The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Davos Boss: A Billion African Refugees?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

From Bloomberg:

Davos Boss Warns Refugee Crisis Could Be Precursor to Something Much Bigger
Joe Weisenthal
TheStalwart
January 18, 2016 — 5:11 AM PST

As the crash in commodities prices spreads economic woe across the developing world, Europe could face a wave of migration that will eclipse today’s refugee crisis, says Klaus Schwab, executive chairman of the World Economic Forum.

“Look how many countries in Africa, for example, depend on the income from oil exports,” Schwab said in an interview ahead of the WEF’s 46th annual meeting, in the Swiss resort of Davos. “Now imagine 1 billion inhabitants, imagine they all move north.”

Whereas much of the discussion about commodities has focused on the economic and market impact, Schwab said he’s concerned that it will also spur “a substantial social breakdown.”

A billion African refugees won’t happen in the next few economic cycles, but it’s good that somebody fashionable has at least put the B-Word out there for contemplation.

 
Hide 98 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. A billion African refugees won’t happen in the next few economic cycles,

    Maybe not. But the distance between human particles is shrinking, so who knows what happens when any more. Also, our systems are incredibly scaled and complex, and therefore that much more fragile.

    I’m repeating myself for the umpteenth time: the Syrian Christians I know never saw it coming. Weren’t visiting German warships in British ports a month before WWI? Wasn’t the MBS market still liquid until it proceeded to crash over a four week period?

    What’s stopping a billion Africans from saying to hell with it, I’m walking to Europe to hang out and grope white women on the taxpayer dime? The “refugees” in photographs are wearing weather-appropriate clothing and backpacks. Where are they getting them? Who’s feeding them on their trek? I suspect NGOs are funding every step.

    • Replies: @Polynikes
    It would seem there is some driver besides poverty. Otherwise, everyone would have been here 30years ago.
    , @ben tillman

    What’s stopping a billion Africans from saying to hell with it, I’m walking to Europe to hang out and grope white women on the taxpayer dime?
     
    Nothing is stopping them from saying that, but it's much easier said than done.
  2. The same people saying this is a problem in Africa will tell you it would be a boon to America. But really, Africa refutes a lot of open borders zealots’ arguments:

  3. Where there’s smoke, there is fire…

  4. but just think of the boost in GDP from all those human livestock! Our corporate profits shall grow high!

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-refugee-crisis-will-actually-have-a-sizable-positive-economic-impact-on-european-countries-eu-a6722396.html

    • Replies: @bomag
    It is so good to know that in the press of bodies, the cost, the inconvenience, and the added friction of the teeming masses; there is growth in GDP somewhere. It just makes it all worthwhile. I can't wait for the total industrialization of the womb so we can render all matter into human flesh and have so much GDP growth that we are all in a state of constant ecstasy.

    *Economists at the EU’s executive agency say the large influx of people to the bloc from Syria and other conflict zones is likely having a positive effect on growth, employment rates, and long-term public finances in the most affected countries.*

    When He broke the fifth seal, I heard the creature saying, “Come.” And another, a green horse, went out; and to him who sat on it, it was granted to take wealth from the earth, and that men would grow the precious GDP above all other things, even unto their utter destruction.

    , @backup
    The independent is a Open Borders propaganda outlet, not a newspaper when it comes to migration. See their part in Operation Restore the Narrative:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/cologne-attacks-american-woman-tells-how-syrian-refugees-rescued-her-from-new-years-eve-sexual-a6816221.html

  5. I say go for it. I mean why not? The “slow” trickle of immigrants wasn’t enough to open everyone’s eyes to the damage caused by mass immigration. The flood incited by Angela Merkel & Co. may very well do the trick.

  6. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Someone must do something about the unchecked growth of the culturally inferior untermenschen, ja?

    Seeing as how the dominant powers of the last few centuries achieved and held their dominance by exploiting and enslaving the areas of the world that are currently viewed as inferior, it doesn’t seem fair dinkum to be so opposed to the shoe going on the other foot.

    • Replies: @bomag
    Yeah, that's how it was back in the day; Germans hauling the good roads, machine tools, and pretty women up from the Middle East and Africa. Now the exploited and enslaved are coming to get their things back. Makes perfect sense.
    , @Wilbur Hassenfus
    1. There's one thing common to all human populations that aren't extinct (and quite a few that went extinct anyhow): they'd rather be called hypocritical than go extinct. Sticks and stones and all that.

    Why should I try to please you? What's in that for me? Nothing. Don't be so childish.

    2. We bought or took some raw materials from people too stupid to use them for anything. We created all the value ourselves. Then we turned around and helped those idiots feed themselves, gave them cell phones, foreign aid, blah blah blah. And all the *nice* things we tried to do for them are the whole reason they're even more screwed up than they were on their own. We should have left Malthus in charge. And it's not too late.

    But never mind that. Destroying all the civilized countries won't help anybody, least of all the Orc horde you destroy them with. That's just stupid. You're blinded by malice. Do you really think you're rich and powerful enough to have a decent life in a post-civilized country? You think all the brown people would worship you as the great white benefactor who brought them to the promised land? You poor clown, they'd eat you alive.
    , @anon
    Colonial control of Africa had nothing to do with the dominance of western Europe. That is a myth. In fact the opposite is more likely to be true. The sub-continent owes all its railways to the period of the Raj.
  7. Between this and Mark Steyn’s column today I’m wishing I hadn’t resolved to give up drinking during the week…

    • Replies: @Bill B.
    Read this from David Goldman - you'll be smashing through the doors of the drinks cabinet in no time:

    http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7221/germany-parable
  8. Didn’t you post a bog last week about that George Mason U. professor who had moved to California who was tossing out the “billion” number as far as immigration into the U.S. was concerned? I am appalled by the U.S. having a population of that size just from internal growth. As I have asked repeatedly, why does the country of 330 million, the third highest population in the world after China and India, have to allow any immigration?

  9. They’ve (globalists) turned the corner. They act like it’s our obligation to take any and all immigrants.
    THEY get to decide when and where they go.
    Just say no !
    The “median age” meme is a lie. We don’t need younger workers.
    We need smarter workers. We have enough low IQ welfare drains.

  10. There really is no hope for the future given our present pace. All the trillions of dollars and the resources of human capital that should be devoted towards scientific achievements that could enable the human race to survive are instead going to be spent allowing the least productive and least intelligent among us to thrive.

    I see the end of the world coming as an Easter Island scenario where the world exhausts its final resource bonanza in a Keynesian inspired drive to build a massive stone head to honor the biggest man’s ego. See your quintessential African dictator for an example.

    Perhaps the elites realize this and are trying to maximize the value of their remaining time before the “whole shit house goes down in flames.”

    • Replies: @bomag
    Don't get too gloomy, Yak. The universe is still out there. The scientific discoveries are still there.

    Look at this as a learning experience: we are learning what does not work. In the next iteration, we will do better.
  11. @The Anti-Gnostic

    A billion African refugees won’t happen in the next few economic cycles,
     
    Maybe not. But the distance between human particles is shrinking, so who knows what happens when any more. Also, our systems are incredibly scaled and complex, and therefore that much more fragile.

    I'm repeating myself for the umpteenth time: the Syrian Christians I know never saw it coming. Weren't visiting German warships in British ports a month before WWI? Wasn't the MBS market still liquid until it proceeded to crash over a four week period?

    What's stopping a billion Africans from saying to hell with it, I'm walking to Europe to hang out and grope white women on the taxpayer dime? The "refugees" in photographs are wearing weather-appropriate clothing and backpacks. Where are they getting them? Who's feeding them on their trek? I suspect NGOs are funding every step.

    It would seem there is some driver besides poverty. Otherwise, everyone would have been here 30years ago.

    • Replies: @Old fogey
    Excellent point!!
  12. I propose creating a new charity, the Incentivized Online Nexplanon Foundation.

    Nexplanon is a birth control device the size of a match that is implanted under the skin.

    An independent contractor will:
    – Buy a Nexplanon from the ION Foundation for $500.
    – Download the free ION software onto his phone.

    This software will use the phone’s camera to verify:
    – The Nexplanon was implanted correctly.
    – The woman is in her childbearing years.
    – The woman has not been implanted recently.

    After verification:
    – The ION Foundation will email the contractor $1000.
    – Therefore, the contractor profits by $500.

    Since implantation can be done anywhere in a few minutes, ION would not require a permanent clinic, which might be attacked by mobs.

  13. Can’t anybody look on the bright side?

    Given the animosity between Black Africans and Arabs, the inevitable fights that will break out between the 2 groups in Europe may end up protecting European women.

  14. Whatever happened to “The Environment” ? Might a billion people make a dent? The Leftoids don’t even pretend anymore.

  15. The Camp of the Saints grows more prescient each year.

  16. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Twenty years ago I took a train from Paris to Munich. Our group stored our luggage near the back doors separating the cars.

    I vividly remember a group of black teens, perhaps 10 in all, running along side of the train as we pulled into a stop. The next thing I knew they were rummaging through our bags and stealing our stuff.

    A friend — a scion of an old Southern family — shook his head sadly and said, “it’s the same wherever you go.”

    The police did nothing and the blacks ran away across the tracks.

    My mild encounter would be — and perhaps is now — a daily occurrence for indigenous Europeans.

  17. I say beat them at their own game. Just give 100,000 “migrants” a thousand dollars (upon arrival) and a one way ticket to camp out in Davos. Turn it into Hell for the next summit and even Soros himself will be paying for them to go back to whence they came from.

  18. @Leftist conservative
    but just think of the boost in GDP from all those human livestock! Our corporate profits shall grow high!

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-refugee-crisis-will-actually-have-a-sizable-positive-economic-impact-on-european-countries-eu-a6722396.html

    It is so good to know that in the press of bodies, the cost, the inconvenience, and the added friction of the teeming masses; there is growth in GDP somewhere. It just makes it all worthwhile. I can’t wait for the total industrialization of the womb so we can render all matter into human flesh and have so much GDP growth that we are all in a state of constant ecstasy.

    *Economists at the EU’s executive agency say the large influx of people to the bloc from Syria and other conflict zones is likely having a positive effect on growth, employment rates, and long-term public finances in the most affected countries.*

    When He broke the fifth seal, I heard the creature saying, “Come.” And another, a green horse, went out; and to him who sat on it, it was granted to take wealth from the earth, and that men would grow the precious GDP above all other things, even unto their utter destruction.

    • Replies: @ben tillman

    It is so good to know that in the press of bodies, the cost, the inconvenience, and the added friction of the teeming masses; there is growth in GDP somewhere.
     
    But, of course, it can't be about GDP, or else our rulers would have been promoting pro-natalist policies among the natives, which would have had better GDP results.
  19. Merkel sets the ratchet to turn against herself as world events unfold. Epic fail.

    Trump sets the ratchet to turn in his favor as the same events unfold. Epic win.

    Yet the media and politicians will tell you Merkel is the genius and Trump is the idiot.

  20. “Whereas much of the discussion about commodities has focused on the economic and market impact, Schwab said he’s concerned that it will also spur “a substantial social breakdown.””…

    Like you said, it’s interesting this has been brought up. It’s gratifying to save one person drowning on the beach. Kind of different to throw your own family out, let strangers move in, while you pay for it somehow.

    I recall Bono saying – ‘Do you want a Europe with walls?’ at some concert. Perhaps he’s letting them all live in his mansion?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I recall Bono saying – ‘Do you want a Europe with walls?’ at some concert.

    The Edge will let the refugees all stay at his five mansions in Malibu, once he buys off some more politicians and environmental groups to get the permits to build them.

    , @Brutusale
    Sayeth the tax exile saving the world with Other People's Money.
    , @anon
    "Do you want a Europe with walls"?

    Well I don't know. I guess it depends on what exactly the walls are for, since a wall in and of itself is not automatically a bad thing. I have four walls that hold my house up for instance. Would freeze without them.

    Now, if those "walls" are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the 'Iron curtain", then I would have to say no.

    If those walls were designed TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT, like stopping illegal aliens, demographic replacement and socio-cultural disintegration, I would have to say yes.
  21. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Looking at the calendar–and judging the frequency of the recent past–we can estimate at least a dozen more ISIS attacks of varying degrees before the election.

    The Merkel and Trump ratchets will keep turning.

    Oh yeah. Frau Hillary probably won’t make it to the general but even if she does she set a helluva ratchet against herself with “Terrorism has nothing to do with Islam”……that one is actually less of a ratchet and more like a guillotine that hangs by a thread above her empty head.

  22. Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…..

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    "Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…"

    Israel, Japan, South Korea - Des Moines alone will probably take in more Middle Eastern refugees than all three of those countries combined.
    , @Jordan
    That's probably because, unlike western white nations, they aren't suicidal and politically correct, at least not to the suicidal levels of the western nations.

    What's happening to Europe is nothing more than suicide by guilt and political correctness.

    I'm so glad I read Camp of the Saints. Written long ago (1979, I think) yet so applicable today.
  23. The people who leave first, will of course be the upper middle class- the peasants can’t afford to, the top echelon will loot to the last then off to the long prepared boltholes.

    Lots of African Tourists not going back.

  24. Enoch Powell’s speech to the Conservative Association meeting in Birmingham on April 20 1968:

    ———

    The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.

    One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.

    Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: “If only,” they love to think, “if only people wouldn’t talk about it, it probably wouldn’t happen.”

    Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.

    At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.
    A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries.

    After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: “If I had the money to go, I wouldn’t stay in this country.” I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn’t last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: “I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan’t be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years’ time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”

    I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?

    The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children.

    I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking – not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.

    In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants. That is not my figure. That is the official figure given to parliament by the spokesman of the Registrar General’s Office.

    There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population, and approaching that of Greater London. Of course, it will not be evenly distributed from Margate to Aberystwyth and from Penzance to Aberdeen. Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population.

    As time goes on, the proportion of this total who are immigrant descendants, those born in England, who arrived here by exactly the same route as the rest of us, will rapidly increase. Already by 1985 the native-born would constitute the majority. It is this fact which creates the extreme urgency of action now, of just that kind of action which is hardest for politicians to take, action where the difficulties lie in the present but the evils to be prevented or minimised lie several parliaments ahead.

    The natural and rational first question with a nation confronted by such a prospect is to ask: “How can its dimensions be reduced?” Granted it be not wholly preventable, can it be limited, bearing in mind that numbers are of the essence: the significance and consequences of an alien element introduced into a country or population are profoundly different according to whether that element is 1 per cent or 10 per cent.

    The answers to the simple and rational question are equally simple and rational: by stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and by promoting the maximum outflow. Both answers are part of the official policy of the Conservative Party.

    It almost passes belief that at this moment 20 or 30 additional immigrant children are arriving from overseas in Wolverhampton alone every week – and that means 15 or 20 additional families a decade or two hence. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen.

    Let no one suppose that the flow of dependants will automatically tail off. On the contrary, even at the present admission rate of only 5,000 a year by voucher, there is sufficient for a further 25,000 dependants per annum ad infinitum, without taking into account the huge reservoir of existing relations in this country – and I am making no allowance at all for fraudulent entry. In these circumstances nothing will suffice but that the total inflow for settlement should be reduced at once to negligible proportions, and that the necessary legislative and administrative measures be taken without delay.

    I stress the words “for settlement.” This has nothing to do with the entry of Commonwealth citizens, any more than of aliens, into this country, for the purposes of study or of improving their qualifications, like (for instance) the Commonwealth doctors who, to the advantage of their own countries, have enabled our hospital service to be expanded faster than would otherwise have been possible. They are not, and never have been, immigrants.

    I turn to re-emigration. If all immigration ended tomorrow, the rate of growth of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population would be substantially reduced, but the prospective size of this element in the population would still leave the basic character of the national danger unaffected. This can only be tackled while a considerable proportion of the total still comprises persons who entered this country during the last ten years or so.

    Hence the urgency of implementing now the second element of the Conservative Party’s policy: the encouragement of re-emigration.

    Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent.

    Nobody knows, because no such policy has yet been attempted. I can only say that, even at present, immigrants in my own constituency from time to time come to me, asking if I can find them assistance to return home. If such a policy were adopted and pursued with the determination which the gravity of the alternative justifies, the resultant outflow could appreciably alter the prospects.

    The third element of the Conservative Party’s policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no “first-class citizens” and “second-class citizens.” This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendent should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.

    There could be no grosser misconception of the realities than is entertained by those who vociferously demand legislation as they call it “against discrimination”, whether they be leader-writers of the same kidney and sometimes on the same newspapers which year after year in the 1930s tried to blind this country to the rising peril which confronted it, or archbishops who live in palaces, faring delicately with the bedclothes pulled right up over their heads. They have got it exactly and diametrically wrong.

    The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the immigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming.
    This is why to enact legislation of the kind before parliament at this moment is to risk throwing a match on to gunpowder. The kindest thing that can be said about those who propose and support it is that they know not what they do.

    Nothing is more misleading than comparison between the Commonwealth immigrant in Britain and the American Negro. The Negro population of the United States, which was already in existence before the United States became a nation, started literally as slaves and were later given the franchise and other rights of citizenship, to the exercise of which they have only gradually and still incompletely come. The Commonwealth immigrant came to Britain as a full citizen, to a country which knew no discrimination between one citizen and another, and he entered instantly into the possession of the rights of every citizen, from the vote to free treatment under the National Health Service.

    Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another’s.
    But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.

    They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.

    In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.

    I am going to allow just one of those hundreds of people to speak for me:
    “Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one white (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her white tenants moved out.

    “The day after the last one left, she was awakened at 7am by two Negroes who wanted to use her ‘phone to contact their employer. When she refused, as she would have refused any stranger at such an hour, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked but for the chain on her door. Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, “Racial prejudice won’t get you anywhere in this country.” So she went home.

    “The telephone is her lifeline. Her family pay the bill, and help her out as best they can. Immigrants have offered to buy her house – at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. “Racialist,” they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.”
    The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word “integration.” To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.

    Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.

    But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.

    We are on the verge here of a change. Hitherto it has been force of circumstance and of background which has rendered the very idea of integration inaccessible to the greater part of the immigrant population – that they never conceived or intended such a thing, and that their numbers and physical concentration meant the pressures towards integration which normally bear upon any small minority did not operate.

    Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. The cloud no bigger than a man’s hand, that can so rapidly overcast the sky, has been visible recently in Wolverhampton and has shown signs of spreading quickly. The words I am about to use, verbatim as they appeared in the local press on 17 February, are not mine, but those of a Labour Member of Parliament who is a minister in the present government:
    ‘The Sikh communities’ campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.’
    All credit to John Stonehouse for having had the insight to perceive that, and the courage to say it.

    For these dangerous and divisive elements the legislation proposed in the Race Relations Bill is the very pabulum they need to flourish. Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see “the River Tiber foaming with much blood.”

    That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
    Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.

    • Replies: @5371
    Uncannily accurate. The only things he didn't see in advance were Muslims. But then in those days political Islam was still if anything an ally or tool of the west, and would long remain so.
  25. Enoch Powell’s speech to the Conservative Association meeting in Birmingham on April 20 1968:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643823/Enoch-Powells-Rivers-of-Blood-speech.html

  26. Yes, a billion refugees are coming. And when they do, everyone will say that no one could have anticipated such a large number.

  27. The weakest objection to mass immigration is “they took our ‘jerbs’!” as South Park parodies. The stronger objection is that it is incompatible with universal suffrage which is universally practiced throughout western civilization. The idea that a host population is obligated to forfeit complete voting control of their entire society and civilization to any and every population that wants entry is absurd. Mass immigration is also incompatible with equal opportunity, and non-discrimination. Even open borders types agree with much of this.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.

    Consider consumer products like fast food and tech gadgets: people love to pick the food and eating experiences that suit them and pick the tech gadgets they like. But consumers generally don’t want to vote on CEOs and CTOs and corporate strategy and learn those fields well enough to make good decisions. And if they did, they wouldn’t be happy with the results. We should let citizens choose among societies by voting with their feet and with their actions and not with elections that choose leaders.

    If people want to move away from Nigeria style societies to Northern European ones, well the former shrinks to demand and the latter expands and natural land and resource use adjusts. Maybe pieces of Singapore style society replace some of European style society due to demand.

    It’s worth exploring new nation state alternatives that we do want in addition to simply fighting negative changes that are happening (and I don’t disagree with that).

    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    If people want to move away from Nigeria style societies to Northern European ones, well the former shrinks to demand and the latter expands and natural land and resource use adjusts.
     
    You'd run into the same problem with that that you do with giving every child a "good school" in the US: the good schools stop being good once you integrate them without regard to who can afford to live in their districts. If one Nigerian moves to Germany, he benefits from living in Germany. But the 80 millionth Nigerian who moves to Germany is moving to an entirely different country, one that's a lot more like the one he just left.

    The solution will probably end up being some new form of colonization by another name ("Charter Cities"), to spread pockets of 1st world institutions in the poor world, along with sticking girls in years of schooling to keep them from getting pregnant early and, consequently slowing down population growth in the poor world.
    , @Clifford Brown
    Put down the bong.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.


    Sure, your family has just been killed by invading barbarians, they might be dead, but maybe you can move away from your job, culture, friends, and family and move to successful Singapore. The fact that you neither understand the predominate local language, cultural traditions or legal system is irrelevant because.... MARIJUANA. That is basically what your fantasy proposal amounts to. I assume you are just playing with this proposal.

    Why Singapore would want to let in unlimited migrants from the destroyed nations is never answered. Wouldn't the winner be the one nation that refuses to be over run and thus remain the dreaded nation state with some semblance of security, order and tradition?

    In your scenario, I assume that Singapore's protector, the United States, would collapse in a month. Do you really think Singapore could win a war with China based on.... what exactly? Oh right, because China is going to agree to break down into a series of competing atomistic libertarian city-states (in complete contradiction of Chinese culture and tradition) because...you guessed it, MARIJUANA.

    Weed can make you lose your brain.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOFJpsDmKvU
  28. OT:

    The episode of the PBS program Finding Your Roots was interesting tonight. Both Maya Rudolph (49.9% Ashkenazi) and Keenen Ivory Wayans were surprised by their DNA test results. Rudolph’s test showed no American Indian ancestry (despite family lore) but some Southeast Asian ancestry via Madagascar. In Wayans’ case, on his father’s side he had 0% African ancestry… all of it was Asian by way of Madagascar. He was stunned. (Wayans was also surprised that one of his emancipated ancestors voluntarily returned to slavery.)

    • Replies: @5371
    You do know that stuff is fraudulent, right?
  29. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It costs money to cross the Sahara. The countries in Africa doing the migrating are Nigeria and Senegal which relative to other African countries are well off. With lower commodity prices how will these countries and others afford to cross the Sahara? You are being a broken record with this Africa inundation theme. We know birthrates are high but that doesn’t mean those people can manage to get to Europe. Try posting a more analytical take.

    • Replies: @bomag
    With lower commodity prices how will these countries and others afford to cross the Sahara?

    People are capable of traveling long distances cheaply. It is something at which we are pretty good.

    If you roll out the welcome mat, people will get there eventually.
  30. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    40 million+ blacks cause lots of problems in the US.

    Solution. Let’s have a billion of them.

    ——————

    A billion blacks mess up Africa real bad.

    Solution. Let’s bring them to Europe. They will make Europe even better.

    Now, if blacks will do wonders for Europe, why can’t they do it for Africa?

    Some people will say it’s because Europe has rule of law whereas Africa doesn’t.

    But maybe the rule of law in Europe has something to do with European temperament and intelligence? But that would be ‘racist’, so never mind.

    Bring the billion blacks to Europe, and they’ll surely turn the northern continent into the biggest paradise the world has ever seen.

    And even if they turn it into hell, Europeans can assure themselves that they deserved it for past ‘racism’.

    It’s win-win.

  31. @Massimo Heitor
    The weakest objection to mass immigration is "they took our 'jerbs'!" as South Park parodies. The stronger objection is that it is incompatible with universal suffrage which is universally practiced throughout western civilization. The idea that a host population is obligated to forfeit complete voting control of their entire society and civilization to any and every population that wants entry is absurd. Mass immigration is also incompatible with equal opportunity, and non-discrimination. Even open borders types agree with much of this.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.

    Consider consumer products like fast food and tech gadgets: people love to pick the food and eating experiences that suit them and pick the tech gadgets they like. But consumers generally don't want to vote on CEOs and CTOs and corporate strategy and learn those fields well enough to make good decisions. And if they did, they wouldn't be happy with the results. We should let citizens choose among societies by voting with their feet and with their actions and not with elections that choose leaders.

    If people want to move away from Nigeria style societies to Northern European ones, well the former shrinks to demand and the latter expands and natural land and resource use adjusts. Maybe pieces of Singapore style society replace some of European style society due to demand.

    It's worth exploring new nation state alternatives that we do want in addition to simply fighting negative changes that are happening (and I don't disagree with that).

    If people want to move away from Nigeria style societies to Northern European ones, well the former shrinks to demand and the latter expands and natural land and resource use adjusts.

    You’d run into the same problem with that that you do with giving every child a “good school” in the US: the good schools stop being good once you integrate them without regard to who can afford to live in their districts. If one Nigerian moves to Germany, he benefits from living in Germany. But the 80 millionth Nigerian who moves to Germany is moving to an entirely different country, one that’s a lot more like the one he just left.

    The solution will probably end up being some new form of colonization by another name (“Charter Cities”), to spread pockets of 1st world institutions in the poor world, along with sticking girls in years of schooling to keep them from getting pregnant early and, consequently slowing down population growth in the poor world.

    • Agree: BB753
    • Replies: @Massimo Heitor

    You’d run into the same problem with that that you do with giving every child a “good school” in the US: the good schools stop being good once you integrate them without regard to who can afford to live in their districts.
     
    Yes, the people make the community to a large extent. You can't replicate the community or society without the inhabitants that make it up.

    That doesn't kill the idea at all. I do retract my analogy of getting replicas of Northern Europe.

    I still trust people of all ethnic groups to choose government + social structures that suit their needs far more than I trust them to vote good leaders and strategies. Just like I trust people to choose a fast food outlet that makes them happy more than I trust people to vote for strategic leadership of fast food outlets.
  32. @The Anti-Gnostic

    A billion African refugees won’t happen in the next few economic cycles,
     
    Maybe not. But the distance between human particles is shrinking, so who knows what happens when any more. Also, our systems are incredibly scaled and complex, and therefore that much more fragile.

    I'm repeating myself for the umpteenth time: the Syrian Christians I know never saw it coming. Weren't visiting German warships in British ports a month before WWI? Wasn't the MBS market still liquid until it proceeded to crash over a four week period?

    What's stopping a billion Africans from saying to hell with it, I'm walking to Europe to hang out and grope white women on the taxpayer dime? The "refugees" in photographs are wearing weather-appropriate clothing and backpacks. Where are they getting them? Who's feeding them on their trek? I suspect NGOs are funding every step.

    What’s stopping a billion Africans from saying to hell with it, I’m walking to Europe to hang out and grope white women on the taxpayer dime?

    Nothing is stopping them from saying that, but it’s much easier said than done.

  33. OT: As reported by NPR, Univision is buying a controlling interest in The Onion.

    • Replies: @Clifford Brown
    Well, good luck having anything satirizing Latinos or immigration now.

    Univision is, of course, owned by Hillary bankroller, Haim Saban. Wouldn't want there to be any ironic comedy about Hillary Clinton, now would we.
  34. The real question is, will the west still be run by a bunch of Economist reading shitheads dumb enough to let them in, or will things have changed by then?

    Sorry, but I’m thoroughly pessimistic.

    • Replies: @Bill B.
    Gideon Rachman in the FT says that mass immigration into Europe is inevitable because it can't be stopped.

    I would be very interested to learn if there was a single sender country that would have any qualms or significant problms stopping inward mass immigration.

    (I am not talking about refugees in temporary camps.)
  35. OT: Ta-Nehisi Coates is taking Sanders to task over his opposition to reparations. Sanders merely promotes universalistic policies that will disproportionately benefit black people but leave white supremacy intact. As if blacks are “a group which magically suffers from disproportionate poverty.”

    You know, VDare was just fretting about Sanders. But here’s TNC to the rescue. How Sanders reacts to a challenges like this has real implications for his electability. (Jared Taylor definitely had a point about BLM-style politics being a gift to his side.)

  36. @Massimo Heitor
    The weakest objection to mass immigration is "they took our 'jerbs'!" as South Park parodies. The stronger objection is that it is incompatible with universal suffrage which is universally practiced throughout western civilization. The idea that a host population is obligated to forfeit complete voting control of their entire society and civilization to any and every population that wants entry is absurd. Mass immigration is also incompatible with equal opportunity, and non-discrimination. Even open borders types agree with much of this.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.

    Consider consumer products like fast food and tech gadgets: people love to pick the food and eating experiences that suit them and pick the tech gadgets they like. But consumers generally don't want to vote on CEOs and CTOs and corporate strategy and learn those fields well enough to make good decisions. And if they did, they wouldn't be happy with the results. We should let citizens choose among societies by voting with their feet and with their actions and not with elections that choose leaders.

    If people want to move away from Nigeria style societies to Northern European ones, well the former shrinks to demand and the latter expands and natural land and resource use adjusts. Maybe pieces of Singapore style society replace some of European style society due to demand.

    It's worth exploring new nation state alternatives that we do want in addition to simply fighting negative changes that are happening (and I don't disagree with that).

    Put down the bong.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.

    Sure, your family has just been killed by invading barbarians, they might be dead, but maybe you can move away from your job, culture, friends, and family and move to successful Singapore. The fact that you neither understand the predominate local language, cultural traditions or legal system is irrelevant because…. MARIJUANA. That is basically what your fantasy proposal amounts to. I assume you are just playing with this proposal.

    Why Singapore would want to let in unlimited migrants from the destroyed nations is never answered. Wouldn’t the winner be the one nation that refuses to be over run and thus remain the dreaded nation state with some semblance of security, order and tradition?

    In your scenario, I assume that Singapore’s protector, the United States, would collapse in a month. Do you really think Singapore could win a war with China based on…. what exactly? Oh right, because China is going to agree to break down into a series of competing atomistic libertarian city-states (in complete contradiction of Chinese culture and tradition) because…you guessed it, MARIJUANA.

    Weed can make you lose your brain.

    • Agree: (((Owen)))
    • Replies: @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    When a corporation makes bad decisions, the price of the stock drops, and the stockholders force the corporation to correct its mistakes.

    There is no such feedback loop in a nation.

    Apathetic citizens tolerate harmful policies, such as unnecessary wars and importing dysfunctional immigrants.

    If citizens suffered immediate financial losses when their nation chose a harmful policy, a nation would not choose harmful policies.

    If citizens could sell their citizenship, they would have a direct financial stake in their nation.

    In Iraq, America spent $2 trillion to replace a tolerant dictator with genocidal religious fanatics.

    ($2 trillion) / (144 million American workers) = $13,888 per American worker

    Would the invasion of Iraq have occurred if every American worker had to pay $13,888?
    , @Massimo Heitor

    Put down the bong.
     
