The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
"Donald Trump and the Rise of White Identity in Politics"
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 The Conversation:

Donald Trump and the rise of white identity in politics
October 20, 2016 9.46pm EDT

Eric D. Knowles
Associate Professor of Psychology, New York University

Linda R. Tropp
Professor of Social Psychology, University of Massachusetts Amherst

Many political commentators credit Donald Trump’s rise to white voters’ antipathy toward racial and ethnic minorities. However, we believe this focus on racial resentment obscures another important aspect of racial thinking.

In a study of white Americans’ attitudes and candidate preferences, we found that Trump’s success reflects the rise of “white identity politics” – an attempt to protect the collective interests of white voters via the ballot box. Whereas racial prejudice refers to animosity toward other racial groups, white identity reflects a sense of connection to fellow white Americans.

We’re not the first to tie Trump’s candidacy to white identity politics. But our data provide some of the clearest evidence that ongoing demographic changes in the United States are increasing white racial identity. White identity, in turn, is pushing white Americans to support Trump.

When we talk about white identity, we’re not referring to the alt-right fringe, the white nationalist movement or others who espouse racist beliefs. Rather, we’re talking about everyday white Americans who, perhaps for the first time, are racially conscious.

The concept of “garden variety” white racial identity stands in contrast to conventional wisdom. In the last three decades of scholarship on whiteness as a race, the prevailing view has been that most whites fail to notice their own whiteness. In a society dominated by white people, whiteness simply fades into the background. Just as fish fail to notice the water around them, whites are unlikely to think about how they are members of a distinct group.

Our research shows that the era of “white invisibility” is coming to a close.

Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become a minority in the year 2044. This increasing diversity across the country is making whites’ own race harder and harder to ignore. Political and social phenomena, from Barack Obama’s presidency to the Black Lives Matter movement, are making whiteness even more salient to white Americans.

As whites increasingly sense that their status in society is falling, white racial identity is becoming politicized. …

To test our ideas about Trump and white identity politics, we surveyed a nationally representative sample of about 1,700 white Americans.

I haven’t been able to find this research.

The survey covered racial identities, attitudes and political preferences. In examining the relationship between white identity and ethnic diversity, we chose to focus on an ethnic minority of particular salience in contemporary politics: Hispanics. More than any other group, Hispanics have been in the Trump campaign’s crosshairs.

Do whites from heavily Hispanic neighborhoods show stronger white racial identity? To measure identity, we used a widely used questionnaire. On a five-point scale, participants rated their agreement with items such as “Being a white person is an important part of how I see myself” and “I feel solidarity with other white people.” As shown in the graph below, there is a positive relationship between exposure to Hispanics and white respondents’ sense of racial identity.

And does white identity lead to support for Donald Trump? We examined the relationship between white identity and respondents’ likelihood of supporting Trump for the presidency versus Hillary Clinton or several Republican primary challengers. Consistent with others’ analyses, white identity strongly predicts a preference for Trump.

Whites at the high end of the racial identity scale are more than four times as likely to support Trump than those at the low end of the scale. Perhaps that’s because whites highest in racial identity are also the ones most likely to harbor negative attitudes against Latinos. Indeed, we found white identity was significantly correlated with another characteristic – prejudice.

However, differences in prejudice don’t explain the relationship between white identity and Trump support. The pattern in the figure above was tested while statistically controlling for levels of anti-Hispanic prejudice. Because the relationship between identity and support for Trump remains strong, we are confident that white identity independently predicts greater Trump support.

We’ve seen that living close to Hispanics leads whites to develop a strong sense of racial identity and that strong racial identity is associated with support for Donald Trump. We should therefore expect whites in heavily Hispanic neighborhoods support Trump more often than those in neighborhoods with fewer Hispanics. This prediction gains credence from work by political scientist Ryan Enos, who finds that everyday exposure to Latinos can increase support for restrictive immigration policies.

Whites’ support for Donald Trump is, in fact, greatest in areas with a large Hispanic population.

We had participants rate their agreement with a series of statements. For example, “There is nothing wrong with a white person choosing to support a political candidate because that candidate is white” and “Blacks, Latinos, and Asians engage in ‘identity politics,’ and there’s nothing wrong with whites doing the same.”

Exactly the same patterns emerged for these questions as for Trump support: Endorsement of white identity politics was highest in heavily Hispanic neighborhoods and was strongly correlated with white racial identity. These results suggest that America’s growing ethnic diversity is creating a politicized form of white identity that has clear repercussions for future elections. …

There’s an Eric Knowles of virtually the same age as Professor Eric Knowles who was a utility infielder in the Yankees minor league baseball organization in the 1990s, but I think they are different individuals.

Baseball is kind of an Implicit White Identity pastime. In particular, Chicago Cubs fandom is a sort of white middle class marker: in the 1980s when most baseball teams didn’t want to be on TV for fear of hurting in-person attendance, the Cubs were owned by the Tribune Company, which pumped out 81 Cubs home games per year over cable TV superstation WGN. (The other team with a similar strategy was Ted Turner’s Atlanta Braves.)

This wound up making the friendly confines of Wrigley Field on the yuppie North Side into a national shrine of urbanism.

Personally, I lived within walking distance of Wrigley Field for 18 years. I always thought that the old Comiskey Park that the White Sox played in on the South Side was cooler looking than Wrigley, which is rather functionalist. On the other hand, the first time I went to a White Sox game on a company outing in 1983, as we were getting off the El at S. 35th St., a local welfare grandmother violently shoved our executive vice-president because he was trying to get off the train when she wanted to get on it.

So, Comiskey’s neighborhood was a little harder to deal with than Wrigley’s.

On September 30, 1990 a friend came from California to attend the last game at Comiskey. He managed to acquire two tickets for face value of $10 each. It was a fine game that included numerous agreeable features such as an all-time record and the two Ken Griffeys, father and son, playing next to each other in the outfield for the Mariners.

We ended up walking back to downtown Chicago on this perfect fall afternoon, picking our route at each street corner, deciding which way looked least ominous. That even in 1990 it was feasible to walk, gingerly, from Comiskey to the Loop should have alerted my gentrification instinct.

 
Hide 114 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I grew up three hours from Chicago but we got WGN so there was a lot more Cubs on TV than our more-local team. WGN also broadcast near-constant Bozo the Clown, as I recall.

    • Replies: @slumber_j
    @Spotted Toad

    As a child, I attended Bozo the Clown as a member of the live audience--twice. Ringmaster Ned, Cookie the Clown, Bozo himself, The New Mode Hose With The No-Bind Top... It was glorious!

  2. “In the last three decades of scholarship on whiteness as a race…”

    LOL . Whiteness studies is about as much of a search-for-truth scholarly pursuit as Lysenkoism.

  3. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Host Whoopi Goldberg challenged her repeatedly that Trump said the media and the polls were crooked. “Everything was crooked, and now he’s doing better because they’re neck and neck. I’m just wondering, will it be crooked if he slips back down in the polls?”

    “I think you should get ready for a chyron that says ‘President-Elect Donald J. Trump.’ He told me to tell you that he’ll be on you show as soon as he’s elected.”

    “I don’t care if he ever comes on this show,” Goldberg snapped back. “He’s been very nasty about people I care about.”

    Anti-White identity politics.

  4. Seems like an article that warrants more discussion than an opportunity to talk about baseball and missed opportunities in real estate (interesting though it is).

    It provides evidence for what I’ve known personally – exposure to high concentrations of non-whites breeds a feeling of white identity. This is perhaps the most calm, non-judgmental and rational look at this phenomenon and where it is headed I have read in a mainstreamy publication.

    Normally this sort of research is composed with leading questions, being designed to pathologize white identity e.g. The Authoritarian Personality. Instead, we get Lee Kwan Yew validated by the research. Kind of ironic/funny that the Frankfurt School has ultimately encouraged white identity.

    It seems very odd though that at the highest level of white identity, Trump probability of support ends at 0.5. Must have sampled in a heavily blue area perhaps.

    • Agree: bomag
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Anonym

    I quite agree.

    I just was in the mood to write about baseball and Chicago.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Sam

    , @Jason Liu
    @Anonym

    The Authoritarian Personality describes a crucial state of mind for civilization, and is far preferable to the egalitarian personality. It's just a pity the guy who wrote it doesn't realize that.

    , @TWS
    @Anonym

    If you have never heard an illegal murder your friend or watched them chasing down someone with machetes or had one burst into your daughter's birthday party while fleeing the police, you might be forgiven for a fuzzy sense of the differences and buying the narrative. Having to walk your ten year old daughter to the corner grocery because the illegals leer and make obscene comments and gestures or try to proposition her gives you a sense there's something different.

    If on the other hand you live in proximity to a big group like say those parents at a high school on Long Island in NY where MS-13 has taken over the town and five children have been beaten to death by Obama's 'dreamers' then you damn well are aware of the differences.

    You have to be a moron, SJW or cuck to fail to see the differences if you live near them.

    Replies: @Ivy

    , @Mike Zwick
    @Anonym

    When I was young, Wrigley Field was the place to take your Aunt Myrtle, in from Dubuque, or to go with your Cub Scout troop. Comiskey was the place to go with 4 or 5 guys to get drunk and rowdy. When Harry Caray was the White Sox announcer he would have a Falstaff Beer in front of him at all times and was known as a bad ass iconoclastic, take no prisoners, type of announcer. When he went to the Cubs, he became a lovable old, somewhat senile, man type of announcer. Even he reflected the attitude of each ball park.

    , @JohnnyWalker123
    @Anonym

    You watch that game, Donut?

    Replies: @Anonym

  5. Anonymous [AKA "Bobby2.5"] says:

    “WGN also broadcast near-constant Bozo the Clown, as I recall.”

    I ate my elementary school breakfast cereal watching Bozo the Clown on WGN in the 80s in Texas.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    My father-in-law played the tuba on the Bozo the Clown TV show. When the dog on the show would get retired, he'd bring him home to the farm for the kids to take care of.

    Replies: @josh, @melendwyr

    , @Father O'Hara
    @Anonymous

    Did you get the REAL Bozo,namely Bob Bell,or the secondary Bozo? If not Bob Bell,sorry,it wasn't the true,pure Bozo.

  6. @Anonymous
    "WGN also broadcast near-constant Bozo the Clown, as I recall."

    I ate my elementary school breakfast cereal watching Bozo the Clown on WGN in the 80s in Texas.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Father O'Hara

    My father-in-law played the tuba on the Bozo the Clown TV show. When the dog on the show would get retired, he’d bring him home to the farm for the kids to take care of.

    • Replies: @josh
    @Steve Sailer

    Where would the dog stay before it way retired?

    , @melendwyr
    @Steve Sailer

    Is that an euphemism? I'm genuinely uncertain.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  7. Americans had white identity for many generations, but the post WW2 Civil Rights movement and beyond was a slow, meandering destruction of white identity.

    In this era, the Left first forcibly attacked Dixie (i.e. Scots-Irish) white identity, forcing integration, using movies and TV shows to smear Southern heritage and people, and blackmailing Hoover’s FBI to infiltrate the Klan and other Southern groups to get them locked up or disbanded. Heck, the Left even used false flag church bombings and such to garner sympathy for their movement and hatred for Dixie (Scots-Irish) identity.

    Meanwhile, the Left used the Ike’s Interstate Highway System to plow through traditional working-class ethnic white neighborhoods in cities. The Old West End in Boston, for example, was thoroughly demolished by the construction of I-93, (which runs through the heart of Boston), though it had been home to generations of Irish and Italian immigrants.

    But that wasn’t enough. They got Affirmative Action, Civil Right’s legislation, and open borders passed. They enforced bussing even outside of Jim Crow places, so that even de facto segregation was “wrong.” By the late 1960s, the rioting by blacks started, and, outside of unions, there were few white groups to fight back. A few places held out (South Boston, famously), but most white people fled to the suburbs and beyond and lost their ethnic roots.

    By the 1980s and 1990s, Affirmative Action had put the blacks into power in many places and taken over cities the left turned to attacking white identity in schools. Now blacks were not equal, but held as “superior”, and white unity was described as racist. White kids were programmed not to feel pride in their ethnicity, but shame over slavery.

    Now they’re banning last remnants of white in-group identity: the Confederate flag is being disappeared from history. Don’t be surprised if the left starts claiming that St. Patrick’s day celebrations/Italian saint festivals are evil/racist, and then move to ban them.

    If you observe it with a keen eye, you’ll note that the Left’s attack on white identity in the last half-century closely mirrors the integration/demoralization tactics the U.S. government used on Native American populations once they were put on reservations.

    P.S> The Left was probably inspired by the near-total eradication of German-American ethnic pride in the WW1 and WW2 years. Defeating that group’s pride let them know they could do it to others.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    @whorefinder

    Very true. As others, Prof Kevin MacDonald included, have shown, America was a country very much aware of its White, European heritage in the 1920s and 30s. After WWII this dissolved or was suppressed by Government.
    Similar changes took place in Europe. Thankfully, in Europe and North America today, we are seeing a rebirth of White racial consciousness. Hopefully, it will be in time to preserve as many White nations as possible.

    , @Anon
    @whorefinder

    That's a good narrative, and I don't disagree, but you left out that the big business "right" also had an interest in destroying White identity (and White neighborhoods) to crush unions and slash wages. Some people might even argue that the big business "right" orchestrated the whole thing and the "left" activities was just the means by which they executed the plan.

    -27 year old caught in UNZ anti sock filter

    , @Ripple Earthdevil
    @whorefinder

    Actually, the West End in Boston was not destroyed by the construction of I-93, which in its pre-Big Dig form as the Central Artery was an elevated highway that separated the waterfront from the rest of downtown, but did not destroy anything. The West End and Scollay Square were razed for the construction of the ugly, windswept City Hall Plaza.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    , @RonaldB
    @whorefinder

    To be credible, you have to give at least a little documentation for really wild claims, such as "false flag church bombings". Otherwise, your posting is just so much hot air.

  8. @Anonym
    Seems like an article that warrants more discussion than an opportunity to talk about baseball and missed opportunities in real estate (interesting though it is).

    It provides evidence for what I've known personally - exposure to high concentrations of non-whites breeds a feeling of white identity. This is perhaps the most calm, non-judgmental and rational look at this phenomenon and where it is headed I have read in a mainstreamy publication.

    Normally this sort of research is composed with leading questions, being designed to pathologize white identity e.g. The Authoritarian Personality. Instead, we get Lee Kwan Yew validated by the research. Kind of ironic/funny that the Frankfurt School has ultimately encouraged white identity.

    It seems very odd though that at the highest level of white identity, Trump probability of support ends at 0.5. Must have sampled in a heavily blue area perhaps.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jason Liu, @TWS, @Mike Zwick, @JohnnyWalker123

    I quite agree.

    I just was in the mood to write about baseball and Chicago.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @Steve Sailer

    I did say it was an interesting anecdote. Also True, New (to me) and Funny as missed opportunities always are. People can relate.

    I have a feeling I am going to be kicking myself I didn't bet on Trump back when he was paying 5 to 1.

    Certainly there are some people who have become very rich in real estate, enabled by immigration. Something seems vaguely wrong about being the Judas to profit from it. Gentrification on the other hand I find less objectionable.

    , @Sam
    @Steve Sailer

    That is what you get for having a high IQ and a wide range of interests and observations that allows you to make understandable analogies. In this case it felt a bit forced but somehow you still managed to make a connection.


    RE:Whiteness
    The real question is if future articles will be as understanding as this one was. I can't fathom that that would be the case.

  9. > We’re not the first to tie Trump’s candidacy to white identity politics.
    Hmmm, is there a well-known but unmentionable Internet pundit who has written on this subject?

    > Whites are unlikely to think about how they are a members of a distinct group.
    For some, being polar bear hunted concentes the mind. Others’ thinking is influenced by reading acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group.

    But the profs are right, most whites don’t notice. Stronger together.

    • Replies: @Mr. Blank
    @ic1000


    Others’ thinking is influenced by reading acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group.
     
    Preposterous. It's ridiculous to think that having their social and intellectual betters constantly tell them how shameful and evil they are could ever cause anybody to develop a militant tribal identity. When in all of human history has such a thing ever happened?

    When I inform my friends that their favorite sports team is a bunch of crybaby losers, they always immediately agree, and go home and burn all their memorabilia that very day. It never backfires and makes them more aggressive and fervent than they might have been if I'd just left them alone. That's just unpossible.
    , @Opinionator
    @ic1000

    acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group

    Cite?

    Replies: @ic1000

    , @dc.sunsets
    @ic1000

    Given that highly educated whites are reportedly less likely to vote for Trump, I must assume none of them attended a public university with a significant black enrollment.

    Only Helen Keller could attend such a U. without getting race-realist religion.

  10. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonym

    I quite agree.

    I just was in the mood to write about baseball and Chicago.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Sam

    I did say it was an interesting anecdote. Also True, New (to me) and Funny as missed opportunities always are. People can relate.

    I have a feeling I am going to be kicking myself I didn’t bet on Trump back when he was paying 5 to 1.

    Certainly there are some people who have become very rich in real estate, enabled by immigration. Something seems vaguely wrong about being the Judas to profit from it. Gentrification on the other hand I find less objectionable.

  11. I always thought that the old Comiskey Park that the White Sox played in on the South Side was cooler looking than Wrigley, which is rather functionalist.

    Surprisingly, there were few movies made lionizing Old Comiskey. John Candy, Maureen O’Hara, and Ally Sheedy did the only one I can remember, the surprisingly very good Only the Lonely https://infogalactic.com/info/Only_the_Lonely_%28film%29.

    But there’s a pretty good reason Old Comiskey never got lionized until after it was gone: it was Old Comiskey’s demolition that kicked off ball park nostalgia.

    IIRC, it was Old Comiskey’s horrible replacement—New Comiskey Park—that freaked out baseball fans and led to the backlash that created Camden Yards and all the retro ball parks afterwards. People didn’t realize how great old ballparks were until Old Comiskey was replaced with a monstrosity (I’ve never seen either, I’m just going on what others have said).

    The love for Wrigley over Old Comiskey likely comes from two things. The first: the old improv-comedy training ground was near Wrigley. Many of those folks who trained there went to games and later became celebrities, and fondly recalled day games at Wrigley while hungover and waiting to go on stage at night.

    The second is what you talked about here: Wrigley is in a far safer/more yuppie neighborhood than Comiskey. Remember Ferris Bueller? Suburban families/teens coming in for the day were probably more likely to choose Wrigley over Comiskey, given the crime at the time. Probably, too, was the fact that there were day games for all Cubs games, which also lowered the safety risk.

    Of course, being in a safer neighborhood didn’t help the Mets become more popular than the Yankees in New York, but Steinbrenner always made sure the area around the stadium on gamedays was safe and sound (there used to be cops lining the entire walk between Yankee Stadium and the subway entrances).

  12. Rather, we’re talking about everyday white Americans who, perhaps for the first time, are racially conscious.

    Reminds me of the stock paraphrase: “you might not be interested in race, but race is interested in you.”

    Don’t let them kid you: EVERYONE is racially conscious, but some have been taught to embrace racial Ecumenism; now they are noticing that that is not working out too well.

  13. @whorefinder
    Americans had white identity for many generations, but the post WW2 Civil Rights movement and beyond was a slow, meandering destruction of white identity.

    In this era, the Left first forcibly attacked Dixie (i.e. Scots-Irish) white identity, forcing integration, using movies and TV shows to smear Southern heritage and people, and blackmailing Hoover's FBI to infiltrate the Klan and other Southern groups to get them locked up or disbanded. Heck, the Left even used false flag church bombings and such to garner sympathy for their movement and hatred for Dixie (Scots-Irish) identity.

    Meanwhile, the Left used the Ike's Interstate Highway System to plow through traditional working-class ethnic white neighborhoods in cities. The Old West End in Boston, for example, was thoroughly demolished by the construction of I-93, (which runs through the heart of Boston), though it had been home to generations of Irish and Italian immigrants.

    But that wasn't enough. They got Affirmative Action, Civil Right's legislation, and open borders passed. They enforced bussing even outside of Jim Crow places, so that even de facto segregation was "wrong." By the late 1960s, the rioting by blacks started, and, outside of unions, there were few white groups to fight back. A few places held out (South Boston, famously), but most white people fled to the suburbs and beyond and lost their ethnic roots.

    By the 1980s and 1990s, Affirmative Action had put the blacks into power in many places and taken over cities the left turned to attacking white identity in schools. Now blacks were not equal, but held as "superior", and white unity was described as racist. White kids were programmed not to feel pride in their ethnicity, but shame over slavery.

    Now they're banning last remnants of white in-group identity: the Confederate flag is being disappeared from history. Don't be surprised if the left starts claiming that St. Patrick's day celebrations/Italian saint festivals are evil/racist, and then move to ban them.

    If you observe it with a keen eye, you'll note that the Left's attack on white identity in the last half-century closely mirrors the integration/demoralization tactics the U.S. government used on Native American populations once they were put on reservations.

    P.S> The Left was probably inspired by the near-total eradication of German-American ethnic pride in the WW1 and WW2 years. Defeating that group's pride let them know they could do it to others.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Anon, @Ripple Earthdevil, @RonaldB

    Very true. As others, Prof Kevin MacDonald included, have shown, America was a country very much aware of its White, European heritage in the 1920s and 30s. After WWII this dissolved or was suppressed by Government.
    Similar changes took place in Europe. Thankfully, in Europe and North America today, we are seeing a rebirth of White racial consciousness. Hopefully, it will be in time to preserve as many White nations as possible.

  14. The NYT sent me a Breaking News email (!) that the FBI latest revelations have had no effect, all parties are welded in… etc., and more etc. HOWEVER, McClatchy which, IMO, is a lot more trust worthy and reputable as a news reporting agency…. says different:

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article112106442.html

    Independents leaning toward Trump in polls after FBI furor erupts

    WASHINGTON The furor over the FBI probe of Hillary Clinton’s emails is helping
    Donald Trump among independent voters in key swing states. ….

    In Wisconsin, among independent voters, Clinton was up by 7 over Trump
    on Wednesday and Thursday. Friday, Trump jumped to a 10 point
    advantage, then back to 8 in Saturday through Monday interviews. ….

    “Within partisan identifiers, there is evidence that some undecided
    Republicans moved to support of Trump over the survey period and that
    independents shifted from a Clinton advantage to a Trump advantage,
    though all the shifts are inside the margin of error.”

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @Hidden Cat

    Interesting how even slashdot, which leans Democrat or libertarian, rarely Repub let alone alt-right, is responding to the election. Outstanding comments in related posts are mostly realistic about Clinton.

    http://m.slashdot.org/story/318309/outstanding

    http://m.slashdot.org/story/318299

    Heck, even the poll has a lot of very salient points about the election and especially HRC corruption.

    http://m.slashdot.org/poll/3011/outstanding

    Yes, Hillary beats Trump 29% to 21%. But it's slashdot.

  15. There’s no cause for concern. The experts have it all under control. If we just shout “white privilege” enough at these white people, they’ll quickly realize the error of their ways, and dump the white identity thing in a heartbeat.

    Based on my Facebook news feed, reminding stressed-out white people how privileged they are is a recipe for tranquility and social cohesion. Telling them all their suffering is just whining because the diverse peoples are finally getting a fair shake leads angry white people to a place of enlightened peace and contentment.

    It’s such an effective strategy that Hillary Clinton has made it the centerpiece of her presidential campaign, which is why polls show her winning the election in a crushing landslide, with 75 percent of the vote. If she only pushed the issue more stridently, she’d probably win 127 percent of the vote. Dictators like Putin are always winning their elections with 99 percent of the vote, and Americans are better than a bunch of dictators, right?

    Truly, we are on the threshold of the New Jerusalem, friends.

    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • LOL: Forbes
  16. @ic1000
    > We’re not the first to tie Trump’s candidacy to white identity politics.
    Hmmm, is there a well-known but unmentionable Internet pundit who has written on this subject?

    > Whites are unlikely to think about how they are a members of a distinct group.
    For some, being polar bear hunted concentes the mind. Others' thinking is influenced by reading acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group.

    But the profs are right, most whites don't notice. Stronger together.

    Replies: @Mr. Blank, @Opinionator, @dc.sunsets

    Others’ thinking is influenced by reading acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group.

    Preposterous. It’s ridiculous to think that having their social and intellectual betters constantly tell them how shameful and evil they are could ever cause anybody to develop a militant tribal identity. When in all of human history has such a thing ever happened?

    When I inform my friends that their favorite sports team is a bunch of crybaby losers, they always immediately agree, and go home and burn all their memorabilia that very day. It never backfires and makes them more aggressive and fervent than they might have been if I’d just left them alone. That’s just unpossible.

    • LOL: Anonym
  17. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @whorefinder
    Americans had white identity for many generations, but the post WW2 Civil Rights movement and beyond was a slow, meandering destruction of white identity.

    In this era, the Left first forcibly attacked Dixie (i.e. Scots-Irish) white identity, forcing integration, using movies and TV shows to smear Southern heritage and people, and blackmailing Hoover's FBI to infiltrate the Klan and other Southern groups to get them locked up or disbanded. Heck, the Left even used false flag church bombings and such to garner sympathy for their movement and hatred for Dixie (Scots-Irish) identity.

    Meanwhile, the Left used the Ike's Interstate Highway System to plow through traditional working-class ethnic white neighborhoods in cities. The Old West End in Boston, for example, was thoroughly demolished by the construction of I-93, (which runs through the heart of Boston), though it had been home to generations of Irish and Italian immigrants.

    But that wasn't enough. They got Affirmative Action, Civil Right's legislation, and open borders passed. They enforced bussing even outside of Jim Crow places, so that even de facto segregation was "wrong." By the late 1960s, the rioting by blacks started, and, outside of unions, there were few white groups to fight back. A few places held out (South Boston, famously), but most white people fled to the suburbs and beyond and lost their ethnic roots.

    By the 1980s and 1990s, Affirmative Action had put the blacks into power in many places and taken over cities the left turned to attacking white identity in schools. Now blacks were not equal, but held as "superior", and white unity was described as racist. White kids were programmed not to feel pride in their ethnicity, but shame over slavery.

    Now they're banning last remnants of white in-group identity: the Confederate flag is being disappeared from history. Don't be surprised if the left starts claiming that St. Patrick's day celebrations/Italian saint festivals are evil/racist, and then move to ban them.

    If you observe it with a keen eye, you'll note that the Left's attack on white identity in the last half-century closely mirrors the integration/demoralization tactics the U.S. government used on Native American populations once they were put on reservations.

    P.S> The Left was probably inspired by the near-total eradication of German-American ethnic pride in the WW1 and WW2 years. Defeating that group's pride let them know they could do it to others.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Anon, @Ripple Earthdevil, @RonaldB

    That’s a good narrative, and I don’t disagree, but you left out that the big business “right” also had an interest in destroying White identity (and White neighborhoods) to crush unions and slash wages. Some people might even argue that the big business “right” orchestrated the whole thing and the “left” activities was just the means by which they executed the plan.

    -27 year old caught in UNZ anti sock filter

  18. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    OT

    There’s still more female identity politics.

    Korean immigrant writes: Why America Needs a Female President

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/03/opinion/why-america-needs-a-female-president.html?_r=0

    Pictured: South Korea’s President Park Geun-hye after her 2013 inauguration in Seoul, South Korea.

    The president that’s going down in flames because she’s backed by a secretive witches’ coven, a feminist’s wet dream of a leader.

  19. There is a great documentary on the Scots Irish White Identity and the impact they had on shaping what we used to think of as the American identity. I think it’s called “Born Fighting: The Scots Irish Story in America”. It’s narrated (and IIRC, produced) by Jim Webb. I highly recommend buying a copy to encourage the production of more White content. If buying plastic discs isn’t your thing, it’s also available for streaming on the Smithsonian (!) channel.

    Edit- I’m no longer sock filtered. Weird.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @27 year old

    Heartiste posited long ago that if America is saved, its saviors will be the Scots Irish.

    Trump is of Scottish ancestry.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Je Suis Charlie Martel
    @27 year old

    It is also a book, by Jim Webb. I once bought several copies and I give them to people at work and in my neighborhood after discussing "so, where are you from? where is your family from? etc."
    Lots of Scots-Irish are just glad to have made out of the Hollers and onto the Cul-de-sac and don't know about or think highly of their contribution to the making of this country. I am not Scots-Irish myself, but I think they're cool and have been denigrated

  20. As whites increasingly sense that their status in society is falling, white racial identity is becoming politicized.

    It’s not just that “whites are losing their status in society,” it’s that the government is actively anti-white and gives (il)legal preferences to “minorities.”

    EVERY Hispanic, African, Caribbean, or Asian legal immigrant WILL be given affirmative action preferences over whites who were born in the U.S. Even illegals are given preference over whites in some cases, e.g., “sanctuary cities,” (did you ever see a “sanctuary city” for whites on the lam for drug or weapons possession?) in-state tuition, etc.

    Why shouldn’t white racial identity become politicized — and why didn’t it happen sooner??

    Voting Trump is ultimately not the answer. Trump is not an explicitly pro-white candidate (he wants a “new deal” for blacks); he is an explicitly anti-bullshit candidate. Thus, whites merely infer that he will not go along with the anti-white agenda of the Establishment.

  21. @ic1000
    > We’re not the first to tie Trump’s candidacy to white identity politics.
    Hmmm, is there a well-known but unmentionable Internet pundit who has written on this subject?

    > Whites are unlikely to think about how they are a members of a distinct group.
    For some, being polar bear hunted concentes the mind. Others' thinking is influenced by reading acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group.

    But the profs are right, most whites don't notice. Stronger together.

    Replies: @Mr. Blank, @Opinionator, @dc.sunsets

    acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group

    Cite?

    • Replies: @ic1000
    @Opinionator

    Steve reviewed Ta-Nehesi Coates' Between the World and Me when it came out, about a year ago. Well written and worth a read. But a bit depressing that Coates' wisdom is considered mainstream, as I'd prefer to live in a 'Citizenist'nation.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  22. @Anonym
    Seems like an article that warrants more discussion than an opportunity to talk about baseball and missed opportunities in real estate (interesting though it is).

    It provides evidence for what I've known personally - exposure to high concentrations of non-whites breeds a feeling of white identity. This is perhaps the most calm, non-judgmental and rational look at this phenomenon and where it is headed I have read in a mainstreamy publication.

    Normally this sort of research is composed with leading questions, being designed to pathologize white identity e.g. The Authoritarian Personality. Instead, we get Lee Kwan Yew validated by the research. Kind of ironic/funny that the Frankfurt School has ultimately encouraged white identity.

    It seems very odd though that at the highest level of white identity, Trump probability of support ends at 0.5. Must have sampled in a heavily blue area perhaps.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jason Liu, @TWS, @Mike Zwick, @JohnnyWalker123

    The Authoritarian Personality describes a crucial state of mind for civilization, and is far preferable to the egalitarian personality. It’s just a pity the guy who wrote it doesn’t realize that.

  23. A previous paper by the first-named author (who according to his CV has obtained overall grant money of at least $507,400 for the years 2013-2017, with somewhat more than half being to study “white identity” and “working-class attitudes”):

    Deny, Distance, or Dismantle? How White Americans Manage a Privileged Identity

    Perspectives on Psychological Science 2014

    Abstract:
    Social scientists have traditionally argued that whiteness — the attribute of being recognized and treated as a White person in society — is powerful because it is invisible. On this view, members of the racially dominant group have the unique luxury of rarely noticing their race or the privileges it confers. This article challenges this “invisibility thesis,” arguing that Whites frequently regard themselves as racial actors. We further argue that whiteness defines a problematic social identity that confronts Whites with 2 psychological threats: the possibility that their accomplishments in life were not fully earned (meritocratic threat) and the association with a group that benefits from unfair social advantages (group-image threat). We theorize that Whites manage their racial identity to dispel these threats. According to our deny, distance, or dismantle (3D) model of White identity management, dominant-group members have three strategies at their disposal: deny the existence of privilege, distance their own self-concepts from the White category, or strive to dismantle systems of privilege. Whereas denial and distancing promote insensitivity and inaction with respect to racial inequality, dismantling reduces threat by relinquishing privileges. We suggest that interventions aimed at reducing inequality should attempt to leverage dismantling as a strategy of White identity management.

    (bold & italic are mine)

  24. Butt, back to our favorite topic: That provoker of white identity is up five points in the LA Times Daybreak poll:

    http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

    and the most objectionable newspaper in the world has seen its quarterly profit fall:

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-york-times-reports-95-7-percent-fall-in-quarterly-profit.html

  25. @Spotted Toad
    I grew up three hours from Chicago but we got WGN so there was a lot more Cubs on TV than our more-local team. WGN also broadcast near-constant Bozo the Clown, as I recall.

    Replies: @slumber_j

    As a child, I attended Bozo the Clown as a member of the live audience–twice. Ringmaster Ned, Cookie the Clown, Bozo himself, The New Mode Hose With The No-Bind Top… It was glorious!

  26. The first half of this prediction has come true, just waiting for the second half:

  27. We should start a pool about when the first “Cubs so White” or “Not all of Chicago joined in Cubs Series celebration” column appears… If it hasn’t already.

    I can see it now: “One thing white America failed to notice among the happy faces on Chicago’s gentrified North Side: people of color.”

  28. So “white identity” is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of “non-white identity” – everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn’t whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here’s another idea – let’s all have an identity as “Americans”. Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let’s get rid of it. It doesn’t mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as “Americans”. Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    “White identity” can’t really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same – a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both “white” but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further “flight from white” – first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the “white identity” folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become “Latinos”, etc., etc. until “whites” are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break “white” down even further – Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well – it makes their job much easier.

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    @Jack D


    “White identity” can’t really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same – a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both “white” but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other.
     
    Pan-White identity is only getting started. The differences between that Boston Brahmin and that gool ol' Mississippi boy are nil in today's world. Same with the difference between a Greek and a Scot, a Portuguese and an Estonian. They will all have a right-of-return to White Zion.

    Two world wars were fought against the Germans. If the soldiers on both sides could have seen a vision of their respective nations from today they would have never fought. The past wars are lamentable, but the enmities they represented no longer exist.
    , @Mr. Blank
    @Jack D

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I've noticed that within the past decade or so there's been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our "Native American heritage." Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don't think these folks are consciously following a "flight from white" strategy -- at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they're just following the signals they're receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn't something to be proud of, so they're looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of.

    If the Left keeps redlining the anti-white stuff, though, it's probably only a matter of time before this becomes a conscious, deliberate survival strategy. And eventually, one imagines, we'll end up with a society where genetic purity police are a thing. Great job, Lefties.

    Replies: @Greg Pandatshang, @Opinionator, @Alec Leamas, @Sunbeam

    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Jack D

    >Here’s another idea – let’s all have an identity as “Americans”.

    Won't work because "American" doesn't mean anything any more. Back in the 1940s, there was a dominant WASP culture, a common European ancestry and almost no non-European immigration. We were culturally and genetically very similar - in not perfectly so. We also made citizenship difficult to attain and thus worth something.

    We were an exclusive club of like-minded and genetically similar people.

    That's dead. I repeat, dead. It will never come back. Monty Python Parrot Dead!

    Here's the situation today:

    1. No dominant culture
    2. Open borders, i.e. zero exclusiveness to this club
    3. Different genetics
    4. Different - really different not some BS Protestant/Catholic gap - religions
    5. Disdain for the people who founded and built the country

    The United States is an economic zone with a boarding house on it. It's just a place where people work. What does being an "American" even mean?

    Is it freedom-loving?
    Lots of countries have democracies. Big deal, especially when open borders constantly devalues my vote. Also, I can get fired for publicly stating verifiable facts about race. Is that freedom-loving? The govt forces me to live with people that I don't want to live around. Is that freedom-loving. The gov discriminates against me because of my race. Is that freedom-loving?

    Americans have no shared race, no shared culture, no shared religion, no shared ethnicity. Therefore, the term American means nothing.

    Whatever America was is dead, and it ain't coming back. I'm not American. I'm white, and I'll look out for my people, my nation. Citizenship only means something if it's based on blood, because all other definitions can - and eventually will - be manipulated.

    Replies: @mosquito

    , @melendwyr
    @Jack D

    Yes, we'd all be better off if we all identified as Americans first. But not everyone is doing that. And that puts those that do, at a disadvantage. Sure, the way to win the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma is to cooperate - but what happens when you're paired with someone who refuses to realize that?

    Defect, baby, defect.

    Replies: @Marcus

    , @Anonym
    @Jack D

    That ship has sailed, Jack. We look the other way on reddit when they have their "I'm a Mexican/ Asian/ LGBTWTFBBQ for Trump!" However, Citizenism is just the (much) lesser evil we vote for today. I don't have a non-white bolthole to flee to, and I am not going to pretend to be something else like some beta loser. Whites are European and Western Civilization would not exist without us. No apologies for being white.

    , @NOTA
    @Jack D

    Ethnic identity politics works out really badly for the voters. I'd rather we try to forge an American identity. This is, however, the opposite of the direction in which the country seems to be moving.

    , @bored identity
    @Jack D



    "...Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first..."

     

    The kind of movies and the wars that makes Jack D's juices running on and on and on...

    Tzadk, you do understand that people are massively voting for Trump because they don't want any new war movies based on the old war movies false narratives?

    "....they were all Americans first. "

    Question:
    How many Sailerites would elect Lindbergh over Morgenthau Jr. on any given day?

    Late voting booths are open!

    Replies: @Opinionator

  29. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    My father-in-law played the tuba on the Bozo the Clown TV show. When the dog on the show would get retired, he'd bring him home to the farm for the kids to take care of.

    Replies: @josh, @melendwyr

    Where would the dog stay before it way retired?

  30. @Anonym
    Seems like an article that warrants more discussion than an opportunity to talk about baseball and missed opportunities in real estate (interesting though it is).

    It provides evidence for what I've known personally - exposure to high concentrations of non-whites breeds a feeling of white identity. This is perhaps the most calm, non-judgmental and rational look at this phenomenon and where it is headed I have read in a mainstreamy publication.

    Normally this sort of research is composed with leading questions, being designed to pathologize white identity e.g. The Authoritarian Personality. Instead, we get Lee Kwan Yew validated by the research. Kind of ironic/funny that the Frankfurt School has ultimately encouraged white identity.

    It seems very odd though that at the highest level of white identity, Trump probability of support ends at 0.5. Must have sampled in a heavily blue area perhaps.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jason Liu, @TWS, @Mike Zwick, @JohnnyWalker123

    If you have never heard an illegal murder your friend or watched them chasing down someone with machetes or had one burst into your daughter’s birthday party while fleeing the police, you might be forgiven for a fuzzy sense of the differences and buying the narrative. Having to walk your ten year old daughter to the corner grocery because the illegals leer and make obscene comments and gestures or try to proposition her gives you a sense there’s something different.

    If on the other hand you live in proximity to a big group like say those parents at a high school on Long Island in NY where MS-13 has taken over the town and five children have been beaten to death by Obama’s ‘dreamers’ then you damn well are aware of the differences.

    You have to be a moron, SJW or cuck to fail to see the differences if you live near them.

    • Replies: @Ivy
    @TWS

    Sweden and Germany are seeing daily the horrible consequences of their immigration/refugee policies. At some point, there may be some SJW/SWPL crossover reporting on international news that makes the domestic idiots take more notice.

  31. @whorefinder
    Americans had white identity for many generations, but the post WW2 Civil Rights movement and beyond was a slow, meandering destruction of white identity.

    In this era, the Left first forcibly attacked Dixie (i.e. Scots-Irish) white identity, forcing integration, using movies and TV shows to smear Southern heritage and people, and blackmailing Hoover's FBI to infiltrate the Klan and other Southern groups to get them locked up or disbanded. Heck, the Left even used false flag church bombings and such to garner sympathy for their movement and hatred for Dixie (Scots-Irish) identity.

    Meanwhile, the Left used the Ike's Interstate Highway System to plow through traditional working-class ethnic white neighborhoods in cities. The Old West End in Boston, for example, was thoroughly demolished by the construction of I-93, (which runs through the heart of Boston), though it had been home to generations of Irish and Italian immigrants.

    But that wasn't enough. They got Affirmative Action, Civil Right's legislation, and open borders passed. They enforced bussing even outside of Jim Crow places, so that even de facto segregation was "wrong." By the late 1960s, the rioting by blacks started, and, outside of unions, there were few white groups to fight back. A few places held out (South Boston, famously), but most white people fled to the suburbs and beyond and lost their ethnic roots.

    By the 1980s and 1990s, Affirmative Action had put the blacks into power in many places and taken over cities the left turned to attacking white identity in schools. Now blacks were not equal, but held as "superior", and white unity was described as racist. White kids were programmed not to feel pride in their ethnicity, but shame over slavery.

