The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Are Democrats Good Because They Are More Nonwhite or Are Nonwhites Good Because They Are More Democrat?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

The New York Times is shocked, SHOCKED to learn that a few smart Republicans have figured out that the Democrats are trying to rig elections through illegal immigration:

People Who Can’t Vote Still Count Politically in America. What if That Changes?

The resulting maps would tend to shift power to areas with more residents that are white and older.

By Emily Badger
June 22, 2019

Three years ago, before the Trump administration moved to add a citizenship question to the census, and before many experts even imagined what that might mean …

Because of course the Democrats are so naive and trusting that they never imagined that anybody would ever notice their Grand Strategy for dominance.

… At the state level, such maps would also strip from these groups a principle as old as the Constitution: that even someone who cannot vote still deserves representation.

Such as the time-honored Three-Fifths clause that gave slaves three-fifths as much representation.

And if the Supreme Court allows the census to gather citizenship data on every person in America, that case seeking to redefine what representation means is likely to come soon.

The Constitution is clear that congressional seats must be apportioned by total population. But states and local governments that would have comprehensive citizenship data in the next redistricting cycle could draw maps built on a very different population base, at a time when the country is growing more diverse, its child population particularly so.

Newly released census data show, for the first time, that the total population of children in America under 15 is now majority nonwhite.

Any future political maps that exclude those children and noncitizens would further depress the power of urban areas that tend to vote Democratic and that are already structurally disadvantaged in redistricting.

Groups that sued to block the citizenship question argue that the Trump administration’s true goal — hinted at in recent documents unearthed in the litigation — is to set this chain of events in motion. Even without these larger changes, a citizenship question that deters some immigrants from participating in the census could affect congressional apportionment.

Texas itself, in defending its total population formula in the Evenwel case, argued that it should still retain the future right to use eligible voters instead. Other proponents of the idea say that existing maps unfairly reward places with more undocumented immigrants.

Any change would be particularly meaningful in Texas, where the citizen voting-age population is 10 percentage points more non-Hispanic white than the state as a whole. The citizen voting-age population is also 20 points more white than the state’s child population.

Texas’ voting-age citizens look demographically more like the entire state of Texas did in 2000, before the state grew more racially and ethnically diverse, according to William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution. The same is true of Arizona. Redefining who gets represented in those states would be akin to rolling back nearly two decades of demographic change.

“We’re moving forward in a global economy and a more diverse country,” Mr. Frey said of this possibility, “and we’re going to have a representation of a country that really is more like the 20th century than the 21st century.”

Anyway, that got me wondering: In the Establishment mindset, are Democrats the Good Party because they are more nonwhite than Republicans are, or are nonwhites the Good People because they are more Democratic than whites?

As far as I can tell, this question seldom gets asked. Instead, the zeitgeist is a seamless web of circular logic.

 
Hide 175 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Thea says:

    They really outsmarted the GOP in the 1960s when they lured them into a “who is the least racist” contest. If that is the sole metric of good and evil, and racism is defined on leftist terms(which is necessarily is) the GOP will always lose.

    The best way to deal with it is to not engage or acknowledge it or flat out say “ right or wrong, I support my people.”

  2. newrouter says:

    > a citizenship question that deters some illegal aliens immigrants from participating in the census could affect congressional apportionment.

  3. The Constitution is clear that congressional seats must be apportioned by total population.

    This “Constitution” thingie is Sacred Writ when we agree with it, instantly dispensable (AKA a “racist tract” written by “racists”) when we don’t.

    • Agree: TWS
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    , @TWS
  4. Daniel H says:

    Anything short of a policy declaration from the Republican party and their presumed presidential nominee that they will end immigration as we have known it for the past 50 years (say, reduce it to 150,000 per year) is futile at this point. I will not weep that the Republican party is going to slip under the waves.

  5. Such as the time-honored Three-Fifths clause that gave slaves three-fifths as much representation.

    You mean gave their guardians three-fifths extra representation. Per each charge. One of history’s great cheats.

    Don’t miss important nuances, though. In St Paul, a pack of feral white pervs, hiding behind the skirts of another person of very slight color, are out to bork a Somali councillor for talking like a white person of 20 years ago:

    St. Paul council members, gay advocates call on Busuri to apologize

    Uganda make this stuff up!

  6. newrouter says:

    >The Constitution is clear that congressional seats must be apportioned by total population. <

    Of legally domiciled populations?

    • Replies: @guest
  7. Kronos says:

    I’ve always been amazed how quickly the Democratic Party changed under Bill Clinton and other neoliberal/New Democrat leaders. Of course, that largely occurred from the heavy bruisings from the 1984 and 1988 presidential elections. They’re still in power (party-wise) despite heavy resistance from the Bernie Sanders/democratic socialist wing. They’ll likely have their “Trump moment” political bloodbath sometime in the future though. (2024?)

    The non-white immigrants (mainly Hispanics) are great for being pimped out for lowering wages and raising real estate prices. Therefore, the neoliberals (and neocons) love them. They’re very politically passive in inter-party politics (the white Jerry Browns have been in office for decades.) Non-white immigrants are essentially blank votes for the Establishment.

    The answer: non-whites are GREAT! People because they vote (Establishment) Democrat. (For now.)

  8. @Daniel H

    Why would the Republican Party execute a complete about-face like that?

    Incidentally, reducing immigration would just delay your demise at this point. Reversing it is the only solution, and that’s way beyond the pale.

    So you see our predicament.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    , @Feryl
  9. JerryC says:

    Oh, it’s definitely the latter.

  10. Escher says:

    Since American policies affect the whole world, it is only fair that the whole world should have a say in electing Congressmen and the president.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  11. SFG says:

    In the Establishment mindset, are Democrats the Good Party because they are more nonwhite than Republicans are, or are nonwhites the Good People because they are more Democratic than whites?

    It’s a very good question, and somewhat a mix of both, I think; people just tally up which groups are on their side and those become the ‘good’ groups. Making tribal coalitions is an old human mental module. I’d guess probably the first as the Dems are (as far as I can tell) still running off the moral capital from the civil right movement of the 60s. among the upper middle classes. But my confidence level is low.

  12. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:

    I believe Bob Whitaker will be vindicated when he said that nonwhites will become ungreat when they demand their own representation from their own frame of reference. Neither mestizos, nor Muslims, nor Hindus, nor Chinese will support LGBT rights. They will all be against legal abortion, except maybe the Chinese. None of them will have much use for Negro misbehavior. They are not liberal except in their desire for gibsmedat -for their own group, no one else.

    But whites, though the largest minority, are so cucked they won’t fight for their own-unless something really bad happens to them and they are radicalized, as (National Alliance supremo William) Pierce hoped for.

    I have a feeling that in the hereafter, Pierce and Kahane are getting along pretty well.

    • Replies: @Ian Smith
  13. @Thea

    All other metrics are too judgmental. Judgment against racism got grandfathered in when the church of nonjudgmentalism was established because otherwise that would be mean to blacks.

  14. The whole idea of causality seems kind of white, Steve.

  15. istevefan says:
    @Daniel H

  16. “That’s they problem really…”

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
  17. Hail says: • Website
    @istevefan

    At the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process

    LOL.

    This is like a bad parody…

    Dump the Chump
    Tucker Carlson 2020

    • Replies: @Hockamaw
  18. @istevefan

    Typical Trump-Tweet big, act small. Let’s face it: there’s absolutely no way Donald Trump wants to be associated with the visuals of “mass” arrests and “mass” deportations. The United States as a reasonable evolution of the nation that existed in 1960 is over. By 2024 or 2028 there’ll be a Pinochet of the left.

    • Replies: @Seneca44
  19. Daniel H says:
    @Thea

    >>The best way to deal with it is to not engage or acknowledge it or flat out say “ right or wrong, I support my people.”

    Could do that. Could call out the evident racism of the grand coalition. The hatred Mexicans have for blacks. The hatred Middle Easterners have for blacks. The hatred Chinese have for blacks. The uber racism of Hinduism, which is well beyond a racism that Americans have any experience with. The hatred Dominicans have for black Haitians, and black Dominicans and on and on. Audit the social media of self-declared liberals (you will note that 95-99% of their “friends” are white). Call out the inherent racism of charter schools in New York city. Call out the inherent racism of the selective schools in NYC, and on, an on. Attack, attack, attack. Relentlessly.

    Or together with the above we can just own the insult, acknowledge that we are racist, accept it, revel in it, let the enemy know that we don’t give a damn that they think we are racists, that we ARE racists, that all we care about at this point is power for ourselves and we intend to seize it and use it to further our interests.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
    , @Thea
  20. “… the zeitgeist is a seamless web of circular logic.”

    Indeed.

  21. Hockamaw says:
    @Hail

    At the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process

    Unironically, I think this is an honest to God brilliant 17-D chess move by Trump. This will force the Democrats to have to talk about both immigration policy and dealing with Republicans in their presidential debates next week. They will all have to go hard left because of the nature of the primary debate. They will all come off as unhinged zealots. Then the next week you’ll have Nancy Pelosi forced to pick up the pieces over the Fourth of July holiday. It will be terrible optics for them. It’s brilliant. Just watch this play out over the next couple of weeks. It’s the first great move by Trump in awhile. Trump may be a moron when it comes to policy, but the guy is a genuine savant when it comes to playing optics in the context of a political campaign. I think the next year and a half is going to be a lot of fun.

    • Agree: Desiderius, TomSchmidt
    • Disagree: Hail
    • Replies: @istevefan
  22. Instead, the zeitgeist is a seamless web of circular logic.

    Nah. A web has two sides.

    What we see is more like a Möbius strip, or a Klein bottle.

  23. @Thea

    They really outsmarted the GOP in the 1960s when they lured them into a “who is the least racist” contest.

    Sean Hannity is determined–determined, I tell you–to win that contest.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @bucky
  24. guest says:

    “What if that changes?”

    It won’t, you ignorant so-and-so.

    Hopefully things will change as regards the invading hordes, but plenty of non-voting groups will continue to count unto forever. For instance children, the pushy bastards.

  25. guest says:
    @newrouter

    Well, they exclude Injuns, who didn’t pay taxes. Otherwise it’s just all free persons.

  26. are Democrats the Good Party because they are more nonwhite than Republicans are, or are nonwhites the Good People because they are more Democratic than whites?

    The former is a lie; the latter a delusion.

  27. @istevefan

    It would be more productive to deport Congress. But they would just sneak back across the border as undocumented congressmen.

  28. The real answer you would get:

    ‘It’s a little bit of both’

    • Agree: Lurker
  29. asdfasdf says:

    > Anyway, that got me wondering: In the Establishment mindset, are Democrats the Good Party because they are more nonwhite than Republicans are, or are nonwhites the Good People because they are more Democratic than whites?

    Extremely good question.

    I think that it’s the latter. That is, nonwhites are only good so long as they vote for leftists. Here are two reasons why:

    1) First, within the US, they are ultimately only valuable to leftists as pawns.

    Is Ben Carson black?
    Is Ann Coulter a woman?
    Is Peter Thiel gay?