    The idea of "exit" over "voice" is not something I made up. This book made the concept famous:
    http://amzn.com/0674276604
    , @Romanian
    http://isteve.blogspot.ro/2013/10/john-rawls-immigration-restrictionist.html

    The famous liberal political philosopher John Rawls (1921-2002) argued for restricting immigration in his 1990s work The Law of Peoples:

    Concerning the second problem, immigration, in #4.3 I argue that an important role of government, however arbitrary a society’s boundaries may appear from a historical point of view, is to be the effective agent of a people as they take responsibility for their territory and the size of their population, as well as for maintaining the land’s environmental integrity. Unless a definite agent is given responsibility for maintaining an asset and bears the responsibility and loss for not doing so, that asset tends to deteriorate. On my account the role of the institution of property is to prevent this deterioration from occurring. In the present case, the asset is the people’s territory and its potential capacity to support them in perpetuity; and the agent is the people itself as politically organized. The perpetuity condition is crucial. People must recognize that they cannot make up for failing to regulate their numbers or to care for their land by conquest in war, or by migrating into another people’s territory without their consent.
     

    More briefly, Rawls opposed invade the world / invite the world.

    Rawls went on to say countries that extrude numerous immigrants are at fault of being poorly run. For example, population pressure is partly the fault of a lack of women's rights. If immigrant-extruding countries managed their affairs on Rawlsian lines, then not so many of their people would try to leave. It's basically the same argument Jorge G. Castaneda made about Mexico in the 1990s.
     

  37. All right Sailer post my comments or not , your choice but watch that shitty little patch of green you call a lawn shrivel and die and turn into a dry brown eyesore . You know I was going to say something unkind about the similarly sparse patch of grey fluff on your head but I won’t because I’m a better man than that (and am only bitter that you still have that much hair left on your wrinkled cranium). Whereas my own dome is more akin to Death Valley with only the occasional Tumbling Tumble Weed .

    You can bury me on the lone prairie , maybe god won’t find me there the prick .

    • Replies: @SteveNation
    Dear friend, Steve is not without resourceful supporters of his own.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFWfOBfTQLg
  38. @anon
    Notice how it is Europe - western white nations - not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a "refugee" crisis. I wonder why that is.....

    “Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…”

    Israel, Japan, South Korea – Des Moines alone will probably take in more Middle Eastern refugees than all three of those countries combined.

    • Replies: @Pierrej

    “Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…”

    Israel, Japan, South Korea – Des Moines alone will probably take in more Middle Eastern refugees than all three of those countries combined.
     
    China alone has a over 60 million vacant apartments. They also have a soaring economy, a very quickly rising standard of living, a large infrastructure, and a huge landmass. Why doesn't China take the refugees?

    Probably because they still have an ounce of sanity left.
  39. If all the people living in Third World hellholes want to be governed by white people then why not let’s just reinstate evil, oppressive colonialism? Stay where you are, and let us take the reins.

    As it is, we in the West are obliged to let people from these hellholes colonize us, and let them govern us, no matter that they have explicitly decided that they don’t want to live in countries governed by people like themselves.

    Mass immigration is the new colonialism – again, just about he greatest evil in all of human history, according to the Left. The difference is that when traditional, Western colonialism ended, the countries they had governed were left demographically pretty much the same. Our countries will be fundamentally forever altered.

  40. I say thank God for the Saharan desert barrier.

    But lots of these phony Syrians in Europa are actually Mahgreb guys.

    So we another Sahara north of the Maghreb.

    It’s the only way to be sure.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Well, the Mediterranean Sea should, in theory, provide a natural moat.

    Too bad, that a load of political shitheads run southern Europe and have set up 'ferry services' rather than 'coast guarding' services.

  41. OT:
    3 min video of the U.K. members of parliament competing with each other to denounce Trump while debating whether to ban him from entering the country.

    Steve, maybe it’s time to focus on higher priorities than driving away Joos. There’s plenty of work involved to save the traditional West.

  42. @Mr. Anon
    OT: As reported by NPR, Univision is buying a controlling interest in The Onion.

    Well, good luck having anything satirizing Latinos or immigration now.

    Univision is, of course, owned by Hillary bankroller, Haim Saban. Wouldn’t want there to be any ironic comedy about Hillary Clinton, now would we.

  43. @Anonymous
    I say thank God for the Saharan desert barrier.

    But lots of these phony Syrians in Europa are actually Mahgreb guys.

    So we another Sahara north of the Maghreb.

    It's the only way to be sure.

    Well, the Mediterranean Sea should, in theory, provide a natural moat.

    Too bad, that a load of political shitheads run southern Europe and have set up ‘ferry services’ rather than ‘coast guarding’ services.

  44. He talks about the possible invasion as if it were a giant asteroid about to hit us. In fact, it’s a problem that’s one hundred per cent preventable. By talking about the “challenge” of dealing with millions of immigrants, people like him are revealing they’ve already decided to let them in.

    That sense of dislocation has fueled the rise of radical political leaders who tap into a rich vein of anger and xenophobia. For reason to prevail, Schwab said, “we have to re-establish a sense that we all are in the same boat.”

    So immigration could boost the popularity of people who want to save Europe from genocide – that’s the disaster we’ve got to avert.

  45. when Swedish, French, English, German people want to have some hundred million or billion people from Subsaharan Africa in their countries and then get it I can´t blame them. The really malicious thing is how they will try East Europeans, Russiand, East Asians to do the same.

  46. @Clifford Brown
    Put down the bong.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.


    Sure, your family has just been killed by invading barbarians, they might be dead, but maybe you can move away from your job, culture, friends, and family and move to successful Singapore. The fact that you neither understand the predominate local language, cultural traditions or legal system is irrelevant because.... MARIJUANA. That is basically what your fantasy proposal amounts to. I assume you are just playing with this proposal.

    Why Singapore would want to let in unlimited migrants from the destroyed nations is never answered. Wouldn't the winner be the one nation that refuses to be over run and thus remain the dreaded nation state with some semblance of security, order and tradition?

    In your scenario, I assume that Singapore's protector, the United States, would collapse in a month. Do you really think Singapore could win a war with China based on.... what exactly? Oh right, because China is going to agree to break down into a series of competing atomistic libertarian city-states (in complete contradiction of Chinese culture and tradition) because...you guessed it, MARIJUANA.

    Weed can make you lose your brain.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOFJpsDmKvU

    When a corporation makes bad decisions, the price of the stock drops, and the stockholders force the corporation to correct its mistakes.

    There is no such feedback loop in a nation.

    Apathetic citizens tolerate harmful policies, such as unnecessary wars and importing dysfunctional immigrants.

    If citizens suffered immediate financial losses when their nation chose a harmful policy, a nation would not choose harmful policies.

    If citizens could sell their citizenship, they would have a direct financial stake in their nation.

    In Iraq, America spent $2 trillion to replace a tolerant dictator with genocidal religious fanatics.

    ($2 trillion) / (144 million American workers) = $13,888 per American worker

    Would the invasion of Iraq have occurred if every American worker had to pay $13,888?

    • Agree: Rob McX
  47. @Dave Pinsen

    If people want to move away from Nigeria style societies to Northern European ones, well the former shrinks to demand and the latter expands and natural land and resource use adjusts.
     
    You'd run into the same problem with that that you do with giving every child a "good school" in the US: the good schools stop being good once you integrate them without regard to who can afford to live in their districts. If one Nigerian moves to Germany, he benefits from living in Germany. But the 80 millionth Nigerian who moves to Germany is moving to an entirely different country, one that's a lot more like the one he just left.

    The solution will probably end up being some new form of colonization by another name ("Charter Cities"), to spread pockets of 1st world institutions in the poor world, along with sticking girls in years of schooling to keep them from getting pregnant early and, consequently slowing down population growth in the poor world.

    You’d run into the same problem with that that you do with giving every child a “good school” in the US: the good schools stop being good once you integrate them without regard to who can afford to live in their districts.

    Yes, the people make the community to a large extent. You can’t replicate the community or society without the inhabitants that make it up.

    That doesn’t kill the idea at all. I do retract my analogy of getting replicas of Northern Europe.

    I still trust people of all ethnic groups to choose government + social structures that suit their needs far more than I trust them to vote good leaders and strategies. Just like I trust people to choose a fast food outlet that makes them happy more than I trust people to vote for strategic leadership of fast food outlets.

  48. @Grumpy
    OT:

    The episode of the PBS program Finding Your Roots was interesting tonight. Both Maya Rudolph (49.9% Ashkenazi) and Keenen Ivory Wayans were surprised by their DNA test results. Rudolph's test showed no American Indian ancestry (despite family lore) but some Southeast Asian ancestry via Madagascar. In Wayans' case, on his father's side he had 0% African ancestry... all of it was Asian by way of Madagascar. He was stunned. (Wayans was also surprised that one of his emancipated ancestors voluntarily returned to slavery.)

    You do know that stuff is fraudulent, right?

    • Replies: @Grumpy
    Are the DNA tests fraudulent? I don't know. Decide for yourself. Here are Wayans and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., discussing Wayans' ancestor who was kidnapped by abolitionists:

    http://www.pbs.org/video/2365646593/
  49. @Jacobite
    Enoch Powell's speech to the Conservative Association meeting in Birmingham on April 20 1968:

    ---------

    The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.

    One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.

    Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."

    Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.

    At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.
    A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries.

    After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: "If I had the money to go, I wouldn't stay in this country." I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn't last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: "I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan't be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man."

    I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?

    The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children.

    I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.

    In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants. That is not my figure. That is the official figure given to parliament by the spokesman of the Registrar General's Office.

    There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population, and approaching that of Greater London. Of course, it will not be evenly distributed from Margate to Aberystwyth and from Penzance to Aberdeen. Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population.

    As time goes on, the proportion of this total who are immigrant descendants, those born in England, who arrived here by exactly the same route as the rest of us, will rapidly increase. Already by 1985 the native-born would constitute the majority. It is this fact which creates the extreme urgency of action now, of just that kind of action which is hardest for politicians to take, action where the difficulties lie in the present but the evils to be prevented or minimised lie several parliaments ahead.

    The natural and rational first question with a nation confronted by such a prospect is to ask: "How can its dimensions be reduced?" Granted it be not wholly preventable, can it be limited, bearing in mind that numbers are of the essence: the significance and consequences of an alien element introduced into a country or population are profoundly different according to whether that element is 1 per cent or 10 per cent.

    The answers to the simple and rational question are equally simple and rational: by stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and by promoting the maximum outflow. Both answers are part of the official policy of the Conservative Party.