    Now they're banning last remnants of white in-group identity: the Confederate flag is being disappeared from history. Don't be surprised if the left starts claiming that St. Patrick's day celebrations/Italian saint festivals are evil/racist, and then move to ban them.

    If you observe it with a keen eye, you'll note that the Left's attack on white identity in the last half-century closely mirrors the integration/demoralization tactics the U.S. government used on Native American populations once they were put on reservations.

    P.S> The Left was probably inspired by the near-total eradication of German-American ethnic pride in the WW1 and WW2 years. Defeating that group's pride let them know they could do it to others.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Anon, @Ripple Earthdevil, @RonaldB

    Actually, the West End in Boston was not destroyed by the construction of I-93, which in its pre-Big Dig form as the Central Artery was an elevated highway that separated the waterfront from the rest of downtown, but did not destroy anything. The West End and Scollay Square were razed for the construction of the ugly, windswept City Hall Plaza.

    • Replies: @whorefinder
    @Ripple Earthdevil


    he construction of I-93, which in its pre-Big Dig form as the Central Artery was an elevated highway that separated the waterfront from the rest of downtown, but did not destroy anything
     
    Actually, I-93, it cut off the West End from North End and Waterfront, and yes, did demolish the West End buildings that connected it to the North End to make room for the highway. That was the beginning of the demolishing of the West End.

    After that, it was trifling easy to use the federal Housing Act to get federal funds for the Boston Housing Authority to rip down the remains of the old West End.
  32. “When we talk about white identity, we’re not referring to the alt-right fringe…”

    Top billing in the basket of deplorables!

  33. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/rise-of-the-alt-right/

    “An argument Jared Taylor and other white nationalists make is that whites choose to live amongst their own given the opportunity. Church congregations self-segregate by race, whites flee black-dominated cities to white suburbs, etc. There is something to this, but an equally important part of reality is that, left to their own devices, people intermarry. Roughly 15 percent of American marriages are now between people of different races, the greatest portion between whites and Latinos and whites and Asians. Offspring of the racially intermarried may soon constitute the country’s largest ‘minority’ group. So too with Jews, usually treated by white nationalists as an irredeemably separate entity: their rising intermarriage rates have for decades been an anxious obsession for Jewish communal leaders. Americans sometimes self-segregate, sometimes intermarry, sometimes neither. Spencer likes to present himself as a bearer of profound and inescapable sociobiological truths, realities that political correctness denies and seeks to suppress, but the evidence for his core assertions is ambiguous or non-existent. Real estate prices rise in multicultural Brooklyn, stagnate in white rural Connecticut.”

    This mixing is the problem. It destroys identity and heritage, and that is why Globalists push it all over the place.
    Why were Asian and African nations able to expel the European imperialists in the end? Because most Asians remained fully Asian and most Africans remained fully African.
    In contrast, massive race-mixing in Latin America led to confusion of identity and heritage, thus the permanent subjugation of the native populations.

    [MORE]

    If there had been little or no race-mixing in Latin America, the indigenous majority might have eventually united to resist and throw out the European imperialists, as happened in India, Vietnam, China, Algeria, Kenya, and etc.
    But because of the racial mixing, the various groups of whites, mestizos, mulattoes, and Indios cannot unite.. and that means European imperialist minority-elites get to rule forever. They rule over a racially confused and divided populace.

    Furthermore, even though race-mixing leads to blending, it never rids society of ethnic tensions that continue to linger since racial variances remain discernible. Look at Brazil. Many people are mixed, but whites see themselves apart from mulattoes(octaroons, quadroons, etc) who don’t identify with blacks who don’t identify with host of other groups. And even though 1000s of yrs of mixing did lead to a kind of mongrel race in the Indian subcontinent, there are still many racial differences along regional, ethnic, and caste lines. (If anything, it was the exploitation of such differences that had allowed the British to rule for so long. This is why Globalists want to increase diversity. Harder for diverse peoples to unify against the Glob Elites.) Only a fool would say the racial situation is better in Mexico, Venezuela, India, and Brazil than in Japan or Finland. Homogeneity may be less vibrant but it secures more peace and stability(at least if the homogeneous population is talented and mutually trusting enough; on the other hand, if it’s homogeneously black, it means a bunch of jive-ass fools running around and acting crazy).

    White Race developed unique qualities of beauty, temperament, and characteristics, as did the other races. To just jumble them altogether with rest of humanity is a form of madness. Why undo 10,000s of yrs of evolution and turn all the world into some melting pot of mestizo-mulatto-ism? Also, race-mixing destroys the very thing that race-mixers are obsessed about. Consider how black men are obsessed about blonde blue-eyed women. Well, the product of black and white mixing is the destruction of the very things that black men find attractive. If mixed-race-ness leads to greater beauty, how come a whole lot of black men still prefer pure white women to mixed-raced mulatto women? The world praised Tiger Woods for being racially mixed, but he had no fondness for mixed-raced women. He wanted pure nordic white women.
    But in mixing with them, he created the kind of children who will grow up to be people he is not attracted to.
    But when pure white women mix with black men, the product is mulatto children. Now, if mulatto-people are so great, why don’t black men prefer them over white women? Race-mixing is a moral contradiction.

    When we look at parts of the world that succumbed to interracism, do we see human improvement? Is Central Asia or Eurasia better off in political and economic development than White Europe or Asian East?
    Is North Africa, a mixture of Europeans, Arabs, Africans, and etc. better off than white Europe? Are Latin American nations that are racially very mixed better than white parts of the US?
    Is Brussels better now that it is over 1/3 African and/or Muslim?

    Also, race-mixing does not lead to some happy harmonious race in the US. Most kids born to white-black parents identify as black(and are often hostile to whites), not least because blackness is associated with ‘badass cool’ and ‘noble victimhood’.
    Just look at Kaepernick who is half-white and was raised by a white family.

    The ‘new antisemtism’ is scapegoating ‘whiteness’, especially ‘white male-ness’, as the source of all evils. Jews who bitch about ‘antisemitism’ use the negative white trope all the time to preach to Diverse Folks that ‘white privilege’ is the reason for all their problems.

    White/black race-mixing just produces more blacks, often very angry ones, not least because light-skinned blacks wanna show off their street cred by expressing black power rage. White/black race mixing is also humiliating to cucked out white males and black females. After all, it’s mostly white women going with black men. White women reject white men for black men because they see black men as superior in thicker voice, dick size, and muscle hardness. So, race-mixing is not about racial equality but racial-sexual hierarchy. It elevates the mandingo over the slow cucked out white boy.
    Race-mixing is also bad for black females. Often loud and abrasive, they are rejected by black men who prefer white girls. So many educated black females are without husbands because black men go off with white girls and since non-black men are not interested in black chicks for the most part.

    And this divergence also exists among whites and Asians. Asian women reject Asian men as inferior and go with white men who are seen as taller and manlier. And some Asian women are into jungle fever just like white girls and go black.. And this means Asian boys are even more cucked out than white boys. So, there is a lot of hierarchy and inequality in interracism.
    Also, just as mulatto kids identify as black, most mixed raced white/asian kids see themselves as white since being ‘asian’ is seen as geeky and uncool, especially if male.

    And yes, some Jews are worried about intermarriage, but Jews are comforted by the fact that mixed race kids with Jewish blood tend to identify as Jewish cuz Jewishness, like blackness, has the mantle of holy victimhood. Also, being Jewish opens a lot of doors in a world that is dominated by Jewish Boys Network(as Old Boy’s Network isn’t what it once was). Also, Jews tend to take the cream of the crop from other races. They tend to marry elite whites and elite Asians, and the kids are raised mostly as Jews. Thus, top white and Asian intelligence is absorbed into Jewishness.
    Jewishness is cultural and racial. There is the thing about line of Jewish blood, but it doesn’t have to be pure as far as Reform Jews are concerned. If you have some Jewish blood and identify mainly as Jewish, you are Jewish.

    As for white/latino mixing, this is complicated because some of this isn’t race-mixing at all. Some Latinos are simply white or mostly white. If someone like Marco Rubio married some white American, that is white and white.
    But there are cases of whites mixing with mestizos. Oftentimes, it’s because lower-income white guys cannot get a white woman. So, they go for some squat brown woman. Or it’s some Mexican guy marrying some ‘fat white trash’. Hardly something to celebrate.

    Anyway, Latin America is very mixed but hardly a model of what humanity should look forward to. If given a choice, a white person would choose a white European nation over a mixed Latino nation like Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, and etc that have so many cultural, political, and racial problems.

    Also, isn’t immigration essentially ‘white supremacist’ in its assumptions since all those non-whites wanna flee from their own kind(seen as inferior) and go live with whites(seen as superior). After all, if diversity and non-whiteness are so wonderful, how come all those non-whites don’t want to stay in their non-white nations or move to other non-white nations? They all wanna go to white nations.
    Immigration is seen as ‘inclusion’, but all those immigrants want to exclude their own race and culture from their own lives(and especially of their children). In wanting to be included by whites, they want to exclude them of their own race and culture.

    Also, even as globalism calls for more diversity and mixing, it also says non-white folks should have a strong cultural identity AGAINST whiteness and blame whites for all their problems.

    “In terms of intellectual accomplishment and range of expertise, the roster of contributors toCommentary and The Public Interest in the 1970s compares to the alt-right like a contemporary version of the ’27 Yankees to, at most, a decent college team.”

    It depends on what is meant by intellectualism. If integrity is part of intellectualism, Alt Right has already won by a mile. Why? It is simply more honest. Neo-conservatism had a lot of smart people, but they never spoke honestly since it was mostly about clever ex-Trotskyites esoterically pretending to be ‘abstract’ and ‘principled’ while pushing a narrow tribal Zionist interest. As such, all those publications and articles could be boiled down to ‘WE want the power.’

    Alt Right is superior in integrity since it doesn’t go for such esoteric sleight-of-hand tricks. It is openly and honestly about race and identity. And it blows away current Neoconservatism and ‘true conservatism’ since both totally support Zionist identity and Israel while dumping on white identity and white racial consciousness. Alt Right’s message is, “If Jews wanna serve Jewish identity and interests, that is fine with us. We want to serve our identity and interests.”
    It is the Jews who bitch about how ‘racist’ it is for whites to think in terms of white consciousness but then demand that whites all line up behind Jewish identity and interests and sing hosannas to Israel while ignoring the fact that Jews are leading the War against whiteness.

    Neoconservatism vs Alt Right is like the story of EMPEROR’S NEW CLOTHES. Those who say that the Emperor has wonderful new clothes may have officially approved intellectual pedigree and may be represented by all the respectable institutions. They are ‘illustrious’ in their accreditation. In contrast, the little boy who sees NO clothes is just a ‘nobody’. But HE speaks the truth that no one sees or pretends not to see because their minds are held hostage to authority and respectability.

    We don’t care how many publications there have been of THE PUBLIC INTEREST and COMMENTARY. They offered some good articles, but they were fundamentally dishonest because they didn’t admit that they were really about ‘How to fool goyim into serving Zion’.

    Alt Right, in saying “We won’t serve Zion”, has 1000x the integrity and courage that ‘true conservatives’ have, those cucks who suck up to globalism.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Anon

    I think you misunderstand the racial dynamics in S. America. In Brazil (and Chile, etc.) there are a lot of people who in American terms are "not white" and who have extensive Amerindian or Black ancestry but who identify completely as being "Brazilian" or even white. These people are often shocked when the come to the US and are considered "not white". To us, it's almost comical because these people are so "not white" in American terms but when they look at themselves in the mirror, they just don't see it. (But then again Liz Warren can see her imaginary Amerindian "high cheek bones" - the self delusion process works both ways. Often (as Steve has mentioned) in Michael Jackson fashion, people actually physically transform themselves into looking less black than they really are, especially if they are economically successful. The hair gets straightened and bleached, they have plastic surgery, etc. Because the advantage in their culture is on being part of the majority, not the minority.


    The strategy of the Conquistadors was not "divide and conquer" but completely wiping out the native identity and creating a hybrid identity that was mostly European defined (and centered on religion). Whatever vestiges of the native culture remained were incorporated into the mainstream culture and religion - native gods became Catholic saints, native holiday rituals became part of Catholic holidays. Later, after the colonial powers left (along with almost all the 100% white people), you had some pure whit(ish) immigrants such as the Lebanese who came in and formed the economic ruling class because they were smarter than the hybrids that the Spanish/Portuguese had left behind.

    This is very different than the modern American situation where people are attempting to define themselves as anything BUT the majority culture. It really doesn't look like we are headed to a situation where everyone will be sort of vaguely brownish.

    Replies: @dc.sunsets, @Dumbo

    , @Alec Leamas
    @Anon


    Roughly 15 percent of American marriages are now between people of different races, the greatest portion between whites and Latinos and whites and Asians.
     
    This is probably much less in practice, since the Latino category is a ridiculous catch-all that doesn't really describe a race (it is a cultural-linguistic subgroup). So if Boston born Irish-American Jimmy O'Monaghan marries Miami Cuban-American Conquistador-descendant Marielena Fernandez, is this really an interracial marriage?
  34. @Jack D
    So "white identity" is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of "non-white identity" - everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn't whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here's another idea - let's all have an identity as "Americans". Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let's get rid of it. It doesn't mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as "Americans". Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    "White identity" can't really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same - a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both "white" but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further "flight from white" - first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the "white identity" folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become "Latinos", etc., etc. until "whites" are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break "white" down even further - Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well - it makes their job much easier.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Mr. Blank, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @melendwyr, @Anonym, @NOTA, @bored identity

    “White identity” can’t really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same – a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both “white” but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other.

