The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
A Nice Liberal Argument for Not Allowing the Camp of the Saints
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Commenter Tunglet writes:

The argument that has made Norway semi-close the border is that for the same money it costs to integrate one immigrant in Norway, you could help hundreds in the home country.

This means that those who now say they want Norway to accept more non-white immigrants get thrown in their face that they don’t really want to help non-whites, as that would be to use the money where they help the most people. Instead, they are being motivated by something far less noble, like wanting Norway to lose it’s Norwegian majority.

Sweden has taken billions out of the foreign aid budget, in order to have money for integrating all the immigrants they now need to support in Sweden, a pretty immoral thing to do, if you mean we have responsibility to help the weakest in the world, instead of helping those with enough money to be smuggled into Sweden.

The Israelis, for example, have made a deal with Paul Kagame, the Davos-lauded dictator of Rwanda, to take a lot of the Sudanese refugees who snuck in before Israel finished its razorwire border fences off their hands for modest considerations. The cash costs of avoiding demographic drowning by steps like this are pretty minimal compared to the cost of letting hundreds of millions of Africans turn Israel and Europe into banlieues of Africa.

 
Hide 139 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Nope, this one is covered. Lots of pundits out there explaining how unskilled, illiterate immigrants *benefit* the economy. So keeping them out is actually bad for poor Americans!

    • Replies: @HA
    "Lots of pundits out there explaining how unskilled, illiterate immigrants *benefit* the economy."

    The purpose of the proposed argument is to demonstrate how pro-immigrationists are, in effect, more concerned with advancing a domestic political agenda than with actually helping refugees.

    In the case of those pundits who do what you claim, i.e., who are not even bothering to hide the fact that helping refugees is not their primary motivation, the absence of any humanitarian concerns is already evident.

  2. Was part of the Israel-Kagame deal that the Israelis would call some nice jewish boy editors and have Kagame repeatedly described as the most intelligent and forward thinking African leader?

    Because I’ve certainly heard that a lot.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Kagame is a bright guy. Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda's drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame's Tutu elitists' reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994). Since then Kagame has held power with few major challenges in Rwanda while engaging in spectacular acts of invasion and piracy in the Congo. A European equivalent might be some Teutonic Knight leader who really stuck it to the Slavs back in the late dark ages in Prussia.
  3. The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don’t want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries.

    From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority (note: I don’t think this is a good idea). I believe that the majority in Sweden, Ireland, and Spain and possibly the majority in Norway, Finland, Iceland, Ireland and Scotland (to then extent that the latter is a country) favor that.

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).

    For Americans: imagine that the US had independent states with attitudes to immigration as shown in VT, MA, MN, OR and parts of CA and you’ll understand.

    True, EU laws that allow free movement would cause problems, but if you could get rid of those laws then the problem could be solved-just send all the migrants to the countries that want them.

    Again for potential critics:

    1/ I’m not arguing that wanting mass migration to one’s country is a good thing.

    2/ People can make stupid decisions-indeed people can be self-destructive.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    There's no assumption: No one wants immigrants at all, or more specifically, not anymore. There are rising nationalist parties in most of the countries you mentioned, and, they are gaining seats in parliament. But, it probably would not turn around the current situation quick enough.

    Most of the Nordic countries are just too polite to say this publicly because it feels inhumane, insensitive, uncivilized to not care about the plight of migrants from Africa and middle east, who, by the way, also have no skills, no education, and would be difficult if not impossible to integrate into cultures that are also profoundly secular. University educated immigrants have always been welcome. And, university educated immigrants integrate well.

    The last few decades, migrants who may or may not claim refugee status are, pretty blatantly,wanting those mythical social welfare benefits that they have heard about that exist in northern Europe - that's why Italy and the low countries are not so worried since the EU member countries must ALL contribute equally (NYT is practically nailing an edict to a door pontificating about this) to settling boatloads of migrants.

    No one has any idea how many migrants will cross the Mediterranean ...and at what point, if ever, it will end. At the same time, there are not enough jobs/large enough industry in any European country to sustain millions of poor, unskilled people arriving at their ports, train & bus stations. On top of that, the information age is simultaneously destroying jobs through automation and robotics.

    The whole issue right now is a conundrum...no head of state wants to say anything or do anything...it's a game of who is going to "crack" first. No one wants to be accused of being a racist, or hear the word 'Nazi' about any policies they maybe considering.

    Lastly, the despotic, chaotic, corrupt countries where these migrants are coming from, and for many years, are full of elites that are basically, sociopaths, and discovered a convenient way years ago how to get rid of their poor. All the heads of state in Africa and the Middle East and the elite in many corrupt countries, have been squirreling money away for years in Swiss bank accounts. They've never instituted (and paid for) any social welfare or broad national health and education policies to pull their poor out of hopelessness. It has been easier just to tell everyone, "go to Sweden, I hear they will give you an apartment and food subsidies."

    And, the fact that most of these countries have contributed nothing to advancing society, technology, human wellness, plant/ animal/marine sustainability, scientific knowledge, should be called a crime, in my opinion. I personally have no respect for many countries that are just a drain on the ones that are trying in vain, it seems, to save the planet from the inevitable degradation that will affect life for all of us.

    European countries have to decide if they want to be suckers for time in memoriam. Sooner or later the migrants will be coming to the USA, Australia, all the countries that have essentially, welcomed immigrants in the past. Conundrum.

    But, let's see...Hawaii? - too far for boat people...even if you remember Kon-Tiki.

    , @iSteveFan

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).
     
    You could make that assumption based upon the results you cited. But you should also take into consideration the influence of the media and other institutions in promoting this view. Individuals or parties against immigration are for the most part portrayed negatively in the media. In Greece they are even subject to arrest. In Germany the Chancellor condemns them.

    Most people go along with the flow so long as they have food in their belly and a roof over their head. Why risk it when you see what happens to critics? Does anyone seriously doubt the public would not become immigration restrictionists if the media and government started to promote that view? What about if open border enthusiasts were held up to ridicule and ostracized as traitors? Let's see how long the public supports open borders when that happens.
    , @tunglet
    A lack of large anti-immigration groups, means that the anti-immigration individuals are found in more normal political parties, in stead of being forced into some extreme ideology that the rest of the country find hard to swallow, in order to end immigration.

    It is the same with Denmark, although the Danes are a few years ahead of us on the curve, so there every party is against immigration in some way.

    It's does not seem to have helped calm the Danes, as my impression is that more Danes than ever, feel immigration is an existential threat to Denmark, and that the government do nothing to counter it.

    More Danes and Norwegians than Swedes will complain over the media coverage being biased in favour of non-whites, although Danish and Norwegian media looks kind of honest, when you compare it to the "reality" Swedish media insists is true, so it seems like both the media and the politicians follow the will of the population, looking for money and voters, rather than being in control.

    Once a pro-white party gets influence, the situation is already so bad and turning worse, that the rest of the parties need to go somewhat pro-white to regain power, and you have the ball rolling, as most of the negative consequences of immigration has not yet become common knowledge by then.
    , @Anonymous
    Many of those countries you mention don't really a have long history of mass third world immigration, so they are really just naive enthusiastic beginners at that game.
    Britain, in this context meaning England, is the European nation with the longest history of third world immigration. It's no coincidence that the English people are the most unconvinced on the subject of immigration. This despite a 67 year history of mass third world immigration, enormous propaganda efforts, immigrationist governments and a huge pro-immigration state apparatus, including the BBC. What's more it is unlikely English attitudes will change from generation to generation, as the immigrationist fervently hope.
    , @Wilkey
    "The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don’t want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries. From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority."

    Reading general elections as a plebiscite on immigration, or any other particular issue, is a mistake. The vast majority of voters are more concerned about issues other than immigration - taxes, the economy, healthcare, the military, and all sorts of other causes both serious and ridiculous.

    One reason modern democracy is failing is that it crams too much power into a handful of government bodies. As the number of issues they manage grows and grows, the ability of the voters to exert influence on any particular issue shrinks.

    There are probably a dozen or more EU countries where the majority of voters want less immigration. But they are never, ever asked that question specifically. When they have been asked that in the US under various guises they have generally, perhaps always, favored less immigration and tighter enforcement - denying benefits to illegals in California, official English in several states, denying drivers licenses to illegals in Oregon (OREGON!), etc.
  4. “People” who work towards a Norwegian minority in Norway see that they are doing the most noble act imaginable…. evil

    • Replies: @Ivy
    Hence the burgeoning movement in Norway to Save the Lutefisk!

    The strategic pickled herring reserve may be tapped as a last-ditch line of defense before another culinary massacre occurs due to insensitive palates amongst undocumented travelers.

    If kroner aren't raised, via a special levy, then we can only anticipate that reindeer farming will have to expand to feed non-vegan guest workers/penitents, necessitating UN aid to Lapland.

    Send'em to Sweden or Finland instead.

    /Sami /Sarc

  5. From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority

    Evidence, please?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I would love it, if we could somehow get a simple referendum put together on what level of immigration people actually want.

    It's such a fundamental issue. Why not even put out a non-binding referendum, so the people can at least have a voice.

    I always get the feeling the ruling class would rather not hear from the average citizen about this topic

  6. @anony-mouse
    The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don't want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries.

    From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority (note: I don't think this is a good idea). I believe that the majority in Sweden, Ireland, and Spain and possibly the majority in Norway, Finland, Iceland, Ireland and Scotland (to then extent that the latter is a country) favor that.

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).

    For Americans: imagine that the US had independent states with attitudes to immigration as shown in VT, MA, MN, OR and parts of CA and you'll understand.

    True, EU laws that allow free movement would cause problems, but if you could get rid of those laws then the problem could be solved-just send all the migrants to the countries that want them.

    Again for potential critics:

    1/ I'm not arguing that wanting mass migration to one's country is a good thing.

    2/ People can make stupid decisions-indeed people can be self-destructive.

    There’s no assumption: No one wants immigrants at all, or more specifically, not anymore. There are rising nationalist parties in most of the countries you mentioned, and, they are gaining seats in parliament. But, it probably would not turn around the current situation quick enough.

    Most of the Nordic countries are just too polite to say this publicly because it feels inhumane, insensitive, uncivilized to not care about the plight of migrants from Africa and middle east, who, by the way, also have no skills, no education, and would be difficult if not impossible to integrate into cultures that are also profoundly secular. University educated immigrants have always been welcome. And, university educated immigrants integrate well.

    The last few decades, migrants who may or may not claim refugee status are, pretty blatantly,wanting those mythical social welfare benefits that they have heard about that exist in northern Europe – that’s why Italy and the low countries are not so worried since the EU member countries must ALL contribute equally (NYT is practically nailing an edict to a door pontificating about this) to settling boatloads of migrants.

    No one has any idea how many migrants will cross the Mediterranean …and at what point, if ever, it will end. At the same time, there are not enough jobs/large enough industry in any European country to sustain millions of poor, unskilled people arriving at their ports, train & bus stations. On top of that, the information age is simultaneously destroying jobs through automation and robotics.

    The whole issue right now is a conundrum…no head of state wants to say anything or do anything…it’s a game of who is going to “crack” first. No one wants to be accused of being a racist, or hear the word ‘Nazi’ about any policies they maybe considering.

    Lastly, the despotic, chaotic, corrupt countries where these migrants are coming from, and for many years, are full of elites that are basically, sociopaths, and discovered a convenient way years ago how to get rid of their poor. All the heads of state in Africa and the Middle East and the elite in many corrupt countries, have been squirreling money away for years in Swiss bank accounts. They’ve never instituted (and paid for) any social welfare or broad national health and education policies to pull their poor out of hopelessness. It has been easier just to tell everyone, “go to Sweden, I hear they will give you an apartment and food subsidies.”

    And, the fact that most of these countries have contributed nothing to advancing society, technology, human wellness, plant/ animal/marine sustainability, scientific knowledge, should be called a crime, in my opinion. I personally have no respect for many countries that are just a drain on the ones that are trying in vain, it seems, to save the planet from the inevitable degradation that will affect life for all of us.

    European countries have to decide if they want to be suckers for time in memoriam. Sooner or later the migrants will be coming to the USA, Australia, all the countries that have essentially, welcomed immigrants in the past. Conundrum.

    But, let’s see…Hawaii? – too far for boat people…even if you remember Kon-Tiki.

    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    But, let’s see…Hawaii? – too far for boat people…even if you remember Kon-Tiki.
     
    I wonder if President Obama is exempting his own home state Hawaii from the states that are required to settle Central American families that are invading the USA.
  7. @BurplesonAFB
    Was part of the Israel-Kagame deal that the Israelis would call some nice jewish boy editors and have Kagame repeatedly described as the most intelligent and forward thinking African leader?

    Because I've certainly heard that a lot.

    Kagame is a bright guy. Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda’s drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame’s Tutu elitists’ reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994). Since then Kagame has held power with few major challenges in Rwanda while engaging in spectacular acts of invasion and piracy in the Congo. A European equivalent might be some Teutonic Knight leader who really stuck it to the Slavs back in the late dark ages in Prussia.

    • Replies: @Mike Sylwester

    Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda’s drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame’s Tutu elitists’ reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994).
     
    You seem to be heaping all the blame onto Museweni.

    You ought to leave some of the blame for the Hutus who actually committed the mass murderers.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    …which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994
     
    What was behind the Tutsi genocide of Hutus in 1972?
    , @Davidski
    What are you talking about?

    The Teutonic Knights lost the two major wars they had with Poland and Russia (ie. Slavs). After the war with Poland they had to pay rent to stay in Prussia.

    Are you perhaps confusing the native Prussians for Slavs? They were Balts.
  8. iSteveFan says:
    @anony-mouse
    The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don't want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries.

    From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority (note: I don't think this is a good idea). I believe that the majority in Sweden, Ireland, and Spain and possibly the majority in Norway, Finland, Iceland, Ireland and Scotland (to then extent that the latter is a country) favor that.

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).

    For Americans: imagine that the US had independent states with attitudes to immigration as shown in VT, MA, MN, OR and parts of CA and you'll understand.

    True, EU laws that allow free movement would cause problems, but if you could get rid of those laws then the problem could be solved-just send all the migrants to the countries that want them.

    Again for potential critics:

    1/ I'm not arguing that wanting mass migration to one's country is a good thing.

    2/ People can make stupid decisions-indeed people can be self-destructive.

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).

    You could make that assumption based upon the results you cited. But you should also take into consideration the influence of the media and other institutions in promoting this view. Individuals or parties against immigration are for the most part portrayed negatively in the media. In Greece they are even subject to arrest. In Germany the Chancellor condemns them.

    Most people go along with the flow so long as they have food in their belly and a roof over their head. Why risk it when you see what happens to critics? Does anyone seriously doubt the public would not become immigration restrictionists if the media and government started to promote that view? What about if open border enthusiasts were held up to ridicule and ostracized as traitors? Let’s see how long the public supports open borders when that happens.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    Except open border enthusiasts represent not only the Left, but the bi-coastal elites(GOP and Democratic elites as well) and Wall Street. So don't expect the MSM and government to turn on them.

    They want the U.S. to turn into a 4th world balkanized cess pit.

    They aren't traitors, but Nihilists.
    , @ganderson
    I've posted versions of this comment in many places- but here I go again: isteve fan is correct about the influence of the media, government and academia. I know Sweden pretty well for a foreigner- I speak the language and have many friends, acquaintances and relatives there. Overwhelmingly the Swedish elites are pro- third world immigration. Jimmy Åkesson and his Sweden Democrats are compared to Hitler and worse. My academic friends are a lost cause- nice people, most of them, but hopeless on this issue. I'd note that, too, just as in the US, most of these folks don't live in Biskopsgården, Rinkeby or Rosengård; they live in places where most everyone is an ethnic Swede. I'd also say that the deterioration of Swedish society is kinda like the guy who puts on five pounds a month- if you work with him everyday you tend not to notice, but if you don't see him for a year- you go "whoa! fatso"!
    My relatives are mostly normal people with normal jobs- when I prompt the they will express some reservations about the "New Sweden"- they'd say things to me that they wouldn't in public. For my part I don't let my academic pals know that, were I a Swedish citizen I'd vote for "the Jimster".

    As for the main thrust of Steve's piece- there's a point there, but unless the aid to these third world hell holes is controlled by the westerners doling out the aid the money will just get stolen. May as well just deposit it directly in Paul Kagame's or Joseph Kabila's Swiss bank account.
  9. This concept – That deportees have to go back to their country of origin if some kind of post WWII Western conceit. It would not surprise me in 10-15 years if countries just start expelling them, in fact I’m not so sure that some places do not already do this, but not noticed in the media.

    • Replies: @HA
    "This concept – That deportees have to go back to their country of origin if some kind of post WWII Western conceit. It would not surprise me in 10-15 years if countries just start expelling them,..."

    I'm not sure what this means. Where will the deportees be expelled, if not to the countries of their origin? Will the countries who expel them just give them a raft and set them adrift in international waters somewhere? Barring some special circumstance like those that Israel arranged, few countries are going to allow themselves to be on the receiving end of any such expulsion, unless the people involved are citizens. If you mean that the deportees are simply going to be sent back through whatever border crossing or port they came from, I believe that's what Australia's policy already amounts to, but that most recent border crossing is not always going to be easy to determine.

  10. @Lagertha
    There's no assumption: No one wants immigrants at all, or more specifically, not anymore. There are rising nationalist parties in most of the countries you mentioned, and, they are gaining seats in parliament. But, it probably would not turn around the current situation quick enough.

    Most of the Nordic countries are just too polite to say this publicly because it feels inhumane, insensitive, uncivilized to not care about the plight of migrants from Africa and middle east, who, by the way, also have no skills, no education, and would be difficult if not impossible to integrate into cultures that are also profoundly secular. University educated immigrants have always been welcome. And, university educated immigrants integrate well.

    The last few decades, migrants who may or may not claim refugee status are, pretty blatantly,wanting those mythical social welfare benefits that they have heard about that exist in northern Europe - that's why Italy and the low countries are not so worried since the EU member countries must ALL contribute equally (NYT is practically nailing an edict to a door pontificating about this) to settling boatloads of migrants.

    No one has any idea how many migrants will cross the Mediterranean ...and at what point, if ever, it will end. At the same time, there are not enough jobs/large enough industry in any European country to sustain millions of poor, unskilled people arriving at their ports, train & bus stations. On top of that, the information age is simultaneously destroying jobs through automation and robotics.

    The whole issue right now is a conundrum...no head of state wants to say anything or do anything...it's a game of who is going to "crack" first. No one wants to be accused of being a racist, or hear the word 'Nazi' about any policies they maybe considering.

    Lastly, the despotic, chaotic, corrupt countries where these migrants are coming from, and for many years, are full of elites that are basically, sociopaths, and discovered a convenient way years ago how to get rid of their poor. All the heads of state in Africa and the Middle East and the elite in many corrupt countries, have been squirreling money away for years in Swiss bank accounts. They've never instituted (and paid for) any social welfare or broad national health and education policies to pull their poor out of hopelessness. It has been easier just to tell everyone, "go to Sweden, I hear they will give you an apartment and food subsidies."

    And, the fact that most of these countries have contributed nothing to advancing society, technology, human wellness, plant/ animal/marine sustainability, scientific knowledge, should be called a crime, in my opinion. I personally have no respect for many countries that are just a drain on the ones that are trying in vain, it seems, to save the planet from the inevitable degradation that will affect life for all of us.

    European countries have to decide if they want to be suckers for time in memoriam. Sooner or later the migrants will be coming to the USA, Australia, all the countries that have essentially, welcomed immigrants in the past. Conundrum.

    But, let's see...Hawaii? - too far for boat people...even if you remember Kon-Tiki.

    But, let’s see…Hawaii? – too far for boat people…even if you remember Kon-Tiki.

    I wonder if President Obama is exempting his own home state Hawaii from the states that are required to settle Central American families that are invading the USA.

    • Replies: @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Well, that would be interesting, especially since the rumor has it that he recently purchased a pretty fancy shamcy estate there for when he officially retires from Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Its one thing to have various states take them in, but to have them as next door neighbors?

    Seriously?

    I mean, come on. Some are more equal than others and should have the right to a nice quiet retirement amongst all the right sort of folks (e.g. Oprah, Zuckerberg, the Cox sisters of the Cox media empire, that billionaire who recently purchased one of the lesser HI islands so as to maintain the unspoiled very little developed areas, etc).

    The right sort of folks should have the right to their privacy, after all.

  11. @Steve Sailer
    Kagame is a bright guy. Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda's drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame's Tutu elitists' reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994). Since then Kagame has held power with few major challenges in Rwanda while engaging in spectacular acts of invasion and piracy in the Congo. A European equivalent might be some Teutonic Knight leader who really stuck it to the Slavs back in the late dark ages in Prussia.

    Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda’s drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame’s Tutu elitists’ reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994).

    You seem to be heaping all the blame onto Museweni.

    You ought to leave some of the blame for the Hutus who actually committed the mass murderers.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I'm explaining the historical circumstances, which are similar to how Robespierre's Terror in 1793 was a reaction to the invasion of France by aristocrats attempting to reimpose the ancient regime.

    Kagame is part of the ancient ethnic ruling class of Rwanda, which had been exiled to Uganda in the 1960s by the Hutu majority. His ruling class exiles invaded Hutu-run Rwanda in 1990. By 1994, they were close to winning. By the way, Kagame consistently opposed Western intervention to stop the genocide because of the likelihood that humanitarians would enforce a ceasefire in place, which would keep him from achieving his total conquest of Rwanda.

  12. @Mike Sylwester

    Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda’s drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame’s Tutu elitists’ reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994).
     
    You seem to be heaping all the blame onto Museweni.

    You ought to leave some of the blame for the Hutus who actually committed the mass murderers.

    I’m explaining the historical circumstances, which are similar to how Robespierre’s Terror in 1793 was a reaction to the invasion of France by aristocrats attempting to reimpose the ancient regime.

    Kagame is part of the ancient ethnic ruling class of Rwanda, which had been exiled to Uganda in the 1960s by the Hutu majority. His ruling class exiles invaded Hutu-run Rwanda in 1990. By 1994, they were close to winning. By the way, Kagame consistently opposed Western intervention to stop the genocide because of the likelihood that humanitarians would enforce a ceasefire in place, which would keep him from achieving his total conquest of Rwanda.

    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    Steve the Assura Accords were still in effect when the Rawandan Genocide commenced. The RPF offensive didn't begin until several days after the genocide broke out. There was no Tutsi invasion to precipitate the genocide because a cease-fire had been in effect for almost a year. You have the cause and effect reversed on this. There's plenty of blame to go around of course but it isn't accurate to speak of an RPF invasion setting off the genocide because the RPF was still participating in the terms of the cease-fire/ power sharing arangement. That's why their was a RPF contingent in Kigala at the time.
    , @Vendetta
    In effect, what the UN intervention was doing was covering the retreat of the Hutu forces into Zaire. They were creating safe zones - for Hutus. Wasn't stopping the genocide at all - was just laying the ground for round two. They allowed so many of the Hutu FDLR to escape the country that they reconstituted an army across the border - housed and fed in UN refugee camps.