    It almost passes belief that at this moment 20 or 30 additional immigrant children are arriving from overseas in Wolverhampton alone every week - and that means 15 or 20 additional families a decade or two hence. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen.

    Let no one suppose that the flow of dependants will automatically tail off. On the contrary, even at the present admission rate of only 5,000 a year by voucher, there is sufficient for a further 25,000 dependants per annum ad infinitum, without taking into account the huge reservoir of existing relations in this country - and I am making no allowance at all for fraudulent entry. In these circumstances nothing will suffice but that the total inflow for settlement should be reduced at once to negligible proportions, and that the necessary legislative and administrative measures be taken without delay.

    I stress the words "for settlement." This has nothing to do with the entry of Commonwealth citizens, any more than of aliens, into this country, for the purposes of study or of improving their qualifications, like (for instance) the Commonwealth doctors who, to the advantage of their own countries, have enabled our hospital service to be expanded faster than would otherwise have been possible. They are not, and never have been, immigrants.

    I turn to re-emigration. If all immigration ended tomorrow, the rate of growth of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population would be substantially reduced, but the prospective size of this element in the population would still leave the basic character of the national danger unaffected. This can only be tackled while a considerable proportion of the total still comprises persons who entered this country during the last ten years or so.

    Hence the urgency of implementing now the second element of the Conservative Party's policy: the encouragement of re-emigration.

    Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent.

    Nobody knows, because no such policy has yet been attempted. I can only say that, even at present, immigrants in my own constituency from time to time come to me, asking if I can find them assistance to return home. If such a policy were adopted and pursued with the determination which the gravity of the alternative justifies, the resultant outflow could appreciably alter the prospects.

    The third element of the Conservative Party's policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no "first-class citizens" and "second-class citizens." This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendent should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.

    There could be no grosser misconception of the realities than is entertained by those who vociferously demand legislation as they call it "against discrimination", whether they be leader-writers of the same kidney and sometimes on the same newspapers which year after year in the 1930s tried to blind this country to the rising peril which confronted it, or archbishops who live in palaces, faring delicately with the bedclothes pulled right up over their heads. They have got it exactly and diametrically wrong.

    The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the immigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming.
    This is why to enact legislation of the kind before parliament at this moment is to risk throwing a match on to gunpowder. The kindest thing that can be said about those who propose and support it is that they know not what they do.

    Nothing is more misleading than comparison between the Commonwealth immigrant in Britain and the American Negro. The Negro population of the United States, which was already in existence before the United States became a nation, started literally as slaves and were later given the franchise and other rights of citizenship, to the exercise of which they have only gradually and still incompletely come. The Commonwealth immigrant came to Britain as a full citizen, to a country which knew no discrimination between one citizen and another, and he entered instantly into the possession of the rights of every citizen, from the vote to free treatment under the National Health Service.

    Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another's.
    But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.

    They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.

    In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.

    I am going to allow just one of those hundreds of people to speak for me:
    “Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one white (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her white tenants moved out.

    “The day after the last one left, she was awakened at 7am by two Negroes who wanted to use her 'phone to contact their employer. When she refused, as she would have refused any stranger at such an hour, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked but for the chain on her door. Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, "Racial prejudice won't get you anywhere in this country." So she went home.

    “The telephone is her lifeline. Her family pay the bill, and help her out as best they can. Immigrants have offered to buy her house - at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. "Racialist," they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.”
    The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.

    Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.

    But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.

    We are on the verge here of a change. Hitherto it has been force of circumstance and of background which has rendered the very idea of integration inaccessible to the greater part of the immigrant population - that they never conceived or intended such a thing, and that their numbers and physical concentration meant the pressures towards integration which normally bear upon any small minority did not operate.

    Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. The cloud no bigger than a man's hand, that can so rapidly overcast the sky, has been visible recently in Wolverhampton and has shown signs of spreading quickly. The words I am about to use, verbatim as they appeared in the local press on 17 February, are not mine, but those of a Labour Member of Parliament who is a minister in the present government:
    'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'
    All credit to John Stonehouse for having had the insight to perceive that, and the courage to say it.

    For these dangerous and divisive elements the legislation proposed in the Race Relations Bill is the very pabulum they need to flourish. Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."

    That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
    Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.

    Uncannily accurate. The only things he didn’t see in advance were Muslims. But then in those days political Islam was still if anything an ally or tool of the west, and would long remain so.

  50. A property management company for asylum seekers’ houses buys red paint in bulk and…it’s Nazi Britain!

  51. Mass immigration is the new colonialism – again, just about he greatest evil in all of human history, according to the Left. The difference is that when traditional, Western colonialism ended, the countries they had governed were left demographically pretty much the same. Our countries will be fundamentally forever altered.

    Another difference is that Western colonialism brought technology, medicine, improved infrastructure, ect. to the colonies. Once mortality dropped, their populations where able to expand much faster than before.

    Somehow, I don’t think the refugees and migrants will be bringing us any new technology.

  52. @asdf
    "Whereas much of the discussion about commodities has focused on the economic and market impact, Schwab said he’s concerned that it will also spur “a substantial social breakdown.”"...

    Like you said, it's interesting this has been brought up. It's gratifying to save one person drowning on the beach. Kind of different to throw your own family out, let strangers move in, while you pay for it somehow.

    I recall Bono saying - 'Do you want a Europe with walls?' at some concert. Perhaps he's letting them all live in his mansion?

    I recall Bono saying – ‘Do you want a Europe with walls?’ at some concert.

    The Edge will let the refugees all stay at his five mansions in Malibu, once he buys off some more politicians and environmental groups to get the permits to build them.

  53. @Wilkey
    "Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…"

    Israel, Japan, South Korea - Des Moines alone will probably take in more Middle Eastern refugees than all three of those countries combined.

    “Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…”

    Israel, Japan, South Korea – Des Moines alone will probably take in more Middle Eastern refugees than all three of those countries combined.

    China alone has a over 60 million vacant apartments. They also have a soaring economy, a very quickly rising standard of living, a large infrastructure, and a huge landmass. Why doesn’t China take the refugees?

    Probably because they still have an ounce of sanity left.

    • Replies: @Massimo Heitor

    China alone has a over 60 million vacant apartments. They also have a soaring economy, a very quickly rising standard of living, a large infrastructure, and a huge landmass. Why doesn’t China take the refugees?

    Probably because they still have an ounce of sanity left.
     
    Also, the Gulf States, like Saudi Arabia. They have an order of magnitude lower population density than Europe or even most of the US, tons of oil money that wasn't really earned but claimed from the earth, and literally they are the exact same Arab Sunni Muslim ethno religious group event. I know within Sunni Islam, the Saudis consider themselves fiercely different from Kuwaitis and Jordanians and Palestinians but the difference is largely arbitrary and absurdly subtle next to Christian Europe or US.

    The current model that all white nations and only white nations are obligated to welcome in every other ethnic group and suppress their own ethnic identity will not last.
    , @martin_2
    China has made great sacrifices with its one child policy. They don't want to throw that away. They are not white leftit morons.
  54. @Leftist conservative
    but just think of the boost in GDP from all those human livestock! Our corporate profits shall grow high!

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-refugee-crisis-will-actually-have-a-sizable-positive-economic-impact-on-european-countries-eu-a6722396.html

    The independent is a Open Borders propaganda outlet, not a newspaper when it comes to migration. See their part in Operation Restore the Narrative:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/cologne-attacks-american-woman-tells-how-syrian-refugees-rescued-her-from-new-years-eve-sexual-a6816221.html

  55. @Anonymous
    Someone must do something about the unchecked growth of the culturally inferior untermenschen, ja?

    Seeing as how the dominant powers of the last few centuries achieved and held their dominance by exploiting and enslaving the areas of the world that are currently viewed as inferior, it doesn't seem fair dinkum to be so opposed to the shoe going on the other foot.

    Yeah, that’s how it was back in the day; Germans hauling the good roads, machine tools, and pretty women up from the Middle East and Africa. Now the exploited and enslaved are coming to get their things back. Makes perfect sense.

  56. @Yak-15
    There really is no hope for the future given our present pace. All the trillions of dollars and the resources of human capital that should be devoted towards scientific achievements that could enable the human race to survive are instead going to be spent allowing the least productive and least intelligent among us to thrive.

    I see the end of the world coming as an Easter Island scenario where the world exhausts its final resource bonanza in a Keynesian inspired drive to build a massive stone head to honor the biggest man's ego. See your quintessential African dictator for an example.

    Perhaps the elites realize this and are trying to maximize the value of their remaining time before the "whole shit house goes down in flames."

    Don’t get too gloomy, Yak. The universe is still out there. The scientific discoveries are still there.

    Look at this as a learning experience: we are learning what does not work. In the next iteration, we will do better.

  57. @Anonymous
    It costs money to cross the Sahara. The countries in Africa doing the migrating are Nigeria and Senegal which relative to other African countries are well off. With lower commodity prices how will these countries and others afford to cross the Sahara? You are being a broken record with this Africa inundation theme. We know birthrates are high but that doesn't mean those people can manage to get to Europe. Try posting a more analytical take.

    With lower commodity prices how will these countries and others afford to cross the Sahara?

    People are capable of traveling long distances cheaply. It is something at which we are pretty good.

    If you roll out the welcome mat, people will get there eventually.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    If cheaply means several thousands of dollars then Africans in the future won't be able to afford it.
  58. @Polynikes
    It would seem there is some driver besides poverty. Otherwise, everyone would have been here 30years ago.

    Excellent point!!

  59. @Anonymous
    Someone must do something about the unchecked growth of the culturally inferior untermenschen, ja?

    Seeing as how the dominant powers of the last few centuries achieved and held their dominance by exploiting and enslaving the areas of the world that are currently viewed as inferior, it doesn't seem fair dinkum to be so opposed to the shoe going on the other foot.

    1. There’s one thing common to all human populations that aren’t extinct (and quite a few that went extinct anyhow): they’d rather be called hypocritical than go extinct. Sticks and stones and all that.

    Why should I try to please you? What’s in that for me? Nothing. Don’t be so childish.

    2. We bought or took some raw materials from people too stupid to use them for anything. We created all the value ourselves. Then we turned around and helped those idiots feed themselves, gave them cell phones, foreign aid, blah blah blah. And all the *nice* things we tried to do for them are the whole reason they’re even more screwed up than they were on their own. We should have left Malthus in charge. And it’s not too late.