    Pan-White identity is only getting started. The differences between that Boston Brahmin and that gool ol’ Mississippi boy are nil in today’s world. Same with the difference between a Greek and a Scot, a Portuguese and an Estonian. They will all have a right-of-return to White Zion.

    Two world wars were fought against the Germans. If the soldiers on both sides could have seen a vision of their respective nations from today they would have never fought. The past wars are lamentable, but the enmities they represented no longer exist.

  35. “I feel solidarity with other white people.”

    I seriously wonder how they’re interpreting the answer to this question. It’s probably no secret that I have strong white nationalist leanings, but I feel no solidarity with other whites. I consider most of them to be the enemy, and the ethnic group I trust least.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    @Ozymandias

    I find solace in r/K theory. https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-theory/rk-selection-theory/

    The whites you hate are the White Rabbits. They are detestable, without doubt, but when K-selection comes (i.e., the illusion of unlimited resources fueling this folly ends), the irredeemable White Rabbits will be slaughtered by their very own pets, or they'll starve, and the masses of redeemable White Rabbits will adapt to a new reality. You won't need to do anything but survive and pull up a chair to watch.

    The relatively few K-selected wolves extant today might actually like living in harsher times. At least we won't have to continually wonder how Nature allows so many horses' asses to survive.

    The role of the amygdala is only now becoming the focus of research. What we will find is that masses of rabbits, most of the rabbit for at least three generations, have essentially zero ability to problem solve or overcome obstacles. When the credit bubble pops and bills come due, most of these people won't even be capable of formulating the simplest plan to survive.

    My wife, a 4th grade teacher, increasingly sees a third to half of her class express less problem-solving initiative (actually zero) than what we see in our 3 year old granddaughter.

    Millions of people in North America are today like roses being raised in a greenhouse located in Fargo, ND during the month of January. When the "power" of the credit bubble goes out, very few of them will be hardy enough to survive.

    If the forecast for a Solar Minimum this century also plays out, Natural Selection will cull a whole heck of a lot of what you might term "human detritus."

    I know it sounds harsh, but times have been far too easy for far too long. Complacency is a disease just as Idiocracy isn't a comedy.

  36. ” ‘White identity’ can’t really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same – a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both ‘white’ but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other.”

    Those white people 150 years ago were more similar ethnically, culturally, religiously, and linguistically than the people inhabiting our country today. If they went to war and almost split the country in two, what are the chances that the USA in its present form will not eventually break up? Pretty poor, I’d say.

    The question is, will the break up be peaceful or violent? If the different “tribes” self segregate over time and more or less ignore one another, then it will be a peaceful divorce. Unfortunately, I am not optimistic that the government would be able to refrain from using force in a misguided, and probably futile attempt to prevent said divorce.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    @Sgt. Joe Friday

    Do an internet search for jayman, HBD and American tribes. He offers a fascinating insight into the different tribes of "whites" in America, showing how different successive waves of immigration from different parts of Europe landed in different places.

    Unless these white tribes overcome their parallels with Native American tribes with regard to cooperation, the size of the reservations American whites eventually hold may be small, indeed.

  37. In the 60’s if I wanted to see a game at Wrigley Field, my parents would give me money and send me on my way. They know Wrigleyville was a slum, but knew I could handle any old wino that came my way.
    White Sox part was different. My uncle had to assure my parents that I was in a large enough group to frighten or fight off any gangs. The parents were terrified of these gangs, and they were white. After leaving one game, we saw someone being beaten up. We were told to walk faster, for there was nothing we could do for the guy.
    The White Sox use to wonder why people did not want to see a winning team but would flock to see the losers at Wrigley. It was safer at Wrigley!

  38. I haven’t been able to find this research.

    Given the delay in getting peer reviewed papers published is it possible that it is not out there yet? I spent a few minutes looking and did not see anything close. Eric D. Knowles responded to a comment there so perhaps you could ask?

    One thing that makes me a little skeptical of their data is the graph captioned “Strong white identity predicts support for Donald Trump” where the probability of support goes from 5% to 40% with increasing white identity. Those percentages seem ridiculously low given the data on overall support for Trump by race. Who exactly did they survey? They did some statistical adjustments so perhaps “probability” on the y-axis is misleading. (I have a similar, but lesser, concern about the graph captioned “Whites’ support for Donald Trump is greatest in areas with a large Hispanic population”)

  39. “…a local welfare grandmother violently shoved our executive vice-president because he was trying to get off the train when she wanted to get on it.”

    In defense of your executive veep’s masculinity, he was probably about 52 while the welfare grandma was probably around 32.

    • LOL: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @bored identity
    @Wilkey

    You just missed the whole point.

    Due to his gentleman and a scholar nature, Steve failed again to become a recipient of MacArthur 'Genius Grant'.

    He could have written a 160-page letter to Corporate-American community lamenting over the hoodized mistreatment of corporate vice president bodies:




    Letter to My Veep


    “Here is what I would like for you to know: In America, it is traditional to destroy the corporate executive body—it is heritage.”

    Perhaps you remember that time we went to see a White Sox game in Comiskey Park, on a company outing in 1983. You were almost 60 years old. The compartment was crowded, and as we came off the El at S. 35th St., you were moving at the dawdling speed of an elderly person.

    A local welfare grandmother pushed you and said, “Come on!”

    Many things now happened at once. There was the reaction of any co-worker when a stranger puts a hand on the body of their boss.

    And there was my own insecurity in my ability to protect your corporate body.

    And more: There was my sense that this woman was pulling rank.
    I knew, for instance, that she would not have pushed out a high-ranked corporate executive on my part of Lincoln Park, because she would be afraid there and would sense, if not know, that there would be a penalty for such an action.

    But I was not out on my part of Lincoln Park. And I was not in North Side of Chicago.

    I forgot all of that. I was only aware that someone had invoked their right over the body of executive vice-president of Information Resources, Inc.

    I turned and spoke to this woman, and my words were hot with all of the moment and all of my history. She shrank back, shocked. A black man standing nearby spoke up in her defense. I experienced this as his attempt to rescue the damsel from the beast.

    He had made no such attempt on behalf of my EVP. And he was now supported by other black people in the assembling crowd. The man came closer. He grew louder. I pushed him away.

    He said, “I could have you polar-beared!”

    I did not care. I told him this, and the desire to do much more was hot in my throat. This desire was only controllable because I remembered someone standing off to the side there, bearing witness to more fury than he had ever seen from me—you.

    I came home shook. It was a mix of shame for having gone back to the law of the streets, and rage—“I could have you polar-beared!”

    Which is to say: “I could take your body.”

    I have told this story many times, not out of bravado, but out of a need for absolution. But more than any shame I felt, my greatest regret was that in seeking to defend you I was, in fact, endangering you.

    Ste-Helvetia Sailer


     
    , @bored identity
    @Wilkey

    You just missed the whole point,Wilkey;

    Due to his gentleman and a scholar nature, our Steve just had failed again to become a recipient of MacArthur's Genius Grant.

    He could have written and published in " The Pacific" his 160-page letter to Corporate-American community lamenting over the instituhoodized mistreatment of corporate vice president bodies:




    Letter to My Veep


    “Here is what I would like for you to know: In America, it is traditional to destroy the corporate executive body—it is heritage.”

    Perhaps you remember that time we went to see a White Sox game in Comiskey Park, on a company outing in 1983. You were almost 60 years old. The compartment was crowded, and as we came off the El at S. 35th St., you were moving at the dawdling speed of an elderly person.

    A local welfare grandmother pushed you and said, “Come on!”

    Many things now happened at once. There was the reaction of any co-worker when a stranger puts a hand on the body of their boss.

    And there was my own insecurity in my ability to protect your corporate body.

    And more: There was my sense that this woman was pulling rank.
    I knew, for instance, that she would not have pushed out a high-ranked corporate executive on my part of Lincoln Park, because she would be afraid there and would sense, if not know, that there would be a penalty for such an action.

    But I was not out on my part of Lincoln Park. And I was not in North Side of Chicago.

    I forgot all of that. I was only aware that someone had invoked their right over the body of executive vice-president of the Information Resources, Inc.

    I turned and spoke to this woman, and my words were hot with all of the moment and all of my history. She shrank back, shocked. A black man standing nearby spoke up in her defense. I experienced this as his attempt to rescue the damsel from the beast.

    He had made no such attempt on behalf of my EVP. And he was now supported by other black people in the assembling crowd. The man came closer. He grew louder. I pushed him away.

    He said, “I could have you polar-beared!”

    I did not care. I told him this, and the desire to do much more was hot in my throat. This desire was only controllable because I remembered someone standing off to the side there, bearing witness to more fury than he had ever seen from me—you.

    I came home shook. It was a mix of shame for having gone back to the law of the streets, and rage—“I could have you polar-beared!”

    Which is to say: “I could take your body.”

    I have told this story many times, not out of bravado, but out of a need for absolution. But more than any shame I felt, my greatest regret was that in seeking to defend you I was, in fact, endangering you.

    Ste-Helvetia Sailer


     
  40. @Jack D
    So "white identity" is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of "non-white identity" - everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn't whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here's another idea - let's all have an identity as "Americans". Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let's get rid of it. It doesn't mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as "Americans". Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    "White identity" can't really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same - a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both "white" but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further "flight from white" - first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the "white identity" folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become "Latinos", etc., etc. until "whites" are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break "white" down even further - Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well - it makes their job much easier.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Mr. Blank, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @melendwyr, @Anonym, @NOTA, @bored identity

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I’ve noticed that within the past decade or so there’s been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our “Native American heritage.” Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don’t think these folks are consciously following a “flight from white” strategy — at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they’re just following the signals they’re receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn’t something to be proud of, so they’re looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of.

    If the Left keeps redlining the anti-white stuff, though, it’s probably only a matter of time before this becomes a conscious, deliberate survival strategy. And eventually, one imagines, we’ll end up with a society where genetic purity police are a thing. Great job, Lefties.

    • Replies: @Greg Pandatshang
    @Mr. Blank

    Isn't that kind of a special case, though? Hasn't there always been an enthusiasm for trace Indian ancestry among white Americans? e.g. toity Virginia families tracing their ancestry back to Pocahontas.

    , @Opinionator
    @Mr. Blank

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry

    How small?

    , @Alec Leamas
    @Mr. Blank

    Isn't 2% Cherokee or Choctaw blood at least perceived as a prophylactic against some (but by no means all) accusations of racism?

    As we've seen in the case of Senator Warren, it can have significant material and career benefits as well.

    , @Sunbeam
    @Mr. Blank

    "I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I’ve noticed that within the past decade or so there’s been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our “Native American heritage.” Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don’t think these folks are consciously following a “flight from white” strategy — at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they’re just following the signals they’re receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn’t something to be proud of, so they’re looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of."

    This is just an anecdote, but it's been a thing in the South for a long time to be proud you had Indian Blood (using my native vernacular). So much so it's been mocked here a few times because the DNA evidence seems to show otherwise (though I also suspect that "native" Southerners are pretty unlikely to pay $100 or whatever it is for the 23AndMe test).

    Anyway that sort of thing was always thought of as cool when I was growing up. Same environment where having an arrowhead hanging on a leather thong to wear around your neck looked awesome.

    As an aside I do not and never have lived around a large Indian reservation like are present in the West. But as a Southerner I've always wondered about you West coast and Western guys in general complaining about Mexicans and Indians being drunkards. Mainly because I've never noticed Mexicans drinking any more than white people.

    Or maybe there is a difference between West Virginia type whites and you guys. Gonna have to pop a cold one and think about whose side I'm on.

    But just to say wanting to believe you have Indian ancestry isn't the same thing as not wanting to be white, at least not in all areas of the country.

    Oh and as another anecdote, something I always heard was if you had trouble growing a beard, you probably had Indian blood. And the Tequila thing.

    Replies: @Mr. Blank

  41. White identity politics? Whoda thunk? What was the first clue? There are so many, it’s nearly a chicken and egg question.

    Race as a social construct. Hyphenated-Americans. Multiculturalism. Dual citizens. Affirmative Action. Tokenism. Quota-denial (Bakke–1978). Diversity (Celebrate diversity! Yay! We’re all different! But we’re all equal cuz we’re all the same!) Disparate impact. Implicit bias.

    I’d say that when founding stock Americans, their relatives, and cohort, are identified for what they are not, i.e. non-Hispanic white, then you’ve broken the eggs for your omelet.

    Now that academics have decided it’s a thing worth study, they’re sure to make a pig’s breakfast of the matter.

    How, for example, does a nationally representative sample of about 1,700 white Americans, include a sufficient sub-sample of whites from heavily Hispanic neighborhoods to draw any conclusions?

    And the conclusions appear to be bogus. Take the first graph, where ‘white identity’ ranges from 3.29 to 3.73 (5-scale)–a range of 13%–to see that ‘Hispanic share of the neighborhood’ (from 0%-100%) has only a very slight relationship with ‘white identity.’ (Needless, the direction of cause –> effect is assumed, not demonstrated.)

    Nonetheless, despite a ‘white identity’ range of 3.29 to 3.73, the researchers express (extrapolate?) a probability of supporting Trump across the entire 1 to 5 ‘white identity’ range, while concluding a “four times more likely to support Trump” using ‘white identity’ scores at the extremes of 1 and 5 that don’t appear to exist in the data.

    I won’t even bother with the third graph, which extrapolates from the bogus second graph.

    Did I say bogus?

  42. @Ripple Earthdevil
    @whorefinder

    Actually, the West End in Boston was not destroyed by the construction of I-93, which in its pre-Big Dig form as the Central Artery was an elevated highway that separated the waterfront from the rest of downtown, but did not destroy anything. The West End and Scollay Square were razed for the construction of the ugly, windswept City Hall Plaza.

    Replies: @whorefinder

    he construction of I-93, which in its pre-Big Dig form as the Central Artery was an elevated highway that separated the waterfront from the rest of downtown, but did not destroy anything

    Actually, I-93, it cut off the West End from North End and Waterfront, and yes, did demolish the West End buildings that connected it to the North End to make room for the highway. That was the beginning of the demolishing of the West End.

    After that, it was trifling easy to use the federal Housing Act to get federal funds for the Boston Housing Authority to rip down the remains of the old West End.

  43. @Anonym
    Seems like an article that warrants more discussion than an opportunity to talk about baseball and missed opportunities in real estate (interesting though it is).

    It provides evidence for what I've known personally - exposure to high concentrations of non-whites breeds a feeling of white identity. This is perhaps the most calm, non-judgmental and rational look at this phenomenon and where it is headed I have read in a mainstreamy publication.

    Normally this sort of research is composed with leading questions, being designed to pathologize white identity e.g. The Authoritarian Personality. Instead, we get Lee Kwan Yew validated by the research. Kind of ironic/funny that the Frankfurt School has ultimately encouraged white identity.

    It seems very odd though that at the highest level of white identity, Trump probability of support ends at 0.5. Must have sampled in a heavily blue area perhaps.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jason Liu, @TWS, @Mike Zwick, @JohnnyWalker123

    When I was young, Wrigley Field was the place to take your Aunt Myrtle, in from Dubuque, or to go with your Cub Scout troop. Comiskey was the place to go with 4 or 5 guys to get drunk and rowdy. When Harry Caray was the White Sox announcer he would have a Falstaff Beer in front of him at all times and was known as a bad ass iconoclastic, take no prisoners, type of announcer. When he went to the Cubs, he became a lovable old, somewhat senile, man type of announcer. Even he reflected the attitude of each ball park.

  44. @Mr. Blank
    @Jack D

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I've noticed that within the past decade or so there's been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our "Native American heritage." Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don't think these folks are consciously following a "flight from white" strategy -- at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they're just following the signals they're receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn't something to be proud of, so they're looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of.

    If the Left keeps redlining the anti-white stuff, though, it's probably only a matter of time before this becomes a conscious, deliberate survival strategy. And eventually, one imagines, we'll end up with a society where genetic purity police are a thing. Great job, Lefties.

    Replies: @Greg Pandatshang, @Opinionator, @Alec Leamas, @Sunbeam

    Isn’t that kind of a special case, though? Hasn’t there always been an enthusiasm for trace Indian ancestry among white Americans? e.g. toity Virginia families tracing their ancestry back to Pocahontas.

  45. I just watched Paul Krugman on Bloomberg tv say that the reason white union workers support Trump is because of race. He didn’t say anything at all about Trump’s attacks on free trade. Dems are the party of free trade and globalization.

  46. @Anon
    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/rise-of-the-alt-right/

    "An argument Jared Taylor and other white nationalists make is that whites choose to live amongst their own given the opportunity. Church congregations self-segregate by race, whites flee black-dominated cities to white suburbs, etc. There is something to this, but an equally important part of reality is that, left to their own devices, people intermarry. Roughly 15 percent of American marriages are now between people of different races, the greatest portion between whites and Latinos and whites and Asians. Offspring of the racially intermarried may soon constitute the country’s largest 'minority' group. So too with Jews, usually treated by white nationalists as an irredeemably separate entity: their rising intermarriage rates have for decades been an anxious obsession for Jewish communal leaders. Americans sometimes self-segregate, sometimes intermarry, sometimes neither. Spencer likes to present himself as a bearer of profound and inescapable sociobiological truths, realities that political correctness denies and seeks to suppress, but the evidence for his core assertions is ambiguous or non-existent. Real estate prices rise in multicultural Brooklyn, stagnate in white rural Connecticut."

    This mixing is the problem. It destroys identity and heritage, and that is why Globalists push it all over the place.
    Why were Asian and African nations able to expel the European imperialists in the end? Because most Asians remained fully Asian and most Africans remained fully African.
    In contrast, massive race-mixing in Latin America led to confusion of identity and heritage, thus the permanent subjugation of the native populations.



    If there had been little or no race-mixing in Latin America, the indigenous majority might have eventually united to resist and throw out the European imperialists, as happened in India, Vietnam, China, Algeria, Kenya, and etc.
    But because of the racial mixing, the various groups of whites, mestizos, mulattoes, and Indios cannot unite.. and that means European imperialist minority-elites get to rule forever. They rule over a racially confused and divided populace.

    Furthermore, even though race-mixing leads to blending, it never rids society of ethnic tensions that continue to linger since racial variances remain discernible. Look at Brazil. Many people are mixed, but whites see themselves apart from mulattoes(octaroons, quadroons, etc) who don't identify with blacks who don't identify with host of other groups. And even though 1000s of yrs of mixing did lead to a kind of mongrel race in the Indian subcontinent, there are still many racial differences along regional, ethnic, and caste lines. (If anything, it was the exploitation of such differences that had allowed the British to rule for so long. This is why Globalists want to increase diversity. Harder for diverse peoples to unify against the Glob Elites.) Only a fool would say the racial situation is better in Mexico, Venezuela, India, and Brazil than in Japan or Finland. Homogeneity may be less vibrant but it secures more peace and stability(at least if the homogeneous population is talented and mutually trusting enough; on the other hand, if it's homogeneously black, it means a bunch of jive-ass fools running around and acting crazy).

    White Race developed unique qualities of beauty, temperament, and characteristics, as did the other races. To just jumble them altogether with rest of humanity is a form of madness. Why undo 10,000s of yrs of evolution and turn all the world into some melting pot of mestizo-mulatto-ism? Also, race-mixing destroys the very thing that race-mixers are obsessed about. Consider how black men are obsessed about blonde blue-eyed women. Well, the product of black and white mixing is the destruction of the very things that black men find attractive. If mixed-race-ness leads to greater beauty, how come a whole lot of black men still prefer pure white women to mixed-raced mulatto women? The world praised Tiger Woods for being racially mixed, but he had no fondness for mixed-raced women. He wanted pure nordic white women.
    But in mixing with them, he created the kind of children who will grow up to be people he is not attracted to.
    But when pure white women mix with black men, the product is mulatto children. Now, if mulatto-people are so great, why don't black men prefer them over white women? Race-mixing is a moral contradiction.

    When we look at parts of the world that succumbed to interracism, do we see human improvement? Is Central Asia or Eurasia better off in political and economic development than White Europe or Asian East?
    Is North Africa, a mixture of Europeans, Arabs, Africans, and etc. better off than white Europe? Are Latin American nations that are racially very mixed better than white parts of the US?
    Is Brussels better now that it is over 1/3 African and/or Muslim?

    Also, race-mixing does not lead to some happy harmonious race in the US. Most kids born to white-black parents identify as black(and are often hostile to whites), not least because blackness is associated with 'badass cool' and 'noble victimhood'.
    Just look at Kaepernick who is half-white and was raised by a white family.

    The 'new antisemtism' is scapegoating 'whiteness', especially 'white male-ness', as the source of all evils. Jews who bitch about 'antisemitism' use the negative white trope all the time to preach to Diverse Folks that 'white privilege' is the reason for all their problems.

    White/black race-mixing just produces more blacks, often very angry ones, not least because light-skinned blacks wanna show off their street cred by expressing black power rage. White/black race mixing is also humiliating to cucked out white males and black females. After all, it's mostly white women going with black men. White women reject white men for black men because they see black men as superior in thicker voice, dick size, and muscle hardness. So, race-mixing is not about racial equality but racial-sexual hierarchy. It elevates the mandingo over the slow cucked out white boy.
    Race-mixing is also bad for black females. Often loud and abrasive, they are rejected by black men who prefer white girls. So many educated black females are without husbands because black men go off with white girls and since non-black men are not interested in black chicks for the most part.

    And this divergence also exists among whites and Asians. Asian women reject Asian men as inferior and go with white men who are seen as taller and manlier. And some Asian women are into jungle fever just like white girls and go black.. And this means Asian boys are even more cucked out than white boys. So, there is a lot of hierarchy and inequality in interracism.
    Also, just as mulatto kids identify as black, most mixed raced white/asian kids see themselves as white since being 'asian' is seen as geeky and uncool, especially if male.

    And yes, some Jews are worried about intermarriage, but Jews are comforted by the fact that mixed race kids with Jewish blood tend to identify as Jewish cuz Jewishness, like blackness, has the mantle of holy victimhood. Also, being Jewish opens a lot of doors in a world that is dominated by Jewish Boys Network(as Old Boy's Network isn't what it once was). Also, Jews tend to take the cream of the crop from other races. They tend to marry elite whites and elite Asians, and the kids are raised mostly as Jews. Thus, top white and Asian intelligence is absorbed into Jewishness.
    Jewishness is cultural and racial. There is the thing about line of Jewish blood, but it doesn't have to be pure as far as Reform Jews are concerned. If you have some Jewish blood and identify mainly as Jewish, you are Jewish.

    As for white/latino mixing, this is complicated because some of this isn't race-mixing at all. Some Latinos are simply white or mostly white. If someone like Marco Rubio married some white American, that is white and white.
    But there are cases of whites mixing with mestizos. Oftentimes, it's because lower-income white guys cannot get a white woman. So, they go for some squat brown woman. Or it's some Mexican guy marrying some 'fat white trash'. Hardly something to celebrate.

    Anyway, Latin America is very mixed but hardly a model of what humanity should look forward to. If given a choice, a white person would choose a white European nation over a mixed Latino nation like Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, and etc that have so many cultural, political, and racial problems.

    Also, isn't immigration essentially 'white supremacist' in its assumptions since all those non-whites wanna flee from their own kind(seen as inferior) and go live with whites(seen as superior). After all, if diversity and non-whiteness are so wonderful, how come all those non-whites don't want to stay in their non-white nations or move to other non-white nations? They all wanna go to white nations.
    Immigration is seen as 'inclusion', but all those immigrants want to exclude their own race and culture from their own lives(and especially of their children). In wanting to be included by whites, they want to exclude them of their own race and culture.

    Also, even as globalism calls for more diversity and mixing, it also says non-white folks should have a strong cultural identity AGAINST whiteness and blame whites for all their problems.

    "In terms of intellectual accomplishment and range of expertise, the roster of contributors toCommentary and The Public Interest in the 1970s compares to the alt-right like a contemporary version of the ’27 Yankees to, at most, a decent college team."

    It depends on what is meant by intellectualism. If integrity is part of intellectualism, Alt Right has already won by a mile. Why? It is simply more honest. Neo-conservatism had a lot of smart people, but they never spoke honestly since it was mostly about clever ex-Trotskyites esoterically pretending to be 'abstract' and 'principled' while pushing a narrow tribal Zionist interest. As such, all those publications and articles could be boiled down to 'WE want the power.'

    Alt Right is superior in integrity since it doesn't go for such esoteric sleight-of-hand tricks. It is openly and honestly about race and identity. And it blows away current Neoconservatism and 'true conservatism' since both totally support Zionist identity and Israel while dumping on white identity and white racial consciousness. Alt Right's message is, "If Jews wanna serve Jewish identity and interests, that is fine with us. We want to serve our identity and interests."
    It is the Jews who bitch about how 'racist' it is for whites to think in terms of white consciousness but then demand that whites all line up behind Jewish identity and interests and sing hosannas to Israel while ignoring the fact that Jews are leading the War against whiteness.

    Neoconservatism vs Alt Right is like the story of EMPEROR'S NEW CLOTHES. Those who say that the Emperor has wonderful new clothes may have officially approved intellectual pedigree and may be represented by all the respectable institutions. They are 'illustrious' in their accreditation. In contrast, the little boy who sees NO clothes is just a 'nobody'. But HE speaks the truth that no one sees or pretends not to see because their minds are held hostage to authority and respectability.

    We don't care how many publications there have been of THE PUBLIC INTEREST and COMMENTARY. They offered some good articles, but they were fundamentally dishonest because they didn't admit that they were really about 'How to fool goyim into serving Zion'.

    Alt Right, in saying "We won't serve Zion", has 1000x the integrity and courage that 'true conservatives' have, those cucks who suck up to globalism.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Alec Leamas

    I think you misunderstand the racial dynamics in S. America. In Brazil (and Chile, etc.) there are a lot of people who in American terms are “not white” and who have extensive Amerindian or Black ancestry but who identify completely as being “Brazilian” or even white. These people are often shocked when the come to the US and are considered “not white”. To us, it’s almost comical because these people are so “not white” in American terms but when they look at themselves in the mirror, they just don’t see it. (But then again Liz Warren can see her imaginary Amerindian “high cheek bones” – the self delusion process works both ways. Often (as Steve has mentioned) in Michael Jackson fashion, people actually physically transform themselves into looking less black than they really are, especially if they are economically successful. The hair gets straightened and bleached, they have plastic surgery, etc. Because the advantage in their culture is on being part of the majority, not the minority.

    The strategy of the Conquistadors was not “divide and conquer” but completely wiping out the native identity and creating a hybrid identity that was mostly European defined (and centered on religion). Whatever vestiges of the native culture remained were incorporated into the mainstream culture and religion – native gods became Catholic saints, native holiday rituals became part of Catholic holidays. Later, after the colonial powers left (along with almost all the 100% white people), you had some pure whit(ish) immigrants such as the Lebanese who came in and formed the economic ruling class because they were smarter than the hybrids that the Spanish/Portuguese had left behind.

    This is very different than the modern American situation where people are attempting to define themselves as anything BUT the majority culture. It really doesn’t look like we are headed to a situation where everyone will be sort of vaguely brownish.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
    @Jack D


    This is very different than the modern American situation where people are attempting to define themselves as anything BUT the majority culture. It really doesn’t look like we are headed to a situation where everyone will be sort of vaguely brownish.
     
    This is unique to the USA. Everywhere else, brown people make every attempt to lighten the appearance of their skin. Paradoxical, no?

    Only in the USA is weakness considered a benefit.

    Parents work to get their kid an IEP or diagnosed with some behavioral disorder so the kid gets special help at school, more time for tests, etc., never imagining that the label will handicap the kid in the kid's own eyes.

    Uncle Sam has a seemingly limitless Visa Card so getting defined as one of the innumerable people meriting Sammy-Cash or Sammy-Help is a blessing only as long as that Visa Card isn't declined. Some day it will be, and then what?

    Today, many Americans are busy making themselves handicapped because being handicapped appears to attract benefits; this is a Cargo Cult writ large. When reality does finally reassert, the result will be that handicaps will actually BE handicaps again.

    People then will be more like me, reveling in my "white privileges" that come from high IQ, good worth ethic, low time preference and ability to handle complex, abstract logical progressions.
    , @Dumbo
    @Jack D

    With millions of low class Mexicans, it will be at least in large part "vaguely brownish".

    I don't think that Conquistadores in Latin America had any plan, other than making money. It was a colony, they never thought of it as a country. They mixed with indians and blacks because there were not so many white women around.

    Most whites in Brazil, Argentina etc are the result of later European migration to South America (German, Spanish, Italian) in the 19th century.

    So for the Globalist elites of today, I think that it doesn't matter for them if there not a lot of race mixing, is large scale immigration of mixed race people plus low white birth rate achieves the same result, only faster.

  47. @ic1000
    > We’re not the first to tie Trump’s candidacy to white identity politics.
    Hmmm, is there a well-known but unmentionable Internet pundit who has written on this subject?

    > Whites are unlikely to think about how they are a members of a distinct group.
    For some, being polar bear hunted concentes the mind. Others' thinking is influenced by reading acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group.

    But the profs are right, most whites don't notice. Stronger together.

    Replies: @Mr. Blank, @Opinionator, @dc.sunsets

    Given that highly educated whites are reportedly less likely to vote for Trump, I must assume none of them attended a public university with a significant black enrollment.

    Only Helen Keller could attend such a U. without getting race-realist religion.

  48. @Sgt. Joe Friday
    " 'White identity' can’t really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same – a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both 'white' but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other."

    Those white people 150 years ago were more similar ethnically, culturally, religiously, and linguistically than the people inhabiting our country today. If they went to war and almost split the country in two, what are the chances that the USA in its present form will not eventually break up? Pretty poor, I'd say.

    The question is, will the break up be peaceful or violent? If the different "tribes" self segregate over time and more or less ignore one another, then it will be a peaceful divorce. Unfortunately, I am not optimistic that the government would be able to refrain from using force in a misguided, and probably futile attempt to prevent said divorce.

    Replies: @dc.sunsets

    Do an internet search for jayman, HBD and American tribes. He offers a fascinating insight into the different tribes of “whites” in America, showing how different successive waves of immigration from different parts of Europe landed in different places.

    Unless these white tribes overcome their parallels with Native American tribes with regard to cooperation, the size of the reservations American whites eventually hold may be small, indeed.

  49. @27 year old
    There is a great documentary on the Scots Irish White Identity and the impact they had on shaping what we used to think of as the American identity. I think it's called "Born Fighting: The Scots Irish Story in America". It's narrated (and IIRC, produced) by Jim Webb. I highly recommend buying a copy to encourage the production of more White content. If buying plastic discs isn't your thing, it's also available for streaming on the Smithsonian (!) channel.

    Edit- I'm no longer sock filtered. Weird.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Je Suis Charlie Martel

    Heartiste posited long ago that if America is saved, its saviors will be the Scots Irish.

    Trump is of Scottish ancestry.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Opinionator

    Trump's mother was a Highland Scot. The Scots Irish are descended mostly from lowland Scots who lived near the border with England who left to settle Ireland in the 16th and 17th centuries.

    Replies: @mosquito

  50. Just posted at 4chan and relevant to this post:
    Binyamin Appelbaum tweeted:
    the FBI just happens to be largely a lot of white [gentile] men.
    An anonymous poster who shall remained unnamed with average-sized hands:
    So are our Special Forces, our inventors, and our Founding Fathers.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @J.Ross

    Someone needs to be logging all of this ugly anti-Gentilism.

  51. @Mr. Blank
    @Jack D

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I've noticed that within the past decade or so there's been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our "Native American heritage." Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don't think these folks are consciously following a "flight from white" strategy -- at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they're just following the signals they're receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn't something to be proud of, so they're looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of.

    If the Left keeps redlining the anti-white stuff, though, it's probably only a matter of time before this becomes a conscious, deliberate survival strategy. And eventually, one imagines, we'll end up with a society where genetic purity police are a thing. Great job, Lefties.

    Replies: @Greg Pandatshang, @Opinionator, @Alec Leamas, @Sunbeam

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry

    How small?

  52. @Ozymandias
    “I feel solidarity with other white people.”

    I seriously wonder how they're interpreting the answer to this question. It's probably no secret that I have strong white nationalist leanings, but I feel no solidarity with other whites. I consider most of them to be the enemy, and the ethnic group I trust least.

    Replies: @dc.sunsets

    I find solace in r/K theory. https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-theory/rk-selection-theory/

    The whites you hate are the White Rabbits. They are detestable, without doubt, but when K-selection comes (i.e., the illusion of unlimited resources fueling this folly ends), the irredeemable White Rabbits will be slaughtered by their very own pets, or they’ll starve, and the masses of redeemable White Rabbits will adapt to a new reality. You won’t need to do anything but survive and pull up a chair to watch.

    The relatively few K-selected wolves extant today might actually like living in harsher times. At least we won’t have to continually wonder how Nature allows so many horses’ asses to survive.

    The role of the amygdala is only now becoming the focus of research. What we will find is that masses of rabbits, most of the rabbit for at least three generations, have essentially zero ability to problem solve or overcome obstacles. When the credit bubble pops and bills come due, most of these people won’t even be capable of formulating the simplest plan to survive.

    My wife, a 4th grade teacher, increasingly sees a third to half of her class express less problem-solving initiative (actually zero) than what we see in our 3 year old granddaughter.

    Millions of people in North America are today like roses being raised in a greenhouse located in Fargo, ND during the month of January. When the “power” of the credit bubble goes out, very few of them will be hardy enough to survive.

    If the forecast for a Solar Minimum this century also plays out, Natural Selection will cull a whole heck of a lot of what you might term “human detritus.”

    I know it sounds harsh, but times have been far too easy for far too long. Complacency is a disease just as Idiocracy isn’t a comedy.

  53. @Jack D
    @Anon

    I think you misunderstand the racial dynamics in S. America. In Brazil (and Chile, etc.) there are a lot of people who in American terms are "not white" and who have extensive Amerindian or Black ancestry but who identify completely as being "Brazilian" or even white. These people are often shocked when the come to the US and are considered "not white". To us, it's almost comical because these people are so "not white" in American terms but when they look at themselves in the mirror, they just don't see it. (But then again Liz Warren can see her imaginary Amerindian "high cheek bones" - the self delusion process works both ways. Often (as Steve has mentioned) in Michael Jackson fashion, people actually physically transform themselves into looking less black than they really are, especially if they are economically successful. The hair gets straightened and bleached, they have plastic surgery, etc. Because the advantage in their culture is on being part of the majority, not the minority.


    The strategy of the Conquistadors was not "divide and conquer" but completely wiping out the native identity and creating a hybrid identity that was mostly European defined (and centered on religion). Whatever vestiges of the native culture remained were incorporated into the mainstream culture and religion - native gods became Catholic saints, native holiday rituals became part of Catholic holidays. Later, after the colonial powers left (along with almost all the 100% white people), you had some pure whit(ish) immigrants such as the Lebanese who came in and formed the economic ruling class because they were smarter than the hybrids that the Spanish/Portuguese had left behind.

    This is very different than the modern American situation where people are attempting to define themselves as anything BUT the majority culture. It really doesn't look like we are headed to a situation where everyone will be sort of vaguely brownish.

    Replies: @dc.sunsets, @Dumbo

    This is very different than the modern American situation where people are attempting to define themselves as anything BUT the majority culture. It really doesn’t look like we are headed to a situation where everyone will be sort of vaguely brownish.

    This is unique to the USA. Everywhere else, brown people make every attempt to lighten the appearance of their skin. Paradoxical, no?

    Only in the USA is weakness considered a benefit.

    Parents work to get their kid an IEP or diagnosed with some behavioral disorder so the kid gets special help at school, more time for tests, etc., never imagining that the label will handicap the kid in the kid’s own eyes.

    Uncle Sam has a seemingly limitless Visa Card so getting defined as one of the innumerable people meriting Sammy-Cash or Sammy-Help is a blessing only as long as that Visa Card isn’t declined. Some day it will be, and then what?

    Today, many Americans are busy making themselves handicapped because being handicapped appears to attract benefits; this is a Cargo Cult writ large. When reality does finally reassert, the result will be that handicaps will actually BE handicaps again.

    People then will be more like me, reveling in my “white privileges” that come from high IQ, good worth ethic, low time preference and ability to handle complex, abstract logical progressions.

  54. It was owner (through inheritance) P. K. Wrigley who sold the television broadcasting rights to WGN-TV, Channel 9, beginning in 1948. (Radio broadcasting rights had initially been granted free of charge, leading to several competing stations all broadcasting the same Cubs home games, back in the 1920s!) By the time that the Cubs became competitive again, in the Summer of Love, most of their away games also were broadcast by WGN; by the time that I was in my my teens, a few seasons later, it was a rare regular-season Cubs game that was not broadcast locally, on WGN.

    In the middle of last summer, WGN America (formerly Superstation WGN) changed its strategy, and those of us outside the local broadcasting range of Chicagoland no longer are able to watch any Cubs, White Sox, Bulls or other Chicago sports teams on the WGN America cable channel, nor tune in to local WGN news broadcasts to keep up with our former Chicagoland haunts. It was the nationalization of Cubs broadcasts, through WGN-TV’s Superstation incarnation, that turned that drunken oaf, Harry Caray (the former voice of the crosstown White Sox and, before that, the longtime voice of the rival Saint Louis Cardinals), into the broadcasting icon of the Cubs, in place of the much more formidable and versatile Jack Brickhouse, out of Peoria, who had been the Cubs television broadcaster for over thirty years, until forced into retirement by the Cubs’ new owners, the Tribune Company, in 1981:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Brickhouse

    Here is to the 2016 World Series Champions, the Chicago Cubs– and to the late Jack Brickhouse and my own late mother, whose four ticket stubs from Games Four through Seven of the 1945 World Series are now my own most prized possessions!

  55. Whites have been at least somewhat conscious of race, but uncomfortable with it insofar as it generates direct conflict. So the pattern has generally been to talk about it in terms of proxies and veiled language about crime, civic cleanliness, diminished public services, schools etc. So whites get to this sort of high water mark of tacit racial awareness, and the more materially prosperous “boil off” by moving to a place that is more white (and less crime-ridden, cleaner, has better public services and better schools) with only a smattering of the most talented and best behaved minorities – which is comforting and allows them to pretend that they’re not fleeing vibrants to Whitopia. Those whites left behind become more explicitly race conscious, which is now defined as racist. The whites who were able to flee and thereby better manage the situation define themselves by their class, the markers of which in large part are defined by rejecting explicit expressions of race consciousness and embracing notions of diversity. As the diversity of the place to which whites have fled increases, the pattern repeats. It’s this odd paradox where part of the cost of fleeing blacks and other vibrants is to praise their virtues and insincerely hope for the presence of more of them.

  56. Personally, I lived within walking distance of Wrigley Field for 18 years. I always thought that the old Comiskey Park that the White Sox played in on the South Side was cooler looking than Wrigley, which is rather functionalist.

    After visiting both one long weekend in 1988, I would tell people that Wrigley isn’t even the best park in Chicago.

    Best of all was Comiskey’s “picnic area” under the left-field bleachers, complete with a fountain and naked boy. (Was that a replica of Mannekin Pis in Belgiium?) You also had great views of the skyline from one of the corner corridors, if the game got dull. And the retired Nancy Faust is still the only organist anyone can name, outside of one’s home team’s. She belongs in the Hall of Fame. Seriously.

    But yeah, the neighborhood was descending fast. Wasn’t it the one that produced Richard Daley? Gentrification is overdue.

    I also remember the bar that Babe Ruth would visit between games of a doubleheader. That’s as dead as the doubleheader itself– it disappeared a year or two before the ballpark.

    Bill Veeck’s ideas outside the foul lines made the difference. Unfortunately, MLB was more likely to listen to his ideas for inside the foul lines, which weren’t so good.

    Bill’s son Mike co-founded the Saint Paul Saints with Bill Murray. Municipal Stadium, not the horrific Metrodome, was the best venue in the Twin Cities in the ’90s. Indeed, the only joy at the Hump was watching the infectious Kirby Puckett, who grew up down the street from Comiskey in the Robert Taylor Homes. I suppose he was their penance.

  57. @Mr. Blank
    @Jack D

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I've noticed that within the past decade or so there's been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our "Native American heritage." Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don't think these folks are consciously following a "flight from white" strategy -- at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they're just following the signals they're receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn't something to be proud of, so they're looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of.

    If the Left keeps redlining the anti-white stuff, though, it's probably only a matter of time before this becomes a conscious, deliberate survival strategy. And eventually, one imagines, we'll end up with a society where genetic purity police are a thing. Great job, Lefties.

    Replies: @Greg Pandatshang, @Opinionator, @Alec Leamas, @Sunbeam

    Isn’t 2% Cherokee or Choctaw blood at least perceived as a prophylactic against some (but by no means all) accusations of racism?

    As we’ve seen in the case of Senator Warren, it can have significant material and career benefits as well.

  58. @Anon
    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/rise-of-the-alt-right/

    "An argument Jared Taylor and other white nationalists make is that whites choose to live amongst their own given the opportunity. Church congregations self-segregate by race, whites flee black-dominated cities to white suburbs, etc. There is something to this, but an equally important part of reality is that, left to their own devices, people intermarry. Roughly 15 percent of American marriages are now between people of different races, the greatest portion between whites and Latinos and whites and Asians. Offspring of the racially intermarried may soon constitute the country’s largest 'minority' group. So too with Jews, usually treated by white nationalists as an irredeemably separate entity: their rising intermarriage rates have for decades been an anxious obsession for Jewish communal leaders. Americans sometimes self-segregate, sometimes intermarry, sometimes neither. Spencer likes to present himself as a bearer of profound and inescapable sociobiological truths, realities that political correctness denies and seeks to suppress, but the evidence for his core assertions is ambiguous or non-existent. Real estate prices rise in multicultural Brooklyn, stagnate in white rural Connecticut."

    This mixing is the problem. It destroys identity and heritage, and that is why Globalists push it all over the place.
    Why were Asian and African nations able to expel the European imperialists in the end? Because most Asians remained fully Asian and most Africans remained fully African.
    In contrast, massive race-mixing in Latin America led to confusion of identity and heritage, thus the permanent subjugation of the native populations.



    If there had been little or no race-mixing in Latin America, the indigenous majority might have eventually united to resist and throw out the European imperialists, as happened in India, Vietnam, China, Algeria, Kenya, and etc.
    But because of the racial mixing, the various groups of whites, mestizos, mulattoes, and Indios cannot unite.. and that means European imperialist minority-elites get to rule forever. They rule over a racially confused and divided populace.

    Furthermore, even though race-mixing leads to blending, it never rids society of ethnic tensions that continue to linger since racial variances remain discernible. Look at Brazil. Many people are mixed, but whites see themselves apart from mulattoes(octaroons, quadroons, etc) who don't identify with blacks who don't identify with host of other groups. And even though 1000s of yrs of mixing did lead to a kind of mongrel race in the Indian subcontinent, there are still many racial differences along regional, ethnic, and caste lines. (If anything, it was the exploitation of such differences that had allowed the British to rule for so long. This is why Globalists want to increase diversity. Harder for diverse peoples to unify against the Glob Elites.) Only a fool would say the racial situation is better in Mexico, Venezuela, India, and Brazil than in Japan or Finland. Homogeneity may be less vibrant but it secures more peace and stability(at least if the homogeneous population is talented and mutually trusting enough; on the other hand, if it's homogeneously black, it means a bunch of jive-ass fools running around and acting crazy).

    White Race developed unique qualities of beauty, temperament, and characteristics, as did the other races. To just jumble them altogether with rest of humanity is a form of madness. Why undo 10,000s of yrs of evolution and turn all the world into some melting pot of mestizo-mulatto-ism? Also, race-mixing destroys the very thing that race-mixers are obsessed about. Consider how black men are obsessed about blonde blue-eyed women. Well, the product of black and white mixing is the destruction of the very things that black men find attractive. If mixed-race-ness leads to greater beauty, how come a whole lot of black men still prefer pure white women to mixed-raced mulatto women? The world praised Tiger Woods for being racially mixed, but he had no fondness for mixed-raced women. He wanted pure nordic white women.
    But in mixing with them, he created the kind of children who will grow up to be people he is not attracted to.
    But when pure white women mix with black men, the product is mulatto children. Now, if mulatto-people are so great, why don't black men prefer them over white women? Race-mixing is a moral contradiction.

    When we look at parts of the world that succumbed to interracism, do we see human improvement? Is Central Asia or Eurasia better off in political and economic development than White Europe or Asian East?
    Is North Africa, a mixture of Europeans, Arabs, Africans, and etc. better off than white Europe? Are Latin American nations that are racially very mixed better than white parts of the US?
    Is Brussels better now that it is over 1/3 African and/or Muslim?

    Also, race-mixing does not lead to some happy harmonious race in the US. Most kids born to white-black parents identify as black(and are often hostile to whites), not least because blackness is associated with 'badass cool' and 'noble victimhood'.
    Just look at Kaepernick who is half-white and was raised by a white family.

    The 'new antisemtism' is scapegoating 'whiteness', especially 'white male-ness', as the source of all evils. Jews who bitch about 'antisemitism' use the negative white trope all the time to preach to Diverse Folks that 'white privilege' is the reason for all their problems.

    White/black race-mixing just produces more blacks, often very angry ones, not least because light-skinned blacks wanna show off their street cred by expressing black power rage. White/black race mixing is also humiliating to cucked out white males and black females. After all, it's mostly white women going with black men. White women reject white men for black men because they see black men as superior in thicker voice, dick size, and muscle hardness. So, race-mixing is not about racial equality but racial-sexual hierarchy. It elevates the mandingo over the slow cucked out white boy.
    Race-mixing is also bad for black females. Often loud and abrasive, they are rejected by black men who prefer white girls. So many educated black females are without husbands because black men go off with white girls and since non-black men are not interested in black chicks for the most part.

    And this divergence also exists among whites and Asians. Asian women reject Asian men as inferior and go with white men who are seen as taller and manlier. And some Asian women are into jungle fever just like white girls and go black.. And this means Asian boys are even more cucked out than white boys. So, there is a lot of hierarchy and inequality in interracism.
    Also, just as mulatto kids identify as black, most mixed raced white/asian kids see themselves as white since being 'asian' is seen as geeky and uncool, especially if male.

    And yes, some Jews are worried about intermarriage, but Jews are comforted by the fact that mixed race kids with Jewish blood tend to identify as Jewish cuz Jewishness, like blackness, has the mantle of holy victimhood. Also, being Jewish opens a lot of doors in a world that is dominated by Jewish Boys Network(as Old Boy's Network isn't what it once was). Also, Jews tend to take the cream of the crop from other races. They tend to marry elite whites and elite Asians, and the kids are raised mostly as Jews. Thus, top white and Asian intelligence is absorbed into Jewishness.
    Jewishness is cultural and racial. There is the thing about line of Jewish blood, but it doesn't have to be pure as far as Reform Jews are concerned. If you have some Jewish blood and identify mainly as Jewish, you are Jewish.

    As for white/latino mixing, this is complicated because some of this isn't race-mixing at all. Some Latinos are simply white or mostly white. If someone like Marco Rubio married some white American, that is white and white.
    But there are cases of whites mixing with mestizos. Oftentimes, it's because lower-income white guys cannot get a white woman. So, they go for some squat brown woman. Or it's some Mexican guy marrying some 'fat white trash'. Hardly something to celebrate.

    Anyway, Latin America is very mixed but hardly a model of what humanity should look forward to. If given a choice, a white person would choose a white European nation over a mixed Latino nation like Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, and etc that have so many cultural, political, and racial problems.

    Also, isn't immigration essentially 'white supremacist' in its assumptions since all those non-whites wanna flee from their own kind(seen as inferior) and go live with whites(seen as superior). After all, if diversity and non-whiteness are so wonderful, how come all those non-whites don't want to stay in their non-white nations or move to other non-white nations? They all wanna go to white nations.
    Immigration is seen as 'inclusion', but all those immigrants want to exclude their own race and culture from their own lives(and especially of their children). In wanting to be included by whites, they want to exclude them of their own race and culture.

    Also, even as globalism calls for more diversity and mixing, it also says non-white folks should have a strong cultural identity AGAINST whiteness and blame whites for all their problems.

    "In terms of intellectual accomplishment and range of expertise, the roster of contributors toCommentary and The Public Interest in the 1970s compares to the alt-right like a contemporary version of the ’27 Yankees to, at most, a decent college team."

    It depends on what is meant by intellectualism. If integrity is part of intellectualism, Alt Right has already won by a mile. Why? It is simply more honest. Neo-conservatism had a lot of smart people, but they never spoke honestly since it was mostly about clever ex-Trotskyites esoterically pretending to be 'abstract' and 'principled' while pushing a narrow tribal Zionist interest. As such, all those publications and articles could be boiled down to 'WE want the power.'

    Alt Right is superior in integrity since it doesn't go for such esoteric sleight-of-hand tricks. It is openly and honestly about race and identity. And it blows away current Neoconservatism and 'true conservatism' since both totally support Zionist identity and Israel while dumping on white identity and white racial consciousness. Alt Right's message is, "If Jews wanna serve Jewish identity and interests, that is fine with us. We want to serve our identity and interests."
    It is the Jews who bitch about how 'racist' it is for whites to think in terms of white consciousness but then demand that whites all line up behind Jewish identity and interests and sing hosannas to Israel while ignoring the fact that Jews are leading the War against whiteness.

    Neoconservatism vs Alt Right is like the story of EMPEROR'S NEW CLOTHES. Those who say that the Emperor has wonderful new clothes may have officially approved intellectual pedigree and may be represented by all the respectable institutions. They are 'illustrious' in their accreditation. In contrast, the little boy who sees NO clothes is just a 'nobody'. But HE speaks the truth that no one sees or pretends not to see because their minds are held hostage to authority and respectability.

    We don't care how many publications there have been of THE PUBLIC INTEREST and COMMENTARY. They offered some good articles, but they were fundamentally dishonest because they didn't admit that they were really about 'How to fool goyim into serving Zion'.

    Alt Right, in saying "We won't serve Zion", has 1000x the integrity and courage that 'true conservatives' have, those cucks who suck up to globalism.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Alec Leamas

    Roughly 15 percent of American marriages are now between people of different races, the greatest portion between whites and Latinos and whites and Asians.

    This is probably much less in practice, since the Latino category is a ridiculous catch-all that doesn’t really describe a race (it is a cultural-linguistic subgroup). So if Boston born Irish-American Jimmy O’Monaghan marries Miami Cuban-American Conquistador-descendant Marielena Fernandez, is this really an interracial marriage?

  59. the prevailing view has been that most whites fail to notice their own whiteness. In a society dominated by white people, whiteness simply fades into the background.

    This is certainly not the case in the SF Bay Area. On my commuter train car, I’m usually the only white guy for the first 5-6 stops (everyone else is Indian).

    At work I can’t fail to notice the difficulty of verbal and written communication with people who think verb tense, mood and number don’t matter.

    Maybe at the university departments where these deep thinkers teach, it’s still a white club.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    Maybe at the university departments where these deep thinkers teach, it’s still a white club.

    Do you sincerely consider them to be deep thinkers?

    Replies: @Anonymous

  60. FWIW, on census forms I identify as white, but on forms at work and my last application for a mortgage I identified as black Hispanic. Our loan officer chuckled a bit when she saw that, but she didn’t change the form.

    The census data is where they draw the numbers for the quotas, set asides, etc., so you never want to misrepresent yourself on that. Reported race and ethnicity at work is how your employer hits their target, so lie away. They probably won’t change it, and they almost certainly cannot fire you for it. Who the hell is going to start questioning all that data? Who are they to question how you identify racially? If Elizabeth Warren can get away with it why can’t I?

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Wilkey

    If I was 18-year-old without a track record, I'd list Hispanic on everything but the census. Fuck this corrupt system.

    We're all Jews now. I hold no allegiance to system that openly discriminates against me.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123, @Wilkey

    , @Opinionator
    @Wilkey

    Any person growing up in Southern California nowadays probably has a legitimate claim to being classified as Hispanic.

  61. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonym

    I quite agree.

    I just was in the mood to write about baseball and Chicago.

    Replies: @Anonym, @Sam

    That is what you get for having a high IQ and a wide range of interests and observations that allows you to make understandable analogies. In this case it felt a bit forced but somehow you still managed to make a connection.

    RE:Whiteness
    The real question is if future articles will be as understanding as this one was. I can’t fathom that that would be the case.

  62. In a funny way, this rise of white identity in America reminds me of the rise of Zionism in 19th century Europe.

    The Jews had of course always had a separate identity, but for close to 2000 years it had been a religious one. So when in the mid-1800s, with the Hungarians, Romanians, Ukrainians, Czechs, Slovaks, etc keen to establish their own states — membership in which pointedly excluded the Jews — so too did more and more Jews start thinking along the same lines.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    Was it closure to jews or was it the openness to them seen in the 19th C that triggered Zionism (which rose in the 19th C)?

    Many Zionists were afraid of intermarriage.

    Replies: @International Jew

    , @Randal
    @International Jew

    I've always regarded Zionism as jewish nationalism. Is that even controversial? I'm not sure what counts as "anti-Semitic" these days.

    Replies: @International Jew

  63. @Mr. Blank
    @Jack D

    I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I've noticed that within the past decade or so there's been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our "Native American heritage." Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don't think these folks are consciously following a "flight from white" strategy -- at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they're just following the signals they're receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn't something to be proud of, so they're looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of.

    If the Left keeps redlining the anti-white stuff, though, it's probably only a matter of time before this becomes a conscious, deliberate survival strategy. And eventually, one imagines, we'll end up with a society where genetic purity police are a thing. Great job, Lefties.

    Replies: @Greg Pandatshang, @Opinionator, @Alec Leamas, @Sunbeam

    “I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I’ve noticed that within the past decade or so there’s been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our “Native American heritage.” Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don’t think these folks are consciously following a “flight from white” strategy — at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they’re just following the signals they’re receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn’t something to be proud of, so they’re looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of.”

    This is just an anecdote, but it’s been a thing in the South for a long time to be proud you had Indian Blood (using my native vernacular). So much so it’s been mocked here