    Their black/female/gay cards got yanked as soon as they opposed the left. Just like with union members many years ago after the Hard Hat Riots, which was roughly the point at which the left switched from economic to cultural Marxism. After this incident, union members were no longer good because they weren’t reliable leftist votes.

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

    2) Second, outside the US, there is an increasing level of demonization of China in particular as “evil” due to the fact that it actually is taking measures to de-Muslimify its Uighur population. Really these measures are just the same thing that the US did to Germany after pacifying it, or that the New York Times and the US government are doing (more slowly) to their own native white American populations. They are just more organized and explicitly government driven because that’s the Chinese way.

    So if China opposes the New York Times and the left (but I repeat myself), they may be nonwhite but they most certainly aren’t good. Same with Modi in India, or Mizrahi Jews in Israel, or the Brazilians who voted for Bolsonaro, or Erdogan in Turkey, or Assad in Syria. All nonwhite, all not good.

    The left cares about pawns of color, not people of color.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  30. Steve the fact you whim any mention of the fact that voting will change nothing coming down the pipe only shows that you know your endless articles are just whistling past the graveyard.

  31. map says:

    Steve,

    So, basically, the Dem strategy is to engineer rotten boroughs.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Rotten_and_pocket_boroughs

  32. George says:

    Still going off on St cloud. Local news joins the Times.

    St. Cloud and immigration: Cowards will be our downfall

    The editorial board of the St. Cloud Times responds to a report on white resistance to the resettlement of Somali refugees in its city.

    http://www.startribune.com/st-cloud-and-immigration-cowards-will-be-our-downfall/511675892/

  33. And one day there will be a screwup, and resettlement and/or Section 8 money will go back to urban areas. Then things will get interesting.

  34. Wilkey says:
    @HammerJack

    This “Constitution” thingie is Sacred Writ when we agree with it, instantly dispensable (AKA a “racist tract” written by “racists”) when we don’t.

    It’s a “living, breathing Constitution” when they disagree with it, able to grow via “emanations from penumbras” when they want it to change.

    When they agree with the status quo, however, the only way to change it is via the stipulated (and therefore impossible) amendment process.

    Modern transportation (planes, trains, and automobiles) is to immigration and birthright citizenship what the M-60 and nuclear bomb are to the Second Amendment. The Left takes for granted that of course the 2nd Amendment doesn’t cover owning a machine gun – why should an amendment be needed to accommodate technological change? – but if you want to get rid of birthright citizenship you better pass an amendment the right way.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
  35. I, for one, welcome our new taco eating overlords.

    The only saving grace may be that these SOBs tend to head to other parts of the country, and not stop at the border where I live. In twenty to thirty years, I’ve gone from seeing Spanish as ubiquitous in Laredo to maybe spoken 1/3 of the time. That’s in, like name grocery stores, Home Depot, etc. Vast majority of Spanish is spoken by Mexican nationals there for the weekend at their investment (safe haven for cash) house.

  36. Wilkey says:
    @George

    The opponents of Somali immigration don’t have to prove anything. It is up to those in favor of mass Somali immigration to prove that Somalis will assimilate and be net contributors to American society.

    This is what none other than a racist news site, Minnesota Public Radio, has to say about Somalis in Minnesota:

    The most recent figures, for 2011-2013, put Somalis’ unemployment at 21 percent, about three times the rate for the general population during the same period of time…

    Unemployment three times higher than the general population.

    Kadra Jama, 20, has been looking for a job for a year. “I applied for Kmart, Walmart, Mall of America, different jobs,” she said. “Still I didn’t get that call. They didn’t hire me.”

    She wasn’t even qualified for a job at WalMart.

    Census numbers show that of Minnesota’s five largest immigrant groups, Somali unemployment is the highest. More than half of the state’s Somalis live in poverty. “We have the highest unemployment rate than any other groups — including the newcomers,” Mohamud Noor, Confederation of Somali Community in Minnesota executive director, said in February.

    Their skill levels, education levels, and work ethic are lower than any other ethnic group in Minnesota (or the country, for that matter) but somehow they’re supposed to be a net boon to the USA – more American than legacy Americans!

    From a different article in USA Today:

    For Minnesotans overall, about 12 percent live below the federal poverty line of $30,750 for a family of four. About 54 percent of Somalis are below that line. She added 65 percent of Somali children live in poverty.

    Four and a half times as many Somalis as Minnesotans living below the poverty line.

    It’s not up to us to prove that Somali immigrants won’t eventually prove themselves to be better citizens. It’s up to those in favor of Somali immigration to prove that they will. Because if it doesn’t work out there is no sending them back to Somalia. They are here forever, breeding at rates far faster than Americans are breeding, and living off the taxpayer teet.

    A nation that already has a $600 billion annual budget deficit *in good times* (and $1 trillion+ annual deficits during the last recession) can ill-afford even more welfare cases.

  37. @Harry Baldwin

    He’s got an entire generation of company plus the rump of a ruling class.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  38. @Thea

    They really outsmarted the GOP in the 1960s when they lured them into a “who is the least racist” contest. If that is the sole metric of good and evil, and racism is defined on leftist terms(which is necessarily is) the GOP will always lose.

    Exactly. The propaganda triumph of minoritarianism–minorities good, majorities bad.

    Minoritarianism was built on Jim Crow and slavery. Then holocaustia piled on … and on … and on– can’t get enough of that holocaust!–to broaden the “treat fairly” into “no nations allow!” and flat out “whitey must die!”

    Clever propaganda, however stupid. Unless whites are willing to challenge–“interrogate” ;-)–the axioms, we will die.

  39. Lot says:
    @istevefan

    Those giant raids Trump promised and then wimped out on again were supposedly going to deport 2,000 illegals.

    Last month, there were about 140,000 catch and releases, 4700 per day.

    So Trump can’t even follow through on a plan that deports 40% of one day’s crop of illegals that are catch-and-released.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    , @Feryl
  40. Wilkey says:
    @Wilkey

    From Wikipedia on the Somali population in the United Kingdom:

    Their family cohesiveness sucks:

    Harris states that the divorce rate for Somalis in the UK is high….Writing in 2006, refugee education expert Jill Rutter reported that research suggested between 20 and 70 per cent of Somali households in Britain were headed by single females. In the 2011 Census, 61 per cent of families in England and Wales where the head of the household was born in Somalia consisted of lone parents with dependent children. This was the highest proportion of all countries of birth. 7.6 per cent of Somali-born lone parents were men, around half of the proportion of male lone parents in the population as a whole.

    Their skill levels suck:

    Analysis of Labour Force Survey data by the Institute for Public Policy Research, published in 2008, shows that in 2006/07, 48 per cent of the working-age Somali-born population of the UK had no qualifications. 6 per cent had GCSEs at grades A*-C or equivalent foreign qualifications, and 19 per cent had A-levels or their equivalent. The remaining 27 per cent were classified as having “other qualifications”.

    Their employment rate really, really sucks:

    Somali-born migrants have the lowest employment rate among all immigrants in the UK. Figures published by the Office for National Statistics show high rates of economic inactivity and unemployment amongst Somali immigrants. In the three months to June 2008, 31.4 per cent of Somali men and 84.2 per cent of Somali women were economically inactive (the statistics include students, carers and the long-term sick, injured or disabled in this group).[110][111] Of those who were economically active, 41.4 per cent of the men and 39.1 per cent of the women were unemployed. Employment rates were 40.1 per cent for men and 9.6 per cent for women. The male employment rate in 2008 had, however, risen from 21.5 per cent in 1998.[110] Writing in 2013, Jill Rutter states that “over the last 10 years, the employment rate of the Somalia-born population has rarely been above 20 per cent of the 16–64-year-old population”

  41. In a related story, we have a new installment of “Homo vs Negro, Who Wins?”

    Do you care about blacks or do you just want to be president?

    Pete Buttigieg returned to the presidential campaign trail on Saturday after facing down angry protesters in his hometown of South Bend

    ‘Are you really here because you care about blacks, or are you just here because you want to be the president?’ a protester asked him

    ‘You running for president and you expect black people to vote for you?’ another said

    ‘I’m not asking for your vote,’ Buttigieg replied

    ‘You ain’t gonna get it either,’ the protester said

    • LOL: Daniel H
    • Replies: @Arclight
    , @Reg Cæsar
  42. When did the White man lose his will to endure? I never did. Most middle-aged Whites I know never did. What happened? And how? My mistake was in thinking that the more diverse the country became, the harder life would get for Whites (correct), and the more that would engender White racial resistance (massively incorrect). Instead, Whites keep apologizing for their non-sins, while making ever more elaborate excuses for the disgusting behavior of nonwhites.

    Clearly, the White race is subdivided in two: the evolutionarily normal, and the outlier maladapteds (liberals). Why are Whites so different from all other peoples? That is the question biodiversitists should be examining above all others.

  43. Republicans are the Wile E. Coyote to the Democrat Roadrunner.

  44. bucky says:
    @Harry Baldwin

    Isn’t it interesting who the left tolerates–Hannity, and who they’ve tried multiple times to destroy–Tucker.

    And then who is advocating destroying Iran, and who is counceling restraint.

  45. @Leon Haller

    My mistake was in thinking that the more diverse the country became, the harder life would get for Whites (correct), and the more that would engender White racial resistance (massively incorrect). Instead, Whites keep apologizing for their non-sins, while making ever more elaborate excuses for the disgusting behavior of nonwhites.

    For something radical, you have to have really, really atrocious life. This documentary on crucial moments in brewing of the Russian revolution illustrates it.
    https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/065312-000-A/lenin-and-the-other-story-of-the-russian-revolution/

  46. @istevefan

    As night follows day, Trump betrayals follow Trump promises.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
  47. @Daniel H

    The West has historically reorganized itself every 80 years or so. After each reorganization, people find themselves doing things that _no_ side before the reorganization would have tolerated for any longer than it took to revolt.

    Example: the wars of religion ended by the Treaty of Westphalia, which subordinated religion to politics just for the sake of ending the endless war. In the wars of religion, religion lost badly.

    Example: End of Athens. Alexander the Great had conqured the civilized world to the Greeks. He’d then died (bad for his career, that) and his troop leaders had taken over. Athens revolted again, put together an immense fleet, and the fleet found itself facing an immense fleet of experienced troops who had seldom been defeated. The Athenian fleet, for the first time in the history of Athens, surrendered unconditionally. The Athenian shipyards were destroyed, the blue collars who made their living by rowing and were therefore always in favor of military expeditions were moved as a group to Thrace, and that was it for Athens as a naval power. The Athenina spirit was gone, had been before the fleet encounter, and Athens became a university town (or clsoe to it).

    Reality is weird stufff.

    Counterinsurgency

  48. Anonymous[183] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thea

    They really outsmarted the GOP in the 1960s when they lured them into a “who is the least racist” contest.

    It was the Soviet Union not the Democrats who did this.

  49. Ian Smith says:
    @Anonymous

    Jack Lemon as William Pierce and Walter Matthau as Kahane would have been fun.

  50. @Reg Cæsar

    He doesn’t want to wear the ribbon!

  51. @George

    The goodwhite cucking in the comments after that article is simply nauseating.

  52. @Wilkey

    Modern transportation (planes, trains, and automobiles) is to immigration and birthright citizenship what the M-60 and nuclear bomb are to the Second Amendment.

    Observation worthy of emphasis.

    The Left takes for granted that of course the 2nd Amendment doesn’t cover owning a machine gun – why should an amendment be needed to accommodate technological change? – but if you want to get rid of birthright citizenship you better pass an amendment the right way.

    Not far behind. They are in the driver’s seat, and they know it, but at least on a few remaining comment forums such as this we can still point out their hypocrisy.

  53. @South Texas Guy

    Are you saying that 1) you live in Laredo and 2) Spanish is spoken there less often than in the old days? Because if true, both of those facts fairly amaze me.

    I should come visit. In January, say.

    • Replies: @South Texas Guy
  54. Arclight says:
    @Mr McKenna

    You could ask this question about any of the Democrats running – the Democrats have set things up so that blacks are an essential constituency for the primaries, so there is a lot of pandering aimed at blacks that they will never follow through on. And why not? The black voter is the most reliably partisan in the entire country and despite half a century of Democrats not really delivering anything that materially improves the lives of black citizens, 90% will vote for them in the general election regardless.

    So on the one hand, I understand the protestor’s anger that their white mayor is just there to do the bare minimum to get the national media off his back, but on the other hand, being a cheap date for 50 years means you can reliably be taken for granted. They same applies to GOP voters who have watched their politicians conspire with the Democrats to do absolutely nothing about illegal immigration since the 1980s , and now face demographics that means the largest racial/ethnic group in the country will be ruled (at a national level) by a Frankenstein’s monster coalition united only by hatred of whites.

  55. @Lot

    He’s not head of state yet. He’s hoping through these little set pieces to win enough support to become one.

  56. @Leon Haller

    The whites who matter aren’t apologizing for their sins, they’re apologizing for yours.

  57. a principle as old as the Constitution: that even someone who cannot vote still deserves representation.

    Also known as the “five-fifths clause”.

  58. Kronos says:
    @Arclight

    Who do you think is the weakest link in the coalition of the fringes? Blacks? Hispanics? Women? The urban black population is getting gored by gentrification. That might be enough of an angle to poison democratic primaries and general elections. The only political power blacks have is control of highly desirable urban areas. Also, everyone hates the black underclass, even middle class blacks. They want them shipped to the suburbs and/or rural areas. I can’t believe they’d want to perform farm work. They can just throw the election like they did for Hillary.

    Pootie Tang (2001)

    https://images.app.goo.gl/6BJKLh5r6wJ94b8x8

    • Replies: @Arclight
  59. @South Texas Guy

    I’d like to hear more about the Mexican investment in the American real estate market. Is it like the Chinese and the Russians, where they need a safe way to invest their dirty money? Or is it more that they need a place to flee to in case of the next revolution?

    Mexico would benefit from their own middle class investing in Mexican properties, wouldn’t it? Or maybe the governance is too unpredictable and they could lose everything with one bad law.

    There were some actual Mexicans commenting here a while back. I wish they’d speak up again.

    • Replies: @Kronos
    , @South Texas Guy
  60. @Leon Haller

    When did the White man lose his will to endure? I never did. Most middle-aged Whites I know never did. What happened? And how?

    They voted for benefits, not principles.

    • Agree: Kronos, Daniel H
  61. @Mr McKenna

    Too bad Kassim Busuri was born in Mogadishu. He’d be the ideal running mate for Buttigieg.

  62. @Wilkey

    This is an excellent comment. I would forward it to my one progressive friend, who lives in Minneapolis, but it would mean nothing to him because immigration is all about what’s good for the immigrants, not for America.

  63. Thea says:
    @Daniel H

    If only the regular GOP senator had the courage to say that

  64. @Harry Baldwin

    Does that mean good for Hindu “Americans”…What about what’s good for the Historic Native Born White American Working Class Majority?…..Your a Civic Nationalist Cuck…..

  65. I think we can all agree that we should not count tourists in the census, since they are only here temporarily. They are not residents. Same with illegal aliens. They are here only temporarily until they can be deported. So do not count them.

    That would drop California’s congressional delegation down to about five.

  66. George says:

    Refugees Got Talent: UN-backed show aims to change perceptions
    Poet, dancer and a reggae singer were among those displaying their skills in Sicily

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/23/refugees-got-talent-un-backed-event-challenges-perceptions

    Sicily of all places, absolute the Mafia has been defeated. The Sicily of my youth seemed like the last place left that the state could not do whatever it pleased, and make the locals like it.

  67. George says:
    @Wilkey

    “For Minnesotans overall, about 12 percent live below the federal poverty line ” If you work for local government poverty is a feature, not a bug. What exactly happens when retirement benefits to old white people have a budgetary collision with poverty programs for young African immigrants and their children, I don’t know. I do know the Teamster pension bailout, aka Butch Lewis Act, while still alive is not sailing through Congress.

    I also wonder how long government subsidies to local St Cloud Minn real estate interests housing the refugees can be maintained if local industry (St Cloud actually makes things) goes into recession or decline. Recently in the NE-Mid Atlantic GE has gotten into trouble, that didn’t stop refugee flows to Buffalo, so maybe the powers that be don’t care if St Cloud makes buses.

  68. Corvinus says:

    “The New York Times is shocked, SHOCKED to learn that a few smart Republicans have figured out that the Democrats are trying to rig elections through illegal immigration”

    Once again, that is not the entire story, Mr. Sailer. Offer the requisite context. Because of course the Republicans are so naive and trusting that they never imagined that anybody would ever notice their Grand Strategy for dominance. I’m shocked, SHOCKED that you didn’t NOTICE.

    Thomas Hofeller was a well-known conservative mapmaker who gave gerrymandering advice to Republicans at the state level. He died last summer, and his estranged daughter in going over his things found something important! Enter the Washington Free Beacon, a conservative newspaper owned by a billionaire (Paul Singer), who thought of filing a federal lawsuit about voting rights, but needed information. Hofeller was hired by the Beacon to conduct a study how to draw political maps, using Texas as a model since it has a large minority population (Hispanics).

    This study used data of ONLY American citizens of voting age (new criteria), NOT population (old criteria), for that state. Why? To determine if the maps would give Republicans an even better advantage in that state to maintain their control of the state legislature by decreasing the future political power of Hispanics, which is a growing population and tends to vote for Democrats. Using the new criteria meant a large segment of the Hispanic population would not be represented…a problem!

    Problem solved—> The newly drawn maps would have to meet Constitutional criteria of “one person, one vote” AND 1965 Voting Rights Act criteria—districts must reflect diversity—meaning that districts would “naturally” be packed. Democrats favor those standards, so Hofeller thought “How can they complain?”. Answer—> They can’t!

    New problem —> The detailed citizenship data, however, did not exist, as required by federal and state law to redraw the districts. Hofeller used statistical sampling measures, NOT total numbers.

    Problem solved —> Require a citizenship question on the national census, something NEVER done before. Thus, states could exclude illegal aliens from the count. The definition of “total population” would now mean ONLY AMERICAN CITIZENS, not ANY AND ALL PEOPLE AS ENVISIONED BY THE FRAMERS.

    Shenangians? How did this new citizenship question on the census suddenly become important…

    Well, Mark Neuman, a Trump transition team member who was friends with Hofeller, had been informed by him about the study. Nueman testified in one of the three federal lawsuits about the citizenship question that Hofeller’s study concluded the new criteria would mean an INCREASE in Latino representation…the opposite of the results of the study.

    Then there is Wilbur Ross, Trump transition team member who becomes Commerce Secretary, which is responsible for adding the citizenship question to the 2020 census. Ross was informed about the study by Neuman. Ross then pressured the Justice Department, who is responsible for enforcing the 1965 Voting Rights Act, that it should support the citizenship question because the data collected would help that cause.

    The Trump Administration denied any connection, but several files from four external hard drives and 18 thumb drives indicate in detail Hofeller’s activities as a Republican consultant…including his role in working with Trump officials to push for the citizenship question…were given by the daughter to lawyers through the proper legal channels in one of those three cases. Those same lawyers filed a lawsuit in federal court Thursday, May 30, 2019 to block the citizenship question from appearing on the 2020 Census, even though the Supreme Court will rule in June 2019 on that issue from three past cases.

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
  69. @Desiderius

    He really has that rump, sure.

  70. @HammerJack

    The Baby Boom happened during the great immigration moratorium. With pressure from immigrant workers removed, wages rose, allowing the population then to afford more children. I think it’s not coincidental that the powers that be increased immigration the year after the end of the boom: their model of wealth requires ever-larger populations at the bottom of the pyramid.

    So, a freeze might allow everyone more wealth and the chance to have more children.

    • Replies: @Mr McKenna
  71. @Escher

    I agree. That ought to be a Republican talking point. It will finish them off, but it will unseat all the White Dems as well.

    I for one welcome our new Asian overlords.

  72. @International Jew

    As night follows day, Trump betrayals follow Trump promises.

    Thanks IJ.

    As pithy a statement of the last two years as i’ve seen.

  73. istevefan says:
    @Hockamaw

    . It’s brilliant. Just watch this play out over the next couple of weeks. It’s the first great move by Trump in awhile.

    I disagree. Every day we are taking in over 2700 LEGAL immigrants. That’s over 1 million a year. Currently we are getting tens of thousands of illegals per month. He has done nothing to change this. I think the only area where he has done some good is in the reduction of the refugee resettlement program.

    Since we remembered the 75th anniversary of D-Day earlier this month, let’s use that as an analogy to what is happening to us today. Over the course of 4 weeks, from the invasion to the 4th of July, the allies landed 1 million men. They averaged landing over 35K men per day over this period. Of course the landings continued after 4 July, but this was the approximate date we hit the 1 million mark.

    If you were a German officer in France in June 1944, you received reports that the US Sherman tanks were not very good. The Panzerschreck, and Tiger and Panther tanks took a toll on them. Your men told you how many tanks they took out on a daily basis. However, you knew it meant little so long as the allies could land 35K men each and every day nonstop. Eventually they would overwhelm with pure numbers alone. And that is what happened.

    This is our position today. You might think Trump acted brilliantly in this action. Or you might be happy about some of his policies which have been good. I like his attempts at trade adjustments and court picks. But I know so long as the other side lands 2700 legal immigrants per day, and a like number of illegals per day, we are doomed. We’ve already allowed them to land 60 million since 1965!!!!

    We can’t continue down this road. Either Trump reverses this tide and starts to send them back, or we will inevitably march on to electoral and demographic oblivion.

    And no, he does not need to round up everyone. I posted this link before, a good piece in the Christian Science Monitor from 2006 about Ike’s Operation Wetback and how the illegals self-deported when Ike cracked down. Border agents only nabbed a few thousand, while almost a million self-deported when they knew the jig was up.

    The bottom line is the other side is landing thousands of new troops per day and so far that has not been reduced at all. The killer is legal immigration, which enables illegal immigration since it creates pockets of foreign nations within our own, which allows the illegals to “swim among the fish” and avoid standing out. So long as they are allowed to land this many troops per day, we are like the Germans in June 1944. No matter how good they were individually, or how good their equipment was, they could not overcome the allies’ numbers. And we won’t be able to overcome globo-homo’s numbers either. We should have put our collective foot down years ago, but no one wanted to listen to Pat Buchanan.

    • Agree: Kylie, Daniel H
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  74. Prosa123 says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    There’s absolutely no way the man pictured in the article is Somali.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  75. Feryl says:
    @HammerJack

    How do you suppose Anglo-Saxon Americans felt about all the Jews, Catholics, and Slavs that began to arrive in large numbers after about 1850? We drastically reduced immigration in the 1920’s and 30’s, but it’s not as if we sent the Ellis Island peoples back. America, in the 1950’s, did not demographically resemble what it was in the 1850’s.

    Places change demographically; that’s life and that’s history. Be that as it may, it’s in the economic interests of 4/5 of the native born population to want drastically reduced immigration. That will slow the race to the bottom, raise wages, and reduce competition for resources (which the large baby boom generation was already accelerating in the 70’s and 80’s, even before immigration levels shot way up under George HW Bush).

    I can’t emphasize enough what a dead end it is, to most Americans, to dwell on racial demographics and cultural issues. That lead to a racial spoils mentality, and trust me, many ethnic groups (least of all blacks) do not want policy decided on the alleged cultural and racial interests of whites.

  76. anon[156] • Disclaimer says:

    Are Democrats the Good Party because they are more nonwhite than Republicans are, or are nonwhites the Good People because they are more Democratic than whites?

    Are Republicans the Evil Party because they are whiter than Democrats are, or are whites the Evil People because they are less Democratic than nonwhites?

    Answer:

    Republicans are the Evil Party because they are all satanic and greedy nazis because all whites are satanic and greedy nazis.

  77. In Germany, the epicenter of lunacy on this mad planet leftists label themselves as : “Gutmenschen” : as good-people, and anyone who openly admits to not being a leftist is then automatically categorized as a “Rechter” which is a synonym for : evil or nazi.

    The total takeover of Deutschland by the Grün/leftist lunatic cabal is in an advanced stage, the plan being the elimination of private automobiles and the wipeout of all capitalistic industry, this being the will of their new savior : Greta

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz performer.

  78. @Feryl

    We drastically reduced immigration in the 1920’s and 30’s, but it’s not as if we sent the Ellis Island peoples back.

    Most of them were Castle Garden people. Ellis Island was open 1892-5, and 1900-54. Someplace called “the Barge Office” was also used.

    If you want to be churlish, you could distinguish between Castle Garden and “Cattle Garden”.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  79. Feryl says:
    @Leon Haller

    You musta been asleep at the wheel as (heavily) white Boomers and Gen X-ers trashed society. We went from a society that raided gay bars as late as 1969, to the late 70’s disco era where revelers gathered to have lots of sex and do lots of drugs, and everyone knew what was going on but society looked the other way. Hey, what’s the harm in letting these young idiots indulge?

    Now middle aged and elderly whites insisted on being “non-judgemental” towards excess and deviance, because they didn’t want the party to be spoiled. It was the Lost and GI generation, who lived through the decadent late 19th and early 20th century, who vowed to clean the place up. The generations born in the 1930’s-1960’s grew up with these stern moral watchdogs, who did not tolerate public displays of deviance and did not want everything to be “de-regulated”. The generations who were born during a wholesome middle class paradise took it all for granted, and have been actively pissing it all away since the late 70’s.

    “Diversity”? Young whites in the 1960’s-1990’s often failed to show any respect for themselves, much less other whites. Crime, violence, drugs, hostility towards authority, and promiscuity are not wholesome, ya know.

    Are today’s younger whites supposed to feel guilty about the commonplace corruption of the present? Well, it’s not our problem. We didn’t worship money and excess, and “de-regulation”, like the 30 and 40 something sociopaths who took over society in the 80’s

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @Mr McKenna
  80. Feryl says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    But Ellis Island sticks out in the popular memory because massive waves of people began arriving in the 1890’s, which helped spark a populist backlash that grew until congress passed the 1924 immigration policy.

    Hopefully, the mid-2000’s rejection of amnesty will follow a similar trajectory: growing popular discontent finally giving us an immigration moratorium by 2035. The sooner this country hits the economic skids, the better (econ troubles will ward off immigrants while enabling true populists to have ammo for immigration reform). The elites of the 1920’s had the good sense to begin reform several years before an econ crisis broke out; I’m not holding my breath that today’s elites can do the same.

    Worst case scenario, this country is a shambling and crumbling neo-liberal zombie that refuses to accept populist reform, and we eventually enter a period of being an ugly and chaotic place beyond even the late 19th century (when vigilante mobs were common and authority was regarded as unreliable and corrupt).

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  81. “Of legally domiciled populations?”

    The constitution is not a universal document. It was written by US citizens and intended soley to address the issues of US citizens. No it does not include all “free” persons. Nonsense. The census is intended to document the number of people under US jurisdiction as citizens.

    Illegal immigrants are not included in that process. What the previous census tells us is that those here illegally are bold enough to say so.

  82. ” Well, it’s not our problem. We didn’t worship money and excess, and “de-regulation”, like the 30 and 40 something sociopaths who took over society in the 80’s”

    No one and no one is forcing the youth of today to make choices that are harmful to them. We all inherent what ails and what heals of previous generations — it is your problem.

  83. Feryl says:
    @Lot

    Beginning with Carter, each president has been worse on immigration than the previous one (in Carter’s term, we began to average about 500,000 legal arrivals per year (a number rarely exceeded from the 1930’s-early 70’s); under Reagan we averaged 600,000 by his 2nd term, and under GHW Bush we hit 1 million. The GOP faction which first pushed “de-regulation” in the 70’s and 80’s is still setting the ideological tone for the party; throw bones to the base on cultural issues (guns and abortion) while doing nothing WRT econ populism (which includes lower immigration levels). The GOP has looked the other way for 40 years while business owners in conservative industries (such as construction and agriculture) have driven up profits by employing foreign labor.

    Many conventional modern conservatives have to resort to screeching about “illegals” in order to disguise the fact that the Reaganite GOP is abysmal on defending America from invaders, as is evidenced by insane levels of legal immigration that could be quickly reformed were elites interested in doing the right thing. People soured on the New Deal in the late 70’s and 80’s, and as such, we began to de-regulate the borders during that time (even during the 60’s, relatively few immigrants came here, and not that many of them were illegal, either; it’s only been during the GOP’s dominance since the late 70’s that pandering to business owners takes priority over defending ordinary workers and thus we adopted open borders beginning in the late 70’s. New Dealers Dukakis and Mondale wouldn’t have been able to close the borders back up (since America in the 80’s was becoming so corrupt), however I seriously doubt they would’ve pulled the shit that GHW Bush pulled starting in 1989 (it was the Bushes who completely annihilated what was left of New Deal era America with the 1990 immigration act and NAFTA).

    • Agree: Lot, Anounder
  84. @Feryl

    The generations born in the 1930’s-1960’s grew up with these stern moral watchdogs, who did not tolerate public displays of deviance and did not want everything to be “de-regulated”.

    Yeah, right. The “generation” that made Playboy a best seller, and pioneered no-fault divorce.

    http://www.playboyenterprises.com/about/history/

    • Replies: @Feryl
    , @Feryl
  85. Feryl says:
    @asdfasdf

    Their black/female/gay cards got yanked as soon as they opposed the left. Just like with union members many years ago after the Hard Hat Riots, which was roughly the point at which the left switched from economic to cultural Marxism. After this incident, union members were no longer good because they weren’t reliable leftist votes.

    Leftists of all stripes at least believed in something halfway earnest and noble in the early 70’s. It wasn’t until the late 70’s that people began pushing the idea of withdrawal from active participation in movements designed to improve and cleanse society. The disco era, basically. Work hard and party harder, don’t let anyone tell you what to do with your money or your body, revel in what you do and don’t be too discouraged by the rising examples of corruption and perversion (like state run lotteries becoming mainstream, and mergers and acquisitions, and rich people spending more and more on themselves after their taxes get cut).

    Certainly, in most respects the Western world in the early 70’s was a much better place than the corrupt dystopia we now live in.

  86. Feryl says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Who does lots of drugs? Who is obese? Who has totally failed to regulate the markets over the last 40 years?

    In 1980, it wasn’t 60 or 70 year old people demanding that all restraints on behavior be ripped out. And even the Silent Gen (those born in the late 20’s and 30’s) had the decency to not start the obesity epidemic (that would be the Boomers who couldn’t stop stuffing their faces). Most states did not have state lotteries before the mid-80’s; by the mid-80’s, we had middle aged Boomers who thought it was “stuffy” and “old-fashioned” to treat gambling like a degenerate activity that ought to be kept on the margins.

    Into the 1980’s, not a whole lot of money was spent on “lobbying”; when the Boomers assumed most leadership in the 90’s, during the Clinton era, that’s when serious levels of open corruption became a big problem (older generations, during the New Deal era, at least had the decency to keep their corruption a shameful secret as much as possible, lest we send the message that it’s “cool” to pile up tons of money).

    Lastly, there’s the sheer size of the Boomer generation; by the mid-90’s, one could not do anything in this country without getting the approval of Boomers first. The Boomers wanted, and got, the total de-regulation of the markets in the 1990’s. They wanted to annihilate private sector unions, and that’s what we got by the 90’s. Gen X has had very little power, partly due to small numbers, but also because they just didn’t not want to deal with arrogant Boomers.

    X-ers and Millennials don’t divorce at the same rate as Boomers. Many are not even getting married, in the first place, because they understand the risks of trying to start a family (after so many Silents and Boomers got divorces).

    Oh, and 50 year old people don’t commit street crime. It was people born in the 1940’s-70’s who sent crime rates to record levels in the late 70’s-early 1990’s. But at least Gen X has decided to grow up after they made a mess during their youth.

    • Replies: @Thea
    , @Kronos
  87. @George

    Reading that op-Ed makes me want to hoist Mencken’s Black Flag.

  88. Feryl says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Midnight Cowboy was given an “X” rating, in 1969, because the aged censors were so disturbed by the candid portrayal of urban homosexuals. Older generations, in the 1970’s and 80’s, reported being against drugs and homosexuality, according to the General Social Survey. That obscenity and deviance could be seen in the media of the 70’s and 80’s says more about the tastes (and lifestyles) of Boomer audiences than anything else.

    Once Boomers became the primary writers in Hollywood, in the 1990’s, obscene language soared in scripts. Evidently it’s just too “square” to be more erudite.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  89. @Feryl

    Somewhere right now in the dachas along the Black Sea coast, a lot of retired Soviet Red Army officers and military planners are really kicking themselves.

    Turns out that, in order to invade and conquer America, you didn’t need armies, tanks, and nuclear bombs.

    All you had to do to take over America was sneak in and do the dishes.

    • LOL: Harry Baldwin
  90. Feryl says:

    The General Social Survey has a question about whether you think it should be permissible for homosexuals to teach children. This survey asked elderly people, middle aged people, and young people. Sure enough, due to GIs and Silents, Americans tended to be skeptical regarding gays back in the 70’s.

    It doesn’t matter how embarrassed and defensive Boomers get, people aren’t going to buy that society decayed because of people born in 1900 or 1920.

  91. Anonymous[183] • Disclaimer says:
    @Feryl

    The elites of the 1920’s had the good sense to begin reform several years before an econ crisis broke out;

    Actually, the accepted wisdom among economists nowadays is that the immigration cut-off directly caused the crash and depression.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    , @Mr. Anon
  92. Thea says:
    @Feryl

    White boomers & gen x voted hugely for Trump. This isn’t their fault. In the 60s half of the boomers were still kids and none were yet societal leaders.

    People in each generation turned their back on Jesus Christ in search of freedom and created Hell on earth.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    , @Reg Cæsar
  93. Sucky says:

    It was amusing watching Dan Savage stop pretending to like black communities in the wake of 2008’s proposition 8.

  94. Michael S says:

    It’s definitely the latter: women and nonwhites good because Democrat. For proof, witness how quickly one of them is excommunicated and character-assassinated if they go rogue and vote R. Whereas, at least until very recently, white men like Joe Biden could get away with pretty much anything as long as they were D.

  95. @Feryl

    Places change demographically; that’s life and that’s history.

    The migrant peoples currently swamping American society were not even a blip on the radar screen before Hart-Celler. It’s not something that happened organically or spontaneously. It’s the direct result of deliberate policy.

  96. @Feryl

    I can’t emphasize enough what a dead end it is, to most Americans, to dwell on racial demographics and cultural issues. That lead to a racial spoils mentality, and trust me, many ethnic groups (least of all blacks) do not want policy decided on the alleged cultural and racial interests of whites.

    You sound like someone who needs to go back.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  97. Feryl says:
    @Thea

    White boomers & gen x voted hugely for Trump. This isn’t their fault. In the 60s half of the boomers were still kids and none were yet societal leaders.

    Get over the 60’s, man. Measures of corruption became substantially worse in the 80’s and 90’s, when the nutty youth cohorts of the 60’s and 70’s begin rising through our institutions. Bad enough that the youth of the 60’s and 70’s was sleeping with everything that moved, and smoking whatever they could get their hands on; worse was when the Sixties generation (and the Seventies generation) actually took on…..Leadership of society. Uh-huh. After insisting that what they did to their bodies was nobody else’s business but their own in the 60’s and 70’s, they then insisted after 1984 that what people did with their money was nobody else’s business but their own. Are you surprised that political and financial corruption has become so abysmal, with this sort of attitude?

    And what, we aren’t supposed to hold 55-75 year old people responsible for what’s happened under their management over the last 30 years? Are you kidding me? Are we supposed to just pretend that the power baton was passed from people born in 1920 to people born in 1980?

    • Replies: @Kronos
  98. Kronos says:
    @stillCARealist

    There’s a book called “Hot Money: the politics of debt” its a bit old, last edition was in 2003. Talks about international cash flows and money laundering.

  99. Kronos says:
    @Feryl

    The Baby Boomers were the biggest generation in US history. Between 75-90 Million people. Gen X was only around 40 million, very small due to the 30-45 million abortions that happened between the 1960s-1980s. My guess major immigration was required to make the math for the boomer entitlements work. (Or at least feasible until the 2030s then it’ll implode.) By that time, the majority of Boomers will be dead.

  100. Kronos says:
    @Feryl

    If you want to read a book that’s real nasty on Baby Boomers, it’s called “Generation of Sociopaths.” If you want to get your Boomer hate on, please read it.

    • Replies: @SFG
    , @Reg Cæsar
  101. @Thea

    Anyone who takes these pop-demography categories seriously cannot be taken seriously himself. Whoever obsesses over them as Feryl does probably has “Œdipal” issues.

    • Replies: @SFG
    , @Kronos
  102. @istevefan

    Great comment, iSteveFan!

    Can I borrow this for Peak Stupidity?

    • Replies: @istevefan
  103. @Arclight

    Also, homos like negroes but negroes do not like homos.

    That sets up an amusing sort of opposition now and then.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7172953/A-rattled-Mayor-Pete-branded-traitor-heckled-fiery-town-hall-meeting.html

  104. SFG says:
    @Kronos

    ‘Generation of Sociopaths’ is a little harsh. The boomers blew it, but it’s not entirely their fault, and anyway it’s tricky to assign ‘fault’ to millions of people. What about all the boomers who *didn’t* blow it, and played by the old rules?

    I *would* say that when the old conservative virtues of dignity, loyalty, and authority (hat tip to Haidt) began to be denigrated and rule-breaking became ‘cool’, you tended to see a lot more selfish behavior. That’s more a matter of ignoring tradition and tearing down Chesterton’s fence, though. I don’t think everyone’s moral centers suddenly disappeared due to environmental toxins.

    The thing is, morality is pretty social among humans; other cultures have tolerated all kinds of stuff like human sacrifice and genocide that we find abhorrent. So if you don’t teach it, you’re stuck with the sort of ‘makes me feel bad’-type stuff that defaults to human empathy. Since most people are not, in fact, sociopaths, they still feel bad if they hurt someone, but you can tolerate a lot more in service of ideals like self-expression on a micro level (breaking up a 20-year marriage because you need to find yourself) or the free market and globalization on a macro level (shipping jobs overseas).

    Similarly, woke millennials tweeting about how asking them where they’re from is ‘violence’ are the result of helicopter parenting where all forms of adversity are removed, leading to extreme responses when mild stressors occur, combined with being launched into a lousy job market with heavy debts and high housing prices that make raising kids financially dicey, so there’s nothing to do but play video games and complain on Twitter. I don’t like the kids and wouldn’t dare tell a joke to them, but I can’t really blame them for turning out like that.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    , @Kronos
    , @Logan
  105. @Feryl

    Virtually all of the blame you lavish upon today’s old people–most of whom had absolutely nothing to do with the direction society took–would be more accurately laid at the doorstep of our nation’s ‘cultural elite’ who actually steered society with their domination of the media, commerce, and institutions. But you studiously avoid that, for some reason. Enjoy your hatred–it really doesn’t affect anyone but yourself.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  106. @TomSchmidt

    The Baby Boom happened during the great immigration moratorium. With pressure from immigrant workers removed, wages rose, allowing the population then to afford more children. I think it’s not coincidental that the powers that be increased immigration the year after the end of the boom: their model of wealth requires ever-larger populations at the bottom of the pyramid.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but America ascended to its position of world domination during the ‘great immigration moratorium’. Living standards increased dramatically, and optimism was not only widespread, it was justified.

    Incidentally, I wonder how many people in 1964 were thinking that a boom was ending, or that a supposed generational cusp had just been transcended.

  107. SFG says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    There are real differences between generations, and they often do get into generational power struggles (look at Greatest-Boomers back in the 1960s or Boomers-Millenials now). I agree it’s often oversold as (1) these things are clinal–generations fade into each other–and (2) very heterogeneous–there were left-wing GI generation types leading the kids astray, right-wing Boomers who joined the YAF etc., and alt-right (and IDW) Millenials fighting the Great Awokening, and (3) don’t explain *everything*–we had huge economic tailwinds in the 1950s with everyone else bombed to rubble, and from what I can tell a lot of the effects of Hart-Celler were unintended–old-school lunchpail Dem politicians were expecting lots of Irish and Italians.

    (Not that they didn’t seize on it when it happened–since nonwhite people rarely vote GOP, the Dems would have to be fools or very patriotic to walk away from that.)

    People love the One Big Theory that Explains Everything, but the world’s huge and complex.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    , @Feryl
  108. Arclight says:
    @Kronos

    If the GOP could just grab enough blacks to make it so Dems only got 85% of their vote instead of 90%, then it would be in a drastically better position in GA, PA, MI, possibly IL. Probably can’t do much better than that though.

    But the weakest link are Hispanics – the right needs to stop playing the game that the left wants, ie that they are a completely different racial/ethnic group that has its own interests separate from the rest of the country. Many are aspirational, and the right needs to talk in that language and welcome them as part of ‘us’ as opposed to ‘them’ (the black/upper class white coalition). That doesn’t mean it should go soft on illegal immigration either, though and I don’t think there is a huge political penalty for it with Hispanics, at least when it comes to those that are reachable. Basically it’s a variation of the Sailer strategy – make them choose who they want to be associated with. The lowest income ones are natural Democrats, but those with a bit of financial independence aren’t.

  109. @Kronos

    Better yet, you could read the work of Pitirim Sorokin, who placed the critical change in the early Renaissance. That’s when the West went from idealistic to “sensate”.

    Sorokin believed in 600-year cycles, so if he’s right, we’ve about blown our sensate wad and are due to return to an ascetic medievaldom.

    Never mind Gates and Jobs; the one to blame is Gutenberg.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  110. SFG says:
    @Arclight

    I agree, though of course I technically fit your description (though I basically identified as white until constantly reading I wasn’t, and have no non-Levantine non-European ancestors I know of, though I’m not doing 23andme so the company and the government have records of my DNA).

    Bush had gotten up to 40% of the Hispanic vote as I recall, and even Trump got 29%. I agree pulling Hispanics out of the Dem coalition is probably the most effective thing (blacks are pretty hardcore Democrat, and there aren’t enough Asians to make a huge difference). You’ll probably have a better chance after a few years when enough of them make enough money to start voting Republican. You don’t have to get them *all*, just enough to make up for the loss of the woke whites. Hispanics are actually pretty Christian, so Bush’s evangelicalism actually kinda helped.

    If I really wanted to rile up this board I’d say the Breitbart guys should find the three Jewish Hispanic Republicans in America and pay them huge amounts of money to put that verbal IQ writing propaganda arguing Hispanics’ interests lie with assimilation and with conservative values. 😉 Alex and Larry, are you reading this?

    • Replies: @Alec Leamas
    , @Feryl
    , @MBlanc46
  111. @Arclight

    If the GOP could just grab enough blacks to make it so Dems only got 85% of their vote

    They don’t have to get any black votes. They just need to keep blacks away from the other side.

    Since voting third-party is even less popular with blacks than voting GOP, the only thing left is to keep them at home.

    “Democrats say you’re overpaid” might do it, but even if it fails with blacks, it could resonate with other demographics. Hell, Donald Trump is president today just by using a watered-down version of this strategy.

  112. Feryl says:
    @SFG

    very heterogeneous–there were left-wing GI generation types leading the kids astray, right-wing Boomers who joined the YAF etc.,

    What “left” and “right” means can change, often based on the inclinations of a particular person. I think that “populist” as opposed to “elitist”, and social conservative/liberal and economic conservative/liberal are better ways to characterize political beliefs. Nobody believes in every single tenet of fiscal and cultural conservatism, likewise with both forms of liberalism. In Western history, we tend to see that cultural conservatism and economic Leftism seem to align with each other (as recently as the 1970’s, we had economic Leftism as well as middle aged and elderly people who had unfavorable views of pot and gays). “Fiscal conservatism” leads to de-regulation, including de-regulation of behavioral restraints. Thus, after the West had uniformly conformed to neo-liberalism by 1990, so too has cultural Leftism soared in the zeitgeist.

    1930-1980 was a populist, egalitarian era with wholesome values (not counting dopey teenagers, bikers, hippies, heroin addicted beatniks etc.). 1880-1930 was more Social Darwinist, and decadent. The post-1980 neo-liberal era is Social Darwinist and elitist, and surprise surprise, we have lots of gender bending, legalized/open use of often quite dangerous drugs (opioids), high suicide rates, lots of dogs mauling children, and a sense of cultural dissolution (since nobody seems to look out for each other anymore). Admittedly, the youth zeigeist of the late 70’s in particular was terrible, but at least in the 70’s we still had elders who were opposed to drug use. Whereas by the time you get to the 2010’s, the New Deal generations no longer have any influence on mainstream culture, and a lot of people seem disturbingly detached from vice control. Boomers hated vice control in the 70’s and 80’s, so now that they are firmly in a leadership role we see gay marriage being passed, and pot being legalized, and not much done to deal with the opioid epidemic. Mass media is now full of vile language, graphic violence, and gratuitious sex, because the pre-Boomer generations are no longer around to shame decadent Boomers into toning things down. Back in the 80’s and early 90’s, we still had some GIs around to remind us to clean up our act; don’t do drugs, don’t mindlessly attack tradition, be calm and reasonable, and have some damn decorum.

    and alt-right (and IDW) Millenials fighting the Great Awokening, and (3) don’t explain *everything*–we had huge economic tailwinds in the 1950s with everyone else bombed to rubble, and from what I can tell a lot of the effects of Hart-Celler were unintended–old-school lunchpail Dem politicians were expecting lots of Irish and Italians.

    A generation is only as good as the leaders it produces. And on that count, the Boomers are bloody awful. The GIs and Silents had their moments of weakness, but it’s nothing compared to what we’ve seen in the Tony Blair/George W Bush era. Hart-Cellar, like Ron Unz, points out, is frequently mis-characterized. In reality, the US has at various times accepted various waves of non-European immigration. And most studies indicate that the vast majority of current immigrants in America came after the 1990 immigration act was passed (from the 1930’s-early 1970’s, we generally did not permit more than 500,000 people a year to come here; blame the neo-liberals, not the New Dealers, for jacking up immigration once people soured on the New Deal). Also, no piece of legislation has ever mandated that we vacate the border; once the GOP became dominant in the 80’s, illegal border crossings surged, particularly after Reagan’s amnesty was not properly enforced (sanctions against employers were supposed to occur, but were never practically enforced; legislation isn’t the same thing as enforcement).

    People love the One Big Theory that Explains Everything, but the world’s huge and complex.

    True, and there’s lots of stuff happens that’s subject to influence by things that are just, well. beyond our control.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  113. @Corvinus

    Thus, states could exclude illegal aliens from the count. The definition of “total population” would now mean ONLY AMERICAN CITIZENS, not ANY AND ALL PEOPLE AS ENVISIONED BY THE FRAMERS.

    Thank goodness someone said the obvious – THE FRAMERS always intended the United States to have a foreign population within its borders numbering in the tens of millions in contravention of the very laws passed by Congress and the explicit authority to control naturalization granted to Congress in the Constitution. These aliens clearly deserve representation in the United States Congress and via the Electoral College – as THE FRAMERS ENVISIONED.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  114. TWS says:
    @HammerJack

    I’m sick or them making noises about total apportionment. It’s like they’ve forgotten what they used to do with non citizens and the tribes. An illegal is no more submitting himself to US sovreiegnty than an Indian was.

  115. @SFG

    Bush had gotten up to 40% of the Hispanic vote as I recall, and even Trump got 29%. I agree pulling Hispanics out of the Dem coalition is probably the most effective thing (blacks are pretty hardcore Democrat, and there aren’t enough Asians to make a huge difference). You’ll probably have a better chance after a few years when enough of them make enough money to start voting Republican. You don’t have to get them *all*, just enough to make up for the loss of the woke whites. Hispanics are actually pretty Christian, so Bush’s evangelicalism actually kinda helped.

    “We lose money on every sale, but we make up for it with volume!”

  116. Corvinus says:
    @Alec Leamas

    It clearly states in the Constitution that “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State”; thus, there is an explicit requirement for s an “actual Enumeration” of the people.

    Now, if people want to change the Constitution on this matter by way of an amendment, then that is the proper route, one I would support.

    Of course, you entirely glossed over Republican/conservative malfeasance on the matter. I thought you were a “real conservative”.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  117. Feryl says:
    @SFG

    A key thing with Bush is that he was part of the Western libertarian (I know, just bear with me here*) trend favored by the GOP (and the general public) from the 1970’s-2000’s. Hispanics are most important in the Southwest, and a lot of Hispanics considered Bush to be sort of a goofy but generally likable uncle in law.

    *More libertarian than the Rockefeller GOP, or the New Deal Dems.

    Nowadays, The West Coast is very pro-Dem, Colorado has shifted, and the Bush family is a joke, and Reagan has a mediocre at best reputation among the dissident/Millennial/Gen Z Right. The rise of the Wisconsin GOP in national circles, the rise of Trump etc. indicates that GOP momentum is beginning to tilt away from the Western US, if even gradually, is certainly something that nobody could’ve seen coming in the 1980’s (when agriculture, energy, logging, and the military dominated the Western US, and from 1980-1988, only 4 Western states voted for the Democrat in the general election).

  118. Corvinus says:
    @Feryl

    “And on that count, the Boomers are bloody awful.”

    They are nowhere near as bad as you think.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  119. Feryl says:
    @SFG

    –old-school lunchpail Dem politicians were expecting lots of Irish and Italians.

    Hart Cellar didn’t demand that we import any particular group. It was up to our officials and law enforcement to act as they saw fit. And prior to the beginnings of neo-liberalism under Carter (and Thatcher, and God knows all the other clowns elected to office in the neo-liberal era), we didn’t admit that many people.

    And Ted Kennedy was right; we didn’t import legions of people from the teeming nations of Asia and Africa immediately after the act was passed. Rather, that would come under George HW Bush’s intensification of globalism. Global capital, in the corrupt neo-liberal era, wants demographic chaos to ensure more cheap labor.

    1990-2000 was the tipping point (most American states had their traditional demographics intact during the 70’s and 80’s).

    Do the screeching haters of Hart-Cellar realize how delusional they sound to anyone who actually remembers the 60’s and 70’s? Our streets weren’t crawling with foreigners until the mid-90’s, in many regions of the country.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  120. Feryl says:
    @Mr McKenna

    They had “nothing to do with” levels of youth crime and drug abuse soaring in the 70’s, and “nothing to do with” with whining that unions were ruining America in the 70’s and 80’s (gee, thanks for giving corporate America what it wanted), and “nothing to do with” America’s waist-line expanding by 8% in the 1980’s.

    Get real; most Boomers actually enjoyed the 70’s and 80’s, only to start to feel shame and regret when they saw how wretched the American family had become (mommy and daddy are too busy working to make sure Jr. isn’t staring at the TV, watching MTV or playing Nintendo, for hours on end), and they saw their own prematurely aged faces staring back at them, and heard the doctor tell them about their STDs, heart-disease, diabetes, etc.

    While you Boomers throw pity parties about how you were “betrayed”, how ’bout some compassion for what later generations had to deal with. Do you think X-ers enjoyed being the most aborted and abused generation in American history? At least X-ers had an excuse for causing trouble.

  121. Feryl says:
    @SFG

    I *would* say that when the old conservative virtues of dignity, loyalty, and authority (hat tip to Haidt) began to be denigrated and rule-breaking became ‘cool’, you tended to see a lot more selfish behavior. That’s more a matter of ignoring tradition and tearing down Chesterton’s fence, though. I don’t think everyone’s moral centers suddenly disappeared due to environmental toxins.

    Certainly, after the Boomers had destroyed any respect for behavioral restraints in the late 60’s and 70’s, perhaps it was not a good idea to listen to them in the 80’s and 90’s when they applied the same “liberation” to the “free” market. As JH Kunstler says (himself a Boomer), “anything goes, and nothing matters”. Greed and cultural dissolution reign supreme.

    Maybe it’s inevitable that these trends happen, but did we have to be sanctimoniously told that anyone who opposes this decline in standards is an enemy of “freedom” and “individualism”?

  122. Feryl says:
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    I have blonde hair and grey eyes, and have some ancestors who were original settlers of the South. That doesn’t change the fact that “fighting fire with fire” against Left ID politics won’t work very well, since it will just poison the atmosphere. Telling people that their life will be objectively better (with econ statistics) if they unite with other American natives to oppose open borders is the approach we should take.

    On the academic Left (not the media Left, or cultural Left, or in the tech industry), there are more than a few people who’ve said that the calm and egalitarian mood of the New Deal era was made possible by immigration being a settled issue after 1924. These people on the Left aren’t crowing about ID politics of any type, but rather, in the best tradition of populist Leftism, are recognizing the objective reality that society is calmer and more productive when we aren’t arguing about whether to keep importing tons of culture changing immigrants.

    The Reaganite/neo-liberal Right has no concern whatsover with objective reality,because of course they say that the Dem dominated New Deal era was full of horrible things that no decent person wants. Yeah, sure, it was so horrible to have investment in manufacturing and infrastructure, and so horrible to censor obscenity, and so horrible to have such a strong middle class.

    The neo-liberals don’t care about recognizing the objective reality that the West has fallen on it’s cultural and economic ass, because in this era people are encouraged to be actively corrupt, dishonest, and delusional. At the same time, the cultural right needs to hit the breaks on the idea that the only reason the New Deal era was desirable was because of racial demographics. That’s a nasty and divisive road to go down, and no better than the cultural Left disdaining that era for the same reason.

    • Agree: Desiderius
  123. Kronos says:
    @SFG

    It’s actually the title of a book. The author is a tech millionaire neoliberal but the book is surprisingly focused and balanced.

    I have respect for the boomers who voted for Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, Ron Paul, as well as those who voted for Ralph Nader and Bernie Sanders. Those voters often had convictions and an eye on the ball. The problem was that neither could form a political majority against “the Bush Crime Family” or the “Crooked Clintons.” Most people are not sociopaths, but the average boomer allowed both to operate as the “town butcher” to gut US manufacturing and offshore high-paying jobs. This was mainly done to increase boomer 401ks and artificially raise the stock market via capital gains. The majority of US industries are undercapitalized, and workers possess ever-diminishing purchasing power. The Boomer electorate cushioned themselves by synchronizing the tax system to their life cycle. While commencing with major job offshoring only once obtaining yuppie management positions. The culture wars were just that, culturally based. Both Bush and Clinton economic/foreign policies were strikingly similar.

  124. istevefan says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Sure, I take ideas from others all the time. We need to find what works and spread it around. I used that D-Day argument with an older guy, a boomer, and it struck a chord. He is very patriotic and likes to discuss WW2. When I described the daily landings and the accumulation of a million man army on Germany’s western front in the span of a month, he seemed to understand what I had been getting at with immigration.

    Here is the link to those landing statistics.

    The total troops, vehicles and supplies landed over the period of the invasion were:

    By the end of 11 June (D + 5), 326,547 troops, 54,186 vehicles and 104,428 tons of supplies.[25]
    By 30 June (D+24) over 850,000 men, 148,000 vehicles, and 570,000 tons of supplies.[24]
    By 4 July one million men had been landed.[26]

  125. Corvinus says:
    @Feryl

    “That obscenity and deviance could be seen in the media of the 70’s and 80’s says more about the tastes (and lifestyles) of Boomer audiences than anything else.”

    Actually what it says is that repressed sexual attitudes cane out of the closet (heh). Recall that the Hays Code was put in specifically to rein in any “immoral urges” by the audience. Drug use and sex outside of marriage happened with more frequency than you think prior to the 1960’s. It’s just that people kept it “on the down low”. Even the American GIs were told to “wrap it up”, as the young men were basking in the glow of Parisian hookers or the Me Love You long time girls of the South Pacific.

  126. Kronos says:
    @Arclight

    I understand it’s a bit of a “fools-gold” operation; trying to get blacks to vote republican. It always looks promising but never seems to pan out. (No pun intended.) But what about just having them so disgusted by democratic candidates they don’t vote at all. Focus on the Labor-Liberal Party split like in England?

    Steve Sailer’s analysis on the Barack Obama vs. Bobby Rush campaign might hold some insights.

  127. Daniel H says:
    @Arclight

    >>But the weakest link are Hispanics – the right needs to stop playing the game that the left wants, ie that they are a completely different racial/ethnic group that has its own interests separate from the rest of the country.

    What, pick up the latino vote by increasing the volume? You don’t have a grasp of elementary mathematics do you? Unless the GOP can secure 51% of the latino vote (absurdly unlikely) then every new 100 latino voters means the GOP loses by 1 vote out of that cohort, all the time, forever. And it only takes 1 vote to lose.

    Latinos, blacks, Africans, Arabs,Pakis, Jews, Asians (south Asians, east Asians, jungle Asians, no matter), comprise national voting blocks. They are not like the majority of white people. They don’t reason with abstract issues of governance. They are looking for gimmees and goodies. The threshold that they give to the left varies little year to year. Each one of these blocks grants a solid majority to the Democrat. This will always be the case. They will never grant less than 70% of their aggregate voting count to the Democrats. Never. This never ending flow of migrants not on spells the end of the Republican party (good riddance) but – someday – the ability of whites to control our affairs in this country. Math, you should try it sometime.

  128. Corvinus says:
    @Feryl

    Boomer Hate is overrated. Each succeeding generation tends to believe that their predecessor was individualist, selfish, cynical, pessimistic, narcissistic, and/or socially responsible. You’re like Vox Day on acid when it comes to blaming Boomers for everything wrong with the world. But perhaps Jews in this apparent ass clown world which we live in would end up on top for creating our current havoc. Then again, I thought it was educated females with the right to vote who ruin everything. Or was it cucks and anti-whites with their unwillingness to procreate more than two offspring and their knack for supporting vibrants and their sportsball activities.

    I need a scorecard to keep up with which group of people is to blame for America’s predicament.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  129. Kronos says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    Not quite, by 1965 the U.S. had a population of around 193 million. The Baby Boomers were between 75-90 million depending if you include the WWII war babies. That’s a substantial number especially if you consider that the GIs were only 25 million. During the 1960s they essentially became outnumbered and lost control of there kids.

    Everyone else has been trying to reign them in ever since.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  130. MBlanc46 says:

    Minor correction: The Three-Fifths Clause gave slave-owners three-fifths more representation.

    • Replies: @Logan
  131. MBlanc46 says:
    @Daniel H

    It would be hard to find a more deserving bunch for oblivion than the Repubs.

  132. MBlanc46 says: • Website
    @Arclight

    Let them be aspirational in Mexico, or Honduras, or Guatemala, or wherever the hell they come from. The Dems aren’t importing them by the million because they’re “natural conservatives”.

  133. MBlanc46 says:
    @SFG

    You lot have the southwest and a good part of the southeast. I and a lot of others are resigned to writing those parts of the country off. They’re lost. Is there no part of the nation that my ancestors built that you’re willing to let me have?

    • Replies: @SFG
  134. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Arclight

    You could ask this question about any of the Democrats running – the Democrats have set things up so that blacks are an essential constituency for the primaries, so there is a lot of pandering aimed at blacks that they will never follow through on. And why not? The black voter is the most reliably partisan in the entire country and despite half a century of Democrats not really delivering anything that materially improves the lives of black citizens, 90% will vote for them in the general election regardless.

    This is the best demonstration of the “blacks in general are not very bright” hypothesis in politics we have. The Dems actually do very little for blacks. Most black pols are either too stupid or too shortsightedly corrupt to do anything very effective. Blacks vote how they are told to vote.

    They obey the Big Man.

    We see this in the operation of black churches. I worked 5 days a week in a small town 2 hours north of my city for a one month temp gig that stretched into three years. They had two black churches. There was exactly one S-Class Mercedes sedan in town and one of the preachers drove it. The other settled for a pretty nicely reworked late 60s Cadillac, but he went to London for his suits.

    The GOP could win the black vote by buying off all the Big Men, but that would send a fair number of white voters to third party voting. No one wants that. And the Big Men are more expensive than you’d think. White voters are what the GOP needs, anyway, not blacks. The more the Dems are considered the Black Party, the better.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  135. Logan says:
    @SFG

    the decadent late 19th and early 20th century

    They were?

    Things did indeed start falling apart in the 20s, but prior to that things were remarkably strait-laced.

    For instance, resort hotels used to have “house detectives,” whose job largely consisted of trying to catch people who weren’t married engaged in “improper activities.” It was quite common for the hotels to dox those caught in their hometown newspapers, part of their attempt to maintain their status as a “respectable hotel.”

    Interestingly, both men and women were thus treated, indicating that this period was probably the closest we ever came to getting rid of the “double standard” by imposing sexual morality on men rather than be encouraging women to become immoral.

    I think this period was the most moral in a sexual sense in our history.

  136. Logan says:
    @MBlanc46

    The Three-Fifths Clause gave slave-owners three-fifths more representation.

    Depends how you look at it. Slave-owners wanted slaves to be fully counted for purposes of representation, so they viewed the clause as a reduction in the representation of their states.

    This of course bears some relationship to the idea by some on the right that only citizens should be counted for purposes of representation, which to be fair won’t fly constitutionally. The Constitution is pretty clear on the point.

    I wouldn’t object to an amendment instituting such a policy, though this is of course quite impossible.

  137. Anon[343] • Disclaimer says:

    The problem with the Boomers is twofold. Firstly, they’re “Dr. Spock’s children”–the first generation of Westerners to be raised without any discipline–because disciplining children is “fascist” and will turn the little tykes into new Hitlers.

    Secondly, the Boomers were the first (and will be the last) generation of Westerners who believe what they see on television. And this is still as true today as it was in the 1950s. They’re completely hypnotised by that flickering tube. It’s the Voice of God to them.

    • Agree: Kronos
  138. Mr. Anon says:

    “…and integrate into it, while still holding onto and bringing some of their own loveliness.”

    Some of that Congolese loveliness:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_the_Congo_Civil_War_(1993%E2%80%9394)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_the_Congo_Civil_War_(1997%E2%80%9399)

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

    Oh, hell, I’m running out of space, so here’s a summary:

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

    Isn’t it all so lovely?

  139. Mr. Anon says:
    @Corvinus

    It clearly states in the Constitution that “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State”; thus, there is an explicit requirement for s an “actual Enumeration” of the people.

    “People” meant “Citizens”, you stupid nincompoop. Else they might have written the preamble of the Constitution thus:

    We the People of the United States, who just happen to be here even if they entered the country illegally hiding in the back of a poulty truck, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our anybody’s Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  140. Mr. Anon says:
    @Corvinus

    I need a scorecard to keep up with which group of people is to blame for America’s predicament.

    Looking in the mirror might give you a hint, nitwit.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  141. Mr. Anon says:
    @Feryl

    Do the screeching haters of Hart-Cellar realize how delusional they sound to anyone who actually remembers the 60’s and 70’s? Our streets weren’t crawling with foreigners until the mid-90’s, in many regions of the country.

    That’s a ridiculous assertion. Hart-Cellar abolished the national origins criteria for immigrants, which made possible the inundation of the US with people from the third world – people from everywhere actually. The fact that it didn’t happen overnight doesn’t mean that Hart Cellar wasn’t largely responsible. The effect of a policy can’t be judged the day after it is enacted. It often takes years for its effects to be seen. That’s why willy-nilly changing laws can be very dangerous.

    I remember America in the 70s, and it looked very different than it does now. And Hart Cellar is a big part of the reason why.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    , @(((Owen)))
  142. Mr. Anon says:
    @Anonymous

    Actually, the accepted wisdom among economists nowadays is that the immigration cut-off directly caused the crash and depression.

    I’ve never heard this contention before. Care to cite some of these economists? Or are we to assume that you just made it up.

    Not that I especially care what the accepted wisdom among economists is. Are these the same economists who think that the law of supply and demand doesn’t apply to wages. and who think that the population of a country can increase without limit?

  143. Seneca44 says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    A good read that proposes just that scenario set in 2029 is “The Mandibles” by Lionel Schriver. Mexican president gets elected in US and defaults on debts.

  144. Seneca44 says:
    @Arclight

    A little OT, but I think a strategy to stand out in the running of 25+ Dem candidates is for one of them to reasonably oppose reparations. There are plenty of reasons which could be calmly elucidated if one can stand the shrieking in the background. There are even some reasonable blacks who realize that reparations is a really dumb idea. Bill Clinton did this successfully with Sister Souljah in his first presidential run. Of course, it is a little different in the Dem primary than the general election against an evil Republican. Still, it would be different enough to get some journalistic ink and, as Trump proves in spades, there is no such thing as bad publicity as long as they spell your name right.

  145. Corvinus says:
    @Mr. Anon

    ““People” meant “Citizens”, you stupid nincompoop.”

    Actually, people referred to as people. Remember the 3/5 Compromise, friend?

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  146. @Anonymous

    Mass immigration + the wokedammerung makes Ds as the Black Party strategy obsolete.

    Leveraging Black disgust with the perfidy of woke whites is a more promising strategy.

    https://www.the-american-interest.com/2018/05/24/atonement-as-activism/

  147. Olorin says:

    > Emily Badger

    Sorry, but I can never get any further than that byline without thinking of…

    As per:
    https://www.emilyslist.org/candidates/donna-shalala-20

  148. SFG says:
    @MBlanc46

    All of it, actually.

    The point is to bring as many Hispanics as possible into a pro-white coalition and assimilate them, thus maintaining a white-ish majority.

    It’s either that or have three groups neither of whom has a majority, and then you have the risk of a black-Hispanic alliance as the Dems are trying to build, and that way lies either of the chaos of Brazil or South Africa, Zimbabwe, and similar horrors.

    What else? Ethnic cleansing? I doubt much would be left of the country after that. NSA and everyone else: I think this is a really, really bad idea.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
  149. Mr. Anon says:
    @Corvinus

    Actually, people referred to as people. Remember the 3/5 Compromise, friend?

    No, you idiot, it says “persons”, and those persons were slaves – i.e. expressly NOT considered citizens.

    You are not my friend. My friends aren’t stupid a**holes.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  150. Feryl says:
    @Kronos

    In the 1950’s, a study showed that most neighborhoods had like 1 teenage babysitter for every 5 or 6 Boomer children. Teenagers did lots of baby sitting in the 50’s and 60’s.

    WRT war babies, they were very culturally influential because they generally were considered qualified leaders and mentors by Boomers. The war babies have been perhaps as influential to the “modern” West as the actual Boomers. But that doesn’t absolve Boomers, in the sense that the Boomers bought into the dopiest stuff promoted by the war babies.

    Another thing about the war babies is that they mostly didn’t have Boomer children; rather it was Gen X who were the children of the war babies. Most Boomers had GI or early Silent parents; this is who they speak of when they talk about the “older generation”.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  151. Feryl says:
    @Mr. Anon

    That’s a ridiculous assertion. Hart-Cellar abolished the national origins criteria for immigrants, which made possible the inundation of the US with people from the third world – people from everywhere actually. The fact that it didn’t happen overnight doesn’t mean that Hart Cellar wasn’t largely responsible.

    The morons in our leadership class who decided, in the late 1980’s-present, to destroy the middle class and deepen Pax American by jacking up immigration rates to absurd levels are the one who are responsible for the current mess. This would’ve happened in the absence of Hart-Cellar, too. The 1986 immigration act was supposed to include sanctions against employers, but guess what? The authorities did no enforcement, and thus the era of open borders began in earnest. Legislation is not the same thing as enforcement. Currently we have widespread insurrection against federal immigration laws, and countless politicians/regulators/judges are doing nothing to stop this.

    I just can’t get ignore the well-reasoned argument that conservatives obsessively focus on Hart-Cellar for reasons of base partisanship, and to desperately conceal the fact that global-capital is responsible for gutting the middle class since the 1980’s. Not every Democrat was perfect in the 1930’s-70’s, but they did far less damage to this country than the post-Reagan GOP has. Deal with it.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Kronos
  152. Mr. Anon says:
    @Feryl

    Simpson-Mazoli dealt with illegal immigration – a big problem, but not the only one. Legal immigration is a big problem too, and that problem was created by Hart Cellar. In favoring family reunification, HC made things worse for the illegal immigration problem too.

    I just can’t get ignore the well-reasoned argument that conservatives obsessively focus on Hart-Cellar for reasons of base partisanship, and to desperately conceal the fact that global-capital is responsible for gutting the middle class since the 1980’s. Not every Democrat was perfect in the 1930’s-70’s, but they did far less damage to this country than the post-Reagan GOP has. Deal with it.

    I don’t need lectures from somebody who appears to be historically ignorant. Perhaps mathematically ignorant too. And nobody here defends the GOP on its immigration record, a fact you would know if you had spent any time here.

  153. @HammerJack

    I go to Laredo relatively frequently. But I’ve been around it all of my life. Two decades ago, you’d walk through a store and hear nothing but Spanish, but now, like I said, a couple talk between themselves, and to their children, in English. I was away, but moved back, and it was a big eye opener for me.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
  154. @stillCARealist

    It’s been going on for decades. I’m not sure if it’s a true analoge to China, but it’s there. A bunch of the 3/2, and 4/2, house suburbs are Mexican owned(not just in Laredo, but all around the border), as a weekend getaway, but also, they know the hammer may fall at some point, so they have some capital stateside.

  155. Kronos says:
    @Feryl

    The boomers are probably what made them so enthusiastic about abortion. Gen X (non-immigrant) is very small because something between 30-45 abortions took place between the 1960s and 1980s. From what I could gather, the 1970s were the most anti-child decade in a long time.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  156. Kronos says:
    @Feryl

    It’s a good point, the rise of the neocons and neoliberals came with opening the flood gates. In many ways those two groups were a political singularity. I’ve always been curious if you can successfully test for a true republican by if his house (or houses) are in a rural or urban location. (I understand many Jews were neocons and many Jews live in cities.) The 1970s and 1980s were a lousy and dangerous time to live in the big cities. Black crime was essentially a city-killer, a neo-Confederate bioweapon of truly WMD proportions.

    Anyway, I wonder if they opened the gates mainly for the purpose of low-grade “blood transfusions” to stabilize and revitalize the cities. Steve Sailer and Ron Unz often touch on this in various articles. After dealing with blacks, every other group looks like a solid 10! If this is true, never trust a urban republican! They want their property values to rise and curse rural residents with their 6th generation welfare recipients.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  157. @South Texas Guy

    That’s amazing. Sounds like we have more Spanish speaking up north than you have down there. Along with a hundred other languages, of course.

  158. @Wilkey

    In Sweden, the Somalis of Minnesota have been touted as a success story, because their unemployment rate is a lot lower than of Somalis in Sweden.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  159. @SFG

    Americans vs anti-Americans.

    It’s so easy even Republicans can’t screw it up.

  160. Feryl says:
    @GermanReader2

    America is much better at integrating immigrants because we have such a “loose” culture, even though Jews complain that WASPs didn’t have any fun for 250 years. Europe is much more conservative, from the standpoint of certain ideas and customs staying in place for eons. European natives just don’t know how to adjust their culture and temperament to be more welcoming of new people and ideas.

    New World people like to travel to Europe and enjoy the “charms” of a way of life, and a way of acting, that are far removed from New World norms of hedonism and individualism. But in modern Europe, there’s a big clash right now between the old ways and the new ways brought by Muslims. I don’t think Europe is ever going to be as flexible as America is.

    • Replies: @GermanReader2
  161. Feryl says:
    @Kronos

    Abortion went way up after Roe V Wade; I don’t think we have very accurate measures of pre-1972 abortions, simply because abortion in most cases was illegal back then. The birth rate gradually declined as the 60’s and 70’s went on, bottoming out around 1977. In 70’s movies, adults being unrepentantly hostile to bratty kids wasn’t that unusual. Neil Howe says that apartments banning children became more common as the 70’s went on, which gradually reversed in the 80’s. He also says that the Germans invented a word to describe the hostility that young and middle aged adults expressed toward kids in the 70’s.

  162. Feryl says:
    @Kronos

    In the 70’s and 80’s, some on the “conservative” spectrum openly admitted that they wanted to bring America and Latin America closer together, as they despised the New Deal model of white and black blue collar workers voting Dem as the borders stayed shut.

    So yes, the, ahem, problematic idea of flooding America with non-black foreigners is something that the modern GOP never really fought, as they had no love for the traditional Americans who voted for FDR 4 times in a row. But many modern Republicans play dumb about this, somehow forgetting that their own party hated everything about the New Deal era (which guys like Pat Buchanan wanted to preserve, but the country club yuppies felt red-hot rage over the cultural and economic stability of the mid-20th century), and only conformed to it for the sake of political survival. When Goldwater ran in 1964, he got destroyed by a populace that still wanted a strong middle class and cultural stability. Nixon was the last president we elected who meant business when it came to cultural stability; future presidents would bend the knee to vultures who wanted to pick our bones clean.

    • Replies: @Kronos
  163. @Feryl

    In my opinion the differences in unemployment rate can be attributed to the generosity of the Swedish welfare state and the lower size of the low pay/low skill labor market in Sweden relative to the US.

  164. Corvinus says:
    @Mr. Anon

    You clearly do not understand history, friend.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  165. Svigor says:

    Such as the time-honored Three-Fifths clause that gave slaves three-fifths as much representation.

    I’m not great at writing teh funny, but there’s a joke in there somewhere, about how at least the three-fifths clause gave three-fifths of slaves’ representation to slave-owners, or something.

    But I recently tumbled to how funny the old “dey said we wuz three fufths of a person!” nonsense is, when I realized “where’s the lie tho?”

    Texas itself, in defending its total population formula in the Evenwel case, argued that it should still retain the future right to use eligible voters instead. Other proponents of the idea say that existing maps unfairly reward places with more undocumented immigrants.

    Any change would be particularly meaningful in Texas, where the citizen voting-age population is 10 percentage points more non-Hispanic white than the state as a whole. The citizen voting-age population is also 20 points more white than the state’s child population.

    When you get into the Electoral College aspect of this, it’s clear that it’s in a state’s interest to count total population, legal or otherwise, when tallying their electoral votes. Then it’s in that state’s citizens’ interests to make sure that only the citizen population gets to vote.

    It’s also in a state’s interests to make sure every other state doesn’t get to use its non-citizen population toward EC vote tallying.

    Wow, it’s really a lot like Jewish Supremacy…

  166. Kronos says:
    @Feryl

    Which side do you believe will reclaim this model first? The re-emerging new left or new right? I believe Trump has given the Buchanan/Perot base a head start but who knows what’ll happen in 2024.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  167. Mr. Anon says:
    @Corvinus

    You clearly do not understand history, friend.

    Again – you moronic dips**t: You are not my friend. I am not your friend.

    And you obviously do not understand history. You evidently understand very little, you idiotic dunderhead.

  168. Feryl says:
    @Kronos

    I really don’t know how things will play out, and sadly, the Civil War era and it’s aftermath did not give us a civic re-birth, but one of well-known corruption, and gangland style culture (violent disputes and vigilante murders were fairly common in the late 19th century), that were not fully cleaned up until the Great Depression finally woke people up.

    So it’s suck to say it, but a crisis can expose problems that we are unable or unwilling to solve (as we saw in the Civil War era), or it can be a catalyst for greatness (like the rebellion that gave us the American Revolution era, or the Great Depression giving us the New Deal era).

    Neil Howe says that a particular generation was blamed for the Civil War when it was middle-aged, and then blamed for the cut-throat culture of the post-Civil War era as that generation aged. In a similar way, we could be seeing aging Boomers take the blame for the current crisis era and our subsequent failure to restore pro-social norms and optimism.

  169. @Mr. Anon

    hat’s a ridiculous assertion. Hart-Cellar abolished the national origins criteria for immigrants, which made possible the inundation of the US with people from the third world

    Actually, there was no restriction on immigration levels from Mexico and Central America before Hart-Cellar and it was only Hart-Cellar that imposed limits. And those newly limited areas account for almost all third world immigration before the 1990 Bush Immigration Act opened the doors wide.

    So we should all be grateful for Hart-Cellar.

Current Commenter
says:

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


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?