    But never mind that. Destroying all the civilized countries won’t help anybody, least of all the Orc horde you destroy them with. That’s just stupid. You’re blinded by malice. Do you really think you’re rich and powerful enough to have a decent life in a post-civilized country? You think all the brown people would worship you as the great white benefactor who brought them to the promised land? You poor clown, they’d eat you alive.

    • Replies: @TheJester
    To point! Carroll Quigley, the eminent historion, states that (all things considered) the British Empire was a good thing for humanity. I'll extend that to Western Civilization as a whole for indeed, it broadcast:

    1. The values of Christian morality (an individual actually has value outside of the family, tribe, and clan) on a global scale;

    2. The concept of democracy (sorry Islam, we know that democracy is antithetical to Islam because the Koran contains all of the laws of God AND a Muslim strongman will always emerge to enforce them);

    3. The concept of a law-based society vice one based on families, tribes, and clans (that is, societies based on "might is right");

    4. The final abrogation of slavery as a natural state for a large percentage of humanity (that is, those not part of the ruling families, tribes, and clans);

    5. Finally, the technology that invented railroads, steamships, airplanes, jets, physics, medical science, economics, and took humanity to the moon.

    The African and Middle Eastern immigrants are only interested in "cashing out" the wealth of Western Civilization among their native families, tribes, and clans ... without as much as a "thank you". The sad part is that many in the West, plagued with a pathological Calvinist guilt, actually agree that we should "cash them out" to make up for the sins of bringing advanced civilization to them and degnigrating their cultures. Please, give them their freedom in their native spaces and let Malthus do his dirty work!
  60. @Pierrej

    “Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…”

    Israel, Japan, South Korea – Des Moines alone will probably take in more Middle Eastern refugees than all three of those countries combined.
     
    China alone has a over 60 million vacant apartments. They also have a soaring economy, a very quickly rising standard of living, a large infrastructure, and a huge landmass. Why doesn't China take the refugees?

    Probably because they still have an ounce of sanity left.

    China alone has a over 60 million vacant apartments. They also have a soaring economy, a very quickly rising standard of living, a large infrastructure, and a huge landmass. Why doesn’t China take the refugees?

    Probably because they still have an ounce of sanity left.

    Also, the Gulf States, like Saudi Arabia. They have an order of magnitude lower population density than Europe or even most of the US, tons of oil money that wasn’t really earned but claimed from the earth, and literally they are the exact same Arab Sunni Muslim ethno religious group event. I know within Sunni Islam, the Saudis consider themselves fiercely different from Kuwaitis and Jordanians and Palestinians but the difference is largely arbitrary and absurdly subtle next to Christian Europe or US.

    The current model that all white nations and only white nations are obligated to welcome in every other ethnic group and suppress their own ethnic identity will not last.

  61. @asdf
    "Whereas much of the discussion about commodities has focused on the economic and market impact, Schwab said he’s concerned that it will also spur “a substantial social breakdown.”"...

    Like you said, it's interesting this has been brought up. It's gratifying to save one person drowning on the beach. Kind of different to throw your own family out, let strangers move in, while you pay for it somehow.

    I recall Bono saying - 'Do you want a Europe with walls?' at some concert. Perhaps he's letting them all live in his mansion?

    Sayeth the tax exile saving the world with Other People’s Money.

  62. @donut
    All right Sailer post my comments or not , your choice but watch that shitty little patch of green you call a lawn shrivel and die and turn into a dry brown eyesore . You know I was going to say something unkind about the similarly sparse patch of grey fluff on your head but I won't because I'm a better man than that (and am only bitter that you still have that much hair left on your wrinkled cranium). Whereas my own dome is more akin to Death Valley with only the occasional Tumbling Tumble Weed .

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQc5gDXQGIs

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-HViBc1o7Y

    You can bury me on the lone prairie , maybe god won't find me there the prick .

    Dear friend, Steve is not without resourceful supporters of his own.

    • Replies: @SteveNation
    Honestly, after rewatching, this includes one of cinema's most beautiful scenes, from a European perspective. You have Costner playing the law-and-order Germanic, and Connery playing the rogue cousin Celt telling the Germanic that sometimes the law has to go out the window. I doubt Brian De Palma ever fully grasped the significance of the scene, but I suspect it will outlive him, if our people survive.
  63. The Africans don’t want to go to Israel, Saudi, or even China. Hell, they don’t even want to go to Poland. They want to go to Germany. Ok, Sweden or Austria will do for some, but basically Germany, and only Germany, is the goal for almost all the one billion. I am not sure that most Germans have really grasped this. I was talking to a Bosnian guy today who is convinced that even if Germany manages to disperse hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees to Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, whatever, they won’t stay there. They will still try to get back to Germany. Really all Germany has to do is turn off the “magnet”, i.e. stop giving out money and housing to all comers, but they seem incapable of taking that step.

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Right in principle - they're going where the money is. Switch off the welfare tap and the flow would subside to a trickle. But I think Britain is even more attractive to them than Germany. Just look at the scenes at Calais.
    , @Anonymous
    They'd all go to Britain if they had the chance.
    Margaret Thatcher's decision not to join the Schengen Area way back in 85 must rank as one of the best, shrewdest and wisest political decisions ever.
    If only that wisdom could be replicated in the upcoming Brexit referendum.
  64. @bomag
    With lower commodity prices how will these countries and others afford to cross the Sahara?

    People are capable of traveling long distances cheaply. It is something at which we are pretty good.

    If you roll out the welcome mat, people will get there eventually.

    If cheaply means several thousands of dollars then Africans in the future won’t be able to afford it.

  65. @Peter Akuleyev
    The Africans don't want to go to Israel, Saudi, or even China. Hell, they don't even want to go to Poland. They want to go to Germany. Ok, Sweden or Austria will do for some, but basically Germany, and only Germany, is the goal for almost all the one billion. I am not sure that most Germans have really grasped this. I was talking to a Bosnian guy today who is convinced that even if Germany manages to disperse hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees to Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, whatever, they won't stay there. They will still try to get back to Germany. Really all Germany has to do is turn off the "magnet", i.e. stop giving out money and housing to all comers, but they seem incapable of taking that step.

    Right in principle – they’re going where the money is. Switch off the welfare tap and the flow would subside to a trickle. But I think Britain is even more attractive to them than Germany. Just look at the scenes at Calais.

  66. @Peter Akuleyev
    The Africans don't want to go to Israel, Saudi, or even China. Hell, they don't even want to go to Poland. They want to go to Germany. Ok, Sweden or Austria will do for some, but basically Germany, and only Germany, is the goal for almost all the one billion. I am not sure that most Germans have really grasped this. I was talking to a Bosnian guy today who is convinced that even if Germany manages to disperse hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees to Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, whatever, they won't stay there. They will still try to get back to Germany. Really all Germany has to do is turn off the "magnet", i.e. stop giving out money and housing to all comers, but they seem incapable of taking that step.

    They’d all go to Britain if they had the chance.
    Margaret Thatcher’s decision not to join the Schengen Area way back in 85 must rank as one of the best, shrewdest and wisest political decisions ever.
    If only that wisdom could be replicated in the upcoming Brexit referendum.

  67. If only there were non-existent Syrian refugees at the non-existent party at UVa and Jackie Coakley would not have been shoved through a non-existent glass table just like it really happened in the movie Scream(Insert number here.) and not been a victim of fake rape.

  68. @turning tide
    Between this and Mark Steyn's column today I'm wishing I hadn't resolved to give up drinking during the week...

    Read this from David Goldman – you’ll be smashing through the doors of the drinks cabinet in no time:

    http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7221/germany-parable

  69. @Wilbur Hassenfus
    1. There's one thing common to all human populations that aren't extinct (and quite a few that went extinct anyhow): they'd rather be called hypocritical than go extinct. Sticks and stones and all that.

    Why should I try to please you? What's in that for me? Nothing. Don't be so childish.

    2. We bought or took some raw materials from people too stupid to use them for anything. We created all the value ourselves. Then we turned around and helped those idiots feed themselves, gave them cell phones, foreign aid, blah blah blah. And all the *nice* things we tried to do for them are the whole reason they're even more screwed up than they were on their own. We should have left Malthus in charge. And it's not too late.

    But never mind that. Destroying all the civilized countries won't help anybody, least of all the Orc horde you destroy them with. That's just stupid. You're blinded by malice. Do you really think you're rich and powerful enough to have a decent life in a post-civilized country? You think all the brown people would worship you as the great white benefactor who brought them to the promised land? You poor clown, they'd eat you alive.

    To point! Carroll Quigley, the eminent historion, states that (all things considered) the British Empire was a good thing for humanity. I’ll extend that to Western Civilization as a whole for indeed, it broadcast:

    1. The values of Christian morality (an individual actually has value outside of the family, tribe, and clan) on a global scale;

    2. The concept of democracy (sorry Islam, we know that democracy is antithetical to Islam because the Koran contains all of the laws of God AND a Muslim strongman will always emerge to enforce them);

    3. The concept of a law-based society vice one based on families, tribes, and clans (that is, societies based on “might is right”);

    4. The final abrogation of slavery as a natural state for a large percentage of humanity (that is, those not part of the ruling families, tribes, and clans);

    5. Finally, the technology that invented railroads, steamships, airplanes, jets, physics, medical science, economics, and took humanity to the moon.

    The African and Middle Eastern immigrants are only interested in “cashing out” the wealth of Western Civilization among their native families, tribes, and clans … without as much as a “thank you”. The sad part is that many in the West, plagued with a pathological Calvinist guilt, actually agree that we should “cash them out” to make up for the sins of bringing advanced civilization to them and degnigrating their cultures. Please, give them their freedom in their native spaces and let Malthus do his dirty work!

  70. Germany, and only Germany, is the goal for almost all the one billion. Somehow, I didn’t think “Today Germany, Tomorrow the World” meant 7 B were going to move to a country the size of Montana. Meanwhile, I note Germany was today claimed as the best country in the world to live.
    Not for much longer.

  71. A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking real demographic replacement.

    • Replies: @rvg
    Maybe you should look at your won house first?
  72. @Anonymous
    Someone must do something about the unchecked growth of the culturally inferior untermenschen, ja?

    Seeing as how the dominant powers of the last few centuries achieved and held their dominance by exploiting and enslaving the areas of the world that are currently viewed as inferior, it doesn't seem fair dinkum to be so opposed to the shoe going on the other foot.

    Colonial control of Africa had nothing to do with the dominance of western Europe. That is a myth. In fact the opposite is more likely to be true. The sub-continent owes all its railways to the period of the Raj.

  73. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @asdf
    "Whereas much of the discussion about commodities has focused on the economic and market impact, Schwab said he’s concerned that it will also spur “a substantial social breakdown.”"...

    Like you said, it's interesting this has been brought up. It's gratifying to save one person drowning on the beach. Kind of different to throw your own family out, let strangers move in, while you pay for it somehow.

    I recall Bono saying - 'Do you want a Europe with walls?' at some concert. Perhaps he's letting them all live in his mansion?

    “Do you want a Europe with walls”?

    Well I don’t know. I guess it depends on what exactly the walls are for, since a wall in and of itself is not automatically a bad thing. I have four walls that hold my house up for instance. Would freeze without them.

    Now, if those “walls” are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the ‘Iron curtain”, then I would have to say no.

    If those walls were designed TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT, like stopping illegal aliens, demographic replacement and socio-cultural disintegration, I would have to say yes.

    • Replies: @Massimo Heitor

    “Do you want a Europe with walls”?
     
    I prefer a Japan with walls even though those walls have always explicitly kept white people like me out. I would still rather Japan exist as the ethnic nation state that it is rather than be turned into some global multi-racial experiment. Same with Europe.

    If we are going to run these massive society transforming experiments we should try it on the failed nation states that people don't want to live in rather than the jewels of the planet.
    , @Anon
    "Now, if those 'walls' are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the ‘Iron curtain', then I would have to say no."

    That is truly a gumbic comment. Just think about it.
    Would it be so bad if black African nations had walls to keep people in?
    Would it be so bad if Mexico built a huge wall to keep Mexicans in Mexico?

    If Nigeria came up with a policy of forcing all Nigerians to stay in Nigeria--and if all other black Africans adopted that policy--, it would be better for the world. It is because black African nations don't have such walls to keep their people in that they keep migrating to other African nations and then to Europe.

    We should support a worldwide system whereby most nations will make it difficult for their people to leave. I mean India is planning to send 300 million dotkins to other nations.
    NO!!! We should urge the Indian government to build walls to keep their people in India. Do you want all those dotkins in UK and Australia?
    , @Anonymous
    If continental Europe 'had walls', just like England had with its sea, then perhaps those nations would have enjoyed the uninterrupted economic and scientific development England did.
  74. @5371
    You do know that stuff is fraudulent, right?

    Are the DNA tests fraudulent? I don’t know. Decide for yourself. Here are Wayans and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., discussing Wayans’ ancestor who was kidnapped by abolitionists:

    http://www.pbs.org/video/2365646593/

    • Replies: @5371
    Yes, these are, and neither Wayans nor Gates knows anything about it.
  75. @Pierrej

    “Notice how it is Europe – western white nations – not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a “refugee” crisis. I wonder why that is…”

    Israel, Japan, South Korea – Des Moines alone will probably take in more Middle Eastern refugees than all three of those countries combined.
     
    China alone has a over 60 million vacant apartments. They also have a soaring economy, a very quickly rising standard of living, a large infrastructure, and a huge landmass. Why doesn't China take the refugees?

    Probably because they still have an ounce of sanity left.

    China has made great sacrifices with its one child policy. They don’t want to throw that away. They are not white leftit morons.

  76. @Anonymous
    The real question is, will the west still be run by a bunch of Economist reading shitheads dumb enough to let them in, or will things have changed by then?

    Sorry, but I'm thoroughly pessimistic.

    Gideon Rachman in the FT says that mass immigration into Europe is inevitable because it can’t be stopped.

    I would be very interested to learn if there was a single sender country that would have any qualms or significant problms stopping inward mass immigration.

    (I am not talking about refugees in temporary camps.)

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I wonder if Gideon Rachman is related to Peter Rachman, a name that is familiar to Britons older than 70?
  77. @anon
    "Do you want a Europe with walls"?

    Well I don't know. I guess it depends on what exactly the walls are for, since a wall in and of itself is not automatically a bad thing. I have four walls that hold my house up for instance. Would freeze without them.

    Now, if those "walls" are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the 'Iron curtain", then I would have to say no.

    If those walls were designed TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT, like stopping illegal aliens, demographic replacement and socio-cultural disintegration, I would have to say yes.

    “Do you want a Europe with walls”?

    I prefer a Japan with walls even though those walls have always explicitly kept white people like me out. I would still rather Japan exist as the ethnic nation state that it is rather than be turned into some global multi-racial experiment. Same with Europe.

    If we are going to run these massive society transforming experiments we should try it on the failed nation states that people don’t want to live in rather than the jewels of the planet.

    • Replies: @rvg
    It's funny isn't it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.
  78. @John Derbyshire
    A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking real demographic replacement.

    Maybe you should look at your won house first?

  79. @Massimo Heitor

    “Do you want a Europe with walls”?
     
    I prefer a Japan with walls even though those walls have always explicitly kept white people like me out. I would still rather Japan exist as the ethnic nation state that it is rather than be turned into some global multi-racial experiment. Same with Europe.

    If we are going to run these massive society transforming experiments we should try it on the failed nation states that people don't want to live in rather than the jewels of the planet.

    It’s funny isn’t it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.

    • Replies: @Massimo Heitor

    It’s funny isn’t it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.
     
    That's not what I believe and not what I said. Han Chinese and Hindu Indian immigration is generally far more desirable than immigration from strict Muslim demographics. And I feel bad even writing that.
  80. @SteveNation
    Dear friend, Steve is not without resourceful supporters of his own.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFWfOBfTQLg

    Honestly, after rewatching, this includes one of cinema’s most beautiful scenes, from a European perspective. You have Costner playing the law-and-order Germanic, and Connery playing the rogue cousin Celt telling the Germanic that sometimes the law has to go out the window. I doubt Brian De Palma ever fully grasped the significance of the scene, but I suspect it will outlive him, if our people survive.

    • Replies: @SteveNation
    I like De Palma, but I think there is zero chance he grasped that his church scene could be a stereotypical dialogue between Celt and Germanic cousins, especially in the context of a 21st century world gone mad. But it holds up remarkably well.
  81. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @anon
    "Do you want a Europe with walls"?

    Well I don't know. I guess it depends on what exactly the walls are for, since a wall in and of itself is not automatically a bad thing. I have four walls that hold my house up for instance. Would freeze without them.

    Now, if those "walls" are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the 'Iron curtain", then I would have to say no.

    If those walls were designed TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT, like stopping illegal aliens, demographic replacement and socio-cultural disintegration, I would have to say yes.

    “Now, if those ‘walls’ are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the ‘Iron curtain’, then I would have to say no.”

    That is truly a gumbic comment. Just think about it.
    Would it be so bad if black African nations had walls to keep people in?
    Would it be so bad if Mexico built a huge wall to keep Mexicans in Mexico?

    If Nigeria came up with a policy of forcing all Nigerians to stay in Nigeria–and if all other black Africans adopted that policy–, it would be better for the world. It is because black African nations don’t have such walls to keep their people in that they keep migrating to other African nations and then to Europe.

    We should support a worldwide system whereby most nations will make it difficult for their people to leave. I mean India is planning to send 300 million dotkins to other nations.
    NO!!! We should urge the Indian government to build walls to keep their people in India. Do you want all those dotkins in UK and Australia?

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    It's not realistic to expect any Third World country to build a wall to keep its people in - none of them shows any sign of going the way of North Korea. Emigration has advantages in the form of remittances, etc. Also, it's good to be able to offload your troublesome minorities on other countries, thanks to asylum treaties. On the other hand, emigration is certainly a brain drain, but maybe corrupt Third World rulers would prefer a population that's mostly dim and docile. That's certainly what Western elites want in their countries.
    , @Corvinus
    "We should support a worldwide system whereby most nations will make it difficult for their people to leave."

    First, who is "we"? Second, is not your plan a direct violation of a country's sovereignty? Third, is not your plan one borne out of the philosophy of neo-cons in that America is sticking it's nose where it does not belong? Fourth, how do you propose on advocating, implementing, and enforcing this system?

    You really should think before spilling digital ink that in your head seems logical but then after actually putting those ideas down is actually illogical.
  82. @anon
    Notice how it is Europe - western white nations - not Israel, Japan, South Korea, etc that will face a "refugee" crisis. I wonder why that is.....

    That’s probably because, unlike western white nations, they aren’t suicidal and politically correct, at least not to the suicidal levels of the western nations.

    What’s happening to Europe is nothing more than suicide by guilt and political correctness.

    I’m so glad I read Camp of the Saints. Written long ago (1979, I think) yet so applicable today.

  83. @SteveNation
    Honestly, after rewatching, this includes one of cinema's most beautiful scenes, from a European perspective. You have Costner playing the law-and-order Germanic, and Connery playing the rogue cousin Celt telling the Germanic that sometimes the law has to go out the window. I doubt Brian De Palma ever fully grasped the significance of the scene, but I suspect it will outlive him, if our people survive.

    I like De Palma, but I think there is zero chance he grasped that his church scene could be a stereotypical dialogue between Celt and Germanic cousins, especially in the context of a 21st century world gone mad. But it holds up remarkably well.

  84. Why do you need white people to continue to exist at all if IQ is all that matters, given that white people have IQ scores that are half a STD lower than the East Asian IQ, and 1 STD lower than the Ashkenazi Jewish IQ? And why doesn’t anyone want to come to the conclusion that if you want to raise global IQ scores in the most efficient manner, the most effective way to deal with the African problem is simply to kill them all (or to forcibly sterilize all of them) and resettle whites and east asians in their place, given that 100 plus IQ Asians and whites can put the resources of Africa to much better use than 70IQ Africans. Maybe the Igbo can be given the territory of Liberia as their own playground.

  85. @Bill B.
    Gideon Rachman in the FT says that mass immigration into Europe is inevitable because it can't be stopped.

    I would be very interested to learn if there was a single sender country that would have any qualms or significant problms stopping inward mass immigration.

    (I am not talking about refugees in temporary camps.)

    I wonder if Gideon Rachman is related to Peter Rachman, a name that is familiar to Britons older than 70?

  86. @anon
    "Do you want a Europe with walls"?

    Well I don't know. I guess it depends on what exactly the walls are for, since a wall in and of itself is not automatically a bad thing. I have four walls that hold my house up for instance. Would freeze without them.

    Now, if those "walls" are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the 'Iron curtain", then I would have to say no.

    If those walls were designed TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT, like stopping illegal aliens, demographic replacement and socio-cultural disintegration, I would have to say yes.

    If continental Europe ‘had walls’, just like England had with its sea, then perhaps those nations would have enjoyed the uninterrupted economic and scientific development England did.

  87. @Grumpy
    Are the DNA tests fraudulent? I don't know. Decide for yourself. Here are Wayans and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., discussing Wayans' ancestor who was kidnapped by abolitionists:

    http://www.pbs.org/video/2365646593/

    Yes, these are, and neither Wayans nor Gates knows anything about it.

  88. @Anon
    "Now, if those 'walls' are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the ‘Iron curtain', then I would have to say no."

    That is truly a gumbic comment. Just think about it.
    Would it be so bad if black African nations had walls to keep people in?
    Would it be so bad if Mexico built a huge wall to keep Mexicans in Mexico?

    If Nigeria came up with a policy of forcing all Nigerians to stay in Nigeria--and if all other black Africans adopted that policy--, it would be better for the world. It is because black African nations don't have such walls to keep their people in that they keep migrating to other African nations and then to Europe.

    We should support a worldwide system whereby most nations will make it difficult for their people to leave. I mean India is planning to send 300 million dotkins to other nations.
    NO!!! We should urge the Indian government to build walls to keep their people in India. Do you want all those dotkins in UK and Australia?

    It’s not realistic to expect any Third World country to build a wall to keep its people in – none of them shows any sign of going the way of North Korea. Emigration has advantages in the form of remittances, etc. Also, it’s good to be able to offload your troublesome minorities on other countries, thanks to asylum treaties. On the other hand, emigration is certainly a brain drain, but maybe corrupt Third World rulers would prefer a population that’s mostly dim and docile. That’s certainly what Western elites want in their countries.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "That’s certainly what Western elites want in their countries."

    That's more speculation than a certainty, depending on what is the criteria for "western elites" these days.
  89. @Rob McX
    It's not realistic to expect any Third World country to build a wall to keep its people in - none of them shows any sign of going the way of North Korea. Emigration has advantages in the form of remittances, etc. Also, it's good to be able to offload your troublesome minorities on other countries, thanks to asylum treaties. On the other hand, emigration is certainly a brain drain, but maybe corrupt Third World rulers would prefer a population that's mostly dim and docile. That's certainly what Western elites want in their countries.

    “That’s certainly what Western elites want in their countries.”

    That’s more speculation than a certainty, depending on what is the criteria for “western elites” these days.

  90. @Anon
    "Now, if those 'walls' are designed TO KEEP PEOPLE IN like the Berlin Wall or the ‘Iron curtain', then I would have to say no."

    That is truly a gumbic comment. Just think about it.
    Would it be so bad if black African nations had walls to keep people in?
    Would it be so bad if Mexico built a huge wall to keep Mexicans in Mexico?

    If Nigeria came up with a policy of forcing all Nigerians to stay in Nigeria--and if all other black Africans adopted that policy--, it would be better for the world. It is because black African nations don't have such walls to keep their people in that they keep migrating to other African nations and then to Europe.

    We should support a worldwide system whereby most nations will make it difficult for their people to leave. I mean India is planning to send 300 million dotkins to other nations.
    NO!!! We should urge the Indian government to build walls to keep their people in India. Do you want all those dotkins in UK and Australia?

    “We should support a worldwide system whereby most nations will make it difficult for their people to leave.”

    First, who is “we”? Second, is not your plan a direct violation of a country’s sovereignty? Third, is not your plan one borne out of the philosophy of neo-cons in that America is sticking it’s nose where it does not belong? Fourth, how do you propose on advocating, implementing, and enforcing this system?

    You really should think before spilling digital ink that in your head seems logical but then after actually putting those ideas down is actually illogical.

  91. @bomag
    It is so good to know that in the press of bodies, the cost, the inconvenience, and the added friction of the teeming masses; there is growth in GDP somewhere. It just makes it all worthwhile. I can't wait for the total industrialization of the womb so we can render all matter into human flesh and have so much GDP growth that we are all in a state of constant ecstasy.

    *Economists at the EU’s executive agency say the large influx of people to the bloc from Syria and other conflict zones is likely having a positive effect on growth, employment rates, and long-term public finances in the most affected countries.*

    When He broke the fifth seal, I heard the creature saying, “Come.” And another, a green horse, went out; and to him who sat on it, it was granted to take wealth from the earth, and that men would grow the precious GDP above all other things, even unto their utter destruction.

    It is so good to know that in the press of bodies, the cost, the inconvenience, and the added friction of the teeming masses; there is growth in GDP somewhere.

    But, of course, it can’t be about GDP, or else our rulers would have been promoting pro-natalist policies among the natives, which would have had better GDP results.

  92. @rvg
    It's funny isn't it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.

    It’s funny isn’t it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.

    That’s not what I believe and not what I said. Han Chinese and Hindu Indian immigration is generally far more desirable than immigration from strict Muslim demographics. And I feel bad even writing that.

    • Replies: @rvg
    I don't get it, why do you believe that civilization and Islam is mutually exclusive, I am talking about the Emirate or Cordoba sort of Islam, not ISIS, have you been to Seville, Cordoba? And an Islamic State/Sharia would get rid of feminism, socialism, and gayism.
    , @rvg
    I remember a member here saying that Australia being 6 percent Indian and Chinese each would not such a bad thing, of course the golden question is after that has been achieved that would stop that quota from being doubled to 12 percent each or whatever percent.
    , @rvg
    But if you have been to Sydney, Melbourne, or Auckland probably less than 60 percent of Australians and Kiwis under 24 are white, so that whole point is moot and academic.
  93. @Clifford Brown
    Put down the bong.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.


    Sure, your family has just been killed by invading barbarians, they might be dead, but maybe you can move away from your job, culture, friends, and family and move to successful Singapore. The fact that you neither understand the predominate local language, cultural traditions or legal system is irrelevant because.... MARIJUANA. That is basically what your fantasy proposal amounts to. I assume you are just playing with this proposal.

    Why Singapore would want to let in unlimited migrants from the destroyed nations is never answered. Wouldn't the winner be the one nation that refuses to be over run and thus remain the dreaded nation state with some semblance of security, order and tradition?

    In your scenario, I assume that Singapore's protector, the United States, would collapse in a month. Do you really think Singapore could win a war with China based on.... what exactly? Oh right, because China is going to agree to break down into a series of competing atomistic libertarian city-states (in complete contradiction of Chinese culture and tradition) because...you guessed it, MARIJUANA.

    Weed can make you lose your brain.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOFJpsDmKvU

    Put down the bong.

    The idea of “exit” over “voice” is not something I made up. This book made the concept famous:
    http://amzn.com/0674276604

  94. @Massimo Heitor

    It’s funny isn’t it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.
     
    That's not what I believe and not what I said. Han Chinese and Hindu Indian immigration is generally far more desirable than immigration from strict Muslim demographics. And I feel bad even writing that.

    I don’t get it, why do you believe that civilization and Islam is mutually exclusive, I am talking about the Emirate or Cordoba sort of Islam, not ISIS, have you been to Seville, Cordoba? And an Islamic State/Sharia would get rid of feminism, socialism, and gayism.

  95. @Massimo Heitor

    It’s funny isn’t it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.
     
    That's not what I believe and not what I said. Han Chinese and Hindu Indian immigration is generally far more desirable than immigration from strict Muslim demographics. And I feel bad even writing that.

    I remember a member here saying that Australia being 6 percent Indian and Chinese each would not such a bad thing, of course the golden question is after that has been achieved that would stop that quota from being doubled to 12 percent each or whatever percent.

  96. @Massimo Heitor

    It’s funny isn’t it how you hypocrites say that mass Chinese and Indian immigration to Australia and Canada is not a bad thing because it will raise the countries IQ, but then turn around and say that mass immigration to Japan is a bad thing, even when it is 100 million 110 IQ Indians and Koreans.
     
    That's not what I believe and not what I said. Han Chinese and Hindu Indian immigration is generally far more desirable than immigration from strict Muslim demographics. And I feel bad even writing that.

    But if you have been to Sydney, Melbourne, or Auckland probably less than 60 percent of Australians and Kiwis under 24 are white, so that whole point is moot and academic.

  97. @Clifford Brown
    Put down the bong.

    There is a better model than the current nation state.

    Replace democratic voting of leaders with the right to easily exit governance structures and choose alternatives.


    Sure, your family has just been killed by invading barbarians, they might be dead, but maybe you can move away from your job, culture, friends, and family and move to successful Singapore. The fact that you neither understand the predominate local language, cultural traditions or legal system is irrelevant because.... MARIJUANA. That is basically what your fantasy proposal amounts to. I assume you are just playing with this proposal.

    Why Singapore would want to let in unlimited migrants from the destroyed nations is never answered. Wouldn't the winner be the one nation that refuses to be over run and thus remain the dreaded nation state with some semblance of security, order and tradition?

    In your scenario, I assume that Singapore's protector, the United States, would collapse in a month. Do you really think Singapore could win a war with China based on.... what exactly? Oh right, because China is going to agree to break down into a series of competing atomistic libertarian city-states (in complete contradiction of Chinese culture and tradition) because...you guessed it, MARIJUANA.

    Weed can make you lose your brain.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOFJpsDmKvU

    http://isteve.blogspot.ro/2013/10/john-rawls-immigration-restrictionist.html

    The famous liberal political philosopher John Rawls (1921-2002) argued for restricting immigration in his 1990s work The Law of Peoples:

    Concerning the second problem, immigration, in #4.3 I argue that an important role of government, however arbitrary a society’s boundaries may appear from a historical point of view, is to be the effective agent of a people as they take responsibility for their territory and the size of their population, as well as for maintaining the land’s environmental integrity. Unless a definite agent is given responsibility for maintaining an asset and bears the responsibility and loss for not doing so, that asset tends to deteriorate. On my account the role of the institution of property is to prevent this deterioration from occurring. In the present case, the asset is the people’s territory and its potential capacity to support them in perpetuity; and the agent is the people itself as politically organized. The perpetuity condition is crucial. People must recognize that they cannot make up for failing to regulate their numbers or to care for their land by conquest in war, or by migrating into another people’s territory without their consent.

    More briefly, Rawls opposed invade the world / invite the world.

    Rawls went on to say countries that extrude numerous immigrants are at fault of being poorly run. For example, population pressure is partly the fault of a lack of women’s rights. If immigrant-extruding countries managed their affairs on Rawlsian lines, then not so many of their people would try to leave. It’s basically the same argument Jorge G. Castaneda made about Mexico in the 1990s.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings