The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Paul Kersey Archive
Georgia to Bill Kristol: Demography IS Destiny—Let's Do Something About It!
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
cobb

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

See also by Paul Kersey about Georgia: The Atlanta School Scandal After A Year and The “Great Tree” Of Atlanta…And The Not-Coincidental War Against White America

Brian Kemp has declared himself the next governor of Georgia and resigned as The Peach State’s secretary. But he might not want to discard the classified job ads just yet. Neither can the GOP/GAP relax: this election shows indisputably that demography is destiny and current immigration policy, unless checked, is right on the edge of Electing A New People.

Radical black leftist Stacey Abrams, Kemp’s Democratic opponent, still hasn’t conceded. All the votes haven’t been counted. And the anti-white Ruling Class in this country is heavily invested in inaugurating the first black woman governor in history.

The count right now is Kemp with 1,973,877 votes, or 50.3 percent, to Abrams’ 1,910,725, or 48.7 percent. [Georgia Election Results, NYT, November 9, 2018] He leads by a little more than 63,000 votes. If he drops below 50 percent as uncounted votes come in, he faces a runoff in December. Of course, he might not be in this fix if yet another pie-in-the-sky Libertarian hadn’t siphoned off 37,094 votes, many of which would have been Kemp’s.

(On that note, an aside: When will right-leaning libertarians get it through their thick skulls that normal Americans are not preoccupied with legalizing dope and prostitution and repealing occupational licensing laws? Voting for oddball candidates wasn’t a problem in 1980. Back then, the country was overwhelmingly white and Republicans could still win handily. But it’s 2018. We can no longer afford to make dogmatic ideological statements in the voting booth that sink imperfect but basically good candidates).

Anyway, the radical Abrams and her Leftist supports won’t give up easily:

“Brian Kemp is 25,622 votes above the threshold for a runoff election. Twenty-five thousand votes of nearly 4 million cast are at issue in this race,” Abrams campaign manager Lauren Groh-Wargo said on Thursday. “By (Kemp’s) own admission, there are at least 25,000 outstanding votes, and hundreds if not thousands of more that we are learning about and discovering every day.”

[Georgia Governor’s Race Is Still Undecided As Votes Continue To Be Counted, by Gregory Krieg, Kaylee Hartung and Devon M. Sayers, CNN.com, November 8, 2018]

But it wasn’t just a candidate for the party of legal dope and prostitutes that hurt Kemp. It was demographics.

Demography, the George governor’s race shows us, is destiny.

Blacks, of course, were all in for the gap-toothed girl. They gave her 92 percent of their vote. But Kemp received just 74 percent of white votes. Meanwhile, Abrams bested even Crooked Hillary among white college women, 26 to 21 percent. [Stacey Abrams Vows To Remain In Georgia Governor’s Race Until “Every Vote Gets Counted,” CBS News, November 7, 2018]

Conservatism Inc. would have us believe race is irrelevant in electoral politics, and that identity politics is a bridge only left-wing collectivists will cross. Well, the demographic change in Georgia through the past 30 years made Kemp’s predicament predictable. And it means the right better get some identity politics of its own.

The voter registration figures tell a story that’s been unfolding for years: Georgia’s voting population is undergoing a consistent demographic shift that could influence which candidates and political parties win elections.

In the race for governor, about 70 percent of white voters support Republican Brian Kemp, and 92 percent of black voters back Democrat Stacey Abrams, according to an AJC poll conducted this month. Election Day is Nov. 6.

More Georgians than ever are registered to vote — over 6.9 million out of the state’s total population of 10.4 million. …

African-Americans make up about 30 percent of the state’s active registered voters, about the same percentage as two years ago. Since 2010, the portion of black voters has inched up by about 1 percentage point.

The share of white active voters in Georgia has been decreasing in recent years, from 62 percent in 2010 to 54 percent today.

[Georgia’s Voters Become More Diverse Ahead Of This Year’s Election, by Mark Niesse and Jennifer Peebles, AJC.com, October 25, 2018]

Drilling into the numbers reveals that Cobb County, part of Metro Atlanta, was 94 percent white in 1980, 87 percent white in 1990 and 73 percent white in 2000. Today, it’s just a few years away from being majority-minority.

The first time Tammy Garnes visited a school in Cobb County, 10 years ago, she left in a hurry. It was just too white.

“I want to surround my children with black people,” said the film producer, who was sitting at a table in Marietta’s Double Take Cafe with a friend.

But when the Garnes family made a second visit to Marietta two years ago, Tammy found a different world: A diverse school, several fellow black California expatriates, a sophisticated town and a true gumbo of cultures. Since then she’s enjoyed Guatemalan cuisine, made Hindu friends and sent her daughter to a friend’s Brazilian baptism.

“We didn’t think that was what Cobb County looked like,” said Garnes. “It is a true melting pot, and that is a beautiful thing to see, with everything happening in the world.”

Cobb County a melting pot?

In four years, this former white conservative bastion is expected to become “majority minority;” that is, minority residents will outnumber white residents.

The massive demographic shift is evident everywhere. Cobb schools offer a dual-language immersion program in which students are taught half the day in Spanish and half the day in English—to the dismay of some longtime residents. In Mableton, where African-Americans accounted for 4 percent of the population 40 years ago, a black man is the state senator. In 1990, one in 10 people in Cobb County was black. Now, it’s more than one in four. And in 10 years, it will be close to one in three, according to projections from the Atlanta Regional Commission.

[The New Face Of Cobb County: Whites Will Be Minority In 4 years, by Bo Emerson, AJC.com, April 27, 2017]

The racial transformation of Metro Atlanta’s Clayton County was complete in 2005 with the election of Victor Hill as the county’s first black sheriff. Clayton was 92 percent white in 1980. Today, it is 11.2 percent white and 68 percent black.

The first thing Hill did after he was sworn in? He fired the top-ranking and other whites, positioned snipers on the roof, and marched the whites out of the building [Georgia Sheriff Fires Workers, But Then A Judge Intervenes, The New York Times, January 5, 2018]. Clayton County reminds us not only that race matters but also that demographic change is bad news for whites, particularly in government work. If your boss is black, watch out.

The racial transformation of Metro Atlanta counties from white to black or minority (Fayette, Clayton, DeKalb, Rockdale, Cobb, Gwinnett, Henry, and Forsyth) followed a simple pattern: whites flee Fulton County, where Atlanta is located, for good schools and safe—meaning white—communities. Minorities follow to escape the disfunction they create, bring it with them, then whites move on again.

But back to votes and elections. Immigration is a big part of the demographic shift that has enabled Democrats to prevail in once solidly Republican communities. More immigrants means more Democratic voters.

An interactive map in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution tracks the percentages. [Map: Demographic Patterns In Every Georgia County, 1990-2050, AJC.com, by Saurabh Datar, April 27, 2017] Georgia is being Californicated.

Check out the screenshots below:

The tipping point for whites is just 15 years away. But it’s no certainty that a Republican can win again even between now and then. Whites are still a majority in the country, but unlike blacks and Hispanics, they don’t vote monolithically. It doesn’t take many white votes for a Democrat to kill a Republican victory. Remember, Donald Trump needed the Electoral College to prevail in 2016. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote.

That’s why the Left was so furious about Trump’s victory. Whites in flyover country and the industrial states put him in the White House.

And that’s why Leftists such as Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times, were so invested in an Abrams victory. They saw it as a kick in the groin to Trump and his “white nationalist” supporters, by which she means anyone a shade or two lighter than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the illiterate buffoon heading to Congress from New York’s 14th congressional district:

Kemp is the candidate of aggrieved whiteness. During the primary, he ran an ad boasting that he drives a big truck “just in case I need to round up criminal illegals and take ’em home myself.” (That would be kidnapping.) A person who claimed to be a Kemp canvasser recently wrote on the racist website VDare, “I know everything I need to know about what happens when blacks are in charge from Detroit, Haiti, South Africa, etc.” Kemp cannot be blamed for the words of his volunteers, but he’s made little discernible effort to distance himself from bigots.

On Saturday morning, Abrams closed by reminding the crowd of Kemp’s views on democracy. “He said he is concerned that if everyone eligible to vote in Georgia does so, he will lose this election,” she said. “Let’s prove him right.” In a week, American voters can do to white nationalists what they fear most. Show them they’re being replaced.

[We Can Replace Them: In Georgia, A Chance To Rebuke White Nationalism, October 29, 2018. Link in original (to MediaMatters) our piece is here. ]

Of course, it wasn’t just a chance to “rebuke white nationalism.” It was a chance to rebuke all whites. Goldberg wants them replaced…with people who look like Abrams, and, of course, Ocasio-Cortez.

Goldberg and the Left have always known demography is destiny. If it weren’t, they wouldn’t be pushing the dispossession of the historic American nation via immigration, and as Georgia goes, Abrams wouldn’t have had a shot at the governor’s mansion. She’d still be writing romance novels under the name of Selena Montgomery. [Plot twist: Stacey Abrams, trailblazing Georgia politician … and romance novelist? by Dartunorro Clark, NBC, May 23, 2018]

Even Never Trumper Bill Kristol finally gets it. “I’ve always disliked the phrase ‘demography is destiny,’ as it seems to minimize the capacity for deliberation and self-government, for reflection and choice,” the top neocon Tweeted. “But looking at tonight’s results in detail, one has to say that today, in America, demography sure seems to be destiny.”

Gee, Bill, if only there were something we could do about that.

Paul Kersey[Email him] is the author of the blog SBPDL, and has published the books SBPDL Year One, Hollywood in Blackface and Escape From Detroit, Opiate of America: College Football in Black and White and Second City Confidential: The Black Experience in Chicagoland. His latest book is The Tragic City: Birmingham 1963-2013.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 156 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Giuseppe says:

    Of course, he might not be in this fix if yet another pie-in-the-sky Libertarian hadn’t siphoned off 37,094 votes, many of which would have been Kemp’s.

    This is a ridiculous and a specious argument. It’s an example of the philosophical fallacy called false dichotomy that is created here by the underlying false assumption of there being only two legitimate political parties. But there are always potentially more legitimate options than two, so despite what Ann Coulter says and despite the perennial complaints by losing Republicans and Democrats, it can never be logically or credibly claimed that any losing third party candidate imperiled the election of any other candidate.

  2. anon[681] • Disclaimer says:

    The whites who voted for Abrams were (((whites))) like Michelle Goldberg.

  3. I’ll have to second Mr. Giuseppe above, as this aside on the Libertarian vote and the Libertarians was not only unnecessary but a bad argument. There may have been issues about Mr. Kemp due to which these Libertarians just couldn’t stomach voting for the guy*. There are other 3rd parties that whites vote for too, the Greenies, etc, taking away votes very likely from Mrs. Abrams. I don’t know. As you say though, the demographic changes are the real problem.

    Otherwise, your expertise on race in American cities shines through on this post. I know from sbpdl what the story is on Baltimore, Chicago, Memphis, Birmingham, and especially Atlanta. You are right that white people better start voting as a Bloc right quick.

    .

    * NO, it’s NOT just about pot and prostitution. As Peak Stupidity has noted, Conservatives have a lot to learn from Libertarians, just as vice versa.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  4. @anon

    1/4 of them? That’s too many to be just the Michelle Goldbergs.

  5. The Republicans probably pander too much to conservative white males with right-wing views on economic issues. These guys can be taken for granted since they are very unlikely to vote Democrat. The Democrats take black voters for granted, so the Republicans should take fiscally conservative white guys for granted. In contrast, white women are the swing voters who need to be courted, and the best way to court female voters is to shift leftward on healthcare.

    Only about 10-20 percent of whites are social progressives, the rest can all be won over with the right policy mix.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Rosie
  6. JC1 says:

    I don’t really know about the race in Georgia, but historically you have to kidding. The funding of third party candidates to siphon votes from a particular candidate has hardly been that rare. A case in point would be Teddy Roosevelt running on the newly formed “Bull Moose” ticket in 1912. The very purpose was to ensure that Woodrow Wilson would win, and the consequences were tragic.

  7. Give up , you can do nothing about it. Whites are doomed. They are hopelessly cucked.
    Not a single damn thing, you can do to change it.
    Paul Kersey is a coward who has not even shown his face.
    I want to debate Paul and I will handle his a## to him any day.
    By early 2040s , Whites will be a Minority and by 2100s, there won’t be many whites left in the America.
    Enjoy.

    • Replies: @Realist
  8. @Giuseppe

    Logic is not your friend. It is not a necessary truth that a candidate appealing to voters whose preferences are to the right or to the left of the mainstream candidates has taken votes that would, in sufficient numbers to make a difference, have gone to one of the mainstream candidates. It is an empirical matter on which good judgments of probability can be made by using exit polls and the like. The libertarian candidate and his active supporters, if not all thay voted for him, must have known how dangerous his candidacy must be for the Republican candidate. Expect in future superficially attractive dummy candidates on the left supported by money from who lnows where. Presumably the desirability of setting up a spoiler candidate to cause a run off will depend on expectations about the willingness of voters for each major candidate turning out to vote twice.

    • Replies: @Giuseppe
  9. No point of whining about anything.
    Republicans themselves gave it away.
    Nothing will stop the dispossession of White folks.
    Paul Kersey can do nothing about it. I and Paul both live in Colorado which is a state with yuppiefied White folks and we elected our first Gay Governor.
    Sorry Paul , you or any of your readers can’t do anything about Whites becoming a Tiny Minority in America.

    • Replies: @Realist
  10. “Normal” Americans are not preoccupied with legalizing dope & prostitution. No, not the basis of a credible political campaign – but sounds tempting none the less….Perhaps we could criminalize, say, social media as a kind of exchange ?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  11. Realist says:
    @Mike Krauthammer

    I want to debate Paul and I will handle his a## to him any day.

    You want to handle Paul Kersey’s ass???

    I want to debate Paul and I will hand his a## to him…

    FIFY

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  12. Realist says:
    @Mike Krauthammer

    I and Paul both live in Colorado which is a state with yuppiefied White folks and we elected our first Gay Governor.

    Where the hell did you go to school???

    Paul and I live in Colorado….

    FIFY

    • Replies: @Mike Krauthammer
  13. @Realist

    Debate me if you can.
    I can make refute your “Realist” theories.
    Just debate me and this is a challenge to the “White Knight” Paul Kersey as well.
    Go ahead, Baby
    Your race is doomed.
    The only elite left in the world will be my fellow Jews.
    Love us or hate us, We rule you.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @annamaria
  14. Realist says:
    @Mike Krauthammer

    The only elite left in the world will be my fellow Jews.

    You sure as hell are not one of the more intelligent Jews.

    • Replies: @Anon
  15. Sean says:
    @Giuseppe

    … it can never be logically or credibly claimed that any losing third party candidate imperiled the election of any other candidate.

    The Founders would agree with you, but they did not even understand that parties would form, George Washington in his farewell address protested against it.

    “It agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions.”

    In the real world individualism just does not work.

  16. Giuseppe says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Logic is not your friend.

    What are you talking about? I had a quiet beer with my friends logic and reality as recently as last night. However it is clear you have been partying with sophistry again. I’m guessing she gave you the idea to sprinkle your argument with weasel words like

    It is an empirical matter on which good judgments of probability can be made by using exit polls and the like…

    to duplicitously bolster this fallacious claim about third party candidates, a claim that nevertheless rests on the horns of a false dichotomy. “If only, if only.” The credulous and the simple suffer such unnecessary anguish.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  17. I drove through Georgia in late sixties and I have seen houses made from sheet metal of open drums.
    Very poor place, I do not know if it did change very much.

  18. annamaria says:
    @Mike Krauthammer

    “The only elite left in the world will be my fellow Jews.”
    – This is some promiscuous use of the word “elite.”

    • Replies: @Wade
  19. Corvinus says:

    “And the anti-white Ruling Class in this country is heavily invested in inaugurating the first black woman governor in history.”

    Of course, the “ruling class” is not anti-white, that is just Alt Right rhetoric.

    “When will right-leaning libertarians get it through their thick skulls that normal Americans are not preoccupied with legalizing dope and prostitution and repealing occupational licensing laws?”

    Actually, “normal Americans” are becoming on board with such matters.

    “We can no longer afford to make dogmatic ideological statements in the voting booth that sink imperfect but basically good candidates.”

    Who is this “we”, Kemosabe?

    “Of course, he might not be in this fix if yet another pie-in-the-sky Libertarian hadn’t siphoned off 37,094 votes, many of which would have been Kemp’s.”

    You really don’t know.

    “And it means the right better get some identity politics of its own.”

    It is about ideology. And normie whites will ultimately make their own decisions about race and politics.

    • Replies: @Mr. Pink
  20. @Realist

    [Commenter Mike Krauthammer:] I want to debate Paul and I will handle his a##

    FIBFY

    No, I’m pretty sure Mr. Krauthammer meant what he said. Let’s not put words in people’s mouths.

    • Replies: @Realist
  21. Anon[200] • Disclaimer says:
    @Realist

    Do you think he’s a Jew? More likely a beer sodden Kraut trolling.

    • Replies: @Realist
  22. @animalogic

    Or we can all just ditch that social media bullshit on our own. That’s a more libertarian way of looking at it – voluntary. That is not to say, animalogic, that I wouldn’t love to see the Goolag, Faceberg, and twatters all get reamed by the Feral government, but unfortunately, they are all on the same side … not agonna happen.

  23. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    Very poor place, I do not know if it did change very much.

    I’ve not seen too many sheet metal houses, Mrs. Rozumova – do you mean the roofs were corrugated sheet metal? I’d rather live in 1960′s Georgia than modern day Georgia, by a long shot.

    There have been some very poor rural Appalachian hillbillies, of course, including in the foothills in N. Georgia, but you can’t go by everything you see in the movies. In Deliverance (a movie based on a novel by the S. Carolinian James Dickey), the only realism in the scene below may have been the red clay and the excellent banjo pickin’:

  24. fnn says:

    The share of white active voters in Georgia has been decreasing in recent years, from 62 percent in 2010 to 54 percent today.

    Considering how many SWPLs/bugmen/NPCs there are in the Atlanta area, it may be a miracle that the GOP did as well as it did. The Georgia GOP may be able to hang on for a while if they run candidates for major office with more sophistication, subtlety and nuance than the overt Redneck Kemp. Someone who can get more white female and Hispanic votes.

    I heard on some credible-sounding podcast that the GOP’s own focus groups showed that voters found the economic argument on illegal immigration more compelling than the crime issue. For some reason Trump chose to focus on the crime angle.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  25. JLK says:

    Is Paul Kersey this guy’s real name? If not, you are brewing trouble for yourself by publishing under his byline.

    • Replies: @Bill
  26. South Africa or Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia) serve as perfect examples of what happens when black-run governments replace white-run governments. One of life’s greatest mysteries is why white people keep insisting on turning government over to Negroes when 10,000 years of tribal history prove them to be totally incapable as serving as unbiased public officials.

    • Replies: @LostHopeless
  27. republic says:

    well I guess that white politicians will have to pass as blacks to get elected.

    remember that book, Black like me?

    from Wikipedia:

    In late 1959, John Howard Griffin went to a friend’s house in New Orleans, Louisiana. Once there, under the care of a dermatologist, Griffin underwent a regimen of large oral doses of the anti-vitiligo drug methoxsalen, and spending up to fifteen hours daily under an ultraviolet lamp. When he could pass as an African American, Griffin began a six-week journey in the South. Don Rutledge traveled with him, documenting the experience with photos.

    White politicians could do it, and once elected revert back to being white

    • Replies: @nsa
  28. @anon

    Millions of left-wing Yankees moving from New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts & New Jersey to Georgia and other southern states account for most of them.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
  29. wayfarer says:

    Battle, n., A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would not yield to the tongue.

    source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambrose_Bierce

    Broward County Election Interference in Focus as Everyone Sues Everyone Else

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  30. Rich says:

    Looks like the Confederacy is doomed. With mentally ill Whites voting along with their future black rulers, it’s just a matter of time before the sane Whites flee the South. Here in NY I know several blacks who have either moved South or tell me they’re going to move down there, definitely not going to end well for Southern Whites. We’ve seen many examples of what happens once blacks gain power in different cities, once they start getting whole state, I can imagine the damage. Maybe we should open the borders, at least the Hispanics fight back. After a decade or two we could be lucky maybe get a Pinochet. Otherwise, we’ll get a Papa Doc Duvalier.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  31. Anon[168] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    ADL and SPLC goons lynch the truth.

  32. Bill says:
    @JLK

    Paul Kersey is a character in the movie Deathwish which dramatized black violent crime.

    • Replies: @Rich
  33. Bill says:

    But it’s 2018. We can no longer afford to make dogmatic ideological statements in the voting booth that sink imperfect but basically good candidates

    I think you are underplaying what a miserable, cucked, pro-oligarch candidate Kemp was. Just look at this pathetic, try-hard (but in heavy rotation) commercial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQBENgYJxgs. Or look at his paint-by-numbers Chamber of Commerce campaign issues: https://www.kempforgovernor.com/issues.

    If whites rally ’round people like Kemp (Reagan, Bushes, etc), they will never get anything better.

    • Agree: Digital Samizdat
    • Replies: @Digital Samizdat
  34. @Giuseppe

    While I agree that Libertarians are loony, it is sheer hypocrisy for republicans to demand that they get off the ballot, while at the same time urging the Greens to take more and more votes away from the Dems. The two corrupt dysfunctional legacy parties have gone a long way in curtailing approved political speech. Hence, with oppressive ballot access rules, you see fewer third parties than there used to be when I was growing up. Independent billionaire Ross Perot, in 1996, was the last one allowed to compete in the sham D/R presidential debates. The more voices heard, the better.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @follyofwar
  35. he might not be in this fix if yet another pie-in-the-sky Libertarian hadn’t siphoned off 37,094 votes, many of which would have been Kemp’s.

    It works the other way, too. In the Arizona Senate race, neither McSally (R) or Sinema (D) has a majority. There’s no Libertarian on the ballot, but the Green candidate has about 2 1/2 percent of the vote. If nearly all those went to Sinema (which they certainly would if no Green was running) she’d have been declared the winner already.

    If I recall correctly, there were a couple of states in 2000 which Bush won with less than 50% of the vote, because Nader.

    I’d like to see the system fixed so that people can vote for their favorite candidate without risking this sort of outcome. Possible solutions:

    - Require a runoff between the top two finishers if no candidate gets 50% of the votes cast;

    - Instant Runoff: each ballot allows for a second-choice vote. If the first choice isn’t one of the top two finishers, the vote is switched to the second choice. (Of course, this might be too complex for some people to understand, and God forbid we should disenfranchise the stupid.)

    - Allow a candidate to transfer his votes to another candidate if he doesn’t finish in the top two. This transfer should be specified in advance of the election, preferably on the ballot itself.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
    , @Wizard of Oz
  36. I vote Libertarian for peace and prosperity in principle and ballot access in practice, and because fuck you.

  37. Rich says:
    @Bill

    Not exactly. Although Paul Kersey was the name of the character in the movie, the movie featured those good old interracial city gangs we’re all used to seeing.The famous Jeff Goldblum played one of the criminals. The fact that there were some black criminals portrayed in the movie, (Lawrence Hilton-Jacobs of “Welcome Back Kotter” fame among them), is probably upsetting to younger people of America today, because we now know no blacks ever commit a crime and are all lawyers, judges, doctors and generals. Oh, and Oprah.

  38. nsa says:
    @republic

    Great idea…….the all new national Blackface party run by co-chairmen Amos and Andy. The never scheming Kingfish could be Prez, Sapphire the First Ho, and the always honest Calhoun could be the Attorney General. Definite improvement over what we have now…..we all be liking it.

    • LOL: Dan Hayes
  39. SafeNow says:

    “The massive demographic shift is evident everywhere.”

    Not quite everywhere. Still white: The airline flight deck. Plumber who knows what the heck he is doing. Landscaper who has a degree in horticulture; has has courses in soils mgt. and pesticides, and can save your tree. I fear that “conscientious, proficient, fastidious” will be replaced by “good enough.” This is not a racial thing, it is a cultural thing. White duck boat captain is an idiot. Asian violin section is wonderful.

  40. @wayfarer

    Styx is no doubt intelligent. But I wish to hell he’d put a damn shirt on. Hard to look at that scrawny white chest!

  41. M Edward says:

    The sad reality of low-IQ races and their inevitable failures ………………

    • Replies: @S
  42. It says a lot about American libertarianism that it derives in part from the writings of three atomized, sterile and emotionally dysfunctional women in the last century who couldn’t form stable or normal marriages – namely, Rose Wilder Lane, Isabel Paterson and, of course, the deracinated immigrant Ayn Rand. Leftism and feminism derive their energy from the same kind of broken psychology.

  43. @Rex Little

    How would that 50% rule apply in presidential elections, since there are 51 separate ones (counting DC)? In a close election with some third party candidates, several states would have to have runoffs while others wouldn’t, creating an electoral nightmare, with probably no winner decided until December. With its faults, the best solution is to keep the Electoral College, though I don’t know how long the increasingly militant Left will go along if Republicans keep winning the EC while losing the popular vote. Trump in 2020 may well repeat what he did in 2016 (win the EC, lose the pop. vote), leading to ever more Antifa riots.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  44. @Jonathan Lester

    The most convincing part of your rationale is the “eff you” part.

    Even Hans-Hermann Hoppe, the current intellectual leader of libertarianism, understands that:

    1) There is no way to get from contemporary political arrangements to libertarian arrangements, and

    2) even if we could, there would be no way to prevent those libertarian arrangements from devolving back into something like one of the various contemporary arrangements or more likely worse ones.

    Also, you might consider the fact that the Libertarian Party isn’t really committed to libertarian principles.

    But, looking on the bright side, a vote for the Libertarian is at least a vote that didn’t go to the Democrats whose Progressive money finances their campaigns, so there’s that.

    But please don’t think that voting Libertarian has any real world effect. It is pure virtue signaling. Better to stay home and read a book.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  45. @Bill

    Globalist Republicans will sell us out just as hard and fast as Globalist Democrats will. So, would you like to be demographically replaced with or without a flag-burning amendment?

  46. crimson2 says:

    Jesus, somebody get this crybaby a tissue. Yeah, your ideology is dying. Now, fuck off.

  47. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    For crying out loud, how old are you?

    • Replies: @Ilyana_Rozumova
  48. @Giuseppe

    Well you enjoy deploying at least a semblance of learned literacy so, while I engage my brain on more practical puzzles would you be good enough to explain simply ‘a claim that… rests on a false dichotomy [sic]. “If only, if only” ‘.

    I would be happy too if you tried an explanation which replaced “dichotomy” with “dilemma” since dilemmas are conventionally the owners of the metaphorical horns.

  49. @Steve in Greensboro

    Interesting. That is about where the money comes from in the light of my speculation that right wing money will be promoting a variety of left-liberal-minority candidates in future.

  50. @fnn

    Wouldn’t you expect to find the Republicans’ professional campaigners testing ads that sounded sane and sensible like [First Draft] “Some people say the Democrats Open Borders policy floods our country with criminals and welfare bludgers. Not really the point: Democrat immigration policy is destroying the jobs and lowering the wages of all Americans already here. Who then needs welfare and turns to crime?”.

  51. @follyofwar

    As I see it, the rule would apply separately in each state. Those which met the conditions for a runoff would have them. So what if the winner isn’t decided til December? That still leaves a month before inauguration.

    Granted, if the election was close enough that the runoff states would decide it, the campaign intensity would be ridiculous. That’s why I’d prefer Instant Runoff.

  52. @follyofwar

    A recent Economist cover featured
    “Aussie Rules What the World Can Learn from Australia”.

    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/10/27/what-the-world-can-learn-from-australia

    The editorial and features inside had some silly points e.g. about Australia not doing enough about climate change (instead of taking the rational economist’s view that a country which can do and say absolutely nothing to stop whatever China and America do to the climate and consequently to coastal inundation etc. so…. ). But on the politics it made some shrewd and I think true comments.

    First, compulsory voting – merely requiring people to turn up on the Saturday at a polling place to have their names ticked off, or to have sent in postal ballot papers – or to have sent in later a specious unsworn excuse to avoid the small fine – probably ensures that the big right of centre and left of centre parties get the valid votes of those who vote just because they have to.

    The further feature of preferential voting/Alternative Vote/instant runoff also probably has the same effect because it seems likely that a voter supporting the Sex Party or Shooters Party facing a ballot paper with six candidates is likely to give his effective vote to one of the main parties.

    Yes, but…. what this system is hugely effective in achieving is reduction in single/special interest bribes/incentives to get people to actually bother to vote. Equally it mitigates the need for scare campaigns (though Labor, with massive union money behind it did quite a job on the Howard government’s basically pro productivity employment law reforms in 2007). Of course it helps that capital punishment and abortion are virtually dead issues in Australia but 30 years ago a marginal electorate member or candidate could be thankful that the comparative handful of fanatical pro lifers who wrote to him would be swamped at the ballot box by the merely indifferent who were just voting because they had to. Could it help US politics at the margin?

    Mind you I wrote in 2000 “thank G for America saving the world from democracy”. If 1990s America had had the Australian electoral system the freezer trade and “neo-liberalism” from which China, and largely by flow-on Australia, has prospered almost certainly wouldn’t have taken off.

  53. Agent76 says:

    Aug 20, 2011 Law without Government: Conflict Resolution in a Free Society

    This is part 2 of my video series exploring a society where law is provided not by government, but by competing voluntary institutions.

  54. Realist says:
    @Anon

    Do you think he’s a Jew? More likely a beer sodden Kraut trolling.

    Definitely an ass clown.

  55. Realist says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    No, I’m pretty sure Mr. Krauthammer meant what he said. Let’s not put words in people’s mouths.

    I am pretty sure he is full of crap.

  56. @Reuben Kaspate

    Most probably the oldest person on this site.

    • Replies: @Reuben Kaspate
  57. Art says:

    Even Never Trumper Bill Kristol finally gets it. “I’ve always disliked the phrase ‘demography is destiny,’ as it seems to minimize the capacity for deliberation and self-government, for reflection and choice,” the top neocon Tweeted. “But looking at tonight’s results in detail, one has to say that today, in America, demography sure seems to be destiny.”

    This is totally galling – it is Jews like Kristol who have divided America – it is Jews who preach group victimhood – it is the Jew media who works too separate peoples into waring groups. Divide and conquer is their game.

    It is Jews who press hate between folks – black and white – men and women – age group against age group – religion against religion. Always seeking power by feeding division and hate – helping the poking of one group in the eye by another group.

    There is no “one America” anymore – our heroes are intellectually assassinated – our families in decline – our primary schools second and third rate – our religions supplanted by government – our military loyal to Israel.

    Clearly, the Jews have done this to us.

    Think Peace — Do No Harm — Art

  58. Haha, “dope.”

    “Dope” is heroin, my boomer friend. “Dope” is crystal meth.

    Go to a trailer park in Vermont looking for “dope” and you won’t walk out of there with an ounce of marijuana, I can assure you.

  59. @Rex Little

    Disenfranchising the stupid and careless once seemed to be a side benefit of Australia’s compulsory preferential** voting system but I am not sure it reliably works the right way now. And the system has been modified in various places to allow “optional preferential which allows voting to be valid even if not all the lower preferences are indicated – meaning of course that just a 1. for the Shooters Party and 2. for the Sex Party ends up saying nothing more than FU to the system. Also, voters may choose to vote for federal Senate candidates by simply checking their favoured party’s list of preferences or laboriously filling in individual preferences. (How to drive electoral office staff and volunteer scrutineers for the candidates/parties mad: on a ballot paper with 120 candidates arranged typically in blocks of six – because there are six Senate places to be filled – fill in numbers 1 to 85 distributed randomly over the ballot paper followed by 85 a second time before continuing regularly to 120 so as not to make it easy to identify your partly “informal” vote).

    **there is a distinction between Australia’s very modest compulsion to (at least making a gesture toward casting a) vote and the old non-optional preferential system because the latter merely threatened invalidity of the voter’s effort to cast a valid vote if he e.g. only voted 1 or 1 and 2 when there were say 5 candidates – though, big concession, you could get away with leaving out the last number, here 5. Now you could vote 1, 2, 3,3, 5 and your vote’s first and second preferences would be validly countable :-)

    Of course no one actually has to vote in Australia, merely turn up to have the name crossed off or send in postal voting forms.

  60. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Demographics and Politics in UK.

    As to the question of WHY IS THERE A SPIKE IN ANTI-JEWISH VIOLENCE, it’s because (1) mass-immigration-invasion let in tons of Muslims into the UK and (2) UK’s government supports the Zionist wars in the Middle East.

    Also, when will British Jews admit they played a huge role in pushing for Mass-Immigration-Invasion? Furthermore, by encouraging anti-white hatred among the POC, Jews set themselves up as targets of anti-white hate too because they look white and are regarded by resentful Muslims as super-white(due to wealth and power). Also, Jewish finance in Britain has a long history of funding British Imperialism. Jewish money and British world conquest were intricately linked.

  61. Then it was probably a lousy idea to disenfranchise millions of blacks based on their skin color and proceed to set a country whose primary mode of politics was based on skin color thereby establishing the system – you are now bemoaning.

    had the nation of whites nor so engaged, the demographic issue would largely be one of immigration or citizenship to identity as opposed to the rather trite and superficial skin color mess that it is.

    By all means close the border, build the wall until we get our act together.

    • Replies: @Rich
  62. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    If the US had, at any time, just allowed the law to become color-blind, as it is in the Constitution, instead of implementing affirmative action, forced integration, set asides and other social engineering schemes, there could have been peaceful co-existence between Whites and blacks. The elites in the US, however, prefer to have constant hostility among the working class in order to keep wages low and themselves firmly in power. They must be pretty smart, because their plan is working well.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    , @bt
  63. The recent election results in Brazil may be a fly in the ointment of the “demographics is destiny” theory. There the “tropical Trump” Bolsonaro crushed the left 55%/45%. Brazil is only about 40% white and most of those are of Latin extraction. Ethnic partisan loyalties that have been stable for long periods can change, sometimes fairly abruptly.

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  64. Anonymous[267] • Disclaimer says:
    @unpc downunder

    >”the best way to court female voters is to shift leftward on healthcare”

    Nope. Just give ‘em nuks, security blankets, lifetime subs to romance novel/movie channels, and gift-cards to shopping networks.

  65. @Rich

    I am concerned that you ignore that for the years prior to the Constitution, the country engaged whole sale policy and practices based on color.

    That by the time one considers AA to black citizens redress — “color blindness” would be a near impossible task. And worse immigration practices which imported millions whose sole benefit was that they were white. When it would have been imperative to begin assimilating those newly freed fully into the system as a priority, so at to avoid the wasteful supposed tribalism and identity machinations we are frustrated by today.

    The most vexing issues to traditionalists have not been advanced by blacks but whites, who have managed to be the majority recipients of affirmative action.

    and had the segregation actually been equal, integration most likely would have not occurred as policy. Unfortunately, whites of every class and political persuasion have sustained and supported the policies of these so called elites.

    • Replies: @Rich
  66. You libertarians amaze me. How big a sperg can a libertarian be? We are facing an invasion. We are currently in the process of being overwhelmed, and there’s libertarian concerns about irrelevant policies and abstract theory. That can only benefit the enemy.
    We get it; you’re smarter than everyone else. With that said, can’t you understand that that’s the actual problem with you? The dindus in Georgia didn’t debate libertarianism. They voted as an ethnic block.
    Which we better do fast. The libertarian state will NEVER happen. You would have to take the right to vote away from all women and minorities, who simply can’t be libertarian for biological reasons. Not to mention the fact that Aspberger’s alienates women like nothing else.
    We are not in a normal time. It is not 1980. There aren’t simply two political parties. There is an anti-white, elitist organization, that uses minorities as foot soldiers. They are trying to destroy the society they live in. There is also a hapless, still too cucked party that is stumbling its way towards defending the lives and culture of white men and women. We have to support them and guide them towards nationalism, which is the only practical and ethical political philosophy for whites in 2018. Some of us have children. The abstract mental masturbation of libertarian debate does nothing but hurt their futures. We have to get it together.
    White Pride.
    Worldwide.

    • Replies: @TRASH(NOT)
  67. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Are you aware that the majority of Whites in the US did not own slaves? Are you aware that many of the original Whites came to America as indentured servants? Do you realize that most who immigrated into America were dirt poor? Do you understand that slavery hurt the average American farmer who was often driven into poverty because of his inability to compete with the big slave plantations? Yes, blacks suffered under slavery, but various European groups, the overwhelming majority of European immigrants, suffered under poverty and also, often, discrimination based on their religion or country of origin, or just the region of Britain that they came from. There was absolutely no benefit for the overwhelming number of Whites because of slavery, or discrimination against blacks, except that by keeping the races separate, crime was kept lower for the Whites.

    If discrimination based on color is wrong, affirmative action is wrong. If aa is okay, then by simple logic, discrimination is okay and that lesson won’t soon be forgotten by the majority of Whites. Affirmative action in my experience, always promotes blacks above their level of competence causing trouble in whatever organization uses it. Competent blacks are all looked down on nowadays as simple affirmative action promotions who are in over their heads.

    And also, in what way did the Jewish, Italian or Eastern European immigrants benefit from slavery. Most arrived many years after slavery ended, faced poverty and discrimination but somehow managed to prosper. They had no affirmative action, no welfare, no government handing them jobs, but their descendants are forced to suffer because a tiny minority of English colonists owned slaves almost 200 years ago?

    Freedom of association is a basic human right and if White folk don’t want to live with, do business with or go to school with blacks, that should be their right, and is their right based on the Constitution.

  68. KenH says:

    Blacks, of course, were all in for the gap-toothed girl. They gave her 92 percent of their vote. But Kemp received just 74 percent of white votes.

    74% is pretty damn good for whites considering they only vote Republican 60% nationally. If a Republican presidential candidate could regularly get 74% or even 70% of the white vote that would guarantee victory for the next two and possibly three presidential election cycles as well as Republican congresses not that it would matter because the Republicans hate their base and only take care of the donor class when they have majorities.

  69. @follyofwar

    When you think about it, Wizard, what could be more totalitarian than requiring people to vote and fining then if they don’t? The essence of democracy and freedom, I think, is that every person has the right to not follow politics and to be left alone. I’d say the lower the voter turnout the better as most voters have no idea what the issues are.

  70. @Jonathan Lester

    Hey Jonathan. My name is Prince Apples. Vote for me.

  71. Mr. Pink says:
    @Corvinus

    Look who’s here. You definitely need some warm milk and a nap son. Why do you troll these boards in such a breathless manner? Does your keyboard slacktivism make you feel important? Go outside and play after your nap and stay off your computer.

  72. @Virginia Classical Liberal

    That’s great news, mate. Once we’ve deteriorated to the social and economic norms of the Philippines and Brazil, the trapped, desperate bourgeois and proletarian classes surrounded by favelas and shocking levels of casual violence will vote for Hector Alizondo Duterte Bolsonaro!

    I guess you’re really looking forward to the day when a Virginia gubernatorial candidate promises to finally clean up all those ritual decapitations and torture-kidnappings in Fairfax County. New challenges for a new era!

    “Classical Liberal?” Educated, naive fool.

  73. @Rich

    That’s all very well and good. But I fail to see the relevance. The policies regarding blacks applied to free blacks and were in place — after slaves were free. how many owned some 4 million or more others is hardly relevant. Whites enjoined color as part of the policy and practice — to deny their fellow citizens their due as citizens and by so doing severely hampered the country’s ability to soldify around the constitution as an cultural unifying force.

    we inherited that legacy — and we must own up to it with integrity and as adults. No hopscotching around IQ is going to ameliorate the matter. We must own up to it head on.

    And you don’t have love, like, appreciate, or have any affinity for blacks — to acknowledge reality.

    • Replies: @Rich
  74. Anonymous[739] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m going with the idea that anyone, including men and women of the sacred J tribe openly calling for the replacement/genocide of White Americans, openly working to elevate the most incompetent, hate White people Black Governor candidates like this Ms Stacey Abrams – these bad, hateful people need to be outed, identified and doxed.

    This is MOST DEFINITELY NOT A CALL FOR EXTREME VIOLENCE OR ASSASSINATION

    for likes of ***#&(@ Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times or “Conservative” William Kristol

    It is more than fair to notice, identify and DOX these extremely bad people – they are not all Js, just as not all the original Bolshevik murderers were all Js.

    But, if the shoe fits…

  75. @Rich

    Nor did they come from an entire population who was denied citizenship and by force subjegated to and depraved of the same.

    Furthermore, I would encourage you to do a little research on the services provided to your referenced groups. You apparently have little basic knowledge of the history of welfare.

    Until the 1960′s blacks were largely excluded from government welfare programs. They like others did benefit from private such programs.

    Nor based on what you have written do seem to understand what policies blacks were subject to — that had nothing to do with denying “freedom of association”.

    if you engage a system that denies one segment of the population fro m access to what should be available to you have engaged in a policy wholesale “affirmative action” However, it’s missing a very important component — it redresses no wrong — it is itself in violation of the Constitution. In otherwords, whites cheated, when they used force to keep black people from:

    work
    school
    legal protections
    legal access
    patent ownership
    even leisure
    political participation

    That is now and has been our nemesis that is continually haunting us and hampering our future as one people. It’s not the association – it’s the forced inequality. more than 100 years of it will have long term consequences.

    The entire country benefited from slavery. I have no idea what the point is of this discussion. I am responding to your claim that integration and affirmative action are to cause for the issues of today . My comment only acknowledges that the policies based on color were created and instituted by whites long before 1968 and that whites have been the biggest beneficiaries of those policies intended for native americans and blacks.

    • Replies: @Rich
  76. anonymous[739] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rich

    I agree with should start networking and promoting tough, whiter Hispanics like Pinochet or that Brazilian strongman.

    I encourage middle aged, divorced Anglos to get a second Hispanic wife, give the children Hispanic names.

  77. S says:
    @M Edward

    He says some brutal hard truths. Trust he’s doing some solid building up of his people in addition to that.

    I can only add I wish there were more such hard soul searching (note: not self hating) amongst the various European peoples and the Jewish as well.

    That’s how problems have at least a chance of being successfully resolved.

    The times demand such honesty.

  78. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    A knowledgeable person like yourself surely knows that many freed blacks also owned slaves, right? I’m sure a man with your knowledge is aware that many Whites were excluded from voting due to poverty and lack of property, right? As I’m sure you know, the majority of States were free states, that the overwhelming majority never owned a slave and that the US fought a bloody war in which many Whites died on the side fighting to free the slaves. Another thing I’m sure you might want to research, is that before 1960 there wasn’t all that much welfare being given out by too many states. Here in NY no one was denied welfare by the State based on color or national origin. I am unaware of any state laws that prohibited charity based on race. I know that when immigrants stepped off the boat in the late 19th and early 20th century, they went straight to work, or they went hungry.

    Those of us who never owned a slave, never discriminated against anyone, owe no one anything. The sins of the father are NOT visited upon the son, except in the twisted minds of some bleeding hearts. And it’s not even the descendants of slave owners you guys think should pay, anyone with pale skin should pay even if he just got off at JFK yesterday. If anything blacks should be giving some of their earnings to the families of the men who fought for the Union Army, because without those brave soldiers, they wouldn’t have been free.

    Reality is that for the past 50 years blacks have had special status, have received Affirmative Action in housing, jobs and school admissions. They have lived privileged lives for the past 50 years, it’s time to stop it.

  79. @Rich

    Freed Blacks purchased their family members and those purchases were recorded as slaves purchases. not at all the same thing – not even close. Those purchases were made to give family members freedom.

    Again, this is not about slave ownership alone, but an entire swath pf policies and practices against and in relationship to blacks that undermined their rights and abilities to function as citizens — so much the better for non-slave owning whites who were able to advance without competing with some 12% of the population as the result of those practices. I would say that is Affirmative action in reverse.

    laugh.

    Well, whites died to keep the union together over the issue of slavery, the freeing of the slaves was side benefit to blacks. But as history makes clear – not for long as whites north, south, east, west and wherever began policies and practices to deny those freed blacks access. i used to hold out hope that my position similar toy your own in some respects could stand — but the data about what the country engaged in in relationship to black citizens is overwhelming damaging to the argument – every aspect of black life was hundred by whites — the record is devastating. The country did not does not embrace black skin color regardless of IQ or good behavior . . . or contribution to country.

    Though I acknowledge the tolerance for a select certain type did exist. The good black, generally those blacks that went along, and maintained a political correct posture to the majority.

    “You guys” — i am note sure I am in the group pf “you guys.” I only know that the country engaged in structural and deliberate discrimination and for the country there are long term consequences for our socialization of blacks. And that is not overcome by mistakes or issues soley to cause of black citizens. Redress is a principle rooted in scripture, common law, and the US constitution.

    “Reality is that for the past 50 years blacks have had special status, have received Affirmative Action in housing, jobs and school admissions.”

    Your problem here is that none of these policies were exclusively black redress – they were shared openly across the board with whites and in the case of affirmative Action, the baton used to drum up white discontentment, as it turns out whites are the big winners more than 70% of the program have gone to whites. The entire program has been so abused and manipulated to derail it from anything resembling it’s design or intent. Upset about affirmative action — I suggest you turn your eyes to your daughter, girlfriend, wife, friends and white homosexual practitioners —

    want a clear image of how that occurs. Exam ine how the New Deal depression era policies were managed —

    It really irks me out that we created the very issues we are complaining about and do so repeatedly.

    Note: I fully appreciate your frustration.

    • Replies: @KenH
  80. @Rich

    Correction:

    every aspect of black life was hindered by whites — the record is devastating.

    • Replies: @KenH
  81. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    You’re wrong on so many fronts here that I don’t know where to begin. If discrimination is wrong, it’s wrong, otherwise once I get the votes I’ll turn it back on you
    How did slavery benefit poor White farmers that had to compete with large farms that had free labo5? How did slavery benefit the poor Irish or Scottish immigrant who lived in the Northern slums? How did Italians or Jews or Poles who showed up here dirt poor 40 or 50 years after slavery ended benefit? How did poor Whites in the North benefit from Jim Crow laws in the South? 50 years of blacks getting special treatment under the law is way too long, but at least recent African immigrants and their children get to cash in on it too, right?

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  82. @The Anti-Gnostic

    The Nordic Bolsonaro (i.e., Trump) was elected by the richest per capita large country in the world. Nor have Italy, Hungary, Austria, Czech Republic, Poland, etc. declined to Brazilian conditions before canning their “progressives”. So your point is really nonsensical.

    The real enemies of liberty and civilization can’t be identified by color or race, but are defined in our time by their adherence to the toxic ideology of “progressivism”, whose founders and original voter base were nearly all as white as the Prince of Wales. The “great progressive” Woodrow Wilson was a closet socialist who wasted our young men in the muddy trenches of WWI, introduced the Federal Reserve, imposed 90% income tax rates, and left office with the economy racked by inflation and headed for three depressions in twenty years (1920, 1929-33, 1937-8). (He also ardently admired the KKK, selected arch white supremacist and “progressive” Josephus Daniels as a chief advisor, and imposed Jim Crow on the federal workforce and armed forces, showing that (1) his great popularity was not based on support from nonwhites, and (2) that “progressives” can also be rampant race bigots, as well as war mongers and economic morons, with no sense of cognitive dissonance.

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  83. @Rich

    “How did slavery benefit poor White farmers that had to compete with large farms that had free labo5?”

    ohhh good greif, small black farmers had slaves though not in the hundreds. Furthermore, the slave economy sustained the south and the country in some periods to fifty percent. There’s a reason that slavery was sustained – it was profitable. The entire country benefited from slavery

    https://adamhudson.org/2012/01/28/wall-street-was-founded-on-slavery/

    http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2014/11/19/slavery-economy-baptist

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2015/12/18/how-slaves-built-american-capitalism/

    https://www.history.com/news/slavery-profitable-southern-economy

    It ever astonishes me how the obvious escapes us.

    “How did slavery benefit the poor Irish or Scottish immigrant who lived in the Northern slums? How did Italians or Jews or Poles who showed up here dirt poor 40 or 50 years after slavery ended benefit? How did poor Whites in the North benefit from Jim Crow laws in the South?”

    By denying blacks access to employment, political participation, education, etc. gave room for white immigrants to the very same. This critical conclusion does not require an extensive knowledge of history. Hence the practice of identity politics. White poor had access to that which black citizens did not.

    My position on immigration is very clear and simple.

    A five year moratorium – period. The author makes the correct assessment on immigration why he ventures into the losing issue of blacks as citizens is unknown to me. The problem is illegal and legal immigration, the incorrect understanding and application of the 14th amendment – it only applies to freed blacks and those whose parents were citizens.

    • Replies: @Rich
  84. @Virginia Classical Liberal

    LOL. Demographics of those countries bear no resemblance to the US. They voted as ethnic blocs in favor of their own nation-states.

  85. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    You’ve been thoroughly brainwashed and no one on earth could ever convince you otherwise. You’re completely wrong, it’s ridiculous to keep harping on things that happened 50 years or more in the past, but, in the end, you guys are stuck there. Good luck with it.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  86. @Rich

    I make no value judgement about the record. It is what it is. In short, AA, desegregation were not the first nor major sources of issues between whites and blacks. It begins with the legalization of slavery based almost exclusively on skin color and laws that denied “free blacks” participation. (I would go back further, but in this discussion, US history is ok with me.)

    If that record and history upsets you, I get it.

    But I can’t change it.

    That’s an interesting suggestion — when history matters. Fifty years is your demarcation line. I take it, you disregard all of history prior to that regarding US citizen polity, ethos and interaction. That you can do that is great.

    But most people tend to see historical US development in broader terms.

    • Replies: @Rich
  87. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    No, 50 years isn’t my demarcation line, 1 day of discriminating against a White person who never owned a slave, is too long. Everyone is responsible only for their personal actions, not the actions of people that lived a long time ago. You people have to finally take responsibility for yourselves instead of expecting Whitey to keep carrying you. If you’re not black, you need to start treating blacks like they’re adults and not a pet project for you to repair.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  88. KenH says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Freed Blacks purchased their family members and those purchases were recorded as slaves purchases. not at all the same thing – not even close. Those purchases were made to give family members freedom.

    Not entirely correct even according to an article by black leftist Henry Louis Gates:
    Halliburton concludes, after examining the evidence, that “it would be a serious mistake to automatically assume that free blacks owned their spouse or children only for benevolent purposes.” } In other words, most black slave owners probably owned family members to protect them, but far too many turned to slavery to exploit the labor of other black people for profit.

    https://www.amren.com/news/2013/03/did-black-people-own-slaves/

    It looks like The Root scrubbed the original article from their database. You also forget that blacks were slaves in Africa but somehow the practice is more objectionable when whites owned blacks.

    Your problem here is that none of these policies were exclusively black redress…. I suggest you turn your eyes to your daughter, girlfriend, wife, friends

    Yes they were and they only reason they got quietly and unofficially expanded to include white women is because there were so few minimally qualified blacks to take advantage of them. But I’ve noticed this is a favorite talking point of black acquaintances I’ve debated over the years.

    Affirmative action wasn’t supposed to span multiple generations and last in perpetuity but any serious attempt to end it and blacks would lay waste to the cities (egged on by black “leaders”) even though most are on welfare anyway. White women, who you claim receive more benefit, might file some lawsuits but wouldn’t riot.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  89. @Rich

    You have a peculiar understanding of US history.

    The system, regardless of slavery, discriminated against blacks — Even poor whites got preferential treatment — that was practice across the entire country, not just the south. As such even poor whites were able to leverage opportunities against the black population.

    Having already demonstrated, minus my usual framing — that slavery was an economic boon for the country, a boon for which blacks were for large swaths of the country’s history unable to advantage — whites in general including poor whites benefited. There’s no magic here — it’s just the record. My comments are not personal — am not sure why you presume what people I belong to — it is by and large irrelevant unless you decide to make it so, I have not and avoid such in these conversations.

    You are caught up on slavery as though slavery is the single frame by which discrimination occurred. I can only encourage you to read more. And by my understanding of history, blacks have taken responsibility, in fact, have done so with no small amount of forbearance. I don’t think there is any evidence that whites carried black people. Quite the opposite. In nearly every walk of life blacks have had to perform twice or more to effectiveness, and knowledge to obtain the same opportunity as with less. That was true before AA and it has remained true after.

    Laughing, nothing in my comments suggests that I don’t treat adult blacks as adults. I understand.

    You like many in the country would like to think that after slavery everything was — equally available, everyone was rated by their character, skills, etc. including blacks — the problem is that is just not the case. I too would love to embrace a history in whites treated blacks as they would themselves – that unfortunately is not our history and I agree that is painful to face. How the country engaged socializing blacks has negative consequences. And on occasion we will have to face them as adults.

    • Replies: @Rich
  90. @KenH

    I am going eschew the purchase ownership issue, not because I agree, but I am willing to grant some truth – as previously noted on the matter.

    Uhhhmmm, no.

    On AA however, I am going to state quite frankly, you’re understanding of affirmative action:

    1. what it was designed to do

    2. it’s methodology and

    3. application

    is deeply parched.

    The inclusion of women was to policy – it had nothing to do with anyone’s qualifications. In fact, the effort was designed to kill civil rights legislation. So I am going to do you the courtesy of encouraging you to your homework on civil rights legislation. There was nothing unofficial about that addition.

    As for qualified blacks — you are simply and deeply incorrect again. That was not really the issue. There was a practice that was targeted before any discussion of qualifications even begins.
    It’s clear you don’t have some of the prerequisite understanding of employment, housing and law enforcement practices.

    So there are two separate issues in your final comment

    1. affirmative action

    2. and violence with respect one to the other

    those two issues are not directly related, though I one could make a case if not employment discrimination based on color — inner city tensions might have been far less and by consequence less rioting. However, the issue in the cities has more to do with direct law enforcement practices that one could argue was exacerbated by other forms of discrimination based on skin color.

    Since the 1960′s, when the black population was able to qualify for welfare as whites have traditionally able to do as routine previously, more blacks were in programs — however, your suggestion that most blacks are on welfare is incorrect — this has been data sourced numerous times here.

    Note, most blacks did not participate in riots or violent protests.

    As for the length of redress, I have no answers.

    • Replies: @KenH
  91. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    You’re off your bird. Poor or middle class Whites gained nothing from slavery, in fact, they lost out in competition against large, slave-owning plantations. How thick is your skull that that fact can’t get through to you? If you own a business in which your competitor doesn’t have to pay his workers, you are going to be left at a disadvantage. Are you really unable to understand that? Slave owning economies have existed throughout history and have always been poorly run and less efficient, that’s the main reason slavery ended everywhere in the world.

    Do you really believe blacks had to “perform twice or more to effectiveness”? Have you ever seen black people work? I’ve never in my life come across a black worker who was half as competent as White workers, I’ve never met a black student who was anywhere near his peers. Ever. Well, no, I mean black Americans, I have met some competent African and Caribbean blacks, but even they were few in number. You guys are so full of yourselves, you can’t see how far behind other races you are in competence, or intelligence.

    I guess it’s okay, we’ll keep promoting you above your ability, you’ll know in your hearts that you’re a fraud, but you can keep repeating those fake positive thoughts to yourself.

    Oh, and just to break another myth that I’m sure you believe, the Egyptians weren’t black.

  92. ” If you own a business in which your competitor doesn’t have to pay his workers, you are going to be left at a disadvantage. Are you really unable to understand that? Slave owning economies have existed throughout history and have always been poorly run and less efficient, that’s the main reason slavery ended everywhere in the world.”

    None of my comments deny that dynamic. However, you as a business owner could start a new business and that business certainly benefits from the capital produced by slavery. Plantation profits did exist in a vacuum. Northerners who never owned a slave benefited. If you didn’t want to start a new business, and decided to work for someone else, you could apply and not be forced to compete against an entire population of blacks numbering in the millions, even if those blacks were free. You could go to work for other plantations. You could start crops that had nothing to with cotton, they key word or phrase is

    “what you could do” that blacks slave or free could not. Education, military service, business loans, travel out of state and start fresh and anywhere you went, your skin color was no barrier – that simply is not the case for blacks. i think you might benefit from the references I provided haphazard as they are. Consider the robust economy from plantation profits and the numerous opportunities that provided, poor, middle class whites. Opportunities blacks could not even in dreams consider.

    I think we are talking about the slave economy in the US. And slave owners engaged it because it was profitable.

    Let’s take the college I worked for several tears, up until the 1990′s every black African American instructor had a Ph.D’s as opposed to their white counterparts who had Master’s, bachelor’s or equivalences. That was the general practice. That practice, in direct response to the misguided belief that blacks were not qualified and only have twice the credentials made them viable candidates. Here is on example about the impact of skin color practices based on qualifications.

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/lending-discrimination-black-borrowers-face-higher-hurdles-in-lending-study_n_1300509.html

    If you understand something about financing then you know a business loan is standard practice. Based on the record, You and a black person are qualified for a loan — but the loan is approved for you, but not the black person.

    You want to attend West Point, you head off to the nearest benefactor — and he helps pave the way. The black will not only be denied entry because they won’t take him, but there are no black benefactors this is substantial because millions of citizens have bolstered their opportunities via military service. And when blacks could get in they were expected to perform to tougher standards than their white counterparts.

    Well based on the academic record there are competent, intelligent capable, qualified blacks in fact, the record indicates that most blacks are.

    https://nces.ed.gov/FastFacts/display.asp?id=72

    Check the percentage differences by degrees conferred.

    I cannot speak for the black population, however, in this country IQ is neither a requirement for citizenship or fair treatment.

    My only comment in reference to ability is this . . . if the country promotes whites above their ability, then there’s no reason not to promote blacks the same way. However, I have never met a black person who contended that anyone be advanced beyond their ability save in this:

    As a mechanism for improving achievement by having a goal to be reached in which any individual develops said abilities over time . . . or in process.

    I won’t address the personal references, they are irrelevant.

    As for the color of Egyptians — you’ll have to take that up with archaeologists for the time being. It’s inconsequential to this discussion.

    • Replies: @Rich
  93. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    You are a lost cause. You don’t understand, are unable to understand, basic economics and how slavery hurts businesses that compete against it and how it eventually becomes a drag on that society until it helps bring about collapse. This is so basic, that I question your competence.

    I don’t know what fake university you worked for, I don’t know where all these black Ph.D’s came from, apparently the US doesn’t discriminate against blacks getting degrees, does it? What we do know from looking at the statistics is that blacks with higher degrees generally receive them in soft subjects, gender studies, ethnic studies, etc. and that often these degrees come with affirmative action passing grades, I remember the laughable senior thesis Michelle Obama submitted at Princeton. Had a White student tried to get away with handing in such a bad paper, he’d have been laughed out of the school.

    Based on SAT scores and IQ tests, blacks wouldn’t qualify for any Ivy league school and none of the top schools in the SUNY system here in NY. It is a fact that blacks are admitted into all the service academies and top universities with scores that are significantly lower than Whites.

    It is comical that you state Whites are promoted over their abilities, Every major invention, every major scientific discovery, every great soldier, every great mechanic or lawyer, has White skin. It is White achievement that carried your people out of the jungle and into modernity. I understand you people are big on ego, like those big cars and colorful clothes, but come on, admit it, when you look in the mirror, you know that without Whitey, you’d be living in poverty. Just compare the relative wealth of the affirmative actioned Negro in the US with his starving counterpart in Africa.

    The fact that you were unaware that blacks owned slaves in the US tells me that even that fancy degree in African-American studies you received isn’t worth the paper it was written on. But keep puffing out your chest, it’s amusing, anyway.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  94. @Carroll Price

    Not white people Ms. Price but (((white))) people who insist on useless (for us that is, not them) wars, invade then invite, open borders, mass “legal” immigration to displace us from well paying jobs and so on.

    When it gets too hot for them, jump ship to some other “fat” host. I think China is now being suitably fattened like a nice juicy ham while old uncle sam’s home is being boarded and sold apiece. These brown and black hordes you see is the last wave of scavengers. They come legally[indians/chinese], they jump the border [mexicans/cholos], they do whatever it takes to rob us blind before the ship goes down. I just wish it goes down abruptly without much of a warning so we can take these parasites down with us

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  95. @White Pride

    Good for you. I hope and pray that you do more than just rant here. At least I do. After having spent my entire working lifetime (10+ years) around extremely clannish and ethnocentric people (mostly hindoos and a couple chinese and others; yeah i’m in tech), You are right, in that abstract ideas have no place in our armory today. It just serves to obfuscate the simple minded among us. If we have to at least have a fighting chance against these people, we have to got to think like a block. These people have used our own sense of justice and fair play against us. We are already bearing the bitter fruit of hosting a similar tribe some scant 150 years ago which then paved the way for all this, these useless wars (wasting much innocent blood, both ours and theirs), stupid trade deals, globalization and homo mania all of which are directly aimed at destroying what remains.

    if we can learn anything from such tribalists, both current and the ones who sit above our heads, is that one’s tribe is ones identity, one’s destiny; tribe is what defines us and our tribes are what could save us. None of us alone can do any of that. What made the US unique was our individualism which naturally gave birth to a lot of creative folks but that time is OVER. Either we stick together and fight or we perish. So stay close to your community, red pill them as much as you can and form a commune. Shun or reduce needless alcohol, marry and have kids, stay true to yourself and the good lord. Try to return to classical religion and don’t give in to the tools of our destruction (porn/alcohol/opioids). If possible sponsor a white child from a broken home. If we don’t get our act together we are almost done. The next 15 years are going to crucial, even if the cucked republicans manage to stay in power (which is unlikely given the demographic shift underway from memphis to montana). And don’t get disheartened. Look at Venezuela, Syria etc. These people have been through worse but still they persist against the globo home empire (the lords of the flies)

  96. @LostHopeless

    Jews take over the economy of China and Mexicans sneak into China to take jobs? Good luck with that.

  97. Moses says:

    Even Never Trumper Bill Kristol finally gets it.

    He has always gotten it. That’s the point.

  98. @Rich

    The data is what it is. I understand why that causes you anxiety and why you are changing subjects once again.

    “I don’t know what fake university you worked for, I don’t know where all these black Ph.D’s came from, apparently the US doesn’t discriminate against blacks getting degrees, does it? What we do know from looking at the statistics is that blacks with higher degrees generally receive them in soft subjects, gender studies, ethnic studies, etc. and that often these degrees come with affirmative action passing grades, I remember the laughable senior thesis Michelle Obama submitted at Princeton. Had a White student tried to get away with handing in such a bad paper, he’d have been laughed out of the school.”

    That’s not really the point, it’s the illustration — if you don’t believe me – fine. But the data sets I provide are quite clear.

    Well, again you seem to unable to grasp some realities.

    1. those attainments are accomplished in spite of any existing discrimination
    2. a considerable number of those degrees are obtained from black colleges. Now the reason the US
    has black colleges is because white colleges would not accept them — and they would not do
    despite having the pre-requisite knowledge to attend.
    3. the academic attainments indicate that the discrimination practiced for most of the countries
    history was clearly unjustified based on mental capacity.
    4. environment is the key element not skin color.
    5. most people get degrees based on their area of interest or orientation as per their environment

    It is very apparent that you know nothing about ancient civilizations that existed on the continent of Africa. Archaeologists are repeatedly uncovering just how complex and industrial african civilizations were – even in the jungle.

    This is an old discussion concerning inventors. And Again, you are simply knowledgeable about inventors past or present. We simply will not know that depth prior civil war even free lacks would have a hard time obtaining patents – you might want to start with — Thomas L. Jennings.

    The IQ and SAT issues are routine here and have been addressed at length, you are invited to plow through those discussions. As an increasing number of anyone is exposed to environments, expectations, etc. that impact IQ – no evidence that skin color save as entry and access to said environments is a factor. I don’t have a view of New York universities and their entrance requirements. But, if they have reversed their practice of denying people access based on skin color – that is appropriate. I don’t have any issues that said entrants should meet the requirements. N or do I have issues that the university consider the same number of unqualified whites and use the same standard for blacks — seems fair. other than that — shrug.

    You see are incapable of discussion without assuming some personal attribute is responsible for my view. As with most all of your commentary, you primary reasoning seems based on guess work and assumptions. I understand your frustration. I tell you what, tell me which population arrived in the western hemisphere and engaged in trade first. Let’s see just how much you know about civilization.

    Laughing. US citizens generally like everything big, engage in grand projects. That’s the nature of our society – we are all Texans at heart. I can’t resolve that for you.

    I am going to eschew the constant and irrelevant personal insinuations – they are just irrelevant, maybe in an attempt to be provocative — shrug.

    Wrong again, you have completely mis-characterized the discussion on slavery. You are encouraged to read it again. My educational back ground is not in black studies. But the issue is so prevalent in our society that one is not ill advised to read something on the issues in question repeatedly. Something that I would encourage you to do. most importantly, re,ember that black citizens are entitled to fair and equal treatment to the constitution regardless of income degree, IQ or anything else. And when evidence indicates that such treatment has been forthcoming and has real world consequences — then redress is not unreasonable. You continue to bemoan AA, but ignore that whites are the primary recipients.

    If you want to play a hitlist of issues about which I a conservative are most concerned about — then whites have been the most destructive in every way.

    1. economic depressions – every single one https://www.nber.org/cycles.html

    2. segregation
    3. wars: 1812, WI II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan
    4. immigration policy – the failure to enforce largely responsible for the attacks on Sept 11
    5. ending prayer in school
    6. destruction of traditional values – faith and practice
    7. murdering children in the womb
    8. Free love
    9. Normalization of the drug culture
    10. the bizarre reversal on homosexual classification
    11. same sex marriage
    12. housing policy
    13. the misconstrued version of AA
    14. the tragic use of scripture to justify discrimination —

    If one is going to measure burden and attribute it to skin color — then by far whites have been the most destructive — one has to allow that knife to cut both ways. My reading of the historical rcord is that blacks in the US did everything they could to be included as citizens and whites did nearly everything they could to deny that assimilation and then are complaining about the nature of tribal politics. I used to think a bit like you when I was in HS. But was forced to challenge those ideas when confronted with contradictory data.

    At some point, one has to stop blaming the 14% for the policies instituted by the other 80%. It’s not just bad form, it’s an incorrect rationale, that if continued will continue to yield incorrect solutions or no solutions at all.

    Your entire line of reasoning here contradicts your claim of rating one as an individual as opposed to some benign and innocuous trait of skin color by which you have repeatedly represents some 30 million people.

    Unfortunately, most black people are on the other side of politics when its clear they needed to support that which best sustains the nation. And that division is in no small part of your faulty reasoning held by millions. It’s hard work to defend my country against a majority that continues to believe nonsense and blacks who by default are aligned with those whose nonsense is more dangerous because they think the US is one big universal smorgasbord, as oppose to the unique – entity is worth preserving, not as the founders practiced but as they envisaged ideally.

    “we the people of the US . . .”

    (as much as I chagrin mass “we the people” a much abused term)

    Want to dismantle identity politics – start by dismantling one’s own – that is no small task. And it is a mistake, a catastrophic mistake to think importing foreigners is going resolve the national identity disintegration.

    • Replies: @Rich
  99. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Hilarious, so you’re an NOI guy, aren’t you? Did you used to stand on the corner of 42nd and 7th years ago spouting out all that anti-White nonsense? Funny, you sit at a White invented computer, under the White invented electric light, in a house designed by Whites with a plumbing, electrical, heating and cooling system invented by Whites, wearing clothes designed by Whites and spout nonsense about how “smart” Blacks are? The great civilizations in sub-Saharan Africa? Was it called Wakanda? Hilarious. Think about that as you watch your White invented television or drive your White invented car to your job in a White invented University,where, using a language invented by Whites, you can tell everyone how much better your people are.

    You’re a joke. I’m done with you, but you’re more than welcome to get in the last word.

  100. Wade says:
    @annamaria

    “Criminal” is more accurate.

  101. @Giuseppe

    This is a ridiculous and a specious argument. It’s an example of the philosophical fallacy called false dichotomy that is created here by the underlying false assumption of there being only two legitimate political parties.

    Not necessarily. For example, in Canada there are 3 main political parties. In the obsolete terms, one is right, one center-left, and the other left. In theory, the “left” vote is split, which should result in the “right” being elected continually. Such is not the case. In a 3 party system, one of the parties suffers electorally in close races, as people park their vote with the least objectionable candidate, or the candidate who has a better chance of beating a candidate who may form part of government.

    I have voted for any number of fringe candidates in various elections, over the years, including communists, because they couldn’t possibly be any worse than the candidates run by the 3 main parties.

  102. KenH says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    The inclusion of women was to policy – it had nothing to do with anyone’s qualifications. In fact, the effort was designed to kill civil rights legislation.

    JFK’s original EO on affirmative action in government contracting was centered around race, creed, color and national origin. No mention of sex (gender). Since blacks were the largest minority at that time by far and considering JFK was a big supporter of negro equality and civil rights they were the intended and primary beneficiaries of the policy.

    LBJ amended the EO in 1965 to include religion and amended it again in 1967 to include sex (gender). But white women really didn’t enter the workforce in large numbers until the 1980′s and didn’t start working in occupations traditionally held by white males and where they might benefit from AA until the 1990′s. So for over 30 yrs white women benefitted very little from AA. I’m referring mainly to AA in large and medium sized private sector companies.

    No civil rights legislation was ever “killed” as a result of the EOs noted above or if it was it was only temporary until the flood of civil rights legislation passed in 1964 and 1965.

    And on the “Great Society” programs it was LBJ who said “I’ll have those niggers voting Democrat for the next 200 years.” He didn’t say he’d have those cracker bitches voting Democrat. So again blacks were the primary intended beneficiaries of most GS and CR legislation but deny it all you wish.

    It’s clear you don’t have some of the prerequisite understanding of employment, housing and law enforcement practices.

    I’m not sure if you do and you seem to be rambling a little. Racially restrictive covenants were struck down in the 1940′s which led to the destruction of white living areas in major cities and white flight to the suburbs. If you’re arguing there was widespread police brutality against blacks that is a false claim although it did exist to some degree against the violent black criminals, but whites were sometimes victims of it as well.

    Note, most blacks did not participate in riots or violent protests.

    I said that the blacks doing the rioting in the cities are mostly welfare recipients. Repealing affirmative action wouldn’t harm them since most are unemployable anyway, but that wouldn’t stop them from committing mayhem and rioting which is ingrained in the DNA of blacks.

    You also try to deny that blacks benefit greatly by AA and that its benefits are reaped largely by white women but if that’s so then would did your black leaders often scream bloody murder and “racism” when Republicans used to threaten to repeal it?

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  103. KenH says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    every aspect of black life was hindered by whites — the record is devastating.

    Actually the quality of life for blacks is highly dependent on their promity to whites. The blacks who live closest to whites have the highest quality of life while the blacks who live furthest from whites and mostly among other blacks have the lowest quality of life. So too many black people is your problem.

    And for all your laughable claims about blacks being hindered by whites, then as now, blacks always seek to live among white people if they have the chance. Who’s hindering black cities like Detroit and all black nations like Haiti that are complete hellholes of violent crime, poverty and dysfunction?

    Jeremiah “God Damn White America” Wright now resides in a 95% white suburb of Chicago and he’s just one of many examples.

  104. Giuseppe says:

    No, your argument that third or fourth parties cost elections is a fallacy, a false dichotomy also known as a false dilemma. In fact, it could be considered a classic example. This is because it presupposes only two options, A or B. But other options are possible. In elections involving more than two parties, a voter could also choose C, D or E or even write in a candidate. There are often many more options; you have just pointed out that in Canada there are usually options A, B and C.

    The article goes on to make the claim that Libertarian candidates appeal to GOP voters, made patently ridiculous by the parenthetical observation that follows:

    On that note, an aside: When will right-leaning libertarians get it through their thick skulls that normal Americans are not preoccupied with legalizing dope and prostitution and repealing occupational licensing laws?

    Does legalizing dope and prostitution sound like something that would appeal to average GOP voters, such that they would be convinced to vote for a Libertarian? I thought not. The internal evidence within the article itself shows the idea the Libertarian made the election close to be preposterous.

    Or take the sour grapes when Democrats scapegoated Jill Stein for costing Hillary the election. Except she didn’t. Hillary ran a poor campaign, wasn’t able to articulate why she even wanted to the office, is generally despised and was caught on video many times showing evidence of a serious neurological problem. Had Jill Stein not been on the ballot and in the absence of another candidate that caught their imagination, most Jill Stein voters would have most likely stayed home. And the problem remains of the faulty logic of the Democrats’ complaint.

    Candidates hoping to win an election need to beat every other candidate on the ballot. When they fail to do that, or when the margin is closer than they think it should have been, they look around for others to blame.

    (Now I’m going to do a parenthetical aside. When unlimited out of state money can pour in to decide local elections, when the military-industrial complex can buy every candidate for Congress, and when a foreign country can ply every elected member of Congress with a free vacation to sun-drenched Israel, I would argue that this isn’t a democracy at all, it’s electoral dysfunction. From a geopolitical standpoint, it’s largely functioning as a one-party state.)

  105. @KenH

    You don’t get AA as policy until the civil rights legislation. JFK’s policy proscription never entered the main. Don’t get policy prescription until civil rights legislation for the country and that policy was to be rejected by the inclusion of gender — that is the policy prescription we have today. Furthermore, Pres Kennedy was not a fan of black anything. He was the first to insist that the CIA investigate the civil rights movement as a possible communist infiltration movement. No. He had to be pushed on the issue of integrating schools — his primary concern was losing southern votes — which is why he selected Pres Johnson in the first place. However, it is nice that you actually looked the matter up. Women were not a happenstance.

    We are not talking about the implemented executive order. People love that because it bolster’s the m myth about Pres Kennedy and civil rights, among other dreams by the Vietnam generation. uhh, that would be correct, no one introduced anything into the executive order, that never left the sitting room. Let’s not engage in making things up — I never stated that the legislation on civil rights – civil rights act was killed — I said the attempt to kill it was to introduce women — the move backfired. You don’t get the policy of affirmative action until 1968 and as policy prescription until the 1970′s and its application to impact until the late seventies. And women were included immediately on application —

    The actual prescription rests in examining employment records. Second consideration whether blacks had even been considered. Third, there was no mandate to lower standards or qualifications. Fourth, initial policies were to federal agencies and suppliers.

    Here’s what you said,

    “Affirmative action wasn’t supposed to span multiple generations and last in perpetuity but any serious attempt to end it and blacks would lay waste to the cities (egged on by black “leaders”) even though most are on welfare anyway. White women, who you claim receive more benefit, might file some lawsuits but wouldn’t riot.”

    There isn’t much in the way of who or who was not on welfare. Enough said. As I indicated, the riots that occurred in the cities had nothing to do with AA, and I will not elaborate further on my first response – which addresses the matter. Most blacks did not participate in riots. The riots were in response to more than police dynamics. However, I would be incorrect, if I tried to deny that was prominent if not primary part of the problem. But AA was certainly not part of that issue.

    That is at the second time you have attempted to misrepresent my comments. i did not not say that blacks have not benefited. I have stated repeatedly, that whites have been the largest beneficiaries of the programs and by whites I will note two populations: a. homosexual practitioners and b. women. What republicans argued was that AA was a form of reverse discrimination.

    nice try

    “Racially restrictive covenants were struck down in the 1940′s which led to the destruction of white living areas in major cities and white flight to the suburbs.”

    You don’t fair housing policy until the early 1970′s and even then as late as 2010, restrictive policies remained about selling or renting to blacks. White flight which is not really unconstitutional has long tradition well past the 1940′s, 1950′s, 1960′s, 1970′s . . .

    I am not sure what the reference to black leaders is intended to imply, however, 15% is better than no percent and might be cause to defend the process, even if the gains were slight. The only salient and relevant point you make regarding AA is to the intended target populations, though i would include native americans. As is so often the case regarding policy — intentions did not match consequence.

    ——

    “I said that the blacks doing the rioting in the cities are mostly welfare recipients. Repealing affirmative action wouldn’t harm them since most are unemployable anyway, but that wouldn’t stop them from committing mayhem and rioting which is ingrained in the DNA of blacks.”

    There’s n o link to dna and black violence or IQ or educational capacity. The conditions that exist in some black urban communities were held previously by whites and the similar social pathologist existed as well – environment not skin color. Though the record is substantial that segregation as practiced throughout the country based on skin color as is our long history has more than likely exacerbated the issues in those environments.

    —-
    “Actually the quality of life for blacks is highly dependent on their proximity to whites. The blacks who live closest to whites have the highest quality of life while the blacks who live furthest from whites and mostly among other blacks have the lowest quality of life. So too many black people is your problem . . .”

    That is beside the point. The fact remains that blacks have had to run muster based on skin color, not talent, not skill, not education, not faith and practice, not even income has been enough to hurdle the dislike that whites have — not the case of all whites as indicated the history – but clearly by the majority as applied. You made the error of equating whiteness to innately by something beneficial. It’s a human tendency, to seek what is best for family regardless of skin color. Had the wealth been concentrated among Blue peacocks, then part of the upward mobility would be to associate with blue peacocks. But anyone contending that the blue peacocks are by innate quality wealthy, smart, moral, , etc. They would have a tough row to hoe.

    As is my tend, I generally avoid strictly avoid irrelevant material that is benign to character. The founders and the ancestors of the US established the color dynamics, whether my shade is blue or yellow or white as snow is just not a factor.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    , @KenH
  106. @Rich

    Answer the question I will may entreat you to a response. But until then . . . I get why you are angry and frustrated.

    I have no idea what NOI is in reference to.

  107. @Rich

    i take it you have abandoned your cause — I was thinking of the lighting I recalled a name not usually affiliated with lighting . . . Lewis Howard Latimer

    There;’s a long list of unknown men and women affiliated with key inventions some of which you nted

    Mr Latimer is but one of the two I mentioned.

  108. @EliteCommInc.

    Similar social pathology existed-

    When Europeans moved into urban neighborhoods they were like colonies-and early on in Virginia for example, they WERE colonies. My grandparents, for example, arrived in Germantown, Detroit. There was no more social pathology there than in the rural South, where people were extremely poor.

    Social pathology among immigrants was cultural-the Italian mafia had always existed. It was easier to recruit from pools of poor Italians than today, when the average Italian-American in the suburbs does not relish spending the latter half of his life in prison or being killed. But it was not the US that created this social pathology to begin with.

    Catholics in the past had large families. They married young. But the issue of young poor whites having children out-of-wedlock is not an epidemic among Catholic whites we associate with urbanization like Italians or Irish in Chicago or New York. It is a problem of the rural white Protestant populations.

    WELCOME BACK KOTTER or SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER touched upon the problems of urban Polish and Italians but these groups are well-nigh gone from the cities. Their neighborhoods have either been gentrified or are now complete ghettos 40 years later. And nobody in the Chicago suburbs is complaining that inner-city kids like Vinnie Barbarino were destroying the classrooms. They might have been a bit rougher and more working class like characters Travolta played as a young man, but they assimilated into the suburbs.

    When Section 8 is built in the suburbs, there is no assimilation.

    • Replies: @ElitecommInc.
  109. bt says:
    @Rich

    Yeah, and that whole slavery thing. If we’d just not enslaved all those negroes in the south and fought a civil war to keep the negroes in chains. Sherman would never have needed to burn Atlanta down, that’s for sure.

    And then if we’d just not spent that next 100 years keeping the negroes down through various laws and methods, rendering them more or less as slaves without all the trappings.

    You are really on the mark here, if we had been color-blind from the beginning, we could have avoided a LOT of trouble.

    And I suspect that giving women the right to vote right from the start would have been helpful as well. The ladies are not so gung ho on the whole “wars of conquest” business – a real plus in my book. I always find it telling that the black men were given the legal right to vote before women were (even though black men were kept from voting in so many creative ways right up until the 1960′s).

    –>My wife always told me that this country would elect a black man before it would elect a woman, and she turned out to be right.

  110. bt says:
    @Rich

    Freedom of association is a basic human right and if White folk don’t want to live with, do business with or go to school with blacks, that should be their right, and is their right based on the Constitution.

    —————————–

    That’s why we have 50 states. I believe Idaho is the one many of you have chosen.

    And I’m confident that you won’t be hiring any immigrants to plant the fields and bring in the crops.

    Am I Right?

    • Replies: @Rosie
  111. @Giuseppe

    In Montana the Libertarian candidate for Senate withdrew because he realized that he was the useful idiot in a liberal dark money mailer. He endorsed the Republican for Senate and admitted that he would only get about 3% of the vote effectively functioning as a spoiler.

    On election day he got 2.9% of the vote and functioned as a spoiler. At first this sounds crazy. The Libertarian not only withdrew, but endorsed the Republican. Even after that he still got about as many votes as he was expected to. That doesn’t make sense until you realize that nobody is really voting for a Libertarian Senate candidate.

    Meanwhile in Montana the Democratic party sued to keep the Green party off of the ticket. Spoilers are real, but only the party of power understands that. The party of principle doesn’t get it at all.

    Libertarian

    https://helenair.com/news/government-and-politics/libertarian-candidate-backs-rosendale-in-montana-s-u-s-senate/article_e7525245-9365-5d54-92d9-8e02b5216ce3.html

    Green

    https://helenair.com/news/government-and-politics/judge-orders-montana-green-party-removed-from-november-ballot/article_145ad8f9-8fe7-5891-a2bc-304cdb6ed50d.html

    • Replies: @Giuseppe
  112. Paul Kersey

    I just saw your tweet…let me state it as boldly as I can:

    VANITA GUPTA’S PEOPLE DEMAND THE RIGHT TO VOTE THE HISTORIC NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICAN MAJORITY WORKING CLASS INTO A WHITE RACIAL MINORITY WITHIN THE BORDERS OF AMERICA!!!……..HINDU “AMERICAN” JUDGES AND HINDU “AMERICAN” ATTORNEY GENERALS THE ENFORCERS………

    Paul Kersey

    Are you that stupid and naive?..

  113. KenH says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Enough said. As I indicated, the riots that occurred in the cities had nothing to do with AA, and I will not elaborate further on my first response

    And I never said they did. I said if AA was abolished today that blacks in the inner cities would riot over it with the irony and hilarity of it all being that most of the black rioters don’t benefit from it since they are unemployable.

    Had the wealth been concentrated among Blue peacocks, then part of the upward mobility would be to associate with blue peacocks.

    Now you’re contradicting your earlier claims that whites “hindered” blacks and tacitly admitting that blacks do benefit by close proximity to whites which means whites aren’t hindering them. You can’t have it both ways.

    If whites were hindering blacks then the best places for blacks to live would be cities and towns with large majorities of blacks, but across the board those are the worst places for blacks and we can count on you to provide the usual grab bag of excuses and cop outs for that fact.

    • Replies: @ElitecommInc.
  114. Giuseppe says:
    @Bill Smith

    …he realized he was the useful idiot…that he (was)…effectively functioning as a spoiler…Spoilers are real…

    The more a stupidity is repeated, the more it takes on the appearance of wisdom. (Voltaire)

  115. @KenH

    Excuse the delay — I was unable to log onto the sight without an unsafe warning yesterday.

    You have a very peculiar understanding of the law. or the general expectations of the Constitution.

    Hindering blacks based on skin color — was and remains unlawful. The primary problem with whiteness as a standard is that it by definitions contrives that unless one is white they are not citizens — some prefer the term”unamerican”. And if people whose rights are violated they may eventually take action in demand of redress.

    Laugh — I have no idea what would happen if welfare was terminated. but if there were to be riots — I have no doubt that whites men and women would be the first to make noise. A look at the history of civil unrest makes it quote clear, that whites will get in a tizzy about almost anything — and no small amount of their tizzies were taken out on black populations.

    I indicated the dynamic that is not in any way relevant to skin color, but finances and opportunity. And you are incorrect about a contradiction – that record is clear.

    Near or far whites, denied hindered, discouraged, prevents, blacked, manipulated, created barriers to black populations access to their due as citizens whether they lived next door or 1000 miles away. There is a reason why the country has considered national redress.

    You might want to reveiw that history before engaging in conversations about white black riots.

    Well, I think it’s an open question whether the segregation of blacks in urban communities has been helpful to US participation and access. It has as it would for like community serve and provide forms of networking needed to sustain itself. But ultimately any networking must have access via links to the greater societies assets or as history indicates, it’s health can be curtailed.

    And if you notice, blacks do inhabit the cities with mixed consequences. I hate to break it to you. But across the board, whites services were routinely denied black populations. Hence one of the reasons for the damaging inter-social dynamics and animosity. When blacks called police, it was routine for the police not to respond — it’s a sordid history — with devastating consequences.

    At any rate, this has been — uhh interesting of sorts. If I do not respond further, it’s unlikely for lack of response, but most likely, we have ended — and I remain as ever wedded to the historical record. And while I have my issues with black polity. I am not inclined to blame them for what clearly they have had little control over.

    You cannot hinder blacks because you don’t like them. You don’t have to like them, but you do have to treat them as citizens in full.

  116. @Jeff Stryker

    As with most immigrant communities they were able to overcome said hurdles via access.

    The hurdles were not color based. In otherwords, hairstyle, dress, language, education, and number of cultural artifacts could be changed to make assimilation easier. Furthermore as Europeans, they had networks that extended in country and out.

    The barrier as to skin color — unlike leopards changing their spot, no such avenues existed for blacks. In fact so intense was the color barrier, the country adopted the one drop rule — so a light skinned near white person – white in my book — was uncovered to a black ancestry, it was not uncommon for the same barriers to be installed.

    Skin color is the issue — and the resulting hurdles based on skin color. No matter how much a black person adopted their language, their dress, their education, their manner, their beliefs — while those changes might have ameliorated the matter — skin color was the ultimate door locking attribute.

    And that is why making it in the “white world” could be a blessing and a curse – color could spring up any moment with any white person and Topsy turvery the whatever the gain. there’s no point talking about if immigrants could do it — the barrier for blacks was inescapable for nearly all.

    They didn’t set that up, but they had to live with and respond to it.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    , @anarchyst
  117. @ElitecommInc.

    To me that does not hold water because most blacks fared worse in the North among Polish and Italian immigrants who had no idea what the Jim Crow laws were.

    There might have been some police brutality, particularly among the Irish, but in general the real abuses towards blacks were in the South.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  118. @ElitecommInc.

    I need to do what protects my children, first and foremost. Letting tens of millions of people from a disproportionately violent, volatile, enraged, relatively unintelligent group be citizens and make my children’s lives Hell, is no obligation.

  119. Rosie says:
    @unpc downunder

    The Democrats take black voters for granted, so the Republicans should take fiscally conservative white guys for granted. In contrast, white women are the swing voters who need to be courted, and the best way to court female voters is to shift leftward on healthcare.

    The midterm election results suggest that you are correct that the GOP should ignore the White male fiscal conservative vote if they actually want to win elections, though that is very much in doubt.

  120. Rosie says:
    @bt

    And I’m confident that you won’t be hiring any immigrants to plant the fields and bring in the crops.

    Can Idahoans prevent “investors” from God knows where from buying up land and importing slave labor to replace them? No, of course not, that’s not who we are.

    Am I right?

  121. @Carroll Price

    Most major “Southern” metropolitan (Houston, Dallas, Austin, Atlanta, Charlotte, Raleigh) areas are full of White “Yankees” from other parts of the country. These metros also full of Blacks and Hispanics.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if native Southern Whites are 20-30% of the population in these places.

    Of course, when you go to the smaller metros and the rural areas, there are hardly any “Yankees.” Lots of Blacks though and an increasing number of Hispanics.

    People think of Houston and Dallas as being full of “redneck Cowboys.” People think of Atlanta as the “capital” of Red State America. When you go down to these places, you’ll see these images are outdated.

    In addition to the demographic changes experienced in much of the South (especially the major metros), there’s been some degree of cultural homogenization. Wherever you go, people listen to the same pop/rap music, shop at the same Walmarts&Krogers, eat at same McDonalds, work at the same Generic BigCorps, get propagandized by the same FOX/CNN/MSNBC, watch the same “Big Bang Theory,” and obsess over the same sports. So regional distinctiveness is being lost. 25-30 years ago, different regions/cities had different cultural flavors. These days a person can move from a Southeastern metro (like Atlanta) to a Northwestern metro (like Seattle) and not feel that out of places. One newspaper even recently wrote about how this cultural homogenization is eliminating regional accents in places like the South and the east coast.

    If you want to understand how much cultural distinctiveness has been blurred, watch this funny movie called “My Cousin Vinny.” The movie was released back in the early 90s and makes lots of jokes about the cultural differences (accent, food, mannerisms) between New Yorkers and Southerners. The movie stars Joe Pesci, so that’s reason enough to watch it.

    The movie wouldn’t be quite so funny today because a lot of the regional stereotype jokes would fly over people’s heads.

    The “South” isn’t quite so “Southern” these days.

  122. Anonymous[300] • Disclaimer says:

    America is being lost to Blacks, Hispanics and the LGBT crowd.

    It is becoming a Third World Homosexual country.

    Conservatives must speak out more about this.

    What can be done about this is unclear.

    Suggestions?

    • Replies: @bt
  123. @Jeff Stryker

    laughing good grief.

    You want haggle about degree — I won’t. o could but that is really not at issue.

    The issue was skin color whether north., south, east or west. The discrimination was to skin color first and foremost.

  124. @ElitecommInc.

    Skin color is no threat to your children —

    No wonder the planet is in trouble.

    it is against the law to discriminate on the basis of skin color and should you proceed to do so. I would not support it. Now I may be the only one — but that’s another matter. The hyperbolic fears of black people is just not born out by the evidence. More harm is likely to come to you and yours based on who they associate with by environment – regardless of skin color.

    good grief.

    note: based on skin color —- whites are more likely to behave violently against blacks — or other people of “color” so says the FBI.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
    , @Meimou
  125. I only zipped by to respond to one suggestion about my person, that i should ignore as irrelevant,. But because the person who made the comment has almost everything about me wrong — so much for soothsaying —

    I am not a Muslim, not even close. Though, it’s refreshing not to be called a Jew.

  126. bt says:
    @Anonymous

    “It is becoming a Third World Homosexual country.

    What can be done about this is unclear.

    Suggestions?”

    ————

    Move to Russia?

  127. Paul Kersey

    Just listened to your most recent broadcast with Jared Taylor…

    Shocking to me what a disgusting Asianphile that Jared Taylor is…And you let him get away with it…

    There is no natural coalition of Asian “Americans” and THE HISTORIC NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICAN WORKING CLASS MAJORITY….The Asian “AMERICANS” want to be the Asian Overlords of THE NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICAN WORKING CLASS across all of America…not just California…

    After listening to the discussion between you and Jared….just confirms my view that IQ test score psychometric jibber-jabber has no place in the NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICA WORKING CLASS REVOLT against post-1965 race-replacement immigration policy…..

    Gruman Corp…THE LEM….began replacing its NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICAN MALE ENGINEERING WORKFORCE throughout the 1970’s with the Hindus from India….And with chain immigration…. Bethpage-Hicksville now a colony of India…..two towns that were 100 percent WORKING CLASS NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICAN SINCE COLONIAL ERA AMERICA…

    Seriously…I really despise Jared Taylor….I really do….

  128. @War for Blair Mountain

    Paul Kersey

    Let me unequivocally clear:

    Jared Taylor’s beloved Asian “Americans” are actively involved in the GENOCIDE OF NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICAN MALES in Tech Labor Markets…

    If the Chinese in China had only one of their Chinese Engineering Universities colonized by Hindus from India…they would scream GENOCIDE!!….and vice a versa….

    Jared Taylor does not have an authentic-racial-gut level-instinct against the post-1965 Demographic Race War against the White Working Class…rather, Taylor came to this issue from an economic reactionary point of view….and the IQ Test score psychometric jibber jabber is the ideological afterthought that justifies his economic reactionary world view…..This is the basis of Taylor’s Asianphilia….

    Ask Jared Taylor why I was banned from commenting on AR….Perhaps AR comment control by Asianphile John Engleman had something to do with it….

    Since I mentioned Gruman Corp….the area surrounding Gruman-Corp=“EDDY AND BRENDA” by by Billy Joel…..The song was about a 100 percent demographically White Long Island town in 1967…..I actually know what happened to Eddy….Billy Joel was his friend…He ended up in trailer park in the town of East Hampton with his wife and daughters….Eddy …former star running back for Hicksville High School…..was a construction worker….driven out of Hicksville by the housing costs and property taxes….True story…Billy Joel talked about it an interview in Newsday…….This is exactly the same thing that happened to Working Class Whites in the Asian infested Los Angeles Suburbs…..

    Perhaps now you understand my disgust with Jared Taylor…..

  129. @War for Blair Mountain

    Paul Kersey

    Perhaps your Asianphile friend Jared Taylor is enamoured of the expression of Brahman Race Power in Sairo Rao’s tweet….this is who the NATIVE BORN WHITE AMERICAN WORKING CLASS is suppose to be in coalition with….

  130. anarchyst says:
    @ElitecommInc.

    ElitecommInc.
    Your concept of race is flawed.
    You fail to notice the differences between American-born blacks and those blacks who are immigrants living in the USA.
    American blacks have been brainwashed by their jewish “handlers” and black “race hustlers” to believe that they are oppressed, the underdogs of society who are being “held down by the man”.
    You see, American-born blacks have lost all incentive to progress and excel in the USA because of their “poor me-my ancestors were slaves” attitudes reinforced by their jewish “handlers”.
    Contrast that with non-native-born blacks who come to the US and see OPPORTUNITY. These immigrants open up their own businesses, see education as an opportunity to get ahead, generally excel at education, and appreciate the things that our country has to offer them. These immigrants have not been infected by the jewish “poison” of (misperceived) oppression and remnants of slavery.
    For all of his faults, Louis Farrakhan hit the “problem” squarely on the head…jewish manipulation of blacks…

  131. KenH says:
    @ElitecommInc.

    So previous generations of Americans were supposed to extend equal rights to black Africans who by all accounts were and still mostly are a stone age people? You keep telling me to learn the history but you need to learn the history as by many metrics blacks were better off in the supposed pre 1965 dark ages than today. For starters the black family was stronger and black illegitimacy and crime much lower due to the imposition of Western norms on the black population. But today that’s racist and blacks who adhere to those values are shouted down as “uncle Tom’s”.

    Things weren’t perfect for blacks, to be sure, but blacks were then as they are now the most successful black population with the highest quality of life anywhere in the world, so most of your arguments ring hollow and aren’t very credible.

    But things weren’t perfect for white indentured servants or poor whites either. In absolute numbers there’s more poor whites on welfare than blacks but they don’t get to blame anyone for their plight.

    Blacks are just lucky they live in America instead of someplace like Turkey who would have exterminated them like they attempted to do to the Armenians. One race riot or a demand for equal rights and blacks would have been goners as the Turks aren’t mushy, sentimental dolts like Western whites have become.

  132. anarchyst says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Your statement, “it is against the law to discriminate on the basis of skin color” is demonstrably FALSE…In fact, according to the United States “civil-rights commission” white (heterosexual) males are NOT afforded protections under the current “civil-rights” laws. You see, only whites can be “racist”, people of color cannot be “racist” because they do not possess the “political power” of whites. This is their official position…
    I came of age in Detroit in the first “civil-rights” era and can personally attest to the fact that blacks were not discriminated against to any great degree, but were criminals and troublemakers. To their credit, blacks did have their own businesses that were relatively successful. All that changed when the civil-rights act became law.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  133. @anarchyst

    Ohhh brother.

    It is against the law use skin color as a cause for denying citizens their rights as to the Constitution.

    In cases where skin color has been so effected — redress can include making said corrections. Redress is a constitutional right.

    But your comments are utter nonsense. It is on the power dynamic that discrimination matters. I think what you mean and have grossly taken out of context is that blacks are not in positions to enact legislation or engage that hinders whites en mass, such whites have successfully done to blacks.

    That is the context of what the “old schoolers” who grasped a real world application of discrimination dynamics or systems. Though I suspect that most blacks were not engaged in making “trouble” or criminal activity — too much television news I suspect.

  134. Laughing.

    I am not going to defend a position suggesting that one should be satisfied because life is worse somewhere else.

    The best measure of your scenario is to ask how many indentured, poor, or otherwise class whites, want to be black. The turn here is always blackness. That being black in any manner was so egregious that whites still maintain the expectation of the “one drop” rule.

    No doubt,

    ” . . . most successful black population with the highest quality of life anywhere in the world, so most of your arguments ring hollow and aren’t very credible.”

    many blacks are successful and no doubt many are grateful as many whites are grateful. But the gratitude for blacks comes with an understanding that they have by fortune, by political correctness, by chance, by god’s grace have not encountered any number of pitfalls that whites have created to hinder said success or more likely, for many, could be more successful if not for their skin color.

    But that blacks should grateful for white “niceness” well, that’s not a question I can answer. Doing what’s right — is expected. The mythos of benevolent white people is prett scarce and always has been.

    • Replies: @Rich
  135. TTSSYF says:
    @Giuseppe

    What you say would be true only if those who voted for the third party candidate abstained from voting from one or the other of the two main party candidates had the third party candidate not been an option.

  136. Giuseppe says:

    You are presupposing that there are only two options in an election, a common misunderstanding. That is false on philosophical grounds. A candidate wishing to win an election must beat every other candidate, and there are often more than two options.

    Google the fallacy called false dilemma or false dichotomy; this is a classic illustration.

  137. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    More nonsense from you. White benevolence is what freed black slaves, it wasn’t a black revolution that ended slavery in the South. White benevolence is what gave blacks the vote. White benevolence is what gave the blacks the so-called civil rights movement gains, White benevolence is what ended segregation, White benevolence is what pays for blacks welfare benefits, affirmative action jobs and school admissions. White benevolence is what causes so many problems for the US. If Whites stopped being so benevolent, maybe we could save this nation.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  138. @Rich

    Excuse me I missed this.

    Uhhhh well, kind a sorta , the war was fought to maintain the union. And even Pres Lincoln makes that abundant clear. As an afterthought/opportunity by making war on the US, the Confederacy invited freedom for slaves. nearly all of whom were black.

    Even the emancipation act, was not a edict breaking slavery – read it. Note the details.

    The war freed slaves. For those that could, they simply walked off the plantations. There was never going to be any going back. Maybe, but I seriously doubt that the north, east, west or the south was going on a round up of slaves, even if it had remained legal after the war – maybe – but very doubtful.

    you grap of history is deeply flawed. every civil right that blacks have managed to obtain —

    1. never should have been denied — doing so was not predicated on whites being nice – but a violation of the law (not the legal standard – that’s a dodge) and moral ethics

    2. blacks have had to fight for that which whites have taken for granted — and that fight has been their unique struggle and

    3. the very fact that they had to do so belies any sincere ethos of beneficence as the dominant population has had behaved like a spoiled child each time it has come to doing the right thing. The fact that that anyone considers giving what is not charity, but the others due — is a sign of just how warped the country is on this matter.

    In reality, had whites not adopted such immoral practices such as slavery, segregation, and causing strife with blacks in the first place — identity politics in all of its manifestations, — the country would hardly be in need of saving. Instead we created a scenario in which the only people witha “blank slate” of what it means to be a citizen support with worst of all that is required to main the nation we have and extend it’s life.

    One may thank me for restoring his property, but in so doing I am only righting the wrong, which I initiated. That is not beneficence — and even christ would funny at anyone who thought it. But maybe that is the problem with us. The dominant society thinks it was an act of beneficence, when it fact it was simply righting a wrong it was responsible for and is constantly frustrated when the consequences of that initial wrong continue to plague us. And in frustration we continue to blame the wronged as opposed to the actor of the wrong.

    So I reject your entire assail, doing what was right is not an act of kindness – it was redress. That is a principle of long standing practice. It does not even require a “thank you.” Though I suppose for charity’s sake, expressing thanks is polite, even if undeserved.

    • Replies: @Rich
  139. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    One may thank me for restoring his property… but blacks would still be slaves if not for the benevolence of Whites. They would still be segregated, if not for the benevolence of Whites., and on and on. Everything blacks have in the US is a gift,a bone thrown to a dog, they have achieved nothing without Whitey’s benevolence. You know it, but have this burning need to deny reality. You probably did very well in pubic school spitting back all those fake stories your teachers fed you, but you are very misinformed. Comical, even, in the way you try to pretend superior knowledge. You sound like your girl Tawana when she said she wouldn’t be “manipsinated”. You guys always do that kind of thing. Who knows, maybe it helps you pick up chicks. But you’re still wrong.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  140. @Rich

    Ohh good grief,

    If you keep repeating the same mantra in the hopes that will be accurate, I have news for you – it won’t change the historical record.

    Again, I hate to break reality over self aggrandized view of benevolence, the central issue to segregation was the manufactured inequality. The argument against said inequality was predicated on arguments made by blacks.

    I don’t think you have a solid grasp of what it means to be benevolent.

    If you can reference a single reference to history that I have incorrect on this matter, you are welcome to demonstrate it by example. few if any of my references are “typical” of academia, quite the opposite.

    I don’t engage in “hook-ups”. laugh and laugh

    No woman, liberal or conservative appreciates my positions. They like you have a hard time dealing with the data.

    Consider this, utter contradictory ‘centrics’ you rely on. White people throwing blacks bones when they are entitled to the meat. In other-words, by your proffer — whites are thieves. That’s a very peculiar example benevolence.

    By your words, you make my point.

    • Replies: @Rich
  141. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    I realize you’re beyond hope, you’ve accepted a false history of America and appear to be deeply invested in it, but you go beyond ridiculous. I really don’t like to respond to you, but you’re insane anti-White ramblings sometimes have to be responded to, just to show other readers that most people see through your nonsense.

    Benevolent-adj; well-meaning and kindly.

    I’d say freeing slaves, giving them welfare, letting them vote and run for office, are overly well-meaning and kindly. The insane affirmative action blacks receive is just insane.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  142. @Rich

    Laugh . . .

    feel free to provide support that the reason for the civil war was to “free slaves”.

    There is not a singular comment that I make that is anti-white. Your comment was that whites threw blacks a bone. The reference to being thrown a bone is derived from Christ’s admonition about a dog sitting at a table garnering its scrapes. The residuals of a meal. Instructive, but it is not ethic as to practice. It’s descriptive is not about the benevolence of those eating. It’s about what is haphazardly or inadvertently disregarded.

    Your use of the reference takes that admonition and twists it out of shape and out of meaning. because black citizens are not dogs, yet are treated as such by your own reference. And that destroys any such benevolence from which would like to derive some characteristic benefit. Because blacks who are citizens of this country should be sitting at the same table, eating the same meal and partaking of its benefits.

    That the fact that any black is denied that access by deliberate intent — undermines any claim to benevolence. In otherwords, a black can effectively and accurately claim that whites by hook and by crook, have stolen the food out of the mouths of their fellows, and consider it kind to leave them bones as dogs.

    Hardly a sign of benevolence to rate your fellow citizens as dogs and worthy of only of meatless bone. I don’t think that is what Christ meant by benevolence and it certainly is not, though the country has spent the better part of brutalizing Jesus’s intent with such rhetoric so as to ameliorate the malfeasance of the matter.

    It’s akin to, “See how kind I am I have stopped beating you. You should be grateful”

    • Replies: @Rich
  143. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    I realize it’s a waste of time to argue with you, you admitted on another thread that you didn’t know blacks in the South owned slaves, and actually made the ridiculous argument that it was the cotton trade that sustained the US, not knowing it was the industrial slave free North that was the powerhouse of the economy. You seem totally unaware that only a tiny number of Americans even owned slaves. Basic economics is beyond your grasp because you don’t understand that it was difficult for free White farmers to compete against slave owned plantations. You make the argument yourself that slavery was actually so unimportant that it wasn’t even the main point of the War Between the States. I guess your lack of information isn’t your fault, you were just poorly educated, but your arrogance is annoying.

    I like dogs. Much more than many people. Your anti-dog attitude is very disturbing. I will leave you the words of the great Felix Unger, “Pup spelled backwards is still pup, but dog spelled backwards…” Think about it.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  144. @Rich

    Utterly false. My response was that said purchase of family members were recorded as the purchase of slaves — you are incorrectly restating my position.

    Another false statement. i said that in period of the US history, for example prior to industrial era slavery constituted a majority of the economy. And that slavery was an profitable enterprise, in spite of industrialization. In act one of the most important industrial innovations insured that slavery would be profitable — the cotton gin.

    Absolutely false yet again, i made it very clear, it was not the number of slave owners, but the number of slaves and the status of slaves to whites — regardless of whether they owned slaves or not. That society north or south, east or west rated color as an a priori indicator of where one ranked in society and that no black could rank higher than the poorest white. There was no counter argument by myself that slavery counted as downward pressure on those who were forced to compete with slave owning property holders.

    Your tend to mischaracterize my responses is consistent if nothing else. Laugh. No. Wrong again. What I said was that slavery was secondary (less important than) to maintaining the union. Though some debate exists whether it was tarrifs on trade or the tarrifs on the slave trade or the value of slaves — clearly, the foundational issue revolved around slavery. But the war was to union first, freeing slaves as an afterthought, as mere consequence or opportunity were secondary consideration.

    As for your dog response. It has no bearing on the meaning, intent or the content of my response to benevolence.

    If you care to put forward evidence that the war was fought to free slaves, feel free to provide it.

    • Replies: @Rich
  145. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Are you now admitting that free blacks owned and used slaves in the deep South? If you are, then I guess I learned you something.

    Your second point is incorrect. At no point in American history were slave owning enterprises a majority of the economy. That is a veritably false statement. That some very rich people got even richer putting free White farmers out of work, is probably true.

    Because of your distorted obsession with black history, you mistakenly believe that a few States in the Deep South represent the entire country. NYC was over 90% White through the 1950′s for example and most Whites could go their whole life never even encountering a Negro let alone discriminating against one.

    You should read a little history about the founding of the Republican party and its position on slavery. It can be argued that freeing slaves was the most important reason for founding the party. That is another verifiable fact that most people with even a small knowledge of American history should know. But an arrogant man like yourself is completely unaware of this. Just read the Wikipedia entry for Heaven’s sake. Maybe you’re unaware Lincoln was a Republican?

    Are you saying that you actually like dogs and would throw one a bone? Good for you.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  146. @Rich

    Laugh . . .

    Here’s what’s happened. You have circled back to issues previously addressed and my responses to them are the same.

    Having currently mangled what I said into something you would like to believe is not going to aide your flaws in comprehension nor your lack of knowledge of the historical record. That fate is sealed and no amount of gymnastics or incorrect renderings of my comments will provide you relief.

    https://www.etymonline.com/columns/post/economics

    https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/impact-slavery-northern-economy

    The impact on the economy is not merely related to cotton — one has to consider the entire southern economy that used slave labor and it goes beyond cotton. Further one has to include the vast array of other industries that were supported by the southern economy, i.e, shipping, manufacturing . . .and then one has to stare history in the face and see it for what it is as opposed to what they would like. The slave economy was much larger than cotton. Some contend at periods, as high and 60% — though I could not locate that reference. It’s not hard to understand how a large industry supports and is connected to others. Make no mistake, the north benefited from slavery.

    I have said nothing that is exclusively or even predominantly “black history” this US history. It’s on the record, its discussed/debated routinely by white historians.

    You repeatedly make comments that are incomprehensible to me. Your introduction, now of the Republican party , Pres Lincon’s nomination and election have nothing to do with the discussion. He was not elected to free slaves, and he had no intention of doing so as he himself made clear – repeatedly.

    The attitudes, policies and practices of the entire country concerning blacks during that period, prior and beyond is no secret.

    Laughing. ROFL good grief — you still hoping to change the discussion to dogs — I am afraid there is no respite for you there either.

    • Replies: @Rich
  147. Rich says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    I’m glad I could make you laugh, even though I was really hoping to educate you. Well, at least you learned that free blacks owned slaves, maybe, eventually you’ll learn a little more. Your main problem is you are completely focused on the black experience in America and are unable to see what a tiny part of the history of this country they actually played. They were really just farm equipment in an agrarian part of the country, for crying out loud. It’s not your fault, you’re just a reflection of the poor educational system in this country and its weird emphasis on victimology. But, this belief appears to be your religion so I’ll say no more. But when I come across your ridiculous comments on race relations, I’ll be sure to point out your ignorance. Not so much for you, but for those who read your inaccuracies.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    , @Svigor
  148. @Rich

    Ohhhh good grief,

    You never tire of repeating that inaccurate statement. If you can find a single statement that indicates your repeated misstatement of my position – please note it and I will address. But at no time do I make any such comment. I do however correct the false assumption that blacks owned slaves en mass, But instead make it clear that what the record reflects is that blacks bought family members from slave owners and those purchases have been construed as blacks owning slaves.

    A valuable and integral part of the nation’s economy, a human tool mightily mishandled . However your understanding is reflective of many in the country then and now and reinforces the contend that no one should consider the notion of white benevolence with regard to constitutional rights by whites seriously. Now surely blacks involved in historical research would discuss these issues — but they are US history, not merely black history. Based on the depth of impact on what citizenship means — they extend well beyond just history of black people.

    You are welcome to support the contend that the civil war was fought to free slaves.

    You remind me of those home school textbooks, that teach black slaves were merely immigrants seeking a better life. I think the record is of our exchange is quite clear.

    And my laughter though on occasion full — is partly the result of and to your “loaded” rhetoric.

  149. Meimou says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    note: based on skin color —- whites are more likely to behave violently against blacks — or other people of “color” so says the FBI.

    Is this the most stupid comment on Unz? Yes. I think it might be.

    You never sell people on the lie that race is only about skin color. Even if you were a good liar…

  150. Svigor says:

    I can’t see Kersey’s name without thinking about how he calls Jew Run America (the Judenreich) “Black Run America.” LOL.

  151. Svigor says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Libertarians are history. All their people left for the alt right. Now it’s just Jews, shabbos goyim, and a few spergs.

  152. Svigor says:
    @Rich

    Well said. It takes a lot of patience and dedication to correct niggers, as they are infinitely capable of speech but infinitesimally capable of thought.

  153. JimB says:

    Blacks seem unjustifiably upbeat that a rising Hispanic electoral tide will raise their slave ship.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.