    It's probably the most disgraceful episode in the entire history of the United Nations.
  13. @iSteveFan

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).
     
    You could make that assumption based upon the results you cited. But you should also take into consideration the influence of the media and other institutions in promoting this view. Individuals or parties against immigration are for the most part portrayed negatively in the media. In Greece they are even subject to arrest. In Germany the Chancellor condemns them.

    Most people go along with the flow so long as they have food in their belly and a roof over their head. Why risk it when you see what happens to critics? Does anyone seriously doubt the public would not become immigration restrictionists if the media and government started to promote that view? What about if open border enthusiasts were held up to ridicule and ostracized as traitors? Let's see how long the public supports open borders when that happens.

    Except open border enthusiasts represent not only the Left, but the bi-coastal elites(GOP and Democratic elites as well) and Wall Street. So don’t expect the MSM and government to turn on them.

    They want the U.S. to turn into a 4th world balkanized cess pit.

    They aren’t traitors, but Nihilists.

  14. OT, but there’s an iSteve-bait controversy going on in the chess world right now. Some chess master I’d never heard of, one Nigel Short, wrote an article daring to assert that the relative lack of women in the highest echelons of chess is due to their brains being wired differently, and that the chess community should quit fretting over sexism and embrace reality.

    I’ve enjoyed reading comments to articles and blog posts about this controversy on chess.com because there’s actually a fair amount of diversity in the responses. The political demographics of casual chess players could be interesting to take a look at.

    • Replies: @Terrahawk
    Competitive chess players tend to be all over the map politically. However, I can say the US Chess Federation, or at least parts of it, tends to be obsessed with getting female players. Mainly though it is a guy's game. There are a decent number of girls in scholastics, but far less go on to play as adults than boys.

    At the upper levels of chess it is typical situation you see in sports. Sure a woman who dedicates her life to the sport can beat up on the schlubs but when facing the same type of competitors, it isn't close. This doesn't mean they won't win a few games, but it's extremely rare that they place high in a major tournament.

    In general, I have found that most woman prefer games that don't take much in the way of thinking and are heavily tied to chance. That's even if they care about games at all.
  15. tunglet wrote:

    Instead, they are being motivated by something far less noble, like wanting Norway to lose it’s Norwegian majority.

    Yes, it is quite obvious that many or even most liberals and almost all high profile journalists, liberal politicians, academicians/professors, so-called Social Justice Warriors, and the like, most of them white, do indeed want to see the white race obliterated, sunk, abolished, shamed, etc. This goes for America, especially, and increasingly, for western europe as well.

    This is obvious. But why is that the case? What led these white people to come to this conclusion? What led them to hate their own race?

    The answer lies in the history they were taught, the narrative they bought into.

    Those liberals, lefties, whatever you to call them, were taught as youngsters to hate their own race. Can everyone here, or at least most here, admit that this is the case?

    They were brainwashed, to put it bluntly. Their minds and worldviews were shaped and molded during their impressionable youth. Most of us here went through the same process, but being older, perhaps we were not subjected to it as much, or perhaps we were not subjected to college level propaganda. In any event, we aint buying into the idea of whiteness being evil.

    I hate the idea of mass immigration obliterating the white race. And I am proud of being white (or about 90% white). I think the white race is the greatest race ever. Period. And second place aint even close.

    But I differ from most here in one respect. I do not hate liberals. I think Leftism has been perverted by forces from on high. Leftism has been made to focus on anti-white, anti-male ideology, and at the same time, the good things about leftist ideology, such as workers rights, universal healthcare, progressive taxation, etc have been abandoned, and instead Leftism is about gay rights and swamping the West with nonwhite immigrants, and so forth.

    But I see liberals as victims of propaganda shoved down their throats. But I don’t hate them. I think many of them will reject anti-white multiculturalism as they get older….and wiser.

    • Replies: @stillCARealist
    I have an aunt who fits your description exactly. She is a social and economic liberal to the core, while still being a nice white lady who wants to help everybody. She's totally cool with the eventual extinction of most white folks and assumes the coming utopia will be a multicultural love festival. She even describes herself as an "anglophile" and attends an Episcopal church.

    Frankly, I don't get it. Somebody help me out here.
    , @Bert
    The Hard Hat Riots and the aftermath convinced an entire generation of intellectual leftists that white men would never come around to the cause of socialist equality. What's worse, they had every intention of violently opposing such ideas. It was at this point that certain parts of the Left started developing explicitly anti-white language.

    Fast forward to the 90s and such people have now came into their own and are now in positions where their ideology can be implemented as policy. At the same time, the Clintons convinced the left to make peace with big business and corporate America. The boom times were happening and nobody wanted a repeat of the depressions of the 70s.

    The rest, they say, is history.
    , @map
    If don't hate the Left, then you have not been paying attention. Leftists are the devil.
  16. HA says:
    @Name Withheld
    This concept - That deportees have to go back to their country of origin if some kind of post WWII Western conceit. It would not surprise me in 10-15 years if countries just start expelling them, in fact I'm not so sure that some places do not already do this, but not noticed in the media.

    “This concept – That deportees have to go back to their country of origin if some kind of post WWII Western conceit. It would not surprise me in 10-15 years if countries just start expelling them,…”

    I’m not sure what this means. Where will the deportees be expelled, if not to the countries of their origin? Will the countries who expel them just give them a raft and set them adrift in international waters somewhere? Barring some special circumstance like those that Israel arranged, few countries are going to allow themselves to be on the receiving end of any such expulsion, unless the people involved are citizens. If you mean that the deportees are simply going to be sent back through whatever border crossing or port they came from, I believe that’s what Australia’s policy already amounts to, but that most recent border crossing is not always going to be easy to determine.

    • Replies: @Bill

    Barring some special circumstance like those that Israel arranged, few countries are going to allow themselves to be on the receiving end of any such expulsion, unless the people involved are citizens.
     
    I've heard these rumors that sometimes, even when you don't want to "allow" something, someone stronger than you makes you allow it. Don't know if there's anything to these rumors, of course. Just thought I would pass the info along.
  17. Paul Kagame is the ideal 21st Century Lee Kuan Yew figure because he’s a black African, is incorruptible, honest, and ruthless, & effortlessly toggling between guilt tripping white liberals and ignoring Western NGOs when he needs to.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Paul Kagame is the ideal 21st Century Lee Kuan Yew figure because he’s a black African
     
    Too bad Kagame doesn't have Singaporeans as his people. Otherwise it might have worked out.
  18. Serious cracks in the unified multiculti front are starting to appear in Europe. The recent deaths of 700 immigrants in a swamped boat off Libya brought the multiculties out of the woodwork demanding that Europe “do something”.

    The Sun opinion piece by Katie Hopkins recommending Australian-style gunboats to block the Libyan refugee invasion has the multicult positively gibbering and frothing.

    An internet petition demanding The Sun fire her has reached 300,000 signatures, yet she has not backed down. Multicultis have filed allegations of criminal racism with the British government, yet it has said and done nothing.

    The ground is shifting. If the multiculti pull out every stop and cannot even get a ditzy blonde reportress fired, what does that say about their power?

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    agree with post; but the ref to "ditzy blonde" (ha, ha, ha... by the way) is a classic example of a much earlier post I wrote about having often been stereotyped because of my looks: blonde (decidedly not ditzy)...and growing up in the NYC metropolitan area, and going to an elite U. Everyone assumed (including professors) I couldn't possibly be smart. I never cried, "bias!; micro-aggression!" but, success really is the best revenge (Coco Chanel) at class reunions!

    Probably, because this Ms. Hopkins is "Legally" blonde is what is really ticking-off her critics. There is a category of women who hate blonde women in the professional/corporate tier. And, blondes age well...which is another dart to throw.

  19. @Steve Sailer
    I'm explaining the historical circumstances, which are similar to how Robespierre's Terror in 1793 was a reaction to the invasion of France by aristocrats attempting to reimpose the ancient regime.

    Kagame is part of the ancient ethnic ruling class of Rwanda, which had been exiled to Uganda in the 1960s by the Hutu majority. His ruling class exiles invaded Hutu-run Rwanda in 1990. By 1994, they were close to winning. By the way, Kagame consistently opposed Western intervention to stop the genocide because of the likelihood that humanitarians would enforce a ceasefire in place, which would keep him from achieving his total conquest of Rwanda.

    Steve the Assura Accords were still in effect when the Rawandan Genocide commenced. The RPF offensive didn’t begin until several days after the genocide broke out. There was no Tutsi invasion to precipitate the genocide because a cease-fire had been in effect for almost a year. You have the cause and effect reversed on this. There’s plenty of blame to go around of course but it isn’t accurate to speak of an RPF invasion setting off the genocide because the RPF was still participating in the terms of the cease-fire/ power sharing arangement. That’s why their was a RPF contingent in Kigala at the time.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Thanks.

    That helps make sense of the shoot-down of the politicians' jet.
  20. Steve,

    What do you see as the end game resulting from all the immigration to the USA and Europe? Will it all end in tears anyway, as Peter Brimelow has often said, and are we just delaying the inevitable? If so, what do you predict ultimately happening? As I believe you wrote once before that at least we can delay the inevitable and say we were right in the end.

  21. For Steve & commenters:

    What do you see as the end game resulting from all the immigration to the USA and Europe? Will it all end in tears anyway, as Peter Brimelow has often said, and are we just hopelessly delaying the inevitable? If so, what do you predict ultimately happening? I believe you (Steve) wrote once that at least we can delay the inevitable and say we were right in the end. I agree. It’s my belief that the tears will most likely be come from the displaced majority, not the invaders, particularity in the US.

    I believe that there’s about an 80% chance in Europe, and about a 90% chance in the USA, that the majority will simply slowly be swamped and there will be intra-country fractioning. Natural selection will continue to work against the native peoples. The less likely scenario involves expelling foreigners. If this were to happen it would be the doing of a junta gov’t and/or the result of a mass-media organ being controlled by the majority or a wealthy individual.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    I think it (USA) will become like a 1950's banana republic. There will be more gated communities, and entire parts of states and major cities will be completely the realm of the elites/the corporate workers and high tech skilled. Worker bees will have their own, separate apartheid towns, regions, systems...and will ride elevated, magnetically powered trains to service the needs of the highly educated.

    In Europe, it may be less pronounced, but the city-center real estate will remain untouchable for modest income people. A new, much more stratified class system will ironically develop. There will be ring-towns beyond ring-towns. Society in Europe will be similar to the multiple class system of India.

    Ok this is crazy talk, and, I need to go to sleep!
    , @Nathan Wartooth
    The real problem is western countries turning immigrants into citizens as fast as they can. You could expel immigrants, but expelling your "fellow" citizens is another matter entirely.

    If anyone tried this, the comparisons to Nazi Germany would obviously be made and other countries might even feel pressure to attack a country that tried to expel citizens because they weren't white.

    The end game is that America looks like Brazil, Australia and Canada get taken over by Asians and Europe by Arabs and Africans. It wouldn't even take any new policies for this to happen, the destiny is already written by current demographics. Any new immigration just speeds things along.

    I disagree that delaying things helps. If the demographic transformation happens slow enough, nothing will be done. But a sudden shift could be fought against, especially if the country is in current economic trouble.
    , @JohnnyWalker123
    The end game.


    In the long term, there will be a collapse in the need for human labor due to the coming robotics revolution. A significant percentage of current jobs will be automated, leaving a large fraction of the population without meaningful employment. The result will be massive unemployment and a huge fall in wages.

    Unfortunately, the coming US debt crisis will likely result in massive spending cuts or hyperinflation, which will hugely erode the standard of living in the US (SS, Medicare, unemployment, and Medicaid will be cut). So this combination of lowered standard of living and joblessness is going to be disastrous for the masses.

    In that atmosphere, immigration will likely be cut substantially. Politicians won't have any choice. Unfortunately, even with immigration cuts, I think America is doomed to Latin America style inequality in the long term.

    I also foresee a situation in which racial tensions flare up, due to competition over scarce jobs and resources. Americans have historically been nice because American has historically been a land of plenty, but what happens when the country is no longer a land of plenty? Then what? When people are fighting tooth and nail not to fall out of the middle class, I could see things getting pretty nasty.

    So, yes, this will end in tears. Debt + immigration + robotic automation + endless wars + oligarchization + outsourcing + dismantling our industrial base = death of the American middle class.

    The tech bubble and then the govt-ignited housing boom masked the underlying weakness of the US worker economy since the early 1990s. Unfortunately, decades of disastrous policies (with respect to trade, regulation, unions, immigration, and inequality) have hollowed out the economy's middle class support structure and that's now becoming very apparent. What the 2008 financial crash did was not cause the current worker recession - rather it laid bare how much the position of workers had deteriorated in recent years. At this point, the govt has run out of tricks to create an illusion of prosperity.

    The reality is the US worker is in a grim recession. Politicians talk of recovery, but the reality is that there's not going to be a recovery. This is the new normal and conditions will continue to worsen in the future. The current situation is actually even worse than the Great Depression in some respects, since at least we could spend our way out of that. The US govt has accumulated so much debt (and is projected to accumulate vastly more in the future) that our hands our tied with regards to spending.

    When the US experiences a Greece-style debt situation sometime in the future, our current system will see the final leg of the table kicked out. At that point, the public will demand the govt "do something." Unlike previous crisises, the govt won't have the financial resources to fix the problem. It will be at that point when we see the collapse of the current order.

    I don't know what will come next. I suppose present day Greece might be our future.

    So, yes, I do think immigration will be deeply cut sometime in the coming years........ but it'll happen under unfortunate circumstances involving the collapse of our middle class.

    That's the end game.
    , @Jack Hanson
    Short term you start seeing a house divided among communities and even federal agencies. When the last batch of illegal aliens were surging across the border, there was an incident at Murrieta station that was brushed over quickly where the Border Patrol agents (who live and work in the community) confronted the ICE agents and US Marshalls sent (from out of town) to break the line of protesters with a riot team.

    There will be a Fort Sumter moment when people realize that their government is against them, and entire states will begin ignoring the dictats of federal mandarins on the judiciary and their bureaucratic enforcers. The US will be gated communities for the elites and favelas for the hoi polloi around DC and in the Northeast, while as you go further west you'll have an odd cowboy society with smartphones.

    It'll be interesting, at least.

    The lesson from Murrieta and Bundy Ranch is that no amount of internet neckbeard chin stroking and pontificating is going to actually change anything: the threat of force must be met with the threat of force. Sitting around grousing on the internet is just the Alt Right's version of slacktivism.
    , @Jon
    I expect a long recessional.

    There are a lot of reasonably capable white people. People good at organizing things. People who have showed themselves exceptionally good at organized violence. People who do crazy shit like sacrificing themselves for their comrades or even for ideas.

    Combine this with the ongoing automation revolution, and the elite have a problem. What are you going to do with all those unemployed white people? In their copious leisure time, they might take a notice of the fact that the dissolute descendants of Lloyd Blankfein have a lot more stuff than they do, despite being POS. They might even take it into their heads to do something about it.

    There is no real prospect of police work, health care, social work, primary & secondary education, &c being automated. But, in order to employ the reserve army of the white unemployed in these occupations, they need someone to take care of. Someone who is incapable of taking care of themselves. Blacks are loud, messy, and violent, so we probably don't want to import a bunch of them to take this role. Mexicans look much better.

    So, that's my prognosis. Where we are going is a three caste society. The Jew-NE Asian-Smart White upper caste behind its tasteful, locally harvested, artisanally mortared stone walls. The white middle class consisting of cops married to social workers and radiology techs married to Kindergarten teachers in their compact, new urbanism neighborhoods. And the black-hispanic-dumb white helot class, some of whom clean houses but most of whom consume the services provided by the white middle caste. It'll be a lightyellow-white-darkbrown kind of world.

    It won't be rigid, this hierarchy. Talented people of swarth can aspire to become cops. The exceptionally talented children of cops could become arbitrageurs and earn their way into the elite, or at least its bottom rung. Elite heroin addicts, of which there will be exceedingly many, can earn their way into swarthmore. Elite sadists, similarly, could decide that being a cop seems like more fun than supervising a roomful of arbitrageurs.

    The really dangerous characters among the middle caste will have to be signed up for the Global Force for Good and sent off to Serbia. There, they will defend the hardworking, longsuffering employment agents scouring the Serbian countryside for entertainment talent. These fine men, the last redoubts of our great civilization, must be protected from marauding bands of prudish, Orthodox fanatics with their strange aversion to liberating, overseas work for the cruelly oppressed blossoms of Serbian womanhood.

    Only the high caste, actually only the leaders among the high caste, will know the nature of this world. Whitey will be handed a pat story about how evil he is for living in his new urbanism digs while darkie is stuck in whatever rubble remains of Detroit. Darkie will be handed the same pat story. Ambassadors from the elite will be available to fine tune the story as necessary. Only the heroin addicts and failed social-climbing arbitrageurs will ever mention the true nature of the society. Conspiracy theorists, the lot of them, says Officer Crupke. See what that kind of thinking brings you, says nurse Ratchet. I wonder if he has any money in that pocket, says D'Pedrovious.

    In short, I think we are going to get the society that RKU aspires to. The society that California becomes, more and more, each year.
  22. HA says:
    @Jean Cocteausten
    Nope, this one is covered. Lots of pundits out there explaining how unskilled, illiterate immigrants *benefit* the economy. So keeping them out is actually bad for poor Americans!

    “Lots of pundits out there explaining how unskilled, illiterate immigrants *benefit* the economy.”

    The purpose of the proposed argument is to demonstrate how pro-immigrationists are, in effect, more concerned with advancing a domestic political agenda than with actually helping refugees.

    In the case of those pundits who do what you claim, i.e., who are not even bothering to hide the fact that helping refugees is not their primary motivation, the absence of any humanitarian concerns is already evident.

  23. This would be an obvious solution with no possible objections, were it not for the fact that most of the immigration enthusiasts are doing it to destroy the host countries, not help the immigrants’ own countries. But it’s nice to see them squirm and think of excuses for not helping immigrants stay at home for a fraction of the cost of “integrating” them into a European society to which they can never assimilate.

  24. “That’s a lot of money to buy voters!”

    Shouldn’t this sort of voting corruption be addressed, especially in this day and age of such rapid travel and rapid potential population movements?

  25. @Big Bill
    Serious cracks in the unified multiculti front are starting to appear in Europe. The recent deaths of 700 immigrants in a swamped boat off Libya brought the multiculties out of the woodwork demanding that Europe "do something".

    The Sun opinion piece by Katie Hopkins recommending Australian-style gunboats to block the Libyan refugee invasion has the multicult positively gibbering and frothing.

    An internet petition demanding The Sun fire her has reached 300,000 signatures, yet she has not backed down. Multicultis have filed allegations of criminal racism with the British government, yet it has said and done nothing.

    The ground is shifting. If the multiculti pull out every stop and cannot even get a ditzy blonde reportress fired, what does that say about their power?

    agree with post; but the ref to “ditzy blonde” (ha, ha, ha… by the way) is a classic example of a much earlier post I wrote about having often been stereotyped because of my looks: blonde (decidedly not ditzy)…and growing up in the NYC metropolitan area, and going to an elite U. Everyone assumed (including professors) I couldn’t possibly be smart. I never cried, “bias!; micro-aggression!” but, success really is the best revenge (Coco Chanel) at class reunions!

    Probably, because this Ms. Hopkins is “Legally” blonde is what is really ticking-off her critics. There is a category of women who hate blonde women in the professional/corporate tier. And, blondes age well…which is another dart to throw.

    • Replies: @Marty
    Blondes age well? I thought it was the reverse.
  26. @Earl Lemongrab
    Paul Kagame is the ideal 21st Century Lee Kuan Yew figure because he's a black African, is incorruptible, honest, and ruthless, & effortlessly toggling between guilt tripping white liberals and ignoring Western NGOs when he needs to.

    Paul Kagame is the ideal 21st Century Lee Kuan Yew figure because he’s a black African

    Too bad Kagame doesn’t have Singaporeans as his people. Otherwise it might have worked out.

    • Replies: @Ed
    I don't know spoke to white girl that did a 4 years at the Peace Corps there. She's now dating the son of a Rwandan diplomat and she's a big fan of Kagame. Says as far as Africa goes it's a decent country.

    A firm, fair hand might be able to whip them into shape. We'll see.
    , @Truth

    Too bad Kagame doesn’t have Singaporeans as his people. Otherwise it might have worked out.
     
    He's only been prime minister for 15 years, what was Lee's record of achievement in 1974?
  27. @Steve Sailer
    Kagame is a bright guy. Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda's drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame's Tutu elitists' reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994). Since then Kagame has held power with few major challenges in Rwanda while engaging in spectacular acts of invasion and piracy in the Congo. A European equivalent might be some Teutonic Knight leader who really stuck it to the Slavs back in the late dark ages in Prussia.

    …which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994

    What was behind the Tutsi genocide of Hutus in 1972?

    • Replies: @anonymous

    What was behind the Tutsi genocide of Hutus in 1972?

     

    Kagame is a client of the US so naturally he gets great PR in our press. I believe he castigated the French for supposedly supporting the Hutus so perhaps the French press isn't as laudatory. The conflict between the two groups apparently goes back a long way, in Burundi as well as in Rwanda. Since neither country has had much in the way of writers most information comes to us from outsiders, many of whom are just hacks. For example, a look at what's available on Amazon makes it seem as if history in that part of the world just began in the 90's.
  28. @Shawn
    For Steve & commenters:

    What do you see as the end game resulting from all the immigration to the USA and Europe? Will it all end in tears anyway, as Peter Brimelow has often said, and are we just hopelessly delaying the inevitable? If so, what do you predict ultimately happening? I believe you (Steve) wrote once that at least we can delay the inevitable and say we were right in the end. I agree. It's my belief that the tears will most likely be come from the displaced majority, not the invaders, particularity in the US.

    I believe that there's about an 80% chance in Europe, and about a 90% chance in the USA, that the majority will simply slowly be swamped and there will be intra-country fractioning. Natural selection will continue to work against the native peoples. The less likely scenario involves expelling foreigners. If this were to happen it would be the doing of a junta gov't and/or the result of a mass-media organ being controlled by the majority or a wealthy individual.

    I think it (USA) will become like a 1950’s banana republic. There will be more gated communities, and entire parts of states and major cities will be completely the realm of the elites/the corporate workers and high tech skilled. Worker bees will have their own, separate apartheid towns, regions, systems…and will ride elevated, magnetically powered trains to service the needs of the highly educated.

    In Europe, it may be less pronounced, but the city-center real estate will remain untouchable for modest income people. A new, much more stratified class system will ironically develop. There will be ring-towns beyond ring-towns. Society in Europe will be similar to the multiple class system of India.

    Ok this is crazy talk, and, I need to go to sleep!

  29. @Shawn
    For Steve & commenters:

    What do you see as the end game resulting from all the immigration to the USA and Europe? Will it all end in tears anyway, as Peter Brimelow has often said, and are we just hopelessly delaying the inevitable? If so, what do you predict ultimately happening? I believe you (Steve) wrote once that at least we can delay the inevitable and say we were right in the end. I agree. It's my belief that the tears will most likely be come from the displaced majority, not the invaders, particularity in the US.

    I believe that there's about an 80% chance in Europe, and about a 90% chance in the USA, that the majority will simply slowly be swamped and there will be intra-country fractioning. Natural selection will continue to work against the native peoples. The less likely scenario involves expelling foreigners. If this were to happen it would be the doing of a junta gov't and/or the result of a mass-media organ being controlled by the majority or a wealthy individual.

    The real problem is western countries turning immigrants into citizens as fast as they can. You could expel immigrants, but expelling your “fellow” citizens is another matter entirely.

    If anyone tried this, the comparisons to Nazi Germany would obviously be made and other countries might even feel pressure to attack a country that tried to expel citizens because they weren’t white.

    The end game is that America looks like Brazil, Australia and Canada get taken over by Asians and Europe by Arabs and Africans. It wouldn’t even take any new policies for this to happen, the destiny is already written by current demographics. Any new immigration just speeds things along.

    I disagree that delaying things helps. If the demographic transformation happens slow enough, nothing will be done. But a sudden shift could be fought against, especially if the country is in current economic trouble.

    • Replies: @ABN
    Steve once said that electing a new people is the final argument of the Confederacy of Whores. Well, revolution is the final argument of nations, and if their survival is at stake they might well resort to it.

    In a revolutionary scenario, I doubt Johnny European will be overly scrupulous about the citizenship status of nominal Europeans. It will be hard to blame him, either.

    It's frustrating that immigrant minorities don't give more thought to the distinction between citizenship and membership in the nation. They benefit greatly from the use of citizenship (a somewhat arbitrary legal classification) as a generally accepted proxy for membership in the nation (conferred organically through blood and history). Thus, some piece of paper stamped by a bureaucrat makes a Pakistani equal in Englishness to an Englishman whose forefathers worked and bled for king and country. The implicitly accepted linkage between the state's legal formalities and the nation's "mystic chords of memory" is a really, really nice deal for the Pakistani immigrant.

    So you would think that the immigrant would go to great lengths to keep that linkage between state and nation plausible in the minds of the native English population. He might, for example, support policies to make immigration minimal and selective so as to avoid rocking the demographic boat. He might avoid trying to impose his religion and culture on the host society. He might avoid voting for leftist parties that use the state's power to wage a culture war on the natives.

    You'd think he might do these things, but...he doesn't, in most cases. The Diversity agenda of the Ruling Class reassures him that he represents progress and the future, while the native population is evil and deserves to lose their country. Naturally, he doesn't feel grateful for the extraordinary gift of being an "honorary native Englishman" by virtue of his acquired citizenship. Why would he want to be an Englishman when the BBC and Guardian and Labor Party tell him that the English are a bunch of losers and that the country belongs to him now?

    So if Europeans revolt and start revoking the citizenship of people who (1) should never have received it in the first place, (2) failed to demonstrate proper gratitude and loyalty once they did receive it, and (3) conspired with the Ruling Class to help dissolve the old nation...well, I can't say I'd be all that outraged or shocked by the development.

    Anyway, the short version is that the high-low assault of the Ruling Class and its immigrant-minority allies is driving native Europeans toward a very explicit and exclusive kind of ethnonationalism. If that has revolutionary consequences, nobody should be surprised.

  30. @Sam Haysom
    Steve the Assura Accords were still in effect when the Rawandan Genocide commenced. The RPF offensive didn't begin until several days after the genocide broke out. There was no Tutsi invasion to precipitate the genocide because a cease-fire had been in effect for almost a year. You have the cause and effect reversed on this. There's plenty of blame to go around of course but it isn't accurate to speak of an RPF invasion setting off the genocide because the RPF was still participating in the terms of the cease-fire/ power sharing arangement. That's why their was a RPF contingent in Kigala at the time.

    Thanks.

    That helps make sense of the shoot-down of the politicians’ jet.

  31. @Steve Sailer
    I'm explaining the historical circumstances, which are similar to how Robespierre's Terror in 1793 was a reaction to the invasion of France by aristocrats attempting to reimpose the ancient regime.

    Kagame is part of the ancient ethnic ruling class of Rwanda, which had been exiled to Uganda in the 1960s by the Hutu majority. His ruling class exiles invaded Hutu-run Rwanda in 1990. By 1994, they were close to winning. By the way, Kagame consistently opposed Western intervention to stop the genocide because of the likelihood that humanitarians would enforce a ceasefire in place, which would keep him from achieving his total conquest of Rwanda.

    In effect, what the UN intervention was doing was covering the retreat of the Hutu forces into Zaire. They were creating safe zones – for Hutus. Wasn’t stopping the genocide at all – was just laying the ground for round two. They allowed so many of the Hutu FDLR to escape the country that they reconstituted an army across the border – housed and fed in UN refugee camps.

    It’s probably the most disgraceful episode in the entire history of the United Nations.

  32. re: Cambodia, I think there are agreements ($$$) with Papua New Guinea and other states in the region for offloading the mig’s they intercept before reaching Australian shores. My question is, what is the primary ethnicity of these boat people? I remember a story — it was probably on here — about people from as far off as SW Asia going to considerable lengths to get themselves smuggled into Aus., but surely these aren’t getting dropped off in the same refugee camps? Is there a unique dynamic for dealing with the maritime DREAMers akin to our special difficulty with Home Depot tourists from Mexico & central America, vs. other mig groups? I’d bet the illegal Australians who look & sound as if they’re from Tajikistan or Cameroon probably stand out in a more pronounced fashion, compared to the Oceanic ones.

    • Replies: @Paul Walker Most beautiful man ever...
    "what is the primary ethnicity of these boat people?"
    From memory the most recent boat people trying to get to Australia were Iranian economic refugees and Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers fleeing "persecution". They made their way to Indonesia then paid smugglers to ship them to Aus.
    Illegal immigration to Australia is nothing compared to the legal intake of 200,000 and the granting of five million student/working/tourist visas per year.
    Student/working visas usually lead to permanent residency.
  33. OT: This catchy music video is getting some press attention: Give Me Greencard.

    “Give me give me give me give me give me give me give me Greencard. Give it to me.”

    It’s about time the U.S. got a new national anthem not written by one of those dead White men.

  34. @Mike Sylwester

    But, let’s see…Hawaii? – too far for boat people…even if you remember Kon-Tiki.
     
    I wonder if President Obama is exempting his own home state Hawaii from the states that are required to settle Central American families that are invading the USA.

    Well, that would be interesting, especially since the rumor has it that he recently purchased a pretty fancy shamcy estate there for when he officially retires from Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Its one thing to have various states take them in, but to have them as next door neighbors?

    Seriously?

    I mean, come on. Some are more equal than others and should have the right to a nice quiet retirement amongst all the right sort of folks (e.g. Oprah, Zuckerberg, the Cox sisters of the Cox media empire, that billionaire who recently purchased one of the lesser HI islands so as to maintain the unspoiled very little developed areas, etc).

    The right sort of folks should have the right to their privacy, after all.

    • Replies: @Ivy
    Exercise among same consists of appropriate balance between bien pensant and bon vivant.
  35. The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It's not.

    Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 'only' had 3 million 'Hispanics'. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million. No doubt people like you would have said in 1950 that the idea of '60 million people sneaking across the Rio Grande is arrant nonsense'.
    The crucial factor is that in both cases there is absolutely no political will whatsoever to seriously repatriate or deter illegal immigrants.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

     

    That 100 Africans could cross into Europe by "dingy" boat would also have been alarmist nonsense when Camp of the Saints was published in 1972. But they're there, aren't they? 100 or more per day.

    A dingy dinghy is easy to come by.
    , @silviosilver

    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.
     
    Maybe. But the idea that is equalitarian sickos want 100 million Africans to come to Europe is all too outrageously true.
    , @AnAnon
    Whats stopping them?
  36. @anony-mouse
    The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don't want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries.

    From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority (note: I don't think this is a good idea). I believe that the majority in Sweden, Ireland, and Spain and possibly the majority in Norway, Finland, Iceland, Ireland and Scotland (to then extent that the latter is a country) favor that.

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).

    For Americans: imagine that the US had independent states with attitudes to immigration as shown in VT, MA, MN, OR and parts of CA and you'll understand.

    True, EU laws that allow free movement would cause problems, but if you could get rid of those laws then the problem could be solved-just send all the migrants to the countries that want them.

    Again for potential critics:

    1/ I'm not arguing that wanting mass migration to one's country is a good thing.

    2/ People can make stupid decisions-indeed people can be self-destructive.

    A lack of large anti-immigration groups, means that the anti-immigration individuals are found in more normal political parties, in stead of being forced into some extreme ideology that the rest of the country find hard to swallow, in order to end immigration.

    It is the same with Denmark, although the Danes are a few years ahead of us on the curve, so there every party is against immigration in some way.

    It’s does not seem to have helped calm the Danes, as my impression is that more Danes than ever, feel immigration is an existential threat to Denmark, and that the government do nothing to counter it.

    More Danes and Norwegians than Swedes will complain over the media coverage being biased in favour of non-whites, although Danish and Norwegian media looks kind of honest, when you compare it to the “reality” Swedish media insists is true, so it seems like both the media and the politicians follow the will of the population, looking for money and voters, rather than being in control.

    Once a pro-white party gets influence, the situation is already so bad and turning worse, that the rest of the parties need to go somewhat pro-white to regain power, and you have the ball rolling, as most of the negative consequences of immigration has not yet become common knowledge by then.

    • Replies: @Tacitus2016
    I was over Copenhagen this week. Copenhagen - in contrast to Malmo across the water - feels quite overcrowded. It has a hustle and bustle. Overcrowding from immigrants to be felt more immediately. Living in the Scanian countryside you can be blissfully unaware of the national demographic changes. I feel I'm essentially living in a monoculture with a few ex-pat spouses.

    In Copenhagen there was a big long sign with: What Does It Mean to Be White? Lots of twee creationist-like questions and answers followed. Really anti-intellectual, childish gush. Then I had a really nice conversation with a black lady at railway station(no hater here).

  37. 930832

    Sorry, either the comment window wiped out my HTML tags or I messed up something. Reposting:

    If you can stomach the ugly answer, read the 2008 post from the Gates of Vienna by El Ingles: Surrender, Genocide… or What? There was also a follow-up discussion in 2009 at the late Lawrence Auster’s View from the Right.

    • Replies: @Paul Mendez
    Your links don't work.
  38. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    One lesson that life has taught me is that it is impossible to rationally argue with the rabid immigrationists of both left and right.

    Simply put, they are just not amenable to reason, let alone argument based on evidence and evidence alone. ‘Fanaticism’ and dogma is all they understand. To defend their dogma they will lie and lie and lie, openly, shamelessly and flagrantly. When that tactic doesn’t work they start the name-calling and the verbal attacks and insults.
    Honestly, in terms of mentality they remind of paranoid schizophrenics – the real medical definition involving unshakeable obvious delusions – and religious fanatics of the most bigotted type.

  39. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    They say conservatism is about the past, but it’s as much about the future.

    Unless we conserve what we are and what we have, our race won’t continue and receive what we’ve left them.

  40. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @anony-mouse
    The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don't want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries.

    From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority (note: I don't think this is a good idea). I believe that the majority in Sweden, Ireland, and Spain and possibly the majority in Norway, Finland, Iceland, Ireland and Scotland (to then extent that the latter is a country) favor that.

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).

    For Americans: imagine that the US had independent states with attitudes to immigration as shown in VT, MA, MN, OR and parts of CA and you'll understand.

    True, EU laws that allow free movement would cause problems, but if you could get rid of those laws then the problem could be solved-just send all the migrants to the countries that want them.

    Again for potential critics:

    1/ I'm not arguing that wanting mass migration to one's country is a good thing.

    2/ People can make stupid decisions-indeed people can be self-destructive.

    Many of those countries you mention don’t really a have long history of mass third world immigration, so they are really just naive enthusiastic beginners at that game.
    Britain, in this context meaning England, is the European nation with the longest history of third world immigration. It’s no coincidence that the English people are the most unconvinced on the subject of immigration. This despite a 67 year history of mass third world immigration, enormous propaganda efforts, immigrationist governments and a huge pro-immigration state apparatus, including the BBC. What’s more it is unlikely English attitudes will change from generation to generation, as the immigrationist fervently hope.

  41. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    It’s not.

    Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 ‘only’ had 3 million ‘Hispanics’. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million. No doubt people like you would have said in 1950 that the idea of ’60 million people sneaking across the Rio Grande is arrant nonsense’.
    The crucial factor is that in both cases there is absolutely no political will whatsoever to seriously repatriate or deter illegal immigrants.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 ‘only’ had 3 million ‘Hispanics’. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million."

    And it's not just about the numbers of immigrants - it's about the behavioral and demographic differences between the immigrants and the natives. Britain has lots of 60-something grandmas and grandpas. The "refugees" pouring into Europe are skewed towards the younger and more virile. They are a highly fecund lot. They're going to comprise a much larger share of the breeding pool than raw numbers would suggest.

    People have no idea what's happening when we import large numbers of fecund immigrants into an aging population with sub-replacement fertility. The demographic changes happen very, very quickly. American whites still have decent birthrates compared to Europeans. The rapid rise in America's Hispanic population over the last 50 years is nothing compared to what's happening in Europe. By the time I start collecting social security whites in Europe will barely be a majority.
    , @Wilkey
    "Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 ‘only’ had 3 million ‘Hispanics’. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million."

    And it's not just about the numbers of immigrants - it's about the behavioral and demographic differences between the immigrants and the natives. Britain has lots of 60-something grandmas and grandpas. The "refugees" pouring into Europe are skewed towards the younger and more virile. They are a highly fecund lot. They're going to comprise a much larger share of the breeding pool than raw numbers would suggest.

    People have no idea what's happening when we import large numbers of fecund immigrants into an aging population with sub-replacement fertility. The demographic changes happen very, very quickly. American whites still have decent birthrates compared to Europeans. The rapid rise in America's Hispanic population over the last 50 years is nothing compared to what's happening in Europe. By the time I start collecting social security whites in Europe will barely be a majority.
    , @Ed
    The number seems like an undercount. There had to be at least 3 million people of Mexican heritage in CA, TX alone in 1950.

    I think folks forget that there was time when minorities fought to be classified as white. There are Supreme Court cases involving Mexicans and Asian Indians that sued to be classified as white. I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.

    , @Anonymous
    There's no comparison. There is nothing separating the US and Mexico. There is a lot of separation between sub-Sahara Africa and Europe. It's impossible for so many people to cross.
  42. @Scotty G. Vito
    re: Cambodia, I think there are agreements ($$$) with Papua New Guinea and other states in the region for offloading the mig's they intercept before reaching Australian shores. My question is, what is the primary ethnicity of these boat people? I remember a story -- it was probably on here -- about people from as far off as SW Asia going to considerable lengths to get themselves smuggled into Aus., but surely these aren't getting dropped off in the same refugee camps? Is there a unique dynamic for dealing with the maritime DREAMers akin to our special difficulty with Home Depot tourists from Mexico & central America, vs. other mig groups? I'd bet the illegal Australians who look & sound as if they're from Tajikistan or Cameroon probably stand out in a more pronounced fashion, compared to the Oceanic ones.

    “what is the primary ethnicity of these boat people?”
    From memory the most recent boat people trying to get to Australia were Iranian economic refugees and Sri Lankan Tamil Tigers fleeing “persecution”. They made their way to Indonesia then paid smugglers to ship them to Aus.
    Illegal immigration to Australia is nothing compared to the legal intake of 200,000 and the granting of five million student/working/tourist visas per year.
    Student/working visas usually lead to permanent residency.

  43. Priss Factor [AKA "The Priss Factor"] says:

    If black Africa were close to the US, they’d all be ‘sailing’ here.

    Their rationale would be they were left behind in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade.

    Since whites didn’t take them then, they have to take the initiative to overcome that injustice.

  44. Hey guys, for those of you (all) who were too, cheap, busy, phlegmatic, lazy, ill, quarrelsome, unconvinced, etc., last week. to show your support for keeping the world white, this YOUNG gentleman covered the Amren conference;

    http://www.returnofkings.com/61903/i-attended-the-2015-white-nationalist-amren-conference

    • Replies: @Southfarthing

    http://www.returnofkings.com/61903/i-attended-the-2015-white-nationalist-amren-conference
     
    That was a glorious read, thanks:

    "A few young girls were being especially snarky. I knew they wouldn’t dance with me, but I decided to ruin their night anyway. I go up to them and say, “You’re fat, and I’m balding. Let’s dance.” They kept saying no, and I kept asking them, just to piss them off. One pushed me, and I pushed her back, and then the bouncer literally threw me out of the bar... Whether it is ethical to push a girl after she first pushes you is up for debate..."
     
  45. @anony-mouse
    The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don't want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries.

    From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority (note: I don't think this is a good idea). I believe that the majority in Sweden, Ireland, and Spain and possibly the majority in Norway, Finland, Iceland, Ireland and Scotland (to then extent that the latter is a country) favor that.

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).

    For Americans: imagine that the US had independent states with attitudes to immigration as shown in VT, MA, MN, OR and parts of CA and you'll understand.

    True, EU laws that allow free movement would cause problems, but if you could get rid of those laws then the problem could be solved-just send all the migrants to the countries that want them.

    Again for potential critics:

    1/ I'm not arguing that wanting mass migration to one's country is a good thing.

    2/ People can make stupid decisions-indeed people can be self-destructive.

    “The assumption in all these iSteve articles is that the people in all European countries don’t want masses of immigrants from 3rd world countries. From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority.”

    Reading general elections as a plebiscite on immigration, or any other particular issue, is a mistake. The vast majority of voters are more concerned about issues other than immigration – taxes, the economy, healthcare, the military, and all sorts of other causes both serious and ridiculous.

    One reason modern democracy is failing is that it crams too much power into a handful of government bodies. As the number of issues they manage grows and grows, the ability of the voters to exert influence on any particular issue shrinks.

    There are probably a dozen or more EU countries where the majority of voters want less immigration. But they are never, ever asked that question specifically. When they have been asked that in the US under various guises they have generally, perhaps always, favored less immigration and tighter enforcement – denying benefits to illegals in California, official English in several states, denying drivers licenses to illegals in Oregon (OREGON!), etc.

  46. @Anonymous
    It's not.

    Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 'only' had 3 million 'Hispanics'. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million. No doubt people like you would have said in 1950 that the idea of '60 million people sneaking across the Rio Grande is arrant nonsense'.
    The crucial factor is that in both cases there is absolutely no political will whatsoever to seriously repatriate or deter illegal immigrants.

    “Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 ‘only’ had 3 million ‘Hispanics’. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million.”

    And it’s not just about the numbers of immigrants – it’s about the behavioral and demographic differences between the immigrants and the natives. Britain has lots of 60-something grandmas and grandpas. The “refugees” pouring into Europe are skewed towards the younger and more virile. They are a highly fecund lot. They’re going to comprise a much larger share of the breeding pool than raw numbers would suggest.

    People have no idea what’s happening when we import large numbers of fecund immigrants into an aging population with sub-replacement fertility. The demographic changes happen very, very quickly. American whites still have decent birthrates compared to Europeans. The rapid rise in America’s Hispanic population over the last 50 years is nothing compared to what’s happening in Europe. By the time I start collecting social security whites in Europe will barely be a majority.

  47. @Anonymous
    It's not.

    Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 'only' had 3 million 'Hispanics'. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million. No doubt people like you would have said in 1950 that the idea of '60 million people sneaking across the Rio Grande is arrant nonsense'.
    The crucial factor is that in both cases there is absolutely no political will whatsoever to seriously repatriate or deter illegal immigrants.

    “Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 ‘only’ had 3 million ‘Hispanics’. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million.”

    And it’s not just about the numbers of immigrants – it’s about the behavioral and demographic differences between the immigrants and the natives. Britain has lots of 60-something grandmas and grandpas. The “refugees” pouring into Europe are skewed towards the younger and more virile. They are a highly fecund lot. They’re going to comprise a much larger share of the breeding pool than raw numbers would suggest.

    People have no idea what’s happening when we import large numbers of fecund immigrants into an aging population with sub-replacement fertility. The demographic changes happen very, very quickly. American whites still have decent birthrates compared to Europeans. The rapid rise in America’s Hispanic population over the last 50 years is nothing compared to what’s happening in Europe. By the time I start collecting social security whites in Europe will barely be a majority.

  48. Ed says:
    @Twinkie

    Paul Kagame is the ideal 21st Century Lee Kuan Yew figure because he’s a black African
     
    Too bad Kagame doesn't have Singaporeans as his people. Otherwise it might have worked out.

    I don’t know spoke to white girl that did a 4 years at the Peace Corps there. She’s now dating the son of a Rwandan diplomat and she’s a big fan of Kagame. Says as far as Africa goes it’s a decent country.

    A firm, fair hand might be able to whip them into shape. We’ll see.

  49. Ed says:
    @Anonymous
    It's not.

    Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 'only' had 3 million 'Hispanics'. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million. No doubt people like you would have said in 1950 that the idea of '60 million people sneaking across the Rio Grande is arrant nonsense'.
    The crucial factor is that in both cases there is absolutely no political will whatsoever to seriously repatriate or deter illegal immigrants.

    The number seems like an undercount. There had to be at least 3 million people of Mexican heritage in CA, TX alone in 1950.

    I think folks forget that there was time when minorities fought to be classified as white. There are Supreme Court cases involving Mexicans and Asian Indians that sued to be classified as white. I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.

    • Replies: @Bill

    I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.
     
    They did check white. There is a separate question that today we call "nationality" which asks what country your ancestors came from. The pre-1970s counts of hispanics are counts of how many people answered Mexico to the nationality question.
    , @anin


    I think folks forget that there was time when minorities fought to be classified as white. There are Supreme Court cases involving Mexicans and Asian Indians that sued to be classified as white. I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.

     

    My grandfather's birth certificate in 1925 lists his mother's race as Mexican and his father's as white. My grandfather is listed as white. While anecdotal, it is likely not anomalous.
  50. @Anonymous
    It's not.

    Lest you forget, the USA of 1950 'only' had 3 million 'Hispanics'. By 2015 this had multiplied to at least 60 million. No doubt people like you would have said in 1950 that the idea of '60 million people sneaking across the Rio Grande is arrant nonsense'.
    The crucial factor is that in both cases there is absolutely no political will whatsoever to seriously repatriate or deter illegal immigrants.

    There’s no comparison. There is nothing separating the US and Mexico. There is a lot of separation between sub-Sahara Africa and Europe. It’s impossible for so many people to cross.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I repeat NO! It is NOT!

    You obviously have very, very little understanding of the dynamics of mass third world immigration into the west, chain migration, the acquiescence and agreement of the political class, the untold billions just itching to get over, and last but not least, exponential growth - which always but always is the concomitant of mass third world immigration into western nations, without any exception whatsoever.
    Anyway the point is that at this stage, it's not 'just a few dinghies' as you might put it, but rather a conveyor belt in which any African who has the nous to put to sea is swiftly plucked out of the water and guaranteed EU citizenship.

    On another note, when the Blair (traitor) government foolishly submitted to an open door immigration policy with Poland, they strenuously claimed - in the same way you are doing - that 'only' 70,000 'at most' would ever come to Britain. In the event many millions did. Poland is not a particularly poor or populous country.
    , @Bill
    Show your damn work. If each boat can carry 100 people, that's 1MM boat trips. You can get that from 1000 boats taking 1000 trips each. Over the period of a couple of years, this is extremely plausible. You can diddle the numbers, but you can't make 100MM people transported implausible.

    Relevant: In WWI, trenchlines 500 miles long were dug, with shovels and wheelbarrows, in a couple of months.

    Multiplication is not something human brains are good at, natively. Multiplying three good size numbers together, it's easy to get to 100MM, but your intuition does not know that. The cube root of 100MM is only 454.
    , @Whiskey
    Wrong. Travel by water s cheaper than by land. Already UN preducts 1 million this year from Libya alone. Europe is doomed, in only a few years. Camp f the Saints is here.

    Because that is the core of Leftism. Not brainwashing, otherwise McDonalds would not have falling sales. But post Christian worship of non Whites and hatred of White eve faster tech progress. Hence Third World in Europe.

    Endgame is most Whites ethnically cleansed ot f Europe to here, angry and revanchist.
  51. Rwanda is the most overcrowded country in Africa as it is, I much doubt that any considerable number of immigrants will be resettled there. Since our whole information on this supposed transaction comes from Israeli sources, there is further reason for scepticism.
    It still remains to be seen how much Kagame and the Israelis have in common, other than grandiose claims of genocide.

    • Replies: @Vendetta
    Rwanda is a good friend to have in Africa if you want to look good giving away foreign aid money but don't want to literally throw it down the toilet.

    Kagame runs a very tight ship and actually spends his aid money on productive improvements to the country. Works wonders, and makes for much better publicity than when your aid money ends up in the hands of warlords or a Swiss bank account.
  52. @Nathan Wartooth
    The real problem is western countries turning immigrants into citizens as fast as they can. You could expel immigrants, but expelling your "fellow" citizens is another matter entirely.

    If anyone tried this, the comparisons to Nazi Germany would obviously be made and other countries might even feel pressure to attack a country that tried to expel citizens because they weren't white.

    The end game is that America looks like Brazil, Australia and Canada get taken over by Asians and Europe by Arabs and Africans. It wouldn't even take any new policies for this to happen, the destiny is already written by current demographics. Any new immigration just speeds things along.

    I disagree that delaying things helps. If the demographic transformation happens slow enough, nothing will be done. But a sudden shift could be fought against, especially if the country is in current economic trouble.

    Steve once said that electing a new people is the final argument of the Confederacy of Whores. Well, revolution is the final argument of nations, and if their survival is at stake they might well resort to it.

    In a revolutionary scenario, I doubt Johnny European will be overly scrupulous about the citizenship status of nominal Europeans. It will be hard to blame him, either.

    It’s frustrating that immigrant minorities don’t give more thought to the distinction between citizenship and membership in the nation. They benefit greatly from the use of citizenship (a somewhat arbitrary legal classification) as a generally accepted proxy for membership in the nation (conferred organically through blood and history). Thus, some piece of paper stamped by a bureaucrat makes a Pakistani equal in Englishness to an Englishman whose forefathers worked and bled for king and country. The implicitly accepted linkage between the state’s legal formalities and the nation’s “mystic chords of memory” is a really, really nice deal for the Pakistani immigrant.

    So you would think that the immigrant would go to great lengths to keep that linkage between state and nation plausible in the minds of the native English population. He might, for example, support policies to make immigration minimal and selective so as to avoid rocking the demographic boat. He might avoid trying to impose his religion and culture on the host society. He might avoid voting for leftist parties that use the state’s power to wage a culture war on the natives.

    You’d think he might do these things, but…he doesn’t, in most cases. The Diversity agenda of the Ruling Class reassures him that he represents progress and the future, while the native population is evil and deserves to lose their country. Naturally, he doesn’t feel grateful for the extraordinary gift of being an “honorary native Englishman” by virtue of his acquired citizenship. Why would he want to be an Englishman when the BBC and Guardian and Labor Party tell him that the English are a bunch of losers and that the country belongs to him now?

    So if Europeans revolt and start revoking the citizenship of people who (1) should never have received it in the first place, (2) failed to demonstrate proper gratitude and loyalty once they did receive it, and (3) conspired with the Ruling Class to help dissolve the old nation…well, I can’t say I’d be all that outraged or shocked by the development.

    Anyway, the short version is that the high-low assault of the Ruling Class and its immigrant-minority allies is driving native Europeans toward a very explicit and exclusive kind of ethnonationalism. If that has revolutionary consequences, nobody should be surprised.

    • Replies: @tunglet
    I'll just leave this here, as Steve might find it interesting as it confirms much of what he is saying. I was supposed to post it in a more relevant thread earlier, but I never finished the post.

    The Oslo schools have become very segregated by race, since the conservative+Frp promised both public benchmark tests for each school, and free choice of schools if a spot was available, to win an election way before racial differences were talked very much about.

    The problem is that you can't do both at the same time, while you insist that differences in the results is independent of race, and not create the impression that non-white immigrants pull down the result of the Norwegian students. Too many immigrants in one school, the results naturally starts to fall, leading to an exodus of the Norwegian children, that makes the results even worse.

    All the spots in the good schools, are naturally always taken, so immigrants that want their children in a Norwegian school, might have to take the kids pretty far, something few bother to do, or buy a house in an expensive Norwegian area, that few non-whites can afford.

    Norwegians that don't have enough money to buy a house in an Norwegian area of Oslo, do however bother, or move elsewhere in Norway, as no Norwegian want their child to be the one paying for integration, not even the salaried anti-racists.

    Had they come clean about racial realities, immigrants would not have come off as infections like they do today, where the numbers indicate that going to an immigrant school, will put your child two years behind a child going to a Norwegian school.

    IIRC Norwegians having 100 in IQ with 16 as the standard deviation, and IQ being age dependent, two years behind, means that non-whites in Norway have roughly 15 points lower IQ than white people.

    ................

    One thing more I want to mention, is what is called Nature Kindergartens, Forest Kindergarten, Outdoor Preschools, where the children spend their day outside, no matter the weather.

    I spent quite some time looking into them some time ago, and is sure that this will become a trend, not only in Norway and Denmark, but in the rest of the white world, because it has everything going for it.

    * Intelligent parents send their children to Nature Kindergartens, so they get excellent results. A large vocabulary is something the parents teach the children, but it shows up in the statistics as the preschool doing a good job, etc.
    * As the children spend most of the time indoors with their nuclear family when they are at home, it becomes important to socialize with other children and play outdoors, when they are in Kindergarten.
    * Because they have no classroom or facilities, they are cheap to run, since they only need a minibus.
    * The progressives loves the connection with nature, but it is rough enough for the reactionaries.
    * But most important of all, is that it offers a way for both the reactionaries and the progressives, to escape the non-white children without coming off as a pro-white.

    Since the adults are not supposed to control play, the SJW is absent. Not only are there no books for them to rage against, it is also hard to rage, when the teacher is not responsible for the sex-differences that shows up during play, since the idea is that the children are free too choose what they want to do, without the adult trying to control too much.

    A few youtube links.

    Arctic Outdoor Preschool
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfOceI7oirI

    A documentary from a Japanese Nature Kindergarten, that explains the philosophy.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNl5p1M96xE
    (jump to 25 minutes, if the start is boring. I laughed when one child taught another to use snow, to wipe blood off your clothes.)

    Not Your Father's School - Early Childhood, Forest Kindergartens and Nature Preschools - David Sobel
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQxIRhwbNQ

    The very expensive American pre-schools, might lose some of their status, if Whites find out that just spending the day in the forest with other intelligent kids, gives about the same academic results, but create much healthier and happier children?

    The no classroom, being outside all day, have also evolved, as the minibus meant the Kindergarten could also visit civilization, like spend the day in an sport-arena, a museum or on a farm. All kindergartens now have days outside kindergartens, but they also do much more than before. They plant, say potatoes in the spring, and harvest in fall, and then cook and eat them.

    You also find minibus based afterschools, where the adult picks up the children at school, go to the forest, a swimming-pool, sports-facility, and then drops them off again, when the parents are home from work.

    The next step then becomes "just a minibus, but no classroom" schools, in those countries where home schooling is legal, so you could get around the demand for facilities and paperwork, by having the parents assume the legal responsibility.

    When private schools suffers from unruly low IQ pupils, and yet cost an average of 13.000$ per year, it becomes rational for parents of high IQ children in mixed areas, to have the child be home schooled on paper, but have him attend a minibus-internet based school in reality, where the days are spent in libraries, sport arenas, museums or nature, with other white high IQ children.

    If the wealthy whites in America, are also looking for ways to escape from over-ambitious Chinese, Persians, Jews and Indians, and schools are forbidden to discriminate, even they might opt for something similar for their children.
  53. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    From what I can see there are European countries which have a pro-mass immigration majority
     
    Evidence, please?

    I would love it, if we could somehow get a simple referendum put together on what level of immigration people actually want.

    It’s such a fundamental issue. Why not even put out a non-binding referendum, so the people can at least have a voice.

    I always get the feeling the ruling class would rather not hear from the average citizen about this topic

  54. @Steve Sailer
    Kagame is a bright guy. Kagame was intelligence chief for Museweni in that Uganda's drive to set himself up for dictator for life in Uganda in the 1980s, in return for Museweni backing Kagame's Tutu elitists' reconquista of Uganda in the 1990s (which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994). Since then Kagame has held power with few major challenges in Rwanda while engaging in spectacular acts of invasion and piracy in the Congo. A European equivalent might be some Teutonic Knight leader who really stuck it to the Slavs back in the late dark ages in Prussia.

    What are you talking about?

    The Teutonic Knights lost the two major wars they had with Poland and Russia (ie. Slavs). After the war with Poland they had to pay rent to stay in Prussia.

    Are you perhaps confusing the native Prussians for Slavs? They were Balts.

  55. @Twinkie

    Paul Kagame is the ideal 21st Century Lee Kuan Yew figure because he’s a black African
     
    Too bad Kagame doesn't have Singaporeans as his people. Otherwise it might have worked out.

    Too bad Kagame doesn’t have Singaporeans as his people. Otherwise it might have worked out.

    He’s only been prime minister for 15 years, what was Lee’s record of achievement in 1974?

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    He’s only been prime minister for 15 years, what was Lee’s record of achievement in 1974?
     
    More than 5-fold increase in Singapore's GDP since 1960 for starters.

    So you think Kagame will achieve this with his people? http://www.medtech.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Annual-GDP.jpg

    It's possible, I suppose, but highly unlikely. Why don't you bet some money on that?

  56. The juice behind immigration was the need to fill old decrepit residential real estate with paying renters. In NY city it is possible to rent a horrible apartment in a falling down building, but when you have the same buildings in third tier rust belt suburbs you cant rent the same buildings unless the state university or a military base is across the street. We may have reached the the point adding the marginal immigrant no longer has a constituency as NYC is filled and who cares about filling Detroit.

    Incidently no renters also means no need for police and school teachers.

    The California drought may also have shook up the concensus.

  57. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    How can China not dominate the next century? Or maybe even starting in 2050. I used to think our only problem in the West would an idiocracy. But with all the Muslim refugees it’ll by a very bloody idiocracy. I think of the Somali refugee mother of thirteen kids in Minnesota. No father. Two of her kids involved in ISIS/plots to attack US targets. She blames America for misunderstanding her good boys.

  58. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    …which is what was behind the Hutu genocide of Tutsis in 1994
     
    What was behind the Tutsi genocide of Hutus in 1972?

    What was behind the Tutsi genocide of Hutus in 1972?

    Kagame is a client of the US so naturally he gets great PR in our press. I believe he castigated the French for supposedly supporting the Hutus so perhaps the French press isn’t as laudatory. The conflict between the two groups apparently goes back a long way, in Burundi as well as in Rwanda. Since neither country has had much in the way of writers most information comes to us from outsiders, many of whom are just hacks. For example, a look at what’s available on Amazon makes it seem as if history in that part of the world just began in the 90’s.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    You still haven't answered the question.

    Fundamentally it's all Hatfields and McCoys. One group commits some atrocities or seems to be on the verge of taking power, so there is a backlash and the other group starts killing the 1st group in revenge or to pre-empt a takeover. Sometime the Hutu kill the Tutsi and sometime it's the other way 'round. Then you'll have an uneasy truce for a couple of decades until something destabilizes the situation and it begins again. As you can see now going on in Ukraine, each side perceives the other as being fundamentally evil and itself as acting simply to right past wrongs, so it is no sin to slaughter the enemy, even enemy civilians. The justification for one massacre is the last massacre in the other direction so you can never say "who started it". The Tutsi were the hereditary ruling class and the Hutus were poor but the majority, so you had an unstable situation like Syria or Iraq where a minority group ruled the majority.
  59. Maybe you guys should have had more children.

    Of course that requires being attractive to women

    • Replies: @Paul Mendez
    Maybe you guys should have had more children.

    Let me clue you in on a little secret: guys don't have children. Women do.

    To blame any white man for the overall paucity of white children is to posit that somewhere in the world existed a white women who was only willing to bear his child, but not the child of anyone else.
  60. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    There's no comparison. There is nothing separating the US and Mexico. There is a lot of separation between sub-Sahara Africa and Europe. It's impossible for so many people to cross.

    I repeat NO! It is NOT!

    You obviously have very, very little understanding of the dynamics of mass third world immigration into the west, chain migration, the acquiescence and agreement of the political class, the untold billions just itching to get over, and last but not least, exponential growth – which always but always is the concomitant of mass third world immigration into western nations, without any exception whatsoever.
    Anyway the point is that at this stage, it’s not ‘just a few dinghies’ as you might put it, but rather a conveyor belt in which any African who has the nous to put to sea is swiftly plucked out of the water and guaranteed EU citizenship.

    On another note, when the Blair (traitor) government foolishly submitted to an open door immigration policy with Poland, they strenuously claimed – in the same way you are doing – that ‘only’ 70,000 ‘at most’ would ever come to Britain. In the event many millions did. Poland is not a particularly poor or populous country.

    • Replies: @annie

    On another note, when the Blair (traitor) government foolishly submitted to an open door immigration policy with Poland, they strenuously claimed – in the same way you are doing – that ‘only’ 70,000 ‘at most’ would ever come to Britain. In the event many millions did. Poland is not a particularly poor or populous country.
     
    If Blair were an honest man, he would have put a 70,000 maximum in the law which would have deported the 70,001 immigrant. But being a liar, he did not.
  61. @Power Child
    OT, but there's an iSteve-bait controversy going on in the chess world right now. Some chess master I'd never heard of, one Nigel Short, wrote an article daring to assert that the relative lack of women in the highest echelons of chess is due to their brains being wired differently, and that the chess community should quit fretting over sexism and embrace reality.

    I've enjoyed reading comments to articles and blog posts about this controversy on chess.com because there's actually a fair amount of diversity in the responses. The political demographics of casual chess players could be interesting to take a look at.

    Competitive chess players tend to be all over the map politically. However, I can say the US Chess Federation, or at least parts of it, tends to be obsessed with getting female players. Mainly though it is a guy’s game. There are a decent number of girls in scholastics, but far less go on to play as adults than boys.

    At the upper levels of chess it is typical situation you see in sports. Sure a woman who dedicates her life to the sport can beat up on the schlubs but when facing the same type of competitors, it isn’t close. This doesn’t mean they won’t win a few games, but it’s extremely rare that they place high in a major tournament.

    In general, I have found that most woman prefer games that don’t take much in the way of thinking and are heavily tied to chance. That’s even if they care about games at all.

    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    How would you assess the Polgar sisters? Are they over-rated?
  62. @Shawn
    For Steve & commenters:

    What do you see as the end game resulting from all the immigration to the USA and Europe? Will it all end in tears anyway, as Peter Brimelow has often said, and are we just hopelessly delaying the inevitable? If so, what do you predict ultimately happening? I believe you (Steve) wrote once that at least we can delay the inevitable and say we were right in the end. I agree. It's my belief that the tears will most likely be come from the displaced majority, not the invaders, particularity in the US.

    I believe that there's about an 80% chance in Europe, and about a 90% chance in the USA, that the majority will simply slowly be swamped and there will be intra-country fractioning. Natural selection will continue to work against the native peoples. The less likely scenario involves expelling foreigners. If this were to happen it would be the doing of a junta gov't and/or the result of a mass-media organ being controlled by the majority or a wealthy individual.

    The end game.

    In the long term, there will be a collapse in the need for human labor due to the coming robotics revolution. A significant percentage of current jobs will be automated, leaving a large fraction of the population without meaningful employment. The result will be massive unemployment and a huge fall in wages.

    Unfortunately, the coming US debt crisis will likely result in massive spending cuts or hyperinflation, which will hugely erode the standard of living in the US (SS, Medicare, unemployment, and Medicaid will be cut). So this combination of lowered standard of living and joblessness is going to be disastrous for the masses.

    In that atmosphere, immigration will likely be cut substantially. Politicians won’t have any choice. Unfortunately, even with immigration cuts, I think America is doomed to Latin America style inequality in the long term.

    I also foresee a situation in which racial tensions flare up, due to competition over scarce jobs and resources. Americans have historically been nice because American has historically been a land of plenty, but what happens when the country is no longer a land of plenty? Then what? When people are fighting tooth and nail not to fall out of the middle class, I could see things getting pretty nasty.

    So, yes, this will end in tears. Debt + immigration + robotic automation + endless wars + oligarchization + outsourcing + dismantling our industrial base = death of the American middle class.

    The tech bubble and then the govt-ignited housing boom masked the underlying weakness of the US worker economy since the early 1990s. Unfortunately, decades of disastrous policies (with respect to trade, regulation, unions, immigration, and inequality) have hollowed out the economy’s middle class support structure and that’s now becoming very apparent. What the 2008 financial crash did was not cause the current worker recession – rather it laid bare how much the position of workers had deteriorated in recent years. At this point, the govt has run out of tricks to create an illusion of prosperity.

    The reality is the US worker is in a grim recession. Politicians talk of recovery, but the reality is that there’s not going to be a recovery. This is the new normal and conditions will continue to worsen in the future. The current situation is actually even worse than the Great Depression in some respects, since at least we could spend our way out of that. The US govt has accumulated so much debt (and is projected to accumulate vastly more in the future) that our hands our tied with regards to spending.

    When the US experiences a Greece-style debt situation sometime in the future, our current system will see the final leg of the table kicked out. At that point, the public will demand the govt “do something.” Unlike previous crisises, the govt won’t have the financial resources to fix the problem. It will be at that point when we see the collapse of the current order.

    I don’t know what will come next. I suppose present day Greece might be our future.

    So, yes, I do think immigration will be deeply cut sometime in the coming years…….. but it’ll happen under unfortunate circumstances involving the collapse of our middle class.

    That’s the end game.

    • Replies: @Paul Mendez
    I wish I could find some way to disagree with your predictions, but I can't.
  63. @iSteveFan

    I base my belief on election results, government actions and in some cases the total lack of anti-immigration groups (eg Ireland, Iceland, and Scotland) or at the very least the lack of large anti-immigration groups (Spain and Norway).
     
    You could make that assumption based upon the results you cited. But you should also take into consideration the influence of the media and other institutions in promoting this view. Individuals or parties against immigration are for the most part portrayed negatively in the media. In Greece they are even subject to arrest. In Germany the Chancellor condemns them.

    Most people go along with the flow so long as they have food in their belly and a roof over their head. Why risk it when you see what happens to critics? Does anyone seriously doubt the public would not become immigration restrictionists if the media and government started to promote that view? What about if open border enthusiasts were held up to ridicule and ostracized as traitors? Let's see how long the public supports open borders when that happens.

    I’ve posted versions of this comment in many places- but here I go again: isteve fan is correct about the influence of the media, government and academia. I know Sweden pretty well for a foreigner- I speak the language and have many friends, acquaintances and relatives there. Overwhelmingly the Swedish elites are pro- third world immigration. Jimmy Åkesson and his Sweden Democrats are compared to Hitler and worse. My academic friends are a lost cause- nice people, most of them, but hopeless on this issue. I’d note that, too, just as in the US, most of these folks don’t live in Biskopsgården, Rinkeby or Rosengård; they live in places where most everyone is an ethnic Swede. I’d also say that the deterioration of Swedish society is kinda like the guy who puts on five pounds a month- if you work with him everyday you tend not to notice, but if you don’t see him for a year- you go “whoa! fatso”!
    My relatives are mostly normal people with normal jobs- when I prompt the they will express some reservations about the “New Sweden”- they’d say things to me that they wouldn’t in public. For my part I don’t let my academic pals know that, were I a Swedish citizen I’d vote for “the Jimster”.

    As for the main thrust of Steve’s piece- there’s a point there, but unless the aid to these third world hell holes is controlled by the westerners doling out the aid the money will just get stolen. May as well just deposit it directly in Paul Kagame’s or Joseph Kabila’s Swiss bank account.

  64. One positive outcome for Amercan conservatives is that now – no matter what the future holds for Europe short of a Hitler-style genocide — “comparative” national statistics will be truly comparative for the first time. The Europeans have imported their very own hereditary, racial underclass that differs in no significant way from the USA’s current one. The USA is going to start looking quite good compared with Europe on measures of such things as crime rates, average educational attainment, etc., etc. It’s going to become more and more difficult to argue that European-style welfare states have a better track record than the USA as measured by metrics like these. Somebody ought to recycle Kipling’s “Take Up the White Man’s Burden” for the future generations of poor European bastards who are about to experience the horrors of a large, new, perpetual, racially distinct underclass.

  65. @HA
    "This concept – That deportees have to go back to their country of origin if some kind of post WWII Western conceit. It would not surprise me in 10-15 years if countries just start expelling them,..."

    I'm not sure what this means. Where will the deportees be expelled, if not to the countries of their origin? Will the countries who expel them just give them a raft and set them adrift in international waters somewhere? Barring some special circumstance like those that Israel arranged, few countries are going to allow themselves to be on the receiving end of any such expulsion, unless the people involved are citizens. If you mean that the deportees are simply going to be sent back through whatever border crossing or port they came from, I believe that's what Australia's policy already amounts to, but that most recent border crossing is not always going to be easy to determine.

    Barring some special circumstance like those that Israel arranged, few countries are going to allow themselves to be on the receiving end of any such expulsion, unless the people involved are citizens.

    I’ve heard these rumors that sometimes, even when you don’t want to “allow” something, someone stronger than you makes you allow it. Don’t know if there’s anything to these rumors, of course. Just thought I would pass the info along.

    • Replies: @HA
    That's a valid point, but I would regard a situation where a country is "made to allow" deportees as one of those special circumstances, inasmuch as it would be pretty much the same as what Israel is doing already, except that it would involve brandishing a stick, instead of offering a carrot.
  66. @Lagertha
    agree with post; but the ref to "ditzy blonde" (ha, ha, ha... by the way) is a classic example of a much earlier post I wrote about having often been stereotyped because of my looks: blonde (decidedly not ditzy)...and growing up in the NYC metropolitan area, and going to an elite U. Everyone assumed (including professors) I couldn't possibly be smart. I never cried, "bias!; micro-aggression!" but, success really is the best revenge (Coco Chanel) at class reunions!

    Probably, because this Ms. Hopkins is "Legally" blonde is what is really ticking-off her critics. There is a category of women who hate blonde women in the professional/corporate tier. And, blondes age well...which is another dart to throw.

    Blondes age well? I thought it was the reverse.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Michele Pfeiffer, Jessica Lange, Ingrid Bergman, Candace Bergen, Anita Ekberg, Ursula Andress, Kirsten Dunst, Uma Thurman, Maggie Gyllenhal, Tippi Hedren, Greta Garbo, Bibi Andersson, Maud Adams, Ann-Margaret, list goes on...many also, decided to age naturally.
  67. @Ed
    The number seems like an undercount. There had to be at least 3 million people of Mexican heritage in CA, TX alone in 1950.

    I think folks forget that there was time when minorities fought to be classified as white. There are Supreme Court cases involving Mexicans and Asian Indians that sued to be classified as white. I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.

    I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.

    They did check white. There is a separate question that today we call “nationality” which asks what country your ancestors came from. The pre-1970s counts of hispanics are counts of how many people answered Mexico to the nationality question.

  68. @Stumpy Pepys
    "People" who work towards a Norwegian minority in Norway see that they are doing the most noble act imaginable.... evil

    Hence the burgeoning movement in Norway to Save the Lutefisk!

    The strategic pickled herring reserve may be tapped as a last-ditch line of defense before another culinary massacre occurs due to insensitive palates amongst undocumented travelers.

    If kroner aren’t raised, via a special levy, then we can only anticipate that reindeer farming will have to expand to feed non-vegan guest workers/penitents, necessitating UN aid to Lapland.

    Send’em to Sweden or Finland instead.

    /Sami /Sarc

  69. @Shawn
    For Steve & commenters:

    What do you see as the end game resulting from all the immigration to the USA and Europe? Will it all end in tears anyway, as Peter Brimelow has often said, and are we just hopelessly delaying the inevitable? If so, what do you predict ultimately happening? I believe you (Steve) wrote once that at least we can delay the inevitable and say we were right in the end. I agree. It's my belief that the tears will most likely be come from the displaced majority, not the invaders, particularity in the US.

    I believe that there's about an 80% chance in Europe, and about a 90% chance in the USA, that the majority will simply slowly be swamped and there will be intra-country fractioning. Natural selection will continue to work against the native peoples. The less likely scenario involves expelling foreigners. If this were to happen it would be the doing of a junta gov't and/or the result of a mass-media organ being controlled by the majority or a wealthy individual.

    Short term you start seeing a house divided among communities and even federal agencies. When the last batch of illegal aliens were surging across the border, there was an incident at Murrieta station that was brushed over quickly where the Border Patrol agents (who live and work in the community) confronted the ICE agents and US Marshalls sent (from out of town) to break the line of protesters with a riot team.

    There will be a Fort Sumter moment when people realize that their government is against them, and entire states will begin ignoring the dictats of federal mandarins on the judiciary and their bureaucratic enforcers. The US will be gated communities for the elites and favelas for the hoi polloi around DC and in the Northeast, while as you go further west you’ll have an odd cowboy society with smartphones.

    It’ll be interesting, at least.

    The lesson from Murrieta and Bundy Ranch is that no amount of internet neckbeard chin stroking and pontificating is going to actually change anything: the threat of force must be met with the threat of force. Sitting around grousing on the internet is just the Alt Right’s version of slacktivism.

  70. TB2 [AKA "JohnB"] says:

    The only legitimate argument for limiting immigration is that you want to preserve your people and culture, anything else is kowtowing to the racists who want to eliminate them, an acknowledgement that you agree that you have no right to your territory and you’re willing to haggle on the conditions of your dispossession and destruction.

  71. @Anonymous
    There's no comparison. There is nothing separating the US and Mexico. There is a lot of separation between sub-Sahara Africa and Europe. It's impossible for so many people to cross.

    Show your damn work. If each boat can carry 100 people, that’s 1MM boat trips. You can get that from 1000 boats taking 1000 trips each. Over the period of a couple of years, this is extremely plausible. You can diddle the numbers, but you can’t make 100MM people transported implausible.

    Relevant: In WWI, trenchlines 500 miles long were dug, with shovels and wheelbarrows, in a couple of months.

    Multiplication is not something human brains are good at, natively. Multiplying three good size numbers together, it’s easy to get to 100MM, but your intuition does not know that. The cube root of 100MM is only 454.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    The migrant boat that capsized last Saturday was thought to be carrying 800, not 100. It was not a large ship, just a fishing trawler, but they pack as many people as they can onto these thing, like sardines. So that cuts the number of trips needed by a factor of 8. And this could be spread out over a decade or decades, not just a couple of years.

    Another factor in the great # of deaths is that most of the migrants were not (contra the photo on the front page of the NY Times) little white girls but African men. For some reason (apparently having to do with bone density or something) Africans, unlike witches, are not buoyant and they sink like stones. This sounds like an urban legend but it apparently has a scientific basis.
  72. @Yojimbo/Zatoichi
    Well, that would be interesting, especially since the rumor has it that he recently purchased a pretty fancy shamcy estate there for when he officially retires from Pennsylvania Avenue.

    Its one thing to have various states take them in, but to have them as next door neighbors?

    Seriously?

    I mean, come on. Some are more equal than others and should have the right to a nice quiet retirement amongst all the right sort of folks (e.g. Oprah, Zuckerberg, the Cox sisters of the Cox media empire, that billionaire who recently purchased one of the lesser HI islands so as to maintain the unspoiled very little developed areas, etc).

    The right sort of folks should have the right to their privacy, after all.

    Exercise among same consists of appropriate balance between bien pensant and bon vivant.

  73. @tunglet
    A lack of large anti-immigration groups, means that the anti-immigration individuals are found in more normal political parties, in stead of being forced into some extreme ideology that the rest of the country find hard to swallow, in order to end immigration.

    It is the same with Denmark, although the Danes are a few years ahead of us on the curve, so there every party is against immigration in some way.

    It's does not seem to have helped calm the Danes, as my impression is that more Danes than ever, feel immigration is an existential threat to Denmark, and that the government do nothing to counter it.

    More Danes and Norwegians than Swedes will complain over the media coverage being biased in favour of non-whites, although Danish and Norwegian media looks kind of honest, when you compare it to the "reality" Swedish media insists is true, so it seems like both the media and the politicians follow the will of the population, looking for money and voters, rather than being in control.

    Once a pro-white party gets influence, the situation is already so bad and turning worse, that the rest of the parties need to go somewhat pro-white to regain power, and you have the ball rolling, as most of the negative consequences of immigration has not yet become common knowledge by then.

    I was over Copenhagen this week. Copenhagen – in contrast to Malmo across the water – feels quite overcrowded. It has a hustle and bustle. Overcrowding from immigrants to be felt more immediately. Living in the Scanian countryside you can be blissfully unaware of the national demographic changes. I feel I’m essentially living in a monoculture with a few ex-pat spouses.

    In Copenhagen there was a big long sign with: What Does It Mean to Be White? Lots of twee creationist-like questions and answers followed. Really anti-intellectual, childish gush. Then I had a really nice conversation with a black lady at railway station(no hater here).

  74. @5371
    Rwanda is the most overcrowded country in Africa as it is, I much doubt that any considerable number of immigrants will be resettled there. Since our whole information on this supposed transaction comes from Israeli sources, there is further reason for scepticism.
    It still remains to be seen how much Kagame and the Israelis have in common, other than grandiose claims of genocide.

    Rwanda is a good friend to have in Africa if you want to look good giving away foreign aid money but don’t want to literally throw it down the toilet.

    Kagame runs a very tight ship and actually spends his aid money on productive improvements to the country. Works wonders, and makes for much better publicity than when your aid money ends up in the hands of warlords or a Swiss bank account.

  75. @leftist conservative
    tunglet wrote:

    Instead, they are being motivated by something far less noble, like wanting Norway to lose it’s Norwegian majority.
     
    Yes, it is quite obvious that many or even most liberals and almost all high profile journalists, liberal politicians, academicians/professors, so-called Social Justice Warriors, and the like, most of them white, do indeed want to see the white race obliterated, sunk, abolished, shamed, etc. This goes for America, especially, and increasingly, for western europe as well.

    This is obvious. But why is that the case? What led these white people to come to this conclusion? What led them to hate their own race?

    The answer lies in the history they were taught, the narrative they bought into.

    Those liberals, lefties, whatever you to call them, were taught as youngsters to hate their own race. Can everyone here, or at least most here, admit that this is the case?

    They were brainwashed, to put it bluntly. Their minds and worldviews were shaped and molded during their impressionable youth. Most of us here went through the same process, but being older, perhaps we were not subjected to it as much, or perhaps we were not subjected to college level propaganda. In any event, we aint buying into the idea of whiteness being evil.

    I hate the idea of mass immigration obliterating the white race. And I am proud of being white (or about 90% white). I think the white race is the greatest race ever. Period. And second place aint even close.

    But I differ from most here in one respect. I do not hate liberals. I think Leftism has been perverted by forces from on high. Leftism has been made to focus on anti-white, anti-male ideology, and at the same time, the good things about leftist ideology, such as workers rights, universal healthcare, progressive taxation, etc have been abandoned, and instead Leftism is about gay rights and swamping the West with nonwhite immigrants, and so forth.

    But I see liberals as victims of propaganda shoved down their throats. But I don't hate them. I think many of them will reject anti-white multiculturalism as they get older....and wiser.

    I have an aunt who fits your description exactly. She is a social and economic liberal to the core, while still being a nice white lady who wants to help everybody. She’s totally cool with the eventual extinction of most white folks and assumes the coming utopia will be a multicultural love festival. She even describes herself as an “anglophile” and attends an Episcopal church.

    Frankly, I don’t get it. Somebody help me out here.

    • Replies: @IA
    I'd be glad to help by way of analogy.

    During the second voyage of Capt. Cook a south sea native, one Omai, was brought back to England. He was "adopted" by Cook's patron the Earl of Sandwich and introduced to the royal family. By this time (late 18th century) the West had blown so far by the RoW they, the Rest, became harmless pets to the elites. The elites could reinforce their status and emphasize distance to the lower classes (who could not afford to make such magnanimous gestures).

    Curiously, at about this same time, the idea of the noble savage developed. Western society itself was evil and corrupted man's pure nature. Ergo, non-Euros, and the more non the better, became objects of sentimentality as eventually happened with artists like Gaugin -who died of syphillis in Tahiti, 'tho this would be expunged from the official narrative.

    Now, all this took a long time to filter down to the middle class. So, your aunt is signaling status to other (bad) whites. It's that simple. If she were of higher status she would adopt a negro.

    There is no other rational explanation for the insanity, other than a desire to prolong adolescence. At least I haven't been persuaded by various arguments. Blacks to this day carry an aura of purity and victimization no matter how stupidly and violently they behave or no matter how much money is spent. It even seems to be getting worse, this Eloi-like status marking. And no other culture on earth does this.
    , @PV van der Byl
    Alas, your aunt is very representative of Episcopali ns--especially the clergy. A regular iSteve reader would be a real outlier in an Episcopalian congregation anywhere outside the South.
  76. My Daughter-in-law is Norwegian. She and my son live in south Florida. I live half an hour away. Consequently we see A LOT of Norwegian friends and relatives, especially in the winter.

    The baby-boomer Norwegians are all “kum-by-a” with the idea of third world immigrants flooding in Norway.

    However the gen x, y, and millenials, once they have determined that its not going to get reported back to Norway and its safe to speak their true thoughts, just unleash mountains of verbal fury against the immigrants. KKK against blacks, or Nazi against Jew level stuff

    If I were a third world immigrant in Norway, I would leave now. Once the boomers are out of power, I would not be surprised at all to see the Norwegians go all viking barbarian on the third-worlders.

  77. Steve,

    I believe the the late Economist/Diplomat John Kenneth Galbraith, who was also ambassador to India under JFK was well known for making the same sort of argument on behalf of generous US foreign aide to developing countries vs the Open Borders policies favored by Globalists.

    Paraphrasing Galbraith would be that it was much better if we help the developing world fix their own countries then wait until they took to their feet and came knocking on our doors. Galbraith would say there is nothing with more past precedence than human migration from poverty and starvation.

    But then Galbraith was an old school non-Marxist Goyim Liberal Progressive of the Margaret Sanger population control variety.

    Here is the NYT’s New School Cultural Marxist Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman’s insane criticism of Galbraith’s anti Camp of Saints liberalism.

    It’s a classic example of the current TWMNBN point of view.


    http://www.pkarchive.org/cranks/GalbraithGoodSociety.html

    Review of John Kenneth Galbraith’s ‘The Good Society: The Humane Agenda’ 9/96

    SYNOPSIS: John Kenneth Galbraith has apparently not been briefed on new developments in macreconomic theory since 1950.

    There is no issue more painful for the serious liberal than immigration, which inevitably pits the interests of poorly paid workers in advanced countries against those of even worse-paid workers in the Third World. Yet Galbraith waves it all away with the airy remark that “admission must, no doubt, be related to the availability of jobs”–as if the number of jobs for low-skill workers were a fixed number, not something that depends on their wage rate. Suppose the United States were to allow $2-an-hour sweatshops to operate freely on our soil; undoubtedly, we could then gainfully employ tens of millions of immigrants, who would be eager to take those jobs. Our decision not to allow such sweatshops, to deny those potential immigrants that opportunity because we want to protect the wages of those already here, is a harsh choice that involves valuing some people’s economic interests over others.


  78. @Shawn
    For Steve & commenters:

    What do you see as the end game resulting from all the immigration to the USA and Europe? Will it all end in tears anyway, as Peter Brimelow has often said, and are we just hopelessly delaying the inevitable? If so, what do you predict ultimately happening? I believe you (Steve) wrote once that at least we can delay the inevitable and say we were right in the end. I agree. It's my belief that the tears will most likely be come from the displaced majority, not the invaders, particularity in the US.

    I believe that there's about an 80% chance in Europe, and about a 90% chance in the USA, that the majority will simply slowly be swamped and there will be intra-country fractioning. Natural selection will continue to work against the native peoples. The less likely scenario involves expelling foreigners. If this were to happen it would be the doing of a junta gov't and/or the result of a mass-media organ being controlled by the majority or a wealthy individual.

    I expect a long recessional.

    There are a lot of reasonably capable white people. People good at organizing things. People who have showed themselves exceptionally good at organized violence. People who do crazy shit like sacrificing themselves for their comrades or even for ideas.

    Combine this with the ongoing automation revolution, and the elite have a problem. What are you going to do with all those unemployed white people? In their copious leisure time, they might take a notice of the fact that the dissolute descendants of Lloyd Blankfein have a lot more stuff than they do, despite being POS. They might even take it into their heads to do something about it.

    There is no real prospect of police work, health care, social work, primary & secondary education, &c being automated. But, in order to employ the reserve army of the white unemployed in these occupations, they need someone to take care of. Someone who is incapable of taking care of themselves. Blacks are loud, messy, and violent, so we probably don’t want to import a bunch of them to take this role. Mexicans look much better.

    So, that’s my prognosis. Where we are going is a three caste society. The Jew-NE Asian-Smart White upper caste behind its tasteful, locally harvested, artisanally mortared stone walls. The white middle class consisting of cops married to social workers and radiology techs married to Kindergarten teachers in their compact, new urbanism neighborhoods. And the black-hispanic-dumb white helot class, some of whom clean houses but most of whom consume the services provided by the white middle caste. It’ll be a lightyellow-white-darkbrown kind of world.

    It won’t be rigid, this hierarchy. Talented people of swarth can aspire to become cops. The exceptionally talented children of cops could become arbitrageurs and earn their way into the elite, or at least its bottom rung. Elite heroin addicts, of which there will be exceedingly many, can earn their way into swarthmore. Elite sadists, similarly, could decide that being a cop seems like more fun than supervising a roomful of arbitrageurs.

    The really dangerous characters among the middle caste will have to be signed up for the Global Force for Good and sent off to Serbia. There, they will defend the hardworking, longsuffering employment agents scouring the Serbian countryside for entertainment talent. These fine men, the last redoubts of our great civilization, must be protected from marauding bands of prudish, Orthodox fanatics with their strange aversion to liberating, overseas work for the cruelly oppressed blossoms of Serbian womanhood.

    Only the high caste, actually only the leaders among the high caste, will know the nature of this world. Whitey will be handed a pat story about how evil he is for living in his new urbanism digs while darkie is stuck in whatever rubble remains of Detroit. Darkie will be handed the same pat story. Ambassadors from the elite will be available to fine tune the story as necessary. Only the heroin addicts and failed social-climbing arbitrageurs will ever mention the true nature of the society. Conspiracy theorists, the lot of them, says Officer Crupke. See what that kind of thinking brings you, says nurse Ratchet. I wonder if he has any money in that pocket, says D’Pedrovious.

    In short, I think we are going to get the society that RKU aspires to. The society that California becomes, more and more, each year.

  79. @Mark Eugenikos
    Sorry, either the comment window wiped out my HTML tags or I messed up something. Reposting:

    If you can stomach the ugly answer, read the 2008 post from the Gates of Vienna by El Ingles: Surrender, Genocide… or What? There was also a follow-up discussion in 2009 at the late Lawrence Auster’s View from the Right.

    Your links don’t work.

    • Replies: @Mark Eugenikos
    Sorry, I tested the links when I posted them but it looks like there's something weird going with redirection. GofW moved, here's the link to the current page for Surrender, Genocide... or What?

    Here's the follow-up discussion at View from the Right again. If the redirection stops working for some reason, just go to VFR and search for el Ingles; the discussion is the first result you get.
  80. @JohnnyWalker123
    The end game.


    In the long term, there will be a collapse in the need for human labor due to the coming robotics revolution. A significant percentage of current jobs will be automated, leaving a large fraction of the population without meaningful employment. The result will be massive unemployment and a huge fall in wages.

    Unfortunately, the coming US debt crisis will likely result in massive spending cuts or hyperinflation, which will hugely erode the standard of living in the US (SS, Medicare, unemployment, and Medicaid will be cut). So this combination of lowered standard of living and joblessness is going to be disastrous for the masses.

    In that atmosphere, immigration will likely be cut substantially. Politicians won't have any choice. Unfortunately, even with immigration cuts, I think America is doomed to Latin America style inequality in the long term.

    I also foresee a situation in which racial tensions flare up, due to competition over scarce jobs and resources. Americans have historically been nice because American has historically been a land of plenty, but what happens when the country is no longer a land of plenty? Then what? When people are fighting tooth and nail not to fall out of the middle class, I could see things getting pretty nasty.

    So, yes, this will end in tears. Debt + immigration + robotic automation + endless wars + oligarchization + outsourcing + dismantling our industrial base = death of the American middle class.

    The tech bubble and then the govt-ignited housing boom masked the underlying weakness of the US worker economy since the early 1990s. Unfortunately, decades of disastrous policies (with respect to trade, regulation, unions, immigration, and inequality) have hollowed out the economy's middle class support structure and that's now becoming very apparent. What the 2008 financial crash did was not cause the current worker recession - rather it laid bare how much the position of workers had deteriorated in recent years. At this point, the govt has run out of tricks to create an illusion of prosperity.

    The reality is the US worker is in a grim recession. Politicians talk of recovery, but the reality is that there's not going to be a recovery. This is the new normal and conditions will continue to worsen in the future. The current situation is actually even worse than the Great Depression in some respects, since at least we could spend our way out of that. The US govt has accumulated so much debt (and is projected to accumulate vastly more in the future) that our hands our tied with regards to spending.

    When the US experiences a Greece-style debt situation sometime in the future, our current system will see the final leg of the table kicked out. At that point, the public will demand the govt "do something." Unlike previous crisises, the govt won't have the financial resources to fix the problem. It will be at that point when we see the collapse of the current order.

    I don't know what will come next. I suppose present day Greece might be our future.

    So, yes, I do think immigration will be deeply cut sometime in the coming years........ but it'll happen under unfortunate circumstances involving the collapse of our middle class.

    That's the end game.

    I wish I could find some way to disagree with your predictions, but I can’t.

  81. European nations should all just end their social welfare programs. That will keep at least some of the “migrants” away.

    • Replies: @ingo

    European nations should all just end their social welfare programs. That will keep at least some of the “migrants” away.
     
    The only aid that should be available is contraception and sterilization. No free food or medicine. If they want it, they have to work for it. If they want to be sterilized, then the gov't could pay for that.
  82. @Anonymous
    There's no comparison. There is nothing separating the US and Mexico. There is a lot of separation between sub-Sahara Africa and Europe. It's impossible for so many people to cross.

    Wrong. Travel by water s cheaper than by land. Already UN preducts 1 million this year from Libya alone. Europe is doomed, in only a few years. Camp f the Saints is here.

    Because that is the core of Leftism. Not brainwashing, otherwise McDonalds would not have falling sales. But post Christian worship of non Whites and hatred of White eve faster tech progress. Hence Third World in Europe.

    Endgame is most Whites ethnically cleansed ot f Europe to here, angry and revanchist.

  83. @Truth

    Too bad Kagame doesn’t have Singaporeans as his people. Otherwise it might have worked out.
     
    He's only been prime minister for 15 years, what was Lee's record of achievement in 1974?

    He’s only been prime minister for 15 years, what was Lee’s record of achievement in 1974?

    More than 5-fold increase in Singapore’s GDP since 1960 for starters.

    So you think Kagame will achieve this with his people?
    It’s possible, I suppose, but highly unlikely. Why don’t you bet some money on that?

    • Replies: @Anon

    More than 5-fold increase in Singapore’s GDP since 1960 for starters.
     
    That included several years of the failed import substitution policies that Brazil still has in place. The thing about Lee is that he was non-ideological vis-a-vis economics - he kept what led to rapid economic growth and discarded what did not. He tried socialism for a few years and dumped it when the numbers came in.
    , @Truth
    Well now, Twinkie, again my intellect is on the low side here, but the little red thingy on your graphy thing-a-ma-jig did look really close at the 1974 marker to where it was at the 1960 marker.

    And while I cannot predict the future, Mr. Kagame is a trendsetter and these types generally do OK:

    http://www.thedeliciousday.com/environment/rwanda-plastic-bag-ban/
  84. @Bill
    Show your damn work. If each boat can carry 100 people, that's 1MM boat trips. You can get that from 1000 boats taking 1000 trips each. Over the period of a couple of years, this is extremely plausible. You can diddle the numbers, but you can't make 100MM people transported implausible.

    Relevant: In WWI, trenchlines 500 miles long were dug, with shovels and wheelbarrows, in a couple of months.

    Multiplication is not something human brains are good at, natively. Multiplying three good size numbers together, it's easy to get to 100MM, but your intuition does not know that. The cube root of 100MM is only 454.

    The migrant boat that capsized last Saturday was thought to be carrying 800, not 100. It was not a large ship, just a fishing trawler, but they pack as many people as they can onto these thing, like sardines. So that cuts the number of trips needed by a factor of 8. And this could be spread out over a decade or decades, not just a couple of years.

    Another factor in the great # of deaths is that most of the migrants were not (contra the photo on the front page of the NY Times) little white girls but African men. For some reason (apparently having to do with bone density or something) Africans, unlike witches, are not buoyant and they sink like stones. This sounds like an urban legend but it apparently has a scientific basis.

  85. @anonymous

    What was behind the Tutsi genocide of Hutus in 1972?

     

    Kagame is a client of the US so naturally he gets great PR in our press. I believe he castigated the French for supposedly supporting the Hutus so perhaps the French press isn't as laudatory. The conflict between the two groups apparently goes back a long way, in Burundi as well as in Rwanda. Since neither country has had much in the way of writers most information comes to us from outsiders, many of whom are just hacks. For example, a look at what's available on Amazon makes it seem as if history in that part of the world just began in the 90's.

    You still haven’t answered the question.

    Fundamentally it’s all Hatfields and McCoys. One group commits some atrocities or seems to be on the verge of taking power, so there is a backlash and the other group starts killing the 1st group in revenge or to pre-empt a takeover. Sometime the Hutu kill the Tutsi and sometime it’s the other way ’round. Then you’ll have an uneasy truce for a couple of decades until something destabilizes the situation and it begins again. As you can see now going on in Ukraine, each side perceives the other as being fundamentally evil and itself as acting simply to right past wrongs, so it is no sin to slaughter the enemy, even enemy civilians. The justification for one massacre is the last massacre in the other direction so you can never say “who started it”. The Tutsi were the hereditary ruling class and the Hutus were poor but the majority, so you had an unstable situation like Syria or Iraq where a minority group ruled the majority.

  86. Steve, is there a reason why “black men will rool da world” style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through but I’m rolling the dice with Komment Kontrol?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Steve, is there a reason why “black men will rool da world” style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through but I’m rolling the dice with Komment Kontrol?

     

    "When your enemy is committing suicide, do not interfere." --Clausewitz (I think)

    "We reserve the right to hold our critics to lower standards." --American Renaissance
    , @Truth

    Steve, is there a reason why “black men will rool da world” style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through ?
     
    That's funny, I must not have logged on those days.
  87. @Truth
    Hey guys, for those of you (all) who were too, cheap, busy, phlegmatic, lazy, ill, quarrelsome, unconvinced, etc., last week. to show your support for keeping the world white, this YOUNG gentleman covered the Amren conference;

    http://www.returnofkings.com/61903/i-attended-the-2015-white-nationalist-amren-conference

    http://www.returnofkings.com/61903/i-attended-the-2015-white-nationalist-amren-conference

    That was a glorious read, thanks:

    “A few young girls were being especially snarky. I knew they wouldn’t dance with me, but I decided to ruin their night anyway. I go up to them and say, “You’re fat, and I’m balding. Let’s dance.” They kept saying no, and I kept asking them, just to piss them off. One pushed me, and I pushed her back, and then the bouncer literally threw me out of the bar… Whether it is ethical to push a girl after she first pushes you is up for debate…”

    • Replies: @D. K.
    Based just on this one-sided snippet: he walked up to a total stranger; he insulted her; he was told to leave her alone; he continued to accost her, creating a reasonable apprehension on her part of an impending battery, which constitutes a legal assault; she used limited force to repel that assault; at which point, he pushed her, thereby committing the anticipated battery. Is that about the size of it? The motherfucker should not have been ejected; he should have been arrested!
  88. @leftist conservative
    tunglet wrote:

    Instead, they are being motivated by something far less noble, like wanting Norway to lose it’s Norwegian majority.
     
    Yes, it is quite obvious that many or even most liberals and almost all high profile journalists, liberal politicians, academicians/professors, so-called Social Justice Warriors, and the like, most of them white, do indeed want to see the white race obliterated, sunk, abolished, shamed, etc. This goes for America, especially, and increasingly, for western europe as well.

    This is obvious. But why is that the case? What led these white people to come to this conclusion? What led them to hate their own race?

    The answer lies in the history they were taught, the narrative they bought into.

    Those liberals, lefties, whatever you to call them, were taught as youngsters to hate their own race. Can everyone here, or at least most here, admit that this is the case?

    They were brainwashed, to put it bluntly. Their minds and worldviews were shaped and molded during their impressionable youth. Most of us here went through the same process, but being older, perhaps we were not subjected to it as much, or perhaps we were not subjected to college level propaganda. In any event, we aint buying into the idea of whiteness being evil.

    I hate the idea of mass immigration obliterating the white race. And I am proud of being white (or about 90% white). I think the white race is the greatest race ever. Period. And second place aint even close.

    But I differ from most here in one respect. I do not hate liberals. I think Leftism has been perverted by forces from on high. Leftism has been made to focus on anti-white, anti-male ideology, and at the same time, the good things about leftist ideology, such as workers rights, universal healthcare, progressive taxation, etc have been abandoned, and instead Leftism is about gay rights and swamping the West with nonwhite immigrants, and so forth.

    But I see liberals as victims of propaganda shoved down their throats. But I don't hate them. I think many of them will reject anti-white multiculturalism as they get older....and wiser.

    The Hard Hat Riots and the aftermath convinced an entire generation of intellectual leftists that white men would never come around to the cause of socialist equality. What’s worse, they had every intention of violently opposing such ideas. It was at this point that certain parts of the Left started developing explicitly anti-white language.

    Fast forward to the 90s and such people have now came into their own and are now in positions where their ideology can be implemented as policy. At the same time, the Clintons convinced the left to make peace with big business and corporate America. The boom times were happening and nobody wanted a repeat of the depressions of the 70s.

    The rest, they say, is history.

    • Replies: @map
    Every socialist movement comes at the expense of White men. That is why socialism is not convincing.

    It's the same reason that Germany rejected International Socialism for National Socialism. IS resulted in bettering the Poles at the expense of the Germans. National Socialism guaranteed German wealth benefited German.
  89. @Anonymous
    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    That 100 Africans could cross into Europe by “dingy” boat would also have been alarmist nonsense when Camp of the Saints was published in 1972. But they’re there, aren’t they? 100 or more per day.

    A dingy dinghy is easy to come by.

    • Replies: @Truth

    . But they’re there, aren’t they? 100 or more per day.
     
    Well you've got to admire the engineering feat.
  90. @stillCARealist
    I have an aunt who fits your description exactly. She is a social and economic liberal to the core, while still being a nice white lady who wants to help everybody. She's totally cool with the eventual extinction of most white folks and assumes the coming utopia will be a multicultural love festival. She even describes herself as an "anglophile" and attends an Episcopal church.

    Frankly, I don't get it. Somebody help me out here.

    I’d be glad to help by way of analogy.

    During the second voyage of Capt. Cook a south sea native, one Omai, was brought back to England. He was “adopted” by Cook’s patron the Earl of Sandwich and introduced to the royal family. By this time (late 18th century) the West had blown so far by the RoW they, the Rest, became harmless pets to the elites. The elites could reinforce their status and emphasize distance to the lower classes (who could not afford to make such magnanimous gestures).

    Curiously, at about this same time, the idea of the noble savage developed. Western society itself was evil and corrupted man’s pure nature. Ergo, non-Euros, and the more non the better, became objects of sentimentality as eventually happened with artists like Gaugin -who died of syphillis in Tahiti, ‘tho this would be expunged from the official narrative.

    Now, all this took a long time to filter down to the middle class. So, your aunt is signaling status to other (bad) whites. It’s that simple. If she were of higher status she would adopt a negro.

    There is no other rational explanation for the insanity, other than a desire to prolong adolescence. At least I haven’t been persuaded by various arguments. Blacks to this day carry an aura of purity and victimization no matter how stupidly and violently they behave or no matter how much money is spent. It even seems to be getting worse, this Eloi-like status marking. And no other culture on earth does this.

  91. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Twinkie

    He’s only been prime minister for 15 years, what was Lee’s record of achievement in 1974?
     
    More than 5-fold increase in Singapore's GDP since 1960 for starters.

    So you think Kagame will achieve this with his people? http://www.medtech.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Annual-GDP.jpg

    It's possible, I suppose, but highly unlikely. Why don't you bet some money on that?

    More than 5-fold increase in Singapore’s GDP since 1960 for starters.

    That included several years of the failed import substitution policies that Brazil still has in place. The thing about Lee is that he was non-ideological vis-a-vis economics – he kept what led to rapid economic growth and discarded what did not. He tried socialism for a few years and dumped it when the numbers came in.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    That included several years of the failed import substitution policies that Brazil still has in place.
     
    Indeed. That's a part of why the rising Singaporean GDP curvature year-to-year *increased* as time went on.

    But it's *much* easier to do economic development when the human quality is high.
  92. @Jack Hanson
    Steve, is there a reason why "black men will rool da world" style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through but I'm rolling the dice with Komment Kontrol?

    Steve, is there a reason why “black men will rool da world” style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through but I’m rolling the dice with Komment Kontrol?

    “When your enemy is committing suicide, do not interfere.” –Clausewitz (I think)

    “We reserve the right to hold our critics to lower standards.” —American Renaissance

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    “When your enemy is committing suicide, do not interfere.” –Clausewitz (I think)
     
    Doesn't sound very Clausewitzean at all. He was very esoteric and wasn't given to easy maxims.
  93. @Anon

    More than 5-fold increase in Singapore’s GDP since 1960 for starters.
     
    That included several years of the failed import substitution policies that Brazil still has in place. The thing about Lee is that he was non-ideological vis-a-vis economics - he kept what led to rapid economic growth and discarded what did not. He tried socialism for a few years and dumped it when the numbers came in.

    That included several years of the failed import substitution policies that Brazil still has in place.

    Indeed. That’s a part of why the rising Singaporean GDP curvature year-to-year *increased* as time went on.

    But it’s *much* easier to do economic development when the human quality is high.

  94. @Reg Cæsar

    Steve, is there a reason why “black men will rool da world” style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through but I’m rolling the dice with Komment Kontrol?

     

    "When your enemy is committing suicide, do not interfere." --Clausewitz (I think)

    "We reserve the right to hold our critics to lower standards." --American Renaissance

    “When your enemy is committing suicide, do not interfere.” –Clausewitz (I think)

    Doesn’t sound very Clausewitzean at all. He was very esoteric and wasn’t given to easy maxims.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Ive seen this attributed to Napoleon and Patton as well.

    Regardless, I think its funny that Steve is panhandling while simultaneously deciding my money may be good, but my comments are not.
  95. @Bill

    Barring some special circumstance like those that Israel arranged, few countries are going to allow themselves to be on the receiving end of any such expulsion, unless the people involved are citizens.
     
    I've heard these rumors that sometimes, even when you don't want to "allow" something, someone stronger than you makes you allow it. Don't know if there's anything to these rumors, of course. Just thought I would pass the info along.

    That’s a valid point, but I would regard a situation where a country is “made to allow” deportees as one of those special circumstances, inasmuch as it would be pretty much the same as what Israel is doing already, except that it would involve brandishing a stick, instead of offering a carrot.

    • Replies: @Name Withheld
    What we have to realize is that many countries in the 3rd world are not really the same as in Europe and the US. If countries like Egypt, Russia, or Brazil decided to expel people to other neighboring countries, there is not much they could do except protest at the UN. They would not get the media hate that would be directed at White Countries.
  96. @Anonymous
    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    Maybe. But the idea that is equalitarian sickos want 100 million Africans to come to Europe is all too outrageously true.

  97. @Southfarthing

    http://www.returnofkings.com/61903/i-attended-the-2015-white-nationalist-amren-conference
     
    That was a glorious read, thanks:

    "A few young girls were being especially snarky. I knew they wouldn’t dance with me, but I decided to ruin their night anyway. I go up to them and say, “You’re fat, and I’m balding. Let’s dance.” They kept saying no, and I kept asking them, just to piss them off. One pushed me, and I pushed her back, and then the bouncer literally threw me out of the bar... Whether it is ethical to push a girl after she first pushes you is up for debate..."
     

    Based just on this one-sided snippet: he walked up to a total stranger; he insulted her; he was told to leave her alone; he continued to accost her, creating a reasonable apprehension on her part of an impending battery, which constitutes a legal assault; she used limited force to repel that assault; at which point, he pushed her, thereby committing the anticipated battery. Is that about the size of it? The motherfucker should not have been ejected; he should have been arrested!

    • Replies: @Truth

    Based just on this one-sided snippet: he walked up to a total stranger; he insulted her; he was told to leave her alone; he continued to accost her, creating a reasonable apprehension on her part of an impending battery, which constitutes a legal assault; she used limited force to repel that assault; at which point, he pushed her, thereby committing the anticipated battery. Is that about the size of it? The motherfucker should not have been ejected; he should have been arrested!
     
    That's all bread and circuses, stick to what's important; he is a race realist.
    , @Bill
    +1

    Why would he publish such a story? Does he think there is some possibility that he was in the right?
  98. @ABN
    Steve once said that electing a new people is the final argument of the Confederacy of Whores. Well, revolution is the final argument of nations, and if their survival is at stake they might well resort to it.

    In a revolutionary scenario, I doubt Johnny European will be overly scrupulous about the citizenship status of nominal Europeans. It will be hard to blame him, either.

    It's frustrating that immigrant minorities don't give more thought to the distinction between citizenship and membership in the nation. They benefit greatly from the use of citizenship (a somewhat arbitrary legal classification) as a generally accepted proxy for membership in the nation (conferred organically through blood and history). Thus, some piece of paper stamped by a bureaucrat makes a Pakistani equal in Englishness to an Englishman whose forefathers worked and bled for king and country. The implicitly accepted linkage between the state's legal formalities and the nation's "mystic chords of memory" is a really, really nice deal for the Pakistani immigrant.

    So you would think that the immigrant would go to great lengths to keep that linkage between state and nation plausible in the minds of the native English population. He might, for example, support policies to make immigration minimal and selective so as to avoid rocking the demographic boat. He might avoid trying to impose his religion and culture on the host society. He might avoid voting for leftist parties that use the state's power to wage a culture war on the natives.

    You'd think he might do these things, but...he doesn't, in most cases. The Diversity agenda of the Ruling Class reassures him that he represents progress and the future, while the native population is evil and deserves to lose their country. Naturally, he doesn't feel grateful for the extraordinary gift of being an "honorary native Englishman" by virtue of his acquired citizenship. Why would he want to be an Englishman when the BBC and Guardian and Labor Party tell him that the English are a bunch of losers and that the country belongs to him now?

    So if Europeans revolt and start revoking the citizenship of people who (1) should never have received it in the first place, (2) failed to demonstrate proper gratitude and loyalty once they did receive it, and (3) conspired with the Ruling Class to help dissolve the old nation...well, I can't say I'd be all that outraged or shocked by the development.

    Anyway, the short version is that the high-low assault of the Ruling Class and its immigrant-minority allies is driving native Europeans toward a very explicit and exclusive kind of ethnonationalism. If that has revolutionary consequences, nobody should be surprised.

    I’ll just leave this here, as Steve might find it interesting as it confirms much of what he is saying. I was supposed to post it in a more relevant thread earlier, but I never finished the post.

    The Oslo schools have become very segregated by race, since the conservative+Frp promised both public benchmark tests for each school, and free choice of schools if a spot was available, to win an election way before racial differences were talked very much about.

    The problem is that you can’t do both at the same time, while you insist that differences in the results is independent of race, and not create the impression that non-white immigrants pull down the result of the Norwegian students. Too many immigrants in one school, the results naturally starts to fall, leading to an exodus of the Norwegian children, that makes the results even worse.

    All the spots in the good schools, are naturally always taken, so immigrants that want their children in a Norwegian school, might have to take the kids pretty far, something few bother to do, or buy a house in an expensive Norwegian area, that few non-whites can afford.

    Norwegians that don’t have enough money to buy a house in an Norwegian area of Oslo, do however bother, or move elsewhere in Norway, as no Norwegian want their child to be the one paying for integration, not even the salaried anti-racists.

    Had they come clean about racial realities, immigrants would not have come off as infections like they do today, where the numbers indicate that going to an immigrant school, will put your child two years behind a child going to a Norwegian school.

    IIRC Norwegians having 100 in IQ with 16 as the standard deviation, and IQ being age dependent, two years behind, means that non-whites in Norway have roughly 15 points lower IQ than white people.

    …………….

    One thing more I want to mention, is what is called Nature Kindergartens, Forest Kindergarten, Outdoor Preschools, where the children spend their day outside, no matter the weather.

    I spent quite some time looking into them some time ago, and is sure that this will become a trend, not only in Norway and Denmark, but in the rest of the white world, because it has everything going for it.

    * Intelligent parents send their children to Nature Kindergartens, so they get excellent results. A large vocabulary is something the parents teach the children, but it shows up in the statistics as the preschool doing a good job, etc.
    * As the children spend most of the time indoors with their nuclear family when they are at home, it becomes important to socialize with other children and play outdoors, when they are in Kindergarten.
    * Because they have no classroom or facilities, they are cheap to run, since they only need a minibus.
    * The progressives loves the connection with nature, but it is rough enough for the reactionaries.
    * But most important of all, is that it offers a way for both the reactionaries and the progressives, to escape the non-white children without coming off as a pro-white.

    Since the adults are not supposed to control play, the SJW is absent. Not only are there no books for them to rage against, it is also hard to rage, when the teacher is not responsible for the sex-differences that shows up during play, since the idea is that the children are free too choose what they want to do, without the adult trying to control too much.

    A few youtube links.

    Arctic Outdoor Preschool

    A documentary from a Japanese Nature Kindergarten, that explains the philosophy.

    (jump to 25 minutes, if the start is boring. I laughed when one child taught another to use snow, to wipe blood off your clothes.)

    Not Your Father’s School – Early Childhood, Forest Kindergartens and Nature Preschools – David Sobel

    The very expensive American pre-schools, might lose some of their status, if Whites find out that just spending the day in the forest with other intelligent kids, gives about the same academic results, but create much healthier and happier children?

    The no classroom, being outside all day, have also evolved, as the minibus meant the Kindergarten could also visit civilization, like spend the day in an sport-arena, a museum or on a farm. All kindergartens now have days outside kindergartens, but they also do much more than before. They plant, say potatoes in the spring, and harvest in fall, and then cook and eat them.

    You also find minibus based afterschools, where the adult picks up the children at school, go to the forest, a swimming-pool, sports-facility, and then drops them off again, when the parents are home from work.

    The next step then becomes “just a minibus, but no classroom” schools, in those countries where home schooling is legal, so you could get around the demand for facilities and paperwork, by having the parents assume the legal responsibility.

    When private schools suffers from unruly low IQ pupils, and yet cost an average of 13.000$ per year, it becomes rational for parents of high IQ children in mixed areas, to have the child be home schooled on paper, but have him attend a minibus-internet based school in reality, where the days are spent in libraries, sport arenas, museums or nature, with other white high IQ children.

    If the wealthy whites in America, are also looking for ways to escape from over-ambitious Chinese, Persians, Jews and Indians, and schools are forbidden to discriminate, even they might opt for something similar for their children.

    • Replies: @ABN
    You've touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    I think that nature may have enormous potential as an olive branch between the reactionary/nationalist Right and the bourgeois Left.

    I guess the crude version of the message would be something like, "Let's drop this Diversity crap and go mountain biking together!"

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the "Shire," but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)

  99. @Tiny Duck
    Maybe you guys should have had more children.

    Of course that requires being attractive to women

    Maybe you guys should have had more children.

    Let me clue you in on a little secret: guys don’t have children. Women do.

    To blame any white man for the overall paucity of white children is to posit that somewhere in the world existed a white women who was only willing to bear his child, but not the child of anyone else.

  100. @Twinkie

    “When your enemy is committing suicide, do not interfere.” –Clausewitz (I think)
     
    Doesn't sound very Clausewitzean at all. He was very esoteric and wasn't given to easy maxims.

    Ive seen this attributed to Napoleon and Patton as well.

    Regardless, I think its funny that Steve is panhandling while simultaneously deciding my money may be good, but my comments are not.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    Maybe you need to increase your commenting quality then? You can get away with saying a lot on here these days, the iSteve Overton window has shifted a great amount (which is a reflection of the zeitgeist in general).

    If you've ever read or talked to people who knew that there was going to be a war long before it happened, maybe this is something along the lines of what those people felt. Not to say there will be a war, but that somewhere, somehow, there are going to be some people on our side who buck the system in a big way and succeed.
  101. @Marty
    Blondes age well? I thought it was the reverse.

    Michele Pfeiffer, Jessica Lange, Ingrid Bergman, Candace Bergen, Anita Ekberg, Ursula Andress, Kirsten Dunst, Uma Thurman, Maggie Gyllenhal, Tippi Hedren, Greta Garbo, Bibi Andersson, Maud Adams, Ann-Margaret, list goes on…many also, decided to age naturally.

  102. Anon:The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    A lot of them won’t have to come by boat. They’ll follow relatives who came by boat and who were accepted as refugees or were otherwise given legal status – chain migration. The later arrivals will come by plane, granted visas due to their existing “family connections” in Europe.

  103. @Anonymous
    I repeat NO! It is NOT!

    You obviously have very, very little understanding of the dynamics of mass third world immigration into the west, chain migration, the acquiescence and agreement of the political class, the untold billions just itching to get over, and last but not least, exponential growth - which always but always is the concomitant of mass third world immigration into western nations, without any exception whatsoever.
    Anyway the point is that at this stage, it's not 'just a few dinghies' as you might put it, but rather a conveyor belt in which any African who has the nous to put to sea is swiftly plucked out of the water and guaranteed EU citizenship.

    On another note, when the Blair (traitor) government foolishly submitted to an open door immigration policy with Poland, they strenuously claimed - in the same way you are doing - that 'only' 70,000 'at most' would ever come to Britain. In the event many millions did. Poland is not a particularly poor or populous country.

    On another note, when the Blair (traitor) government foolishly submitted to an open door immigration policy with Poland, they strenuously claimed – in the same way you are doing – that ‘only’ 70,000 ‘at most’ would ever come to Britain. In the event many millions did. Poland is not a particularly poor or populous country.

    If Blair were an honest man, he would have put a 70,000 maximum in the law which would have deported the 70,001 immigrant. But being a liar, he did not.

  104. @HA
    That's a valid point, but I would regard a situation where a country is "made to allow" deportees as one of those special circumstances, inasmuch as it would be pretty much the same as what Israel is doing already, except that it would involve brandishing a stick, instead of offering a carrot.

    What we have to realize is that many countries in the 3rd world are not really the same as in Europe and the US. If countries like Egypt, Russia, or Brazil decided to expel people to other neighboring countries, there is not much they could do except protest at the UN. They would not get the media hate that would be directed at White Countries.

    • Replies: @HA
    "If countries like Egypt, Russia, or Brazil decided to expel people to other neighboring countries, there is not much they could do except protest at the UN."

    What about expelling them right back into Egypt, Russia or Brazil or wherever the deportees wanted to be in the first place (assuming those deportees didn't beat them to it by setting off for some other spot along the border where they could cross back on their own)? That seems a lot more effective than protesting to the UN.
  105. @Calogero
    European nations should all just end their social welfare programs. That will keep at least some of the "migrants" away.

    European nations should all just end their social welfare programs. That will keep at least some of the “migrants” away.

    The only aid that should be available is contraception and sterilization. No free food or medicine. If they want it, they have to work for it. If they want to be sterilized, then the gov’t could pay for that.

  106. @Ed
    The number seems like an undercount. There had to be at least 3 million people of Mexican heritage in CA, TX alone in 1950.

    I think folks forget that there was time when minorities fought to be classified as white. There are Supreme Court cases involving Mexicans and Asian Indians that sued to be classified as white. I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.

    I think folks forget that there was time when minorities fought to be classified as white. There are Supreme Court cases involving Mexicans and Asian Indians that sued to be classified as white. I bet a significant number if not majority of Hispanics in 1950 would have checked white as opposed to Hispanic or whatever word was used to count them.

    My grandfather’s birth certificate in 1925 lists his mother’s race as Mexican and his father’s as white. My grandfather is listed as white. While anecdotal, it is likely not anomalous.

  107. @leftist conservative
    tunglet wrote:

    Instead, they are being motivated by something far less noble, like wanting Norway to lose it’s Norwegian majority.
     
    Yes, it is quite obvious that many or even most liberals and almost all high profile journalists, liberal politicians, academicians/professors, so-called Social Justice Warriors, and the like, most of them white, do indeed want to see the white race obliterated, sunk, abolished, shamed, etc. This goes for America, especially, and increasingly, for western europe as well.

    This is obvious. But why is that the case? What led these white people to come to this conclusion? What led them to hate their own race?

    The answer lies in the history they were taught, the narrative they bought into.

    Those liberals, lefties, whatever you to call them, were taught as youngsters to hate their own race. Can everyone here, or at least most here, admit that this is the case?

    They were brainwashed, to put it bluntly. Their minds and worldviews were shaped and molded during their impressionable youth. Most of us here went through the same process, but being older, perhaps we were not subjected to it as much, or perhaps we were not subjected to college level propaganda. In any event, we aint buying into the idea of whiteness being evil.

    I hate the idea of mass immigration obliterating the white race. And I am proud of being white (or about 90% white). I think the white race is the greatest race ever. Period. And second place aint even close.

    But I differ from most here in one respect. I do not hate liberals. I think Leftism has been perverted by forces from on high. Leftism has been made to focus on anti-white, anti-male ideology, and at the same time, the good things about leftist ideology, such as workers rights, universal healthcare, progressive taxation, etc have been abandoned, and instead Leftism is about gay rights and swamping the West with nonwhite immigrants, and so forth.

    But I see liberals as victims of propaganda shoved down their throats. But I don't hate them. I think many of them will reject anti-white multiculturalism as they get older....and wiser.

    If don’t hate the Left, then you have not been paying attention. Leftists are the devil.

  108. @Bert
    The Hard Hat Riots and the aftermath convinced an entire generation of intellectual leftists that white men would never come around to the cause of socialist equality. What's worse, they had every intention of violently opposing such ideas. It was at this point that certain parts of the Left started developing explicitly anti-white language.

    Fast forward to the 90s and such people have now came into their own and are now in positions where their ideology can be implemented as policy. At the same time, the Clintons convinced the left to make peace with big business and corporate America. The boom times were happening and nobody wanted a repeat of the depressions of the 70s.

    The rest, they say, is history.

    Every socialist movement comes at the expense of White men. That is why socialism is not convincing.

    It’s the same reason that Germany rejected International Socialism for National Socialism. IS resulted in bettering the Poles at the expense of the Germans. National Socialism guaranteed German wealth benefited German.

  109. @Paul Mendez
    Your links don't work.

    Sorry, I tested the links when I posted them but it looks like there’s something weird going with redirection. GofW moved, here’s the link to the current page for Surrender, Genocide… or What?

    Here’s the follow-up discussion at View from the Right again. If the redirection stops working for some reason, just go to VFR and search for el Ingles; the discussion is the first result you get.

  110. @Twinkie

    He’s only been prime minister for 15 years, what was Lee’s record of achievement in 1974?
     
    More than 5-fold increase in Singapore's GDP since 1960 for starters.

    So you think Kagame will achieve this with his people? http://www.medtech.sg/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Annual-GDP.jpg

    It's possible, I suppose, but highly unlikely. Why don't you bet some money on that?

    Well now, Twinkie, again my intellect is on the low side here, but the little red thingy on your graphy thing-a-ma-jig did look really close at the 1974 marker to where it was at the 1960 marker.

    And while I cannot predict the future, Mr. Kagame is a trendsetter and these types generally do OK:

    http://www.thedeliciousday.com/environment/rwanda-plastic-bag-ban/

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Well now, Twinkie, again my intellect is on the low side here, but the little red thingy on your graphy thing-a-ma-jig did look really close at the 1974 marker to where it was at the 1960 marker.
     
    Yes, your intellect is on the very low side here. They only look close to people who don't pay attention, because of the need to scale for even greater increases later. In 1962, Singapore's GDP was about $700 million. By 1974, that increased to about $4.25 billion, in excess of a six-fold increase. This despite the early failures of the socialist model as well as a complete and utter lack of any natural resources... except a very high quality people and a visionary leader, of course.

    Kagame is no Lee Kuan Yew, and Rwandans aren't Singaporeans. Good for an African leader, but that's not exactly saying a lot, is it?

  111. @Reg Cæsar

    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

     

    That 100 Africans could cross into Europe by "dingy" boat would also have been alarmist nonsense when Camp of the Saints was published in 1972. But they're there, aren't they? 100 or more per day.

    A dingy dinghy is easy to come by.

    . But they’re there, aren’t they? 100 or more per day.

    Well you’ve got to admire the engineering feat.

  112. @D. K.
    Based just on this one-sided snippet: he walked up to a total stranger; he insulted her; he was told to leave her alone; he continued to accost her, creating a reasonable apprehension on her part of an impending battery, which constitutes a legal assault; she used limited force to repel that assault; at which point, he pushed her, thereby committing the anticipated battery. Is that about the size of it? The motherfucker should not have been ejected; he should have been arrested!

    Based just on this one-sided snippet: he walked up to a total stranger; he insulted her; he was told to leave her alone; he continued to accost her, creating a reasonable apprehension on her part of an impending battery, which constitutes a legal assault; she used limited force to repel that assault; at which point, he pushed her, thereby committing the anticipated battery. Is that about the size of it? The motherfucker should not have been ejected; he should have been arrested!

    That’s all bread and circuses, stick to what’s important; he is a race realist.

  113. @Jack Hanson
    Steve, is there a reason why "black men will rool da world" style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through but I'm rolling the dice with Komment Kontrol?

    Steve, is there a reason why “black men will rool da world” style comments always seem to have no trouble making it through ?

    That’s funny, I must not have logged on those days.

  114. HA says:
    @Name Withheld
    What we have to realize is that many countries in the 3rd world are not really the same as in Europe and the US. If countries like Egypt, Russia, or Brazil decided to expel people to other neighboring countries, there is not much they could do except protest at the UN. They would not get the media hate that would be directed at White Countries.

    “If countries like Egypt, Russia, or Brazil decided to expel people to other neighboring countries, there is not much they could do except protest at the UN.”

    What about expelling them right back into Egypt, Russia or Brazil or wherever the deportees wanted to be in the first place (assuming those deportees didn’t beat them to it by setting off for some other spot along the border where they could cross back on their own)? That seems a lot more effective than protesting to the UN.

  115. @tunglet
    I'll just leave this here, as Steve might find it interesting as it confirms much of what he is saying. I was supposed to post it in a more relevant thread earlier, but I never finished the post.

    The Oslo schools have become very segregated by race, since the conservative+Frp promised both public benchmark tests for each school, and free choice of schools if a spot was available, to win an election way before racial differences were talked very much about.

    The problem is that you can't do both at the same time, while you insist that differences in the results is independent of race, and not create the impression that non-white immigrants pull down the result of the Norwegian students. Too many immigrants in one school, the results naturally starts to fall, leading to an exodus of the Norwegian children, that makes the results even worse.

    All the spots in the good schools, are naturally always taken, so immigrants that want their children in a Norwegian school, might have to take the kids pretty far, something few bother to do, or buy a house in an expensive Norwegian area, that few non-whites can afford.

    Norwegians that don't have enough money to buy a house in an Norwegian area of Oslo, do however bother, or move elsewhere in Norway, as no Norwegian want their child to be the one paying for integration, not even the salaried anti-racists.

    Had they come clean about racial realities, immigrants would not have come off as infections like they do today, where the numbers indicate that going to an immigrant school, will put your child two years behind a child going to a Norwegian school.

    IIRC Norwegians having 100 in IQ with 16 as the standard deviation, and IQ being age dependent, two years behind, means that non-whites in Norway have roughly 15 points lower IQ than white people.

    ................

    One thing more I want to mention, is what is called Nature Kindergartens, Forest Kindergarten, Outdoor Preschools, where the children spend their day outside, no matter the weather.

    I spent quite some time looking into them some time ago, and is sure that this will become a trend, not only in Norway and Denmark, but in the rest of the white world, because it has everything going for it.

    * Intelligent parents send their children to Nature Kindergartens, so they get excellent results. A large vocabulary is something the parents teach the children, but it shows up in the statistics as the preschool doing a good job, etc.
    * As the children spend most of the time indoors with their nuclear family when they are at home, it becomes important to socialize with other children and play outdoors, when they are in Kindergarten.
    * Because they have no classroom or facilities, they are cheap to run, since they only need a minibus.
    * The progressives loves the connection with nature, but it is rough enough for the reactionaries.
    * But most important of all, is that it offers a way for both the reactionaries and the progressives, to escape the non-white children without coming off as a pro-white.

    Since the adults are not supposed to control play, the SJW is absent. Not only are there no books for them to rage against, it is also hard to rage, when the teacher is not responsible for the sex-differences that shows up during play, since the idea is that the children are free too choose what they want to do, without the adult trying to control too much.

    A few youtube links.

    Arctic Outdoor Preschool
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfOceI7oirI

    A documentary from a Japanese Nature Kindergarten, that explains the philosophy.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNl5p1M96xE
    (jump to 25 minutes, if the start is boring. I laughed when one child taught another to use snow, to wipe blood off your clothes.)

    Not Your Father's School - Early Childhood, Forest Kindergartens and Nature Preschools - David Sobel
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJQxIRhwbNQ

    The very expensive American pre-schools, might lose some of their status, if Whites find out that just spending the day in the forest with other intelligent kids, gives about the same academic results, but create much healthier and happier children?

    The no classroom, being outside all day, have also evolved, as the minibus meant the Kindergarten could also visit civilization, like spend the day in an sport-arena, a museum or on a farm. All kindergartens now have days outside kindergartens, but they also do much more than before. They plant, say potatoes in the spring, and harvest in fall, and then cook and eat them.

    You also find minibus based afterschools, where the adult picks up the children at school, go to the forest, a swimming-pool, sports-facility, and then drops them off again, when the parents are home from work.

    The next step then becomes "just a minibus, but no classroom" schools, in those countries where home schooling is legal, so you could get around the demand for facilities and paperwork, by having the parents assume the legal responsibility.

    When private schools suffers from unruly low IQ pupils, and yet cost an average of 13.000$ per year, it becomes rational for parents of high IQ children in mixed areas, to have the child be home schooled on paper, but have him attend a minibus-internet based school in reality, where the days are spent in libraries, sport arenas, museums or nature, with other white high IQ children.

    If the wealthy whites in America, are also looking for ways to escape from over-ambitious Chinese, Persians, Jews and Indians, and schools are forbidden to discriminate, even they might opt for something similar for their children.

    You’ve touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    I think that nature may have enormous potential as an olive branch between the reactionary/nationalist Right and the bourgeois Left.

    I guess the crude version of the message would be something like, “Let’s drop this Diversity crap and go mountain biking together!”

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the “Shire,” but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.
     
    By "most minorities," if you meant NAMs, yes.
    , @Anon

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the “Shire,” but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)
     
    My impression is that SWPL's don't have a problem with their kids mixing with non-whites. They just don't want them getting beaten up in school. Or held back academically because some other kid in class can't keep up with the curriculum. Hence the enthusiasm for misnamed "gifted" programs that are a backdoor way of doing European-style student tracking.
    , @Bill

    You’ve touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.
     
    Every California state park is the same. You park your car. You marvel at all the Mexicans sitting at the picnic tables drinking beer. You find the trailhead. You hike for fifteen minutes. You marvel that everyone you meet thereafter is speaking German.

    Contra Twinkie, I don't recall seeing many Japanese or Chinese tourists in those parks. Seems to be a Northern European thing.
    , @tunglet
    I was wrong in what I said.

    The rich, elite whites in the USA have already started sending their children to Nature Preschool, and parents in Germany have already started Forest schools for their children, since it would be too painful to send their free roaming forest children to normal schools, as one mum in Berlin said it.

    I also thought there would be resistance, but it is like charging in open doors, as those wishing to start, gets locations from people with facilities, willing to help.

    Some newspapers articles illustrating the boom.

    Victoria parents form tent city to get kids spot in nature kindergarten

    A communal area was set up by some of the parents, allowing them a place to warm their hands over an electric fire and watch football games on a laptop. They’re all committed to giving their children an exceptional educational experience – but they’re also aware of how strange their 60-hour campout may look to some.

    “I wouldn’t blame them at all,” says Sutton. “I certainly scratched my head and wondered what I was doing myself when I was setting up my tent.”

    “But…having spent a few hours with a couple other parents, I now know that my child will now be in a classroom with other children whose parents are as involved with their children lives as much as I like to think I am.”
    http://globalnews.ca/news/1767687/victoria-parents-form-tent-city-to-get-kids-spot-in-nature-kindergarten/

    http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2014/11/14/forest-kindergarten-play-nature-based-alternative

    Forest Kindergartens Push Back Against Academic Focus For Young Kid

    "As a physics professor at St. Mary’s College, Boyda see lots of students who can’t figure things out for themselves. He thinks that’s a product of schools that reward students for rote learning and following instructions. He loves that his 3-year-old son is passionate about building and can spend hours absorbed in a design challenge. He doesn’t want to take that joy away from him by sending him to a traditional school."

    And for a very telling comment to the article:
    "While I appreciate the fund, the elitism of who makes up the majority of kids in these program worries me. Even more concerning to me, I couldn't see a single student of color in any of the images in the article."
  116. @Truth
    Well now, Twinkie, again my intellect is on the low side here, but the little red thingy on your graphy thing-a-ma-jig did look really close at the 1974 marker to where it was at the 1960 marker.

    And while I cannot predict the future, Mr. Kagame is a trendsetter and these types generally do OK:

    http://www.thedeliciousday.com/environment/rwanda-plastic-bag-ban/

    Well now, Twinkie, again my intellect is on the low side here, but the little red thingy on your graphy thing-a-ma-jig did look really close at the 1974 marker to where it was at the 1960 marker.

    Yes, your intellect is on the very low side here. They only look close to people who don’t pay attention, because of the need to scale for even greater increases later. In 1962, Singapore’s GDP was about $700 million. By 1974, that increased to about $4.25 billion, in excess of a six-fold increase. This despite the early failures of the socialist model as well as a complete and utter lack of any natural resources… except a very high quality people and a visionary leader, of course.

    Kagame is no Lee Kuan Yew, and Rwandans aren’t Singaporeans. Good for an African leader, but that’s not exactly saying a lot, is it?

    • Replies: @Truth

    In 1962, Singapore’s GDP was about $700 million. By 1974, that increased to about $4.25 billion, in excess of a six-fold increase.
     
    This site disputes your numbers, but the percentage of increase is roughly the same:

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/singapore/gdp-per-capita

    The same chart applied to Rwanda under Kagame (the chart does not progress past 2011 for some reason, but assuming a fairly modest growth rate) indicates roughly the same increase. Little lower, but in the same ball park.

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/rwanda/gdp

    Taking it to another chart from a different site, that goes to 2013, the result is roughly the same.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/rwanda/gdp

    But now here's the interesting graph, My Good Man; a look at Rwanda's economy from 1960 to 1974, on the same site implies, well, a more impressive financial performance from Mr. Kagame's PREDECESSORS in Rwanda than it does for the Singaporean genius himself.

    I leave it to you to surmise.
  117. @ABN
    You've touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    I think that nature may have enormous potential as an olive branch between the reactionary/nationalist Right and the bourgeois Left.

    I guess the crude version of the message would be something like, "Let's drop this Diversity crap and go mountain biking together!"

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the "Shire," but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)

    Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    By “most minorities,” if you meant NAMs, yes.

    • Replies: @ABN

    By “most minorities,” if you meant NAMs, yes.
     
    Yes, I mean NAMs. I'm half- (South-) Asian myself and I enjoy hiking, biking, skiing, sailing, etc.

    I'm pretty conservative in general, but there's a part of me that wouldn't much mind if America were a giant Vermont with really good border fences.

  118. @Twinkie

    Well now, Twinkie, again my intellect is on the low side here, but the little red thingy on your graphy thing-a-ma-jig did look really close at the 1974 marker to where it was at the 1960 marker.
     
    Yes, your intellect is on the very low side here. They only look close to people who don't pay attention, because of the need to scale for even greater increases later. In 1962, Singapore's GDP was about $700 million. By 1974, that increased to about $4.25 billion, in excess of a six-fold increase. This despite the early failures of the socialist model as well as a complete and utter lack of any natural resources... except a very high quality people and a visionary leader, of course.

    Kagame is no Lee Kuan Yew, and Rwandans aren't Singaporeans. Good for an African leader, but that's not exactly saying a lot, is it?

    In 1962, Singapore’s GDP was about $700 million. By 1974, that increased to about $4.25 billion, in excess of a six-fold increase.

    This site disputes your numbers, but the percentage of increase is roughly the same:

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/singapore/gdp-per-capita

    The same chart applied to Rwanda under Kagame (the chart does not progress past 2011 for some reason, but assuming a fairly modest growth rate) indicates roughly the same increase. Little lower, but in the same ball park.

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/rwanda/gdp

    Taking it to another chart from a different site, that goes to 2013, the result is roughly the same.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/rwanda/gdp

    But now here’s the interesting graph, My Good Man; a look at Rwanda’s economy from 1960 to 1974, on the same site implies, well, a more impressive financial performance from Mr. Kagame’s PREDECESSORS in Rwanda than it does for the Singaporean genius himself.

    I leave it to you to surmise.

    • Replies: @Anon

    The same chart applied to Rwanda under Kagame (the chart does not progress past 2011 for some reason, but assuming a fairly modest growth rate) indicates roughly the same increase. Little lower, but in the same ball park.
     
    3x for Rwanda vs 6x for Singapore. Rwanda's GDP per capita growth rates are similar to those of its East African counterparts, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya. Of course, none of those neighbors went through a genocide that killed almost a million people, followed by a civil war. Not to mention that unlike Lee, Kagame is a minority Tutsi ruling the majority Hutus.

    What's remarkable about Singapore is the gap in growth vis-a-vis its neighbors during that 15 year period. Apart from Indonesia (whose numbers were distorted by the ructions of the Konfrontasi and the troubles of 65-66 memorialized in Mel Gibson's star-making role, The Year of Living Dangerously), Singapore had at least double their growth rates, and in some cases, almost triple. What's equally remarkable is that where Hong Kong and Singapore were neck-and-neck in 1997, when Hong Kong was handed back to China, Singapore's number is now 1/3 higher. Hong Kong's relative stagnation may account for the increasing political temperature there, and the consequent emergence of popular dissatisfaction with Chinese rule.
    , @Twinkie

    This site disputes your numbers, but the percentage of increase is roughly the same
     
    That site is GDP per capita. We were discussing GDP. Must I educate you on the difference?

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/rwanda/gdp

    But now here’s the interesting graph, My Good Man; a look at Rwanda’s economy from 1960 to 1974, on the same site implies, well, a more impressive financial performance from Mr. Kagame’s PREDECESSORS in Rwanda than it does for the Singaporean genius himself.

    I leave it to you to surmise.
     

    I shall surmise, Mr. Sub-1000. From your own link, here are the raw data:

    Singaporean GDP
    1960: $0.7 billion; 1974: $5.26 billion; it grew 7.51x (hey, thanks, that data is even better!).

    Rwandan GDP
    1960: $0.12 billion; 1974: $0.31 billion; it grew 2.58x

    So in your mind, having roughly 1/3 of the rate of GDP growth in the same time frame is "a more impressive financial performance"? Wow, I always knew sub-1000 SAT was not very bright, but the inability to do basic subtraction and division is astounding. Is Brooklyn Tech really that bad?

  119. @Jack Hanson
    Ive seen this attributed to Napoleon and Patton as well.

    Regardless, I think its funny that Steve is panhandling while simultaneously deciding my money may be good, but my comments are not.

    Maybe you need to increase your commenting quality then? You can get away with saying a lot on here these days, the iSteve Overton window has shifted a great amount (which is a reflection of the zeitgeist in general).

    If you’ve ever read or talked to people who knew that there was going to be a war long before it happened, maybe this is something along the lines of what those people felt. Not to say there will be a war, but that somewhere, somehow, there are going to be some people on our side who buck the system in a big way and succeed.

  120. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Indeed. That’s a part of why the rising Singaporean GDP curvature year-to-year *increased* as time went on. But it’s *much* easier to do economic development when the human quality is high.

    Oddly enough, Singapore’s experience is an indication that the Flynn effect for China may be far more significant that anyone thinks now. Singapore is only 70+% ethnic Chinese, yet has a far higher GDP per capita than either Hong Kong or Taiwan, despite the fact that Hong Kong has a far bigger economic hinterland in China, as well as Japan. And yet the origins of Singapore’s ethnic Chinese are unremarkable – they are descended mainly from smallholders and itinerant traders from south China. Lee is characteristically self-deprecating when he suggests that China has far more potential because it hung on to most of the talents that used to go into the imperial mandarinate. In traditional China, as in traditional Japan and Korea (and most non-Western countries even today), people got ahead because of political power and family connections, a good chunk of which was the result of serendipity (i.e. being in the right place at the right time with the right mix of troops and weaponry, or deals with the powers-that-be).

    And yet, despite Hong Kong and Taiwan getting the vast majority of Chinese diaspora talent fleeing the Communist victory in 1949, not to mention the massive capital injection that came with it as well as their superior location and/or natural resources, Singapore is clearly ahead of both territories with respect to GDP per capita. This suggests that China has a vast reserve of untapped talent not currently represented among the powers-that-be, and they may come into their own if the suffocating hand of the Communist party princelings who rule the roost is ever lifted.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Yeah, you can see Hong Kong and Taiwan inheriting great talent in filmmakers like Wong Kar-wai and Ang Lee from the old cultural elites of the mainland, while Singapore has yet to generate much artistic talent. But Singaporeans make a lot of money.

    In Wong Kar-wai movies, 1960s Hong Kong is haunted, full of melancholy aesthetes who wish they were back in Shanghai in the 1930s, the way 1920s Berlin and Paris were full of Russian writers like Nabokov who wished they were home in Czarist Russia. Occasionally, his characters visit Singapore, but it seems to strike them mostly as a place for tasty cheap food.

    , @Twinkie

    Oddly enough, Singapore’s experience is an indication that the Flynn effect for China may be far more significant that anyone thinks now.
     
    Could be. National leadership makes a huge difference. Just look at North Korea vs. South Korea. In 1945, North Korea was actually more industrialized and richer.

    they may come into their own if the suffocating hand of the Communist party princelings who rule the roost is ever lifted.
     
    If, indeed. If wishes were horses.
  121. @Anon

    Indeed. That’s a part of why the rising Singaporean GDP curvature year-to-year *increased* as time went on. But it’s *much* easier to do economic development when the human quality is high.
     
    Oddly enough, Singapore's experience is an indication that the Flynn effect for China may be far more significant that anyone thinks now. Singapore is only 70+% ethnic Chinese, yet has a far higher GDP per capita than either Hong Kong or Taiwan, despite the fact that Hong Kong has a far bigger economic hinterland in China, as well as Japan. And yet the origins of Singapore's ethnic Chinese are unremarkable - they are descended mainly from smallholders and itinerant traders from south China. Lee is characteristically self-deprecating when he suggests that China has far more potential because it hung on to most of the talents that used to go into the imperial mandarinate. In traditional China, as in traditional Japan and Korea (and most non-Western countries even today), people got ahead because of political power and family connections, a good chunk of which was the result of serendipity (i.e. being in the right place at the right time with the right mix of troops and weaponry, or deals with the powers-that-be).

    And yet, despite Hong Kong and Taiwan getting the vast majority of Chinese diaspora talent fleeing the Communist victory in 1949, not to mention the massive capital injection that came with it as well as their superior location and/or natural resources, Singapore is clearly ahead of both territories with respect to GDP per capita. This suggests that China has a vast reserve of untapped talent not currently represented among the powers-that-be, and they may come into their own if the suffocating hand of the Communist party princelings who rule the roost is ever lifted.

    Yeah, you can see Hong Kong and Taiwan inheriting great talent in filmmakers like Wong Kar-wai and Ang Lee from the old cultural elites of the mainland, while Singapore has yet to generate much artistic talent. But Singaporeans make a lot of money.

    In Wong Kar-wai movies, 1960s Hong Kong is haunted, full of melancholy aesthetes who wish they were back in Shanghai in the 1930s, the way 1920s Berlin and Paris were full of Russian writers like Nabokov who wished they were home in Czarist Russia. Occasionally, his characters visit Singapore, but it seems to strike them mostly as a place for tasty cheap food.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Wong Kar-wai... Half of his "Chungking Express" was sublime. The other half... was not.

    Ang Lee... His "Lust, Caution" made me speechless. Too bad the Chinese under the red rule only saw the censored version.
  122. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @Truth

    In 1962, Singapore’s GDP was about $700 million. By 1974, that increased to about $4.25 billion, in excess of a six-fold increase.
     
    This site disputes your numbers, but the percentage of increase is roughly the same:

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/singapore/gdp-per-capita

    The same chart applied to Rwanda under Kagame (the chart does not progress past 2011 for some reason, but assuming a fairly modest growth rate) indicates roughly the same increase. Little lower, but in the same ball park.

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/rwanda/gdp

    Taking it to another chart from a different site, that goes to 2013, the result is roughly the same.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/rwanda/gdp

    But now here's the interesting graph, My Good Man; a look at Rwanda's economy from 1960 to 1974, on the same site implies, well, a more impressive financial performance from Mr. Kagame's PREDECESSORS in Rwanda than it does for the Singaporean genius himself.

    I leave it to you to surmise.

    The same chart applied to Rwanda under Kagame (the chart does not progress past 2011 for some reason, but assuming a fairly modest growth rate) indicates roughly the same increase. Little lower, but in the same ball park.

    3x for Rwanda vs 6x for Singapore. Rwanda’s GDP per capita growth rates are similar to those of its East African counterparts, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya. Of course, none of those neighbors went through a genocide that killed almost a million people, followed by a civil war. Not to mention that unlike Lee, Kagame is a minority Tutsi ruling the majority Hutus.

    What’s remarkable about Singapore is the gap in growth vis-a-vis its neighbors during that 15 year period. Apart from Indonesia (whose numbers were distorted by the ructions of the Konfrontasi and the troubles of 65-66 memorialized in Mel Gibson’s star-making role, The Year of Living Dangerously), Singapore had at least double their growth rates, and in some cases, almost triple. What’s equally remarkable is that where Hong Kong and Singapore were neck-and-neck in 1997, when Hong Kong was handed back to China, Singapore’s number is now 1/3 higher. Hong Kong’s relative stagnation may account for the increasing political temperature there, and the consequent emergence of popular dissatisfaction with Chinese rule.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "Mel Gibson’s star-making role, The Year of Living Dangerously"

    People have a lot of different opinions about on-screen "romantic chemistry" but Mel and Sigourney Weaver in that movie strike me as having as much chemistry as anybody ever.

    The problem with the movie is that the soundtrack overwhelms the dialogue. I think that's intentional: I suspect Australian director Peter Weir wanted to get across how noisy Jakarta is.

    By the way when reading up on the Indonesian Subdub cult that had some influence on Obama's mom, I only started to realize how much of Australia's elite literary/journalistic/espionage talent was stationed in Jakarta in the 1960s. It makes sense when you think about it, but I'd never thought about it before.

  123. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @ABN
    You've touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    I think that nature may have enormous potential as an olive branch between the reactionary/nationalist Right and the bourgeois Left.

    I guess the crude version of the message would be something like, "Let's drop this Diversity crap and go mountain biking together!"

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the "Shire," but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the “Shire,” but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)

    My impression is that SWPL’s don’t have a problem with their kids mixing with non-whites. They just don’t want them getting beaten up in school. Or held back academically because some other kid in class can’t keep up with the curriculum. Hence the enthusiasm for misnamed “gifted” programs that are a backdoor way of doing European-style student tracking.

  124. @Anon

    The same chart applied to Rwanda under Kagame (the chart does not progress past 2011 for some reason, but assuming a fairly modest growth rate) indicates roughly the same increase. Little lower, but in the same ball park.
     
    3x for Rwanda vs 6x for Singapore. Rwanda's GDP per capita growth rates are similar to those of its East African counterparts, Uganda, Tanzania and Kenya. Of course, none of those neighbors went through a genocide that killed almost a million people, followed by a civil war. Not to mention that unlike Lee, Kagame is a minority Tutsi ruling the majority Hutus.

    What's remarkable about Singapore is the gap in growth vis-a-vis its neighbors during that 15 year period. Apart from Indonesia (whose numbers were distorted by the ructions of the Konfrontasi and the troubles of 65-66 memorialized in Mel Gibson's star-making role, The Year of Living Dangerously), Singapore had at least double their growth rates, and in some cases, almost triple. What's equally remarkable is that where Hong Kong and Singapore were neck-and-neck in 1997, when Hong Kong was handed back to China, Singapore's number is now 1/3 higher. Hong Kong's relative stagnation may account for the increasing political temperature there, and the consequent emergence of popular dissatisfaction with Chinese rule.

    “Mel Gibson’s star-making role, The Year of Living Dangerously”

    People have a lot of different opinions about on-screen “romantic chemistry” but Mel and Sigourney Weaver in that movie strike me as having as much chemistry as anybody ever.

    The problem with the movie is that the soundtrack overwhelms the dialogue. I think that’s intentional: I suspect Australian director Peter Weir wanted to get across how noisy Jakarta is.

    By the way when reading up on the Indonesian Subdub cult that had some influence on Obama’s mom, I only started to realize how much of Australia’s elite literary/journalistic/espionage talent was stationed in Jakarta in the 1960s. It makes sense when you think about it, but I’d never thought about it before.

    • Replies: @Bill

    People have a lot of different opinions about on-screen “romantic chemistry” but Mel and Sigourney Weaver in that movie strike me as having as much chemistry as anybody ever.
     
    Didn't notice. Of course, I have a lot of trouble noticing anything when Sigourney Weaver is on-screen. Dreamy. She's like a female Jean Kirkpatrick.
  125. @Terrahawk
    Competitive chess players tend to be all over the map politically. However, I can say the US Chess Federation, or at least parts of it, tends to be obsessed with getting female players. Mainly though it is a guy's game. There are a decent number of girls in scholastics, but far less go on to play as adults than boys.

    At the upper levels of chess it is typical situation you see in sports. Sure a woman who dedicates her life to the sport can beat up on the schlubs but when facing the same type of competitors, it isn't close. This doesn't mean they won't win a few games, but it's extremely rare that they place high in a major tournament.

    In general, I have found that most woman prefer games that don't take much in the way of thinking and are heavily tied to chance. That's even if they care about games at all.

    How would you assess the Polgar sisters? Are they over-rated?

  126. @stillCARealist
    I have an aunt who fits your description exactly. She is a social and economic liberal to the core, while still being a nice white lady who wants to help everybody. She's totally cool with the eventual extinction of most white folks and assumes the coming utopia will be a multicultural love festival. She even describes herself as an "anglophile" and attends an Episcopal church.

    Frankly, I don't get it. Somebody help me out here.

    Alas, your aunt is very representative of Episcopali ns–especially the clergy. A regular iSteve reader would be a real outlier in an Episcopalian congregation anywhere outside the South.

  127. @D. K.
    Based just on this one-sided snippet: he walked up to a total stranger; he insulted her; he was told to leave her alone; he continued to accost her, creating a reasonable apprehension on her part of an impending battery, which constitutes a legal assault; she used limited force to repel that assault; at which point, he pushed her, thereby committing the anticipated battery. Is that about the size of it? The motherfucker should not have been ejected; he should have been arrested!

    +1

    Why would he publish such a story? Does he think there is some possibility that he was in the right?

  128. @Steve Sailer
    "Mel Gibson’s star-making role, The Year of Living Dangerously"

    People have a lot of different opinions about on-screen "romantic chemistry" but Mel and Sigourney Weaver in that movie strike me as having as much chemistry as anybody ever.

    The problem with the movie is that the soundtrack overwhelms the dialogue. I think that's intentional: I suspect Australian director Peter Weir wanted to get across how noisy Jakarta is.

    By the way when reading up on the Indonesian Subdub cult that had some influence on Obama's mom, I only started to realize how much of Australia's elite literary/journalistic/espionage talent was stationed in Jakarta in the 1960s. It makes sense when you think about it, but I'd never thought about it before.

    People have a lot of different opinions about on-screen “romantic chemistry” but Mel and Sigourney Weaver in that movie strike me as having as much chemistry as anybody ever.

    Didn’t notice. Of course, I have a lot of trouble noticing anything when Sigourney Weaver is on-screen. Dreamy. She’s like a female Jean Kirkpatrick.

  129. @ABN
    You've touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    I think that nature may have enormous potential as an olive branch between the reactionary/nationalist Right and the bourgeois Left.

    I guess the crude version of the message would be something like, "Let's drop this Diversity crap and go mountain biking together!"

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the "Shire," but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)

    You’ve touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    Every California state park is the same. You park your car. You marvel at all the Mexicans sitting at the picnic tables drinking beer. You find the trailhead. You hike for fifteen minutes. You marvel that everyone you meet thereafter is speaking German.

    Contra Twinkie, I don’t recall seeing many Japanese or Chinese tourists in those parks. Seems to be a Northern European thing.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Contra Twinkie, I don’t recall seeing many Japanese or Chinese tourists in those parks. Seems to be a Northern European thing.
     
    Why would foreign tourists come and see parks? They are busy seeing the Empire State Building and buying jeans. Even the Germans.

    Back when I lived in western Washington state, I ran into a lot of East Asian hikers and campers on the mountains (Seattle area is around 2/3 white, 15-20% Asian). Many East Asians are yellow SWPLs. Heck, I even ran into Asians in the mountains of Colorado, and that state doesn't even have that many Asians!

    I, in general, do not care to be in the woods with a lot of people, so I stopped hiking around the Seattle-Tacoma area and started to go deep into the woods... which was much more serene until I ran into a brown bear. Not so fun at all. And I don't mind admitting that I was terrified.

    Hiking and camping and "taking in the nature" are big in South Korea and Japan, and increasingly in China.

  130. @ABN
    You've touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.

    I think that nature may have enormous potential as an olive branch between the reactionary/nationalist Right and the bourgeois Left.

    I guess the crude version of the message would be something like, "Let's drop this Diversity crap and go mountain biking together!"

    (Deep down, I think both conservative nationalists and SWPLs basically want to live in the "Shire," but they hate each other too much to recognize that fact.)

    I was wrong in what I said.

    The rich, elite whites in the USA have already started sending their children to Nature Preschool, and parents in Germany have already started Forest schools for their children, since it would be too painful to send their free roaming forest children to normal schools, as one mum in Berlin said it.

    I also thought there would be resistance, but it is like charging in open doors, as those wishing to start, gets locations from people with facilities, willing to help.

    Some newspapers articles illustrating the boom.

    Victoria parents form tent city to get kids spot in nature kindergarten

    A communal area was set up by some of the parents, allowing them a place to warm their hands over an electric fire and watch football games on a laptop. They’re all committed to giving their children an exceptional educational experience – but they’re also aware of how strange their 60-hour campout may look to some.

    “I wouldn’t blame them at all,” says Sutton. “I certainly scratched my head and wondered what I was doing myself when I was setting up my tent.”

    “But…having spent a few hours with a couple other parents, I now know that my child will now be in a classroom with other children whose parents are as involved with their children lives as much as I like to think I am.”
    http://globalnews.ca/news/1767687/victoria-parents-form-tent-city-to-get-kids-spot-in-nature-kindergarten/

    http://ww2.kqed.org/news/2014/11/14/forest-kindergarten-play-nature-based-alternative

    Forest Kindergartens Push Back Against Academic Focus For Young Kid

    “As a physics professor at St. Mary’s College, Boyda see lots of students who can’t figure things out for themselves. He thinks that’s a product of schools that reward students for rote learning and following instructions. He loves that his 3-year-old son is passionate about building and can spend hours absorbed in a design challenge. He doesn’t want to take that joy away from him by sending him to a traditional school.”

    And for a very telling comment to the article:
    “While I appreciate the fund, the elitism of who makes up the majority of kids in these program worries me. Even more concerning to me, I couldn’t see a single student of color in any of the images in the article.”

  131. Has Komment Kontrol been outsourced to India, of all places, Steve?

  132. @Anonymous
    The idea that 100 million Africans can cross into Europe by dingy boat is alarmist nonsense.

    Whats stopping them?

  133. @Twinkie

    Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.
     
    By "most minorities," if you meant NAMs, yes.

    By “most minorities,” if you meant NAMs, yes.

    Yes, I mean NAMs. I’m half- (South-) Asian myself and I enjoy hiking, biking, skiing, sailing, etc.

    I’m pretty conservative in general, but there’s a part of me that wouldn’t much mind if America were a giant Vermont with really good border fences.

  134. @Truth

    In 1962, Singapore’s GDP was about $700 million. By 1974, that increased to about $4.25 billion, in excess of a six-fold increase.
     
    This site disputes your numbers, but the percentage of increase is roughly the same:

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/singapore/gdp-per-capita

    The same chart applied to Rwanda under Kagame (the chart does not progress past 2011 for some reason, but assuming a fairly modest growth rate) indicates roughly the same increase. Little lower, but in the same ball park.

    http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/rwanda/gdp

    Taking it to another chart from a different site, that goes to 2013, the result is roughly the same.

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/rwanda/gdp

    But now here's the interesting graph, My Good Man; a look at Rwanda's economy from 1960 to 1974, on the same site implies, well, a more impressive financial performance from Mr. Kagame's PREDECESSORS in Rwanda than it does for the Singaporean genius himself.

    I leave it to you to surmise.

    This site disputes your numbers, but the percentage of increase is roughly the same

    That site is GDP per capita. We were discussing GDP. Must I educate you on the difference?

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/rwanda/gdp

    But now here’s the interesting graph, My Good Man; a look at Rwanda’s economy from 1960 to 1974, on the same site implies, well, a more impressive financial performance from Mr. Kagame’s PREDECESSORS in Rwanda than it does for the Singaporean genius himself.

    I leave it to you to surmise.

    I shall surmise, Mr. Sub-1000. From your own link, here are the raw data:

    Singaporean GDP
    1960: $0.7 billion; 1974: $5.26 billion; it grew 7.51x (hey, thanks, that data is even better!).

    Rwandan GDP
    1960: $0.12 billion; 1974: $0.31 billion; it grew 2.58x

    So in your mind, having roughly 1/3 of the rate of GDP growth in the same time frame is “a more impressive financial performance”? Wow, I always knew sub-1000 SAT was not very bright, but the inability to do basic subtraction and division is astounding. Is Brooklyn Tech really that bad?

  135. @Anon

    Indeed. That’s a part of why the rising Singaporean GDP curvature year-to-year *increased* as time went on. But it’s *much* easier to do economic development when the human quality is high.
     
    Oddly enough, Singapore's experience is an indication that the Flynn effect for China may be far more significant that anyone thinks now. Singapore is only 70+% ethnic Chinese, yet has a far higher GDP per capita than either Hong Kong or Taiwan, despite the fact that Hong Kong has a far bigger economic hinterland in China, as well as Japan. And yet the origins of Singapore's ethnic Chinese are unremarkable - they are descended mainly from smallholders and itinerant traders from south China. Lee is characteristically self-deprecating when he suggests that China has far more potential because it hung on to most of the talents that used to go into the imperial mandarinate. In traditional China, as in traditional Japan and Korea (and most non-Western countries even today), people got ahead because of political power and family connections, a good chunk of which was the result of serendipity (i.e. being in the right place at the right time with the right mix of troops and weaponry, or deals with the powers-that-be).

    And yet, despite Hong Kong and Taiwan getting the vast majority of Chinese diaspora talent fleeing the Communist victory in 1949, not to mention the massive capital injection that came with it as well as their superior location and/or natural resources, Singapore is clearly ahead of both territories with respect to GDP per capita. This suggests that China has a vast reserve of untapped talent not currently represented among the powers-that-be, and they may come into their own if the suffocating hand of the Communist party princelings who rule the roost is ever lifted.

    Oddly enough, Singapore’s experience is an indication that the Flynn effect for China may be far more significant that anyone thinks now.

    Could be. National leadership makes a huge difference. Just look at North Korea vs. South Korea. In 1945, North Korea was actually more industrialized and richer.

    they may come into their own if the suffocating hand of the Communist party princelings who rule the roost is ever lifted.

    If, indeed. If wishes were horses.

  136. @Steve Sailer
    Yeah, you can see Hong Kong and Taiwan inheriting great talent in filmmakers like Wong Kar-wai and Ang Lee from the old cultural elites of the mainland, while Singapore has yet to generate much artistic talent. But Singaporeans make a lot of money.

    In Wong Kar-wai movies, 1960s Hong Kong is haunted, full of melancholy aesthetes who wish they were back in Shanghai in the 1930s, the way 1920s Berlin and Paris were full of Russian writers like Nabokov who wished they were home in Czarist Russia. Occasionally, his characters visit Singapore, but it seems to strike them mostly as a place for tasty cheap food.

    Wong Kar-wai… Half of his “Chungking Express” was sublime. The other half… was not.

    Ang Lee… His “Lust, Caution” made me speechless. Too bad the Chinese under the red rule only saw the censored version.

  137. @Bill

    You’ve touched on something very important: the fact that both progressive SWPL liberals and reactionary traditionalists share an attraction to nature and the outdoors. Most minorities seem less inclined to that sort of thing.
     
    Every California state park is the same. You park your car. You marvel at all the Mexicans sitting at the picnic tables drinking beer. You find the trailhead. You hike for fifteen minutes. You marvel that everyone you meet thereafter is speaking German.

    Contra Twinkie, I don't recall seeing many Japanese or Chinese tourists in those parks. Seems to be a Northern European thing.

    Contra Twinkie, I don’t recall seeing many Japanese or Chinese tourists in those parks. Seems to be a Northern European thing.

    Why would foreign tourists come and see parks? They are busy seeing the Empire State Building and buying jeans. Even the Germans.

    Back when I lived in western Washington state, I ran into a lot of East Asian hikers and campers on the mountains (Seattle area is around 2/3 white, 15-20% Asian). Many East Asians are yellow SWPLs. Heck, I even ran into Asians in the mountains of Colorado, and that state doesn’t even have that many Asians!

    I, in general, do not care to be in the woods with a lot of people, so I stopped hiking around the Seattle-Tacoma area and started to go deep into the woods… which was much more serene until I ran into a brown bear. Not so fun at all. And I don’t mind admitting that I was terrified.

    Hiking and camping and “taking in the nature” are big in South Korea and Japan, and increasingly in China.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2