to change their direction and set a general deterrent example for others thinking of doing the same.

    In general, we're doing better than others on this front thus far so there's not really a need to change the game plan if it is generally working:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDXB5tgMO6o

    why should the U.S., a Christian-majority country, allow Muslim intermarriage or immigration?
     
    They are free to do whatever they want - majority rules. In fact, I wish they would stop Muslim men from marrying non-Muslim women (even Jews and Christians that they are allowed to); it is highly discouraged by the ulema and has caused quite a bit of problems, especially because the child grows up confused and without any sense of religion and (in case of divorce) we've seen that the father can be shut out.

    protecting the domestic market, but engaging in aggressive export in other countries.
     
    I don't mind this to be honest.

    If you wanted to go to the mat with me - let's say - and insist you have one hand tied behind your back. OK - that's on you, I have no need to do you a favor and also tie my hand behind mine. NOW, if you were to insist that you want to use both hands as I did and THEN I complained of unfairness, then that would simply be hypocritical of me and not respectable. But I'm not insisting that secular (post-Christian) Western countries drop these kinds of defenses - they are. They had these discussions together a while back, mostly due to how miserable a time they had in sectarian wars among themselves. Muslims were not involved at all in these discussions. I guarantee you that some of the loudest voices to shout you down if you tried to institute the kinds of policies would be Christians themselves and that's an internal conversation your community needs to have.

    Let's take a look at Greece for example. On the books, Greek Orthodoxy is still the official religion and proselytization is forbidden by law (whether they actually care enough to enforce it is another matter):
    "Anyone engaging in proselytization shall be liable to imprisonment and a fine of between 1,000 and 50,000 drachmas; he shall, moreover, be subject to police supervision for a period of between six months and one year to be fixed by the court when convicting the offender."
    https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-and-religion/article/proselytization-in-greece-criminal-offense-vs-religious-persuasion-and-equality/ED76B64A3DCA81EB541C09628CD3EA42

    there is this idea that one’s child marrying a good, kind, decent, honorable, and chaste person, regardless of religion, is a good end in itself
     
    That sounds nice, but the sacred law explicitly prohibits it without ambiguity. This is where the difference between Christianity and Islam arises; Christianity doesn't have these kinds of explicit prohibitions or obligations...and things change over time. What you just stated is similar to what I have heard as statements arguing for the validity of same-sex marriage from leftist-Christian types.

    After all, God does work in mysterious ways.
     
    No doubt.

    So, far from being one of lenience, a situation such as this strikes me as an opportunity for conversion.
     
    And I would agree with your approach in the context of a place like the US.

    Shouldn’t a confident religious faith – one that is sure of the truthfulness of itself – welcome such opportunities?
     
    This is a cost-benefit analysis with regards to avoiding the slippery slope.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Because you misunderstood my answer.

    I think I understood your answer perfectly well.

    They are free to do whatever they want – majority rules.

    No, I am afraid you don’t understand one of the basic tenets of this country – protection of minority rights from the tyranny of the majority (more on that below). We are supposed to be a representative republic, not a democracy of mob-rule. The Founding Fathers specifically did not want Athenian-style democracy in which those outside of power could be arbitrarily persecuted.

    post-Christian

    The United States is not post-Christian just yet. I am sure you’d like it to be, but it’s not. A large majority still identify as Christian.

    On the books, Greek Orthodoxy

    The Eastern Orthodox are a small minority in this country, which is Western Christian (Catholic and Protestant) in the majority, so it’s disingenuous to use it in the context of this discussion.

    the slippery slope.

    What slippery slope? You can use “the slippery slope” argument with everything – interracial/international marriages (you are in one, aren’t you?), disparities of cult, etc. We are supposed to have legal equality for all in this country, including ethnic (as well as political) minorities. Radicals have “re-interpreted” this to mean that even those ethnic groups that underperform must be made equal in outcomes. Is equality under the law “a slippery slope” to this kind of radical egalitarianism of “equal outcomes”?

    Traditional Christianity is pretty clear on homosexuality, let alone homosexual “marriage.” For that matter, everywhere there were votes on the legalization of homosexual marriage – including California (!) – people spoke pretty clearly, and were overridden by machinations of a hostile elite.

    Setting aside these “procedural” concerns, anyone who is remotely intelligent knows the difference between an issue of conscience and biology. A man (or a daughter-in-law, in this case) can change his heart in an instant and embrace God, but a homosexual partner cannot change his biological sex. Equating the two situations and adopting the argument of those who want to destroy Christianity through false analogies puts you decisively on the side of anti-Christian coalition in this country (which of course Muslims seem to be these days).

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Twinkie


    No, I am afraid you don’t understand one of the basic tenets of this country – protection of minority rights from the tyranny of the majority
     
    I understand that, but the rules are in place such that if the majority has no problems with it, everything is game. If the people elect the representatives that vote for their interests, then all that matters is; what are the people's interests?

    You can do everything from prohibit alcohol in the Constitution, repeal it, prohibit slavery, etc. Super-majorities can change/amend constitutions as they like.

    I am sure you’d like it to be, but it’s not.
     
    No I would not. A post-Christian society is far more dangerous an environment for a Muslim and his faith than a Christian one. Christians (traditional ones) share far more general values with Muslims.

    so it’s disingenuous to use it in the context of this discussion.
     
    Ok, so it is not germane to use anything but Western (Catholic and Protestant examples), I'll accept that.

    What slippery slope?
     
    The slippery slope is that if you are in a Muslim-majority country and you go easy on these things, it'll open up the flood gates to such things as even redefinition of what constitutes a valid Muslim marriage and whether that belongs in the secular domain or whether it is defined by sacred law.

    We are supposed to have legal equality for all in this country, including ethnic (as well as political) minorities.
     
    Yup - which is why I would adopt the more lenient and open approach (that you mentioned) to resolving the hypothetical situation with my son; there simply is no legal recourse nor are the people in any mood for such any time soon. Again, context.

    Equating the two situations and adopting the argument of those who want to destroy Christianity through false analogies puts you decisively on the side of anti-Christian coalition in this country (which of course Muslims seem to be these days).
     
    If you want to consider me to be decisively on the anti-Christian side, that is fine by me. Not how I would characterize myself, but neither am I begging for acceptance or as an ally.

    As far as the false analogy with homosexuality; I'm not the person you need to convince - I specifically stated those are arguments leftist-Christians make, so you need to convince them. When I used to go into work (before this lock-down), I would see many churches with rainbow pride flags prominently displayed. Again, another internal discussion you need to have among fellow Christians.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  178. 85% of US births are non-black.

  179. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    Because you misunderstood my answer.
     
    I think I understood your answer perfectly well.

    They are free to do whatever they want – majority rules.
     
    No, I am afraid you don't understand one of the basic tenets of this country - protection of minority rights from the tyranny of the majority (more on that below). We are supposed to be a representative republic, not a democracy of mob-rule. The Founding Fathers specifically did not want Athenian-style democracy in which those outside of power could be arbitrarily persecuted.

    post-Christian
     
    The United States is not post-Christian just yet. I am sure you'd like it to be, but it's not. A large majority still identify as Christian.

    On the books, Greek Orthodoxy
     
    The Eastern Orthodox are a small minority in this country, which is Western Christian (Catholic and Protestant) in the majority, so it's disingenuous to use it in the context of this discussion.

    the slippery slope.
     
    What slippery slope? You can use "the slippery slope" argument with everything - interracial/international marriages (you are in one, aren't you?), disparities of cult, etc. We are supposed to have legal equality for all in this country, including ethnic (as well as political) minorities. Radicals have "re-interpreted" this to mean that even those ethnic groups that underperform must be made equal in outcomes. Is equality under the law "a slippery slope" to this kind of radical egalitarianism of "equal outcomes"?

    Traditional Christianity is pretty clear on homosexuality, let alone homosexual "marriage." For that matter, everywhere there were votes on the legalization of homosexual marriage - including California (!) - people spoke pretty clearly, and were overridden by machinations of a hostile elite.

    Setting aside these "procedural" concerns, anyone who is remotely intelligent knows the difference between an issue of conscience and biology. A man (or a daughter-in-law, in this case) can change his heart in an instant and embrace God, but a homosexual partner cannot change his biological sex. Equating the two situations and adopting the argument of those who want to destroy Christianity through false analogies puts you decisively on the side of anti-Christian coalition in this country (which of course Muslims seem to be these days).

    Replies: @Talha

    No, I am afraid you don’t understand one of the basic tenets of this country – protection of minority rights from the tyranny of the majority

    I understand that, but the rules are in place such that if the majority has no problems with it, everything is game. If the people elect the representatives that vote for their interests, then all that matters is; what are the people’s interests?

    You can do everything from prohibit alcohol in the Constitution, repeal it, prohibit slavery, etc. Super-majorities can change/amend constitutions as they like.

    I am sure you’d like it to be, but it’s not.

    No I would not. A post-Christian society is far more dangerous an environment for a Muslim and his faith than a Christian one. Christians (traditional ones) share far more general values with Muslims.

    so it’s disingenuous to use it in the context of this discussion.

    Ok, so it is not germane to use anything but Western (Catholic and Protestant examples), I’ll accept that.

    What slippery slope?

    The slippery slope is that if you are in a Muslim-majority country and you go easy on these things, it’ll open up the flood gates to such things as even redefinition of what constitutes a valid Muslim marriage and whether that belongs in the secular domain or whether it is defined by sacred law.

    We are supposed to have legal equality for all in this country, including ethnic (as well as political) minorities.

    Yup – which is why I would adopt the more lenient and open approach (that you mentioned) to resolving the hypothetical situation with my son; there simply is no legal recourse nor are the people in any mood for such any time soon. Again, context.

    Equating the two situations and adopting the argument of those who want to destroy Christianity through false analogies puts you decisively on the side of anti-Christian coalition in this country (which of course Muslims seem to be these days).

    If you want to consider me to be decisively on the anti-Christian side, that is fine by me. Not how I would characterize myself, but neither am I begging for acceptance or as an ally.

    As far as the false analogy with homosexuality; I’m not the person you need to convince – I specifically stated those are arguments leftist-Christians make, so you need to convince them. When I used to go into work (before this lock-down), I would see many churches with rainbow pride flags prominently displayed. Again, another internal discussion you need to have among fellow Christians.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Talha


    The slippery slope is that if you are in a Muslim-majority country and you go easy on these things, it’ll open up the flood gates to such things as even redefinition of what constitutes a valid Muslim marriage and whether that belongs in the secular domain or whether it is defined by sacred law.
     
    So you don’t think that Islam is appealing enough to turn these mixed marriage partners into Muslims even where they are a vast majority?

    Moreover, are you suggesting that the marriage habits of Muslims in these countries are constrained by the force of law (and force, period) and that a large enough of the people would behave otherwise without the said force?

    If you want to consider me to be decisively on the anti-Christian side, that is fine by me. Not how I would characterize myself, but neither am I begging for acceptance or as an ally.
     
    This strikes me as a passive-aggressive word game: “Religious restrictions on my side, but open market in your country - and if you see this religious mercantilism as hostile, that’s your problem!”

    I don’t expect you or any minority to beg for equality, but I do expect you not to be on the side of destruction and also to support similar tolerance for ethnic and religious minorities elsewhere, including whence your family originates. Otherwise, your position is that of a hostile colonist, no matter how much you deny it with pleasant words. And it’s not just you - it’s what I ask of any immigrant. I call myself an assimilationist for a reason.

    Replies: @Talha

  180. @Talha
    @RSDB


    There are Parsis in India
     
    And dying off. They basically have picked one of the worst ways to tie religion to ethnic identity:
    "While most other ethnic groups in India are growing at a fast pace, the number of Parsis has been dwindling so fast, at 10 to 15 per cent a decade, that the Indian Government and community leaders have agreed on a plan to increase birth-rates.

    Four years ago, the Parsi community in Mumbai was facing extinction....Unlike other religions, including Christianity and Islam, the Parsi community doesn't practice the conversion of people from other faiths into Zoroastrianism.

    And under traditional Parsi laws, lineage passes through fathers but not mothers.

    That means kids of Parsi women who marry non-Parsis are not considered Parsis.

    Purists now fear that the pure Parsi bloodlines will be eliminated in a few generations."
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-16/parsis-in-india-bid-to-save-dwindling-population/8891660

    and cohabit anyway? Are you going to have them locked up?
     
    Sure, or fine, etc. It doesn't have to be them, only the Muslim who is violating the sacred law, the other person didn't to anything wrong according to their law.

    You made a good point that this marriage is basically a legal fiction in Islam and a Muslim man cannot "marry" a Hindu woman any more than he can "marry" his refrigerator. So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play. To annul the marriage, I was talking about the situation

    You fine the guy or put him into jail and tell him to knock it off. He does it again, you do it again and increase the punishment.

    Pakistani law will specifically not automatically dissolve marriages in case of [t]he renunciation of Islam by a married Muslim woman or her conversion to a faith other than Islam (and see https://www.refworld.org/docid/4c3f1c632.html) which I find interesting.
     
    I could see a provision that - technically - if she became either a Jew or Christian, then the marriage is still valid versus if she became a Hindu or atheist. I'd have to ask someone about this particular case.

    Also, how can they divorce if they’re not married?
     
    Legally annul and see above.

    Caliphate of Chicago
     
    LOOOOOL!!! Sultanate of the Great Lakes!

    As I see it they are more relevant to your case because you have an abiding metaphysical interest
     
    Indeed. See the video I posted to Twinkie's comment featuring inter-religious mating attitudes among the various religious groups profiled. I think people in general are more accepting of discrimination based on the beliefs of an individual versus something they cannot change about themselves. I would to see a similar video on race. The first question they asked was; would you date outside your religion? The ratios were:
    Atheists: 94%, yes - 6%, no
    Jews: 89%, yes - 11%, no
    Christians: 72%, yes - 28%, no
    Muslims: 28%, yes - 72%, no

    What if they put a bunch of whites, blacks, browns, yellows and reds together and asked; would you date outside your race? Remember, a NO is a hard no, and that is not the same is someone saying, "I prefer to date within my own race?" What do you think the numbers would be? My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.

    Also...would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?
    https://twitter.com/ambrghostxo/status/1284689784741470208

    Peace.

    Replies: @RSDB

    And dying off.

    They are dying off because they choose not to have children; if Rosie 1.0’s strategy gives her an equivalent 1200-year run I think her 1100-year old ghost (barring radical life extension) can hand off the torch of White Preservation or whatever to Rosie 2.0 with a sense of grateful accomplishment. I don’t claim to control the future 1200 years in advance, do you?

    I’d have to ask someone about this particular case.

    Please do; the law seems to discuss her being a deist or atheist since it separates her renunciation of the Muslim religion from her adoption of another one.

    So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play.

    Most Muslim cities (like most other cities) have old and venerable red-light districts so it seems there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another. If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.

    My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.

    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can’t it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.

    Also…would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?

    Since we were discussing the Howard society we need a new rule with a snazzy acronym for these cases.

    WWLLD

    What would Lazarus Long do?

    I think in one book this involves going back in time several centuries and marrying his mother. Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there’s that.

    [MORE]

    Rekha’s character is however a Muslim so her position could presumably eventually be regularized. Not bloody likely though.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @RSDB


    They are dying off because they choose not to have children;
     
    Well, that's quite a lot of folks. But they are also kicking out potentially fertile people who choose to marry (and have kids) out rather than giving any options for people to join in. It's just bad strategy. Bad enough that the government of India has to do some kind of official policy like China does with pandas.

    Please do;
     
    I have my exegesis class on Tuesday nights with a Hanafi mufti, so I'll ask him to see if he knows. He may have to dig into some books to get back to me. Some of those details are in the big ones. I used to live near a young mufti that had studied in South Africa and once asked him if he had studied Imam Sarakhsi's al-Mabsut* with his teachers - to which his eyes went wide and he said; "ALL of it?!"

    there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another.
     
    Sure and especially if you are quiet and discreet about it. Publicly declaring a prohibited marriage is not being quiet and discreet, it is pushing it in everyone's face. If the guy moves to a new town and simply co-habits with some random Hindu woman and has kids with her, most people simply will assume you are married in a traditional society - they don't go around asking to see your marriage certificate.

    If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.
     
    Yes, this.

    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can’t it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.
     
    Basically. I do wonder though if anyone has done a solid and anonymous (very few people would be truthful about this in a public setting) poll/survey of people regarding whether or not they would flat out refuse to marry a person of a different race and what the breakdown is.

    Calling AE! Calling AE!

    Peace.

    *
    https://kitaabun.com/shopping3/images/KitabMabsut.jpg

    Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there’s that.
     
    Dang.

    Rekha’s character is however a Muslim
     
    LOL! I haven't heard that song for ages! Brings back memories. The translation is interesting though in what they choose to add and omit.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    , @Twinkie
    @RSDB


    I think in one book this involves going back in time several centuries and marrying his mother.
     
    One of the most unusual TV shows I have seen is a recent Netflix German sci-fi series called “Dark.” It features recursive inbreeding through time travel and its consequences. Very mind-bending and complex.

    Time travelers should not have sex - it makes a mess of things to say the least.
    , @Talha
    @RSDB

    I just asked my teacher, hopefully he will get back to me soon. I'll respond in a few days though; the blessed ten days and nights of Dhul-Hijjah are upon us and I'm pulling back like I do for Ramadan.

    A bit of advice, in parting:
    https://twitter.com/Farid_0v/status/1285319355350364161

    See you in a few days. If you (and others) could bother yourselves to pray for my elderly father, it would be appreciated; he has pneumonia and is on a ventilator (thank God it's not Covid), but none of us can see him due to the new rules and we basically get updates by phone from the nurse...he is getting better, but it is a hard slog for an old man in his condition.

    Thanks in advance you for your kindness and may your prayers for my father be a means of protection for your own.

    Peace.

    Replies: @RSDB

  181. @RSDB
    @Talha


    And dying off.
     
    They are dying off because they choose not to have children; if Rosie 1.0's strategy gives her an equivalent 1200-year run I think her 1100-year old ghost (barring radical life extension) can hand off the torch of White Preservation or whatever to Rosie 2.0 with a sense of grateful accomplishment. I don't claim to control the future 1200 years in advance, do you?

    I’d have to ask someone about this particular case.
     
    Please do; the law seems to discuss her being a deist or atheist since it separates her renunciation of the Muslim religion from her adoption of another one.

    So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play.
     
    Most Muslim cities (like most other cities) have old and venerable red-light districts so it seems there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another. If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.

    My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.
     
    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can't it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.

    Also…would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?
     
    Since we were discussing the Howard society we need a new rule with a snazzy acronym for these cases.

    WWLLD

    What would Lazarus Long do?

    I think in one book this involves going back in time several centuries and marrying his mother. Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there's that.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz2pTtSmBkA

    Rekha's character is however a Muslim so her position could presumably eventually be regularized. Not bloody likely though.

    Replies: @Talha, @Twinkie, @Talha

    They are dying off because they choose not to have children;

    Well, that’s quite a lot of folks. But they are also kicking out potentially fertile people who choose to marry (and have kids) out rather than giving any options for people to join in. It’s just bad strategy. Bad enough that the government of India has to do some kind of official policy like China does with pandas.

    Please do;

    I have my exegesis class on Tuesday nights with a Hanafi mufti, so I’ll ask him to see if he knows. He may have to dig into some books to get back to me. Some of those details are in the big ones. I used to live near a young mufti that had studied in South Africa and once asked him if he had studied Imam Sarakhsi’s al-Mabsut* with his teachers – to which his eyes went wide and he said; “ALL of it?!”

    there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another.

    Sure and especially if you are quiet and discreet about it. Publicly declaring a prohibited marriage is not being quiet and discreet, it is pushing it in everyone’s face. If the guy moves to a new town and simply co-habits with some random Hindu woman and has kids with her, most people simply will assume you are married in a traditional society – they don’t go around asking to see your marriage certificate.

    If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.

    Yes, this.

    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can’t it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.

    Basically. I do wonder though if anyone has done a solid and anonymous (very few people would be truthful about this in a public setting) poll/survey of people regarding whether or not they would flat out refuse to marry a person of a different race and what the breakdown is.

    Calling AE! Calling AE!

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    *

    Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there’s that.

    Dang.

    Rekha’s character is however a Muslim

    LOL! I haven’t heard that song for ages! Brings back memories. The translation is interesting though in what they choose to add and omit.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    This is the closest I'm able to get.

  182. @Talha
    @Twinkie


    No, I am afraid you don’t understand one of the basic tenets of this country – protection of minority rights from the tyranny of the majority
     
    I understand that, but the rules are in place such that if the majority has no problems with it, everything is game. If the people elect the representatives that vote for their interests, then all that matters is; what are the people's interests?

    You can do everything from prohibit alcohol in the Constitution, repeal it, prohibit slavery, etc. Super-majorities can change/amend constitutions as they like.

    I am sure you’d like it to be, but it’s not.
     
    No I would not. A post-Christian society is far more dangerous an environment for a Muslim and his faith than a Christian one. Christians (traditional ones) share far more general values with Muslims.

    so it’s disingenuous to use it in the context of this discussion.
     
    Ok, so it is not germane to use anything but Western (Catholic and Protestant examples), I'll accept that.

    What slippery slope?
     
    The slippery slope is that if you are in a Muslim-majority country and you go easy on these things, it'll open up the flood gates to such things as even redefinition of what constitutes a valid Muslim marriage and whether that belongs in the secular domain or whether it is defined by sacred law.

    We are supposed to have legal equality for all in this country, including ethnic (as well as political) minorities.
     
    Yup - which is why I would adopt the more lenient and open approach (that you mentioned) to resolving the hypothetical situation with my son; there simply is no legal recourse nor are the people in any mood for such any time soon. Again, context.

    Equating the two situations and adopting the argument of those who want to destroy Christianity through false analogies puts you decisively on the side of anti-Christian coalition in this country (which of course Muslims seem to be these days).
     
    If you want to consider me to be decisively on the anti-Christian side, that is fine by me. Not how I would characterize myself, but neither am I begging for acceptance or as an ally.

    As far as the false analogy with homosexuality; I'm not the person you need to convince - I specifically stated those are arguments leftist-Christians make, so you need to convince them. When I used to go into work (before this lock-down), I would see many churches with rainbow pride flags prominently displayed. Again, another internal discussion you need to have among fellow Christians.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    The slippery slope is that if you are in a Muslim-majority country and you go easy on these things, it’ll open up the flood gates to such things as even redefinition of what constitutes a valid Muslim marriage and whether that belongs in the secular domain or whether it is defined by sacred law.

    So you don’t think that Islam is appealing enough to turn these mixed marriage partners into Muslims even where they are a vast majority?

    Moreover, are you suggesting that the marriage habits of Muslims in these countries are constrained by the force of law (and force, period) and that a large enough of the people would behave otherwise without the said force?

    If you want to consider me to be decisively on the anti-Christian side, that is fine by me. Not how I would characterize myself, but neither am I begging for acceptance or as an ally.

    This strikes me as a passive-aggressive word game: “Religious restrictions on my side, but open market in your country – and if you see this religious mercantilism as hostile, that’s your problem!”

    I don’t expect you or any minority to beg for equality, but I do expect you not to be on the side of destruction and also to support similar tolerance for ethnic and religious minorities elsewhere, including whence your family originates. Otherwise, your position is that of a hostile colonist, no matter how much you deny it with pleasant words. And it’s not just you – it’s what I ask of any immigrant. I call myself an assimilationist for a reason.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Talha
    @Twinkie


    So you don’t think that Islam is appealing enough to turn these mixed marriage partners into Muslims even where they are a vast majority?
     
    Maybe and maybe not. But there are other considerations, like deterrence of others from such actions.

    are you suggesting that the marriage habits of Muslims in these countries are constrained by the force of law (and force, period) and that a large enough of the people would behave otherwise without the said force?
     
    No, only a minority would and that helps keep it decisively in the minority position. It's a feedback loop meant to reinforce itself.

    This strikes me as a passive-aggressive word game
     
    It's not a word game. I was never involved in the conversation to secularize Western societies, they did this themselves. If they want to proudly call themselves secular, then that has a definition and certain requirements to meet them. Most Muslim-majority counties openly declare that Islam is the official state religion and guides the laws of the land, they don't claim to be secular.

    Each society is acting in accordance to its fundamental assumptions; why would anyone expect them to act similarly in these regards.

    and if you see this religious mercantilism as hostile, that’s your problem
     
    I can totally see why someone would be put off by this. It is then up to them to either change the situation by instituting laws that prevent people like myself from immigrating to the West (maybe some kind of a religious/ideological test) ; this will require a fundamental revisiting of some of the foundational legal assumptions. It can be done, but it is not an easy task.

    I call myself an assimilationist for a reason.
     
    I'm all for integration; living life in accordance with the legal codes of the land one resides in, the sacred law obliges us as such.

    Assimilation means a lot of different things to a lot of different people; me and other Muslims I know decline plenty of invitations by co-workers to after hours drinks, for instance.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  183. @RSDB
    @Talha


    And dying off.
     
    They are dying off because they choose not to have children; if Rosie 1.0's strategy gives her an equivalent 1200-year run I think her 1100-year old ghost (barring radical life extension) can hand off the torch of White Preservation or whatever to Rosie 2.0 with a sense of grateful accomplishment. I don't claim to control the future 1200 years in advance, do you?

    I’d have to ask someone about this particular case.
     
    Please do; the law seems to discuss her being a deist or atheist since it separates her renunciation of the Muslim religion from her adoption of another one.

    So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play.
     
    Most Muslim cities (like most other cities) have old and venerable red-light districts so it seems there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another. If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.

    My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.
     
    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can't it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.

    Also…would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?
     
    Since we were discussing the Howard society we need a new rule with a snazzy acronym for these cases.

    WWLLD

    What would Lazarus Long do?

    I think in one book this involves going back in time several centuries and marrying his mother. Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there's that.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz2pTtSmBkA

    Rekha's character is however a Muslim so her position could presumably eventually be regularized. Not bloody likely though.

    Replies: @Talha, @Twinkie, @Talha

    I think in one book this involves going back in time several centuries and marrying his mother.

    One of the most unusual TV shows I have seen is a recent Netflix German sci-fi series called “Dark.” It features recursive inbreeding through time travel and its consequences. Very mind-bending and complex.

    Time travelers should not have sex – it makes a mess of things to say the least.

  184. @Talha
    @iffen

    Are you serious or just joking around? I know a lady who looks completely European and she did a test and had 1% East African. Of course she had some Mediterranean in her so maybe there was a black concubine or something a long time ago.

    Peace.

    Replies: @iffen

    No, I’m serious. I don’t know what it means. A non-Cau in the woodpile 20 generations ago? ?

    • Replies: @Talha
    @iffen

    Yeah, I don't know. Maybe those Vikings raided a lot further south than one gives them credit for.

    Or, maybe just maybe, some set of Vikings were down in Anatolia selling white women and a nubile black woman shipped in from North Africa happened to catch one's eye in the same market. Some negotiations and a few furs later, brown sugar thrall.

    Peace.

    Replies: @iffen

  185. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    The slippery slope is that if you are in a Muslim-majority country and you go easy on these things, it’ll open up the flood gates to such things as even redefinition of what constitutes a valid Muslim marriage and whether that belongs in the secular domain or whether it is defined by sacred law.
     
    So you don’t think that Islam is appealing enough to turn these mixed marriage partners into Muslims even where they are a vast majority?

    Moreover, are you suggesting that the marriage habits of Muslims in these countries are constrained by the force of law (and force, period) and that a large enough of the people would behave otherwise without the said force?

    If you want to consider me to be decisively on the anti-Christian side, that is fine by me. Not how I would characterize myself, but neither am I begging for acceptance or as an ally.
     
    This strikes me as a passive-aggressive word game: “Religious restrictions on my side, but open market in your country - and if you see this religious mercantilism as hostile, that’s your problem!”

    I don’t expect you or any minority to beg for equality, but I do expect you not to be on the side of destruction and also to support similar tolerance for ethnic and religious minorities elsewhere, including whence your family originates. Otherwise, your position is that of a hostile colonist, no matter how much you deny it with pleasant words. And it’s not just you - it’s what I ask of any immigrant. I call myself an assimilationist for a reason.

    Replies: @Talha

    So you don’t think that Islam is appealing enough to turn these mixed marriage partners into Muslims even where they are a vast majority?

    Maybe and maybe not. But there are other considerations, like deterrence of others from such actions.

    are you suggesting that the marriage habits of Muslims in these countries are constrained by the force of law (and force, period) and that a large enough of the people would behave otherwise without the said force?

    No, only a minority would and that helps keep it decisively in the minority position. It’s a feedback loop meant to reinforce itself.

    This strikes me as a passive-aggressive word game

    It’s not a word game. I was never involved in the conversation to secularize Western societies, they did this themselves. If they want to proudly call themselves secular, then that has a definition and certain requirements to meet them. Most Muslim-majority counties openly declare that Islam is the official state religion and guides the laws of the land, they don’t claim to be secular.

    Each society is acting in accordance to its fundamental assumptions; why would anyone expect them to act similarly in these regards.

    and if you see this religious mercantilism as hostile, that’s your problem

    I can totally see why someone would be put off by this. It is then up to them to either change the situation by instituting laws that prevent people like myself from immigrating to the West (maybe some kind of a religious/ideological test) ; this will require a fundamental revisiting of some of the foundational legal assumptions. It can be done, but it is not an easy task.

    I call myself an assimilationist for a reason.

    I’m all for integration; living life in accordance with the legal codes of the land one resides in, the sacred law obliges us as such.

    Assimilation means a lot of different things to a lot of different people; me and other Muslims I know decline plenty of invitations by co-workers to after hours drinks, for instance.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Talha


    But there are other considerations, like deterrence of others from such actions.
     
    What does this mean? You didn't clearly answer these two questions.

    It is then up to them to either change the situation by instituting laws that prevent people like myself from immigrating to the West (maybe some kind of a religious/ideological test)
     
    "If you let me take advantage of your tolerance, you can't really blame me for being a crook," is not an endearing argument, no. It's certainly not a moral one. And many Americans, not just I, would consider an immigrant espousing such "pragmatism" unworthy of being in our midst.

    living life in accordance with the legal codes of the land one resides in, the sacred law obliges us as such.

    Assimilation means a lot of different things to a lot of different people
     
    Assimilation requires more than simply following "the legal code." If you were to violate the latter, you'd be a criminal and would be justly sanctioned and deported rather than simply existing as an unassimilated immigrant. Assimilation requires (or should require), among other things, respecting the history and the tradition of the host country (e.g. respecting Christmas as a national holiday and not demanding the holiday of an alien religion an equal place).

    me and other Muslims I know decline plenty of invitations by co-workers to after hours drinks, for instance.
     
    As a practical matter, couldn't you have joined and simply imbibed non-alcoholic drinks?

    Replies: @Talha

  186. @iffen
    @Talha

    No, I'm serious. I don't know what it means. A non-Cau in the woodpile 20 generations ago? ?

    Replies: @Talha

    Yeah, I don’t know. Maybe those Vikings raided a lot further south than one gives them credit for.

    Or, maybe just maybe, some set of Vikings were down in Anatolia selling white women and a nubile black woman shipped in from North Africa happened to catch one’s eye in the same market. Some negotiations and a few furs later, brown sugar thrall.

    Peace.

    • LOL: iffen
    • Replies: @iffen
    @Talha

    Your scenario could work.

    I do have 2% Norwegian, which is almost as surprising as the 1% Bantu. The rest is what I expected: Welsh, English, Scottish, German and Northern European.

    Replies: @Talha, @Twinkie

  187. @Talha
    @iffen

    Yeah, I don't know. Maybe those Vikings raided a lot further south than one gives them credit for.

    Or, maybe just maybe, some set of Vikings were down in Anatolia selling white women and a nubile black woman shipped in from North Africa happened to catch one's eye in the same market. Some negotiations and a few furs later, brown sugar thrall.

    Peace.

    Replies: @iffen

    Your scenario could work.

    I do have 2% Norwegian, which is almost as surprising as the 1% Bantu. The rest is what I expected: Welsh, English, Scottish, German and Northern European.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @iffen


    I do have 2% Norwegian
     
    Then it’s settled. Your Viking ancestor saw a young beautiful Bantu woman across the slave market and was instantly smitten with her charm and innocence. And he was the white knight that she dreamed of carrying her away. He took her to Scandinavia where she bore him three beautiful brown boys with green eyes and blond afros. They were an asset to the tribe and became dependable warriors and raiders. Two died seeking glory of Valhalla, but your ancestor survived and captured a nice prolific lass with wide hips off the coast of Wales...few centuries later, here we are. Romantic and adventurous!

    All’s well that ends well.

    Peace.
    , @Twinkie
    @iffen

    A lot of Old Stock Americans have tiny bits of sub-Saharan African ancestry through blacks in America.

    The whites in this country who lack any black genes are those who immigrated later, e.g. Germans and Scandinavians in the Midwest.

    Replies: @iffen, @iffen

  188. @Mark G.
    @dfordoom


    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

     

    Racial purity would require that neither men or women would be allowed to pick their spouse. It would lead to the intolerable situation of seeing someone arrested for wanting to be with the person they love.

    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though. The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own. The welfare state also often acts as a magnet pulling in nonwhite immigrants. Not only do they want to hop on the welfare gravy train but welfare enables them to stay here. In the late nineteenth century up to half of all immigrants here ended up going back home because they couldn't make it here. Now they not only don't have to go home if they can't support themselves but refugee programs are often set up to provide free transportation for even more of them to come here. Many of these refugee resettlement programs are funded by the government.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Twinkie

    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though.

    You could, but without totalitarianism those methods would be very very unlikely to work.

    The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own.

    Getting rid of the welfare state would create more problems than it would solve. Only libertarians believe that getting rid of the welfare state would be a magical solution, but then libertarians have no understanding of the real world. They think that libertarianism would work because they read a book by a libertarian that said it would work. They’re more detached from reality than even the most hardcore marxists of the past.

  189. @Rosie
    @dfordoom


    OK, two questions. Do you think that in the interests of avoiding white extinction it would be OK to take away from women the right to decide how many children they will have?
     
    Yes.



    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?
     
    Yes.

    I'm not interested in accepting White extinction in order to preserve individual liberty for brown people.

    Because if you really want high white fertility and white racial purity that’s the price.
     
    I'm not convinced of that.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    I’m not interested in accepting White extinction in order to preserve individual liberty for brown people.

    But it would be white people (including white women) whose freedoms would be taken away.

    How many white women do you seriously think would be OK with that?

    And if we’re talking about taking away a woman’s right to choose her own husband, isn’t that getting perilously close to arranged marriages (which I believe you have in the past condemned as forced prostitution)? The only difference is that instead of parents making the decision for a woman the decision would be made by a bureaucrat.

    How many white women do you seriously think would be OK with having to apply to the government for permission to marry? And having to present her racial purity documents to the government before permission was granted?

    I’d also be interested to hear what punishments you’d have in mind for white women who broke the racial purity laws.

  190. @iffen
    @Talha

    Your scenario could work.

    I do have 2% Norwegian, which is almost as surprising as the 1% Bantu. The rest is what I expected: Welsh, English, Scottish, German and Northern European.

    Replies: @Talha, @Twinkie

    I do have 2% Norwegian

    Then it’s settled. Your Viking ancestor saw a young beautiful Bantu woman across the slave market and was instantly smitten with her charm and innocence. And he was the white knight that she dreamed of carrying her away. He took her to Scandinavia where she bore him three beautiful brown boys with green eyes and blond afros. They were an asset to the tribe and became dependable warriors and raiders. Two died seeking glory of Valhalla, but your ancestor survived and captured a nice prolific lass with wide hips off the coast of Wales…few centuries later, here we are. Romantic and adventurous!

    All’s well that ends well.

    Peace.

  191. @Talha
    @Twinkie


    So you don’t think that Islam is appealing enough to turn these mixed marriage partners into Muslims even where they are a vast majority?
     
    Maybe and maybe not. But there are other considerations, like deterrence of others from such actions.

    are you suggesting that the marriage habits of Muslims in these countries are constrained by the force of law (and force, period) and that a large enough of the people would behave otherwise without the said force?
     
    No, only a minority would and that helps keep it decisively in the minority position. It's a feedback loop meant to reinforce itself.

    This strikes me as a passive-aggressive word game
     
    It's not a word game. I was never involved in the conversation to secularize Western societies, they did this themselves. If they want to proudly call themselves secular, then that has a definition and certain requirements to meet them. Most Muslim-majority counties openly declare that Islam is the official state religion and guides the laws of the land, they don't claim to be secular.

    Each society is acting in accordance to its fundamental assumptions; why would anyone expect them to act similarly in these regards.

    and if you see this religious mercantilism as hostile, that’s your problem
     
    I can totally see why someone would be put off by this. It is then up to them to either change the situation by instituting laws that prevent people like myself from immigrating to the West (maybe some kind of a religious/ideological test) ; this will require a fundamental revisiting of some of the foundational legal assumptions. It can be done, but it is not an easy task.

    I call myself an assimilationist for a reason.
     
    I'm all for integration; living life in accordance with the legal codes of the land one resides in, the sacred law obliges us as such.

    Assimilation means a lot of different things to a lot of different people; me and other Muslims I know decline plenty of invitations by co-workers to after hours drinks, for instance.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    But there are other considerations, like deterrence of others from such actions.

    What does this mean? You didn’t clearly answer these two questions.

    It is then up to them to either change the situation by instituting laws that prevent people like myself from immigrating to the West (maybe some kind of a religious/ideological test)

    “If you let me take advantage of your tolerance, you can’t really blame me for being a crook,” is not an endearing argument, no. It’s certainly not a moral one. And many Americans, not just I, would consider an immigrant espousing such “pragmatism” unworthy of being in our midst.

    living life in accordance with the legal codes of the land one resides in, the sacred law obliges us as such.

    Assimilation means a lot of different things to a lot of different people

    Assimilation requires more than simply following “the legal code.” If you were to violate the latter, you’d be a criminal and would be justly sanctioned and deported rather than simply existing as an unassimilated immigrant. Assimilation requires (or should require), among other things, respecting the history and the tradition of the host country (e.g. respecting Christmas as a national holiday and not demanding the holiday of an alien religion an equal place).

    me and other Muslims I know decline plenty of invitations by co-workers to after hours drinks, for instance.

    As a practical matter, couldn’t you have joined and simply imbibed non-alcoholic drinks?

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Talha
    @Twinkie


    What does this mean?
     
    It means that if you are in a Muslim-majority land and you have established certain norms, then the "stick" approach may work better than the "carrot" approach in order to keep the minority, who wish to violate the rules, firmly as the minority. When the majority is already onboard with those rules, then this is fairly straightforward.

    You didn’t clearly answer these two questions.
     
    I did, but I don't think you liked my answers.

    “If you let me take advantage of your tolerance, you can’t really blame me for being a crook,” is not an endearing argument
     
    But I'm not advocating for any crookedness. You and I simply disagree on our ultimate vision of the society and we are trying to convince people to our vision. I don't necessarily like what Rosie is advocating towards, but if she is able to convince enough people to her vision, then she and her folks deserve to reap the rewards that come with it for their efforts, even if that means it's not the vision I agree with.

    And many Americans, not just I, would consider an immigrant espousing such “pragmatism” unworthy of being in our midst.
     
    OK, well if there are enough of you that feel this way, it should be reasonably simple to change the laws to make sure someone like me is no longer in your midst. Some people don't like Muslims, some don't like Mormons, some don't like Libertarians, some don't like Communists, etc. Some people around here simply consider any immigrants to be "unworthy of being in our midst"; again, if they can convince enough people, they can run things their way.

    respecting the history and the tradition of the host country (e.g. respecting Christmas as a national holiday and not demanding the holiday of an alien religion an equal place).
     
    Sure, I have no problems with this. I've never been a big fan of trying to get a majority non-Muslim population to think Eid is some special national holiday. However, if America wakes up tomorrow and 80% of her population is Muslim (including overwhelming masses of natives), then considering Islam an alien religion is simply silly. It is only an alien religion now because it is demographically what Christianity was when IT was an alien religion to these shores. These are the vicissitudes of time.

    As a practical matter, couldn’t you have joined and simply imbibed non-alcoholic drinks?
     
    No. A Muslim is obligated to not only avoid alcohol, but also the environment in which it is being served. As a practical matter, this may well be overridden by a higher priority maxim; I myself sit with my non-Muslim in-laws even when they are serving alcohol among themselves because (as my teachers have advised) the duty of keeping family ties overrides the fact that they are drinking alcohol among themselves (as non-Muslims and thus are not blatantly violating the sacred law they claim to be a part of). Camaraderie with co-workers provides no equivalency.

    This will be my last reply on this particular topic - I'm taking a break for ten days or so. Feel free to respond, but don't expect a reply.

    Stay safe.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Malla

  192. @iffen
    @Talha

    Your scenario could work.

    I do have 2% Norwegian, which is almost as surprising as the 1% Bantu. The rest is what I expected: Welsh, English, Scottish, German and Northern European.

    Replies: @Talha, @Twinkie

    A lot of Old Stock Americans have tiny bits of sub-Saharan African ancestry through blacks in America.

    The whites in this country who lack any black genes are those who immigrated later, e.g. Germans and Scandinavians in the Midwest.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Twinkie

    A lot of Old Stock Americans have tiny bits of sub-Saharan African ancestry through blacks in America.

    I know that this is possible. I do have more than one line that I can place back to the 1700's. I assume that some would go back into the 1600's. I'm not knowledgeable enough on genetics to know how many generations would be required to drive it down to 1%.

    Replies: @RSDB

    , @iffen
    @Twinkie

    I just remembered that years ago Razib pointed me to information on this very question. I took a look at it again and it seems that one is likely to get to 1% for a particular ancestor in the range of 7-9 generations.

  193. @Mark G.
    @dfordoom


    And do you think that in the interests of white racial purity it would be OK to take away from women the right to choose their own husbands?

     

    Racial purity would require that neither men or women would be allowed to pick their spouse. It would lead to the intolerable situation of seeing someone arrested for wanting to be with the person they love.

    You could use non-totalitarian methods to change the current racial composition of the country, though. The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own. The welfare state also often acts as a magnet pulling in nonwhite immigrants. Not only do they want to hop on the welfare gravy train but welfare enables them to stay here. In the late nineteenth century up to half of all immigrants here ended up going back home because they couldn't make it here. Now they not only don't have to go home if they can't support themselves but refugee programs are often set up to provide free transportation for even more of them to come here. Many of these refugee resettlement programs are funded by the government.

    Replies: @Rosie, @dfordoom, @Twinkie

    The welfare state enables nonwhites to have more children than they could afford on their own.

    Only if, by “nonwhites,” you meant blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians.

    Asians (esp. American-born Asians) have the lowest entitlement usage rate in the U.S., lower than those of whites.

    • Agree: Mark G.
  194. @Twinkie
    @iffen

    A lot of Old Stock Americans have tiny bits of sub-Saharan African ancestry through blacks in America.

    The whites in this country who lack any black genes are those who immigrated later, e.g. Germans and Scandinavians in the Midwest.

    Replies: @iffen, @iffen

    A lot of Old Stock Americans have tiny bits of sub-Saharan African ancestry through blacks in America.

    I know that this is possible. I do have more than one line that I can place back to the 1700’s. I assume that some would go back into the 1600’s. I’m not knowledgeable enough on genetics to know how many generations would be required to drive it down to 1%.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @iffen

    1% is 1/100, which lies between 2^(-6)=1/64 at six generations back and 2^(-7)=1/128 at 7 generations back.

    Some interesting things to consider here though.

  195. @Twinkie
    @iffen

    A lot of Old Stock Americans have tiny bits of sub-Saharan African ancestry through blacks in America.

    The whites in this country who lack any black genes are those who immigrated later, e.g. Germans and Scandinavians in the Midwest.

    Replies: @iffen, @iffen

    I just remembered that years ago Razib pointed me to information on this very question. I took a look at it again and it seems that one is likely to get to 1% for a particular ancestor in the range of 7-9 generations.

  196. @iffen
    @Twinkie

    A lot of Old Stock Americans have tiny bits of sub-Saharan African ancestry through blacks in America.

    I know that this is possible. I do have more than one line that I can place back to the 1700's. I assume that some would go back into the 1600's. I'm not knowledgeable enough on genetics to know how many generations would be required to drive it down to 1%.

    Replies: @RSDB

    1% is 1/100, which lies between 2^(-6)=1/64 at six generations back and 2^(-7)=1/128 at 7 generations back.

    Some interesting things to consider here though.

    • Thanks: iffen
  197. @Twinkie
    @Talha


    But there are other considerations, like deterrence of others from such actions.
     
    What does this mean? You didn't clearly answer these two questions.

    It is then up to them to either change the situation by instituting laws that prevent people like myself from immigrating to the West (maybe some kind of a religious/ideological test)
     
    "If you let me take advantage of your tolerance, you can't really blame me for being a crook," is not an endearing argument, no. It's certainly not a moral one. And many Americans, not just I, would consider an immigrant espousing such "pragmatism" unworthy of being in our midst.

    living life in accordance with the legal codes of the land one resides in, the sacred law obliges us as such.

    Assimilation means a lot of different things to a lot of different people
     
    Assimilation requires more than simply following "the legal code." If you were to violate the latter, you'd be a criminal and would be justly sanctioned and deported rather than simply existing as an unassimilated immigrant. Assimilation requires (or should require), among other things, respecting the history and the tradition of the host country (e.g. respecting Christmas as a national holiday and not demanding the holiday of an alien religion an equal place).

    me and other Muslims I know decline plenty of invitations by co-workers to after hours drinks, for instance.
     
    As a practical matter, couldn't you have joined and simply imbibed non-alcoholic drinks?

    Replies: @Talha

    What does this mean?

    It means that if you are in a Muslim-majority land and you have established certain norms, then the “stick” approach may work better than the “carrot” approach in order to keep the minority, who wish to violate the rules, firmly as the minority. When the majority is already onboard with those rules, then this is fairly straightforward.

    You didn’t clearly answer these two questions.

    I did, but I don’t think you liked my answers.

    “If you let me take advantage of your tolerance, you can’t really blame me for being a crook,” is not an endearing argument

    But I’m not advocating for any crookedness. You and I simply disagree on our ultimate vision of the society and we are trying to convince people to our vision. I don’t necessarily like what Rosie is advocating towards, but if she is able to convince enough people to her vision, then she and her folks deserve to reap the rewards that come with it for their efforts, even if that means it’s not the vision I agree with.

    And many Americans, not just I, would consider an immigrant espousing such “pragmatism” unworthy of being in our midst.

    OK, well if there are enough of you that feel this way, it should be reasonably simple to change the laws to make sure someone like me is no longer in your midst. Some people don’t like Muslims, some don’t like Mormons, some don’t like Libertarians, some don’t like Communists, etc. Some people around here simply consider any immigrants to be “unworthy of being in our midst”; again, if they can convince enough people, they can run things their way.

    respecting the history and the tradition of the host country (e.g. respecting Christmas as a national holiday and not demanding the holiday of an alien religion an equal place).

    Sure, I have no problems with this. I’ve never been a big fan of trying to get a majority non-Muslim population to think Eid is some special national holiday. However, if America wakes up tomorrow and 80% of her population is Muslim (including overwhelming masses of natives), then considering Islam an alien religion is simply silly. It is only an alien religion now because it is demographically what Christianity was when IT was an alien religion to these shores. These are the vicissitudes of time.

    As a practical matter, couldn’t you have joined and simply imbibed non-alcoholic drinks?

    No. A Muslim is obligated to not only avoid alcohol, but also the environment in which it is being served. As a practical matter, this may well be overridden by a higher priority maxim; I myself sit with my non-Muslim in-laws even when they are serving alcohol among themselves because (as my teachers have advised) the duty of keeping family ties overrides the fact that they are drinking alcohol among themselves (as non-Muslims and thus are not blatantly violating the sacred law they claim to be a part of). Camaraderie with co-workers provides no equivalency.

    This will be my last reply on this particular topic – I’m taking a break for ten days or so. Feel free to respond, but don’t expect a reply.

    Stay safe.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Malla
    @Talha

    What about Alcohol in medicine? What is the advice in such cases?

  198. @RSDB
    @Talha


    And dying off.
     
    They are dying off because they choose not to have children; if Rosie 1.0's strategy gives her an equivalent 1200-year run I think her 1100-year old ghost (barring radical life extension) can hand off the torch of White Preservation or whatever to Rosie 2.0 with a sense of grateful accomplishment. I don't claim to control the future 1200 years in advance, do you?

    I’d have to ask someone about this particular case.
     
    Please do; the law seems to discuss her being a deist or atheist since it separates her renunciation of the Muslim religion from her adoption of another one.

    So the rules of how one deals with fornicators come into play.
     
    Most Muslim cities (like most other cities) have old and venerable red-light districts so it seems there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another. If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.

    My guess for whites would be some akin to the inverse of the above for atheists or Jews.
     
    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can't it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.

    Also…would you have a starchild with someone outside your galaxy and/or realm?
     
    Since we were discussing the Howard society we need a new rule with a snazzy acronym for these cases.

    WWLLD

    What would Lazarus Long do?

    I think in one book this involves going back in time several centuries and marrying his mother. Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there's that.



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz2pTtSmBkA

    Rekha's character is however a Muslim so her position could presumably eventually be regularized. Not bloody likely though.

    Replies: @Talha, @Twinkie, @Talha

    I just asked my teacher, hopefully he will get back to me soon. I’ll respond in a few days though; the blessed ten days and nights of Dhul-Hijjah are upon us and I’m pulling back like I do for Ramadan.

    A bit of advice, in parting:

    See you in a few days. If you (and others) could bother yourselves to pray for my elderly father, it would be appreciated; he has pneumonia and is on a ventilator (thank God it’s not Covid), but none of us can see him due to the new rules and we basically get updates by phone from the nurse…he is getting better, but it is a hard slog for an old man in his condition.

    Thanks in advance you for your kindness and may your prayers for my father be a means of protection for your own.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @Talha


    . If you (and others) could bother yourselves to pray for my elderly father, it would be appreciated; he has pneumonia and is on a ventilator (thank God it’s not Covid), but none of us can see him due to the new rules and we basically get updates by phone from the nurse…he is getting better, but it is a hard slog for an old man in his condition.
     
    I haven't read this comment until today but I'll put this intention in my daily rosary. Please keep us updated. Thanks for asking.

    none of us can see him due to the new rules and we basically get updates by phone from the nurse
     
    This is something that terrifies me; when my father was in the hospital a few years ago I don't know what would have happened if my mother hadn't been there. Glad to hear things seem to be going well though.
  199. @indocon
    Black births are in excess of their overall share of the population, that's surprising? I recall black TFR is similar to white? Could more interracial couples involve back moms?? That would be even more surprising.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Intelligent Dasein, @Audacious Epigone

    TFRs for all groups, including Hispanics, are now below replacement. Black rates are higher than white and Asian rates, so this shouldn’t be too surprising.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Audacious Epigone


    TFRs for all groups, including Hispanics, are now below replacement.
     
    Yes. Demographic collapse is a problem that has no connection whatsoever with race. It is entirely a function of modernism and its associated phenomena (capitalism, mass media, urbanisation, materialism, excessive higher education, etc).

    It's a problem that cannot be addressed intelligently until people accept that it has nothing to do with race. All First World populations, regardless of race or ethnicity, are going to be equally affected.

    There's no such thing as "white genocide." What there is is the self-genocide of the entire First World - white, black, brown, Asian, everybody.
  200. @Some Guy
    So is there reliable data on under-18s that doesn't just go by mother's race?

    I wonder how the great awokening will affect racial identification in the census. Perhaps a lot more overwhelmingly white people will identify as something else due to white shame/affirmative action benefits. The rise of DNA testing could also have an effect perhaps, tales about native American ancestry being disproven etc.

    This guy estimated what the census results would be with more detailed racial categories like East Asian and Middle Eastern by the way: https://youtu.be/sf-isX7Rn_g?t=649
    No age breakdown though.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    The explosion of personal genomics testing companies is going to force the issue. The white left is going to try to maintain that race is a social construct, but POCs aren’t going to be foolish enough to let that fly.

  201. @Achmed E. Newman

    Just as the graph’s color scheme is random, so are the label placements. No political implications there, no sirree!
     
    Hey, you don't have to explain that to us, A.E. We believe you. I just will be too busy to back you up when you need to defend this color scheme to the People's Cultural Committee. (Gotta do my nails that day.)

    You know I've always appreciated your making the graphs easier to read. The PC ones with their various shades of green (some kind of appropriation of a Bill Cosby joke?) make one have to keep going back and forth the legend, and they aren't even consistent between graphs. On the Audacious Epigone blog, we don't neeeed no steeeenking legends!

    As Twinkie wrote, though, perhaps the shades don't truly match. The Oriental ladies, at least from China and Korea, will lighten up toward #FFFFFF, while many of the white ladies with hot bods look like that piece of Hispanic ass I mean pie, after spending time laying out. For me, after some time on the water the other day right when the sun was highest, I could fit right into your feather-Indian sector color.

    As usual, I ask, knowing the likely answer, can't we separate out the Asian sector into Oriental and .Indian, at least? I mean, if they've got Pacific Islander, which is only a tiny proportion of people in the world, they may as well break out these 2 large groups. I understand "they" is not you.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    The GSS, YouGov, and the CDC are among my most frequented sources. The latter two generally don’t break out results beyond “Asian” and with the GSS the samples are small as is. Forgiveness please!

  202. @Rosie
    @SFG


    It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument–new groups will eventually identify with mainstream America, so people who are half white (or a quarter white and a quarter Jewish), a quarter Asian, and a quarter Latino like himself will eventually identify as white. Eventually Asian and Latino ancestry will be like Italian and Irish–“oh yeah, my grandma’s Italian, that’s why I love pasta!”
     
    In other words, it's a pathetic attempt to make Whites feel better about being driven to extinction.

    On the plus side, most of the famous ‘non-white’ tsunami is actually Hispanic
     
    I don't know if that's a plus. For all the hand- wringing about BM-WM and WM-AF pairings, it is actually Whites and Hispanics who are most prone to mixing, and it goes both ways, with W- H pairings accounting for 42% of interracial marriage. This is no surprise, because Hispanics already have some European ancestry. Of course, that is the precisely the problem with race mixing. The results of such are more desirable as mates and the process accelerates until the recessive and/or less numerous group is totally absorbed.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    Replies: @Feryl, @Achmed E. Newman, @Bardon Kaldian, @Twinkie, @Twinkie, @dfordoom, @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    That W/A pairings are more common than W/B pairings is remarkable given that the black population is over twice as large as the Asian population is.

  203. @prime noticer
    "It’s Kauffman’s ‘whiteshift’ argument"

    it's simply not correct. and, without knowing Kaufmann's politics specifically, i'll just assume it's the usual jewish tactics. Sailer's concept of flight from white is the correct description about what is going on. nobody wants to be associated with the europeans now that America is under new management. originally the shift was towards the government preferences and handouts, now it's plainly about not being categorized among the colonizers. jews have always automatically made this shift explicitly, but they're not europeans anyway.

    i do note that somehow they've gotten away with not having to answer for how many african slaves they owned - they almost never even have to deflect that charge, as it's almost never even made except by african nationalists, and 100% of the african slave trade has somehow been shifted onto germanic europeans. everybody else seems blameless. i would argue this is largely due to how lucrative it is to attack germanics. there's no money to be made for example in suing Latin American countries, businesses, or organizations. despite only 600,000 africans making their way to what would become the US, which was about 5% of the total, core Americans are the main target of all the attacks globally, even the northerners.

    "Black TFR is significantly below replacement"

    i don't think this is the case at all. not only are 'pure blooded' africans still above TFR (they're about 83% african per the latest biological research), but mulattos are being made are a furious pace, and they're all subsumed into the african fork on the anthropology tree. the trend is that mulattos become more african each generation moving forward.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

  204. @Rosie
    @Talha


    I, uh, think you just described the problem with survival of the fittest. The less fit don’t generally like it.
     
    That was an uncharacteristically shitty thing to say on your part, Talha.

    Replies: @Talha, @Audacious Epigone

    Is it incorrect, though? Fitness in this context is measured by reproduction, a prerequisite of which is survival to reproductive age. The ‘supremacist’ idea that “inferior races” are breeding too much and “superior races” are breeding too little is nothing more than subjective preferences being couched in sciency language.

  205. @Talha
    @Rosie


    but it is very common for anti-Whites to question a man’s masculinity if he concerns himself with the wellbeing and future prospects of their own kind.
     
    Yeah - I'm certainly not anti-white. In fact, if you read the rules of zakat and charity in the sacred law, you find that it is considered more praiseworthy to give it to one's own needy relatives and extended family instead of strangers. The reason being that you are accomplishing two tasks with this; 1) helping the poor and 2) keeping good ties with blood relations (or what are called "those joined by the womb" in Islamic terminology).

    I personally have no problem with whites preferring to marry their own and in fact think it is a good idea for them to mix it up once in a while and marry first or second cousins just to restart a level healthy kinship networks again.

    We have plenty of Bosnians in our community and they prefer to marry their daughters within their own community (generally skipping over even Albanians!!!) and it's not seen as anything bizarre or racist or anything; cultural compatibility helps maintain a stronger marriage bond and is a very reasonable and legitimate concern.

    Indeed, susceptibility to such taunting and manipulation may well be the fatal weakness that brings down the White man for good.
     
    That's not really my angle. I'm trying to explain that when you plan on putting into practice a policy of racial purity - that leads to certain facts on the ground. There are laws that need to be drafted. The rights of certain individuals will have to be restricted. You are taking away a man's choice of open mate selection. Patriarchal societies do not like governments getting in the way of those kinds of decisions.

    It's a bit akin to encroaching gun-control; you are taking away a man's right to make the necessary decisions he feels are best for him and the defense of his family. Patriarchal societies also don't like governments interfering in that decision as well.

    flourishing of the White race
     
    I personally don't see them flourishing without some level of a return of a serious (not joke or LARPer) patriarchy; time will tell.

    A note I posted on another thread:

    I was at a small barbecue today with a handful of brothers. One of the core brothers in the community is a convert from (mostly) Polish (and mixed European background) and another is Senegalese – the rest are mostly Desi with a few Bosnians and Arabs thrown in for good measure.

    The Polish brother has three kids (mashaAllah) and I was asking him if he plans to have more, to which he replied in the affirmative. He definitely wants to try to have another son so that he has two boys and two girls.

    What’s interesting is when we were exploring what his chances would be in having settled with a family being what he is in his thirties had he not converted. He admitted, if he was one of the lucky few, he might be married with two kids. In his extended family; siblings, cousins, etc. there is only one other couple that had twins and they are done (understandably since twins are a tough package to deal with). His family line is literally about to disappear within a generation.

    He further told me – since he did some research on his family name and background and what not – that apparently there aren’t that many of the them in the US and the rest are settled mostly around the Czech Republic. He knows full well that he is likely establishing a patrilineal line. He said; I’m hoping in a few generations, my last name is as common as any other Muslim last name – that when people hear somebody with my last name, they say, “Oh yeah, that must be a Muslim”. This is full progenitor/founder mode and inshaAllah it will happen and his bloodline will survive the Great Culling.
     
    I was literally discussing with him how he should draft a family sigil. He is not the only one who sees what is happening, I have come across multiple white converts that are very cognizant of the fact that they are establishing the surviving progenitor lines among their families. Whites aren't going anywhere only certain types of whites are - and honestly, there is only so much you can do for some people who will fight you tooth and nail for the right to abort their own babies by the millions annually.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Audacious Epigone

    Tangentially, according to the GSS the broad racial distribution of self-identifying Muslims in the US is one-third white, one-third black, and one-third Asian.

  206. @Talha
    @RSDB


    They are dying off because they choose not to have children;
     
    Well, that's quite a lot of folks. But they are also kicking out potentially fertile people who choose to marry (and have kids) out rather than giving any options for people to join in. It's just bad strategy. Bad enough that the government of India has to do some kind of official policy like China does with pandas.

    Please do;
     
    I have my exegesis class on Tuesday nights with a Hanafi mufti, so I'll ask him to see if he knows. He may have to dig into some books to get back to me. Some of those details are in the big ones. I used to live near a young mufti that had studied in South Africa and once asked him if he had studied Imam Sarakhsi's al-Mabsut* with his teachers - to which his eyes went wide and he said; "ALL of it?!"

    there are ways to evade the vigilance of the law one way or another.
     
    Sure and especially if you are quiet and discreet about it. Publicly declaring a prohibited marriage is not being quiet and discreet, it is pushing it in everyone's face. If the guy moves to a new town and simply co-habits with some random Hindu woman and has kids with her, most people simply will assume you are married in a traditional society - they don't go around asking to see your marriage certificate.

    If, of course, you have, say, a specific informant who gives police more information on the couple, it is probably easier to punish them.
     
    Yes, this.

    1% of whites in America is about two million people; if Rosie can get a group this size to care about her concerns she has no problems, and if she can’t it would be idiotic to talk about compulsory measures.
     
    Basically. I do wonder though if anyone has done a solid and anonymous (very few people would be truthful about this in a public setting) poll/survey of people regarding whether or not they would flat out refuse to marry a person of a different race and what the breakdown is.

    Calling AE! Calling AE!

    Peace.

    *
    https://kitaabun.com/shopping3/images/KitabMabsut.jpg

    Most of us would be repulsed by this but it is undeniable that his wife in this case was from within his race, so there’s that.
     
    Dang.

    Rekha’s character is however a Muslim
     
    LOL! I haven't heard that song for ages! Brings back memories. The translation is interesting though in what they choose to add and omit.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    • Thanks: Talha
  207. @Talha
    @RSDB

    I just asked my teacher, hopefully he will get back to me soon. I'll respond in a few days though; the blessed ten days and nights of Dhul-Hijjah are upon us and I'm pulling back like I do for Ramadan.

    A bit of advice, in parting:
    https://twitter.com/Farid_0v/status/1285319355350364161

    See you in a few days. If you (and others) could bother yourselves to pray for my elderly father, it would be appreciated; he has pneumonia and is on a ventilator (thank God it's not Covid), but none of us can see him due to the new rules and we basically get updates by phone from the nurse...he is getting better, but it is a hard slog for an old man in his condition.

    Thanks in advance you for your kindness and may your prayers for my father be a means of protection for your own.

    Peace.

    Replies: @RSDB

    . If you (and others) could bother yourselves to pray for my elderly father, it would be appreciated; he has pneumonia and is on a ventilator (thank God it’s not Covid), but none of us can see him due to the new rules and we basically get updates by phone from the nurse…he is getting better, but it is a hard slog for an old man in his condition.

    I haven’t read this comment until today but I’ll put this intention in my daily rosary. Please keep us updated. Thanks for asking.

    none of us can see him due to the new rules and we basically get updates by phone from the nurse

    This is something that terrifies me; when my father was in the hospital a few years ago I don’t know what would have happened if my mother hadn’t been there. Glad to hear things seem to be going well though.

    • Thanks: Talha
  208. @Audacious Epigone
    @indocon

    TFRs for all groups, including Hispanics, are now below replacement. Black rates are higher than white and Asian rates, so this shouldn't be too surprising.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    TFRs for all groups, including Hispanics, are now below replacement.

    Yes. Demographic collapse is a problem that has no connection whatsoever with race. It is entirely a function of modernism and its associated phenomena (capitalism, mass media, urbanisation, materialism, excessive higher education, etc).

    It’s a problem that cannot be addressed intelligently until people accept that it has nothing to do with race. All First World populations, regardless of race or ethnicity, are going to be equally affected.

    There’s no such thing as “white genocide.” What there is is the self-genocide of the entire First World – white, black, brown, Asian, everybody.

  209. @Talha
    @Twinkie


    What does this mean?
     
    It means that if you are in a Muslim-majority land and you have established certain norms, then the "stick" approach may work better than the "carrot" approach in order to keep the minority, who wish to violate the rules, firmly as the minority. When the majority is already onboard with those rules, then this is fairly straightforward.

    You didn’t clearly answer these two questions.
     
    I did, but I don't think you liked my answers.

    “If you let me take advantage of your tolerance, you can’t really blame me for being a crook,” is not an endearing argument
     
    But I'm not advocating for any crookedness. You and I simply disagree on our ultimate vision of the society and we are trying to convince people to our vision. I don't necessarily like what Rosie is advocating towards, but if she is able to convince enough people to her vision, then she and her folks deserve to reap the rewards that come with it for their efforts, even if that means it's not the vision I agree with.

    And many Americans, not just I, would consider an immigrant espousing such “pragmatism” unworthy of being in our midst.
     
    OK, well if there are enough of you that feel this way, it should be reasonably simple to change the laws to make sure someone like me is no longer in your midst. Some people don't like Muslims, some don't like Mormons, some don't like Libertarians, some don't like Communists, etc. Some people around here simply consider any immigrants to be "unworthy of being in our midst"; again, if they can convince enough people, they can run things their way.

    respecting the history and the tradition of the host country (e.g. respecting Christmas as a national holiday and not demanding the holiday of an alien religion an equal place).
     
    Sure, I have no problems with this. I've never been a big fan of trying to get a majority non-Muslim population to think Eid is some special national holiday. However, if America wakes up tomorrow and 80% of her population is Muslim (including overwhelming masses of natives), then considering Islam an alien religion is simply silly. It is only an alien religion now because it is demographically what Christianity was when IT was an alien religion to these shores. These are the vicissitudes of time.

    As a practical matter, couldn’t you have joined and simply imbibed non-alcoholic drinks?
     
    No. A Muslim is obligated to not only avoid alcohol, but also the environment in which it is being served. As a practical matter, this may well be overridden by a higher priority maxim; I myself sit with my non-Muslim in-laws even when they are serving alcohol among themselves because (as my teachers have advised) the duty of keeping family ties overrides the fact that they are drinking alcohol among themselves (as non-Muslims and thus are not blatantly violating the sacred law they claim to be a part of). Camaraderie with co-workers provides no equivalency.

    This will be my last reply on this particular topic - I'm taking a break for ten days or so. Feel free to respond, but don't expect a reply.

    Stay safe.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Malla

    What about Alcohol in medicine? What is the advice in such cases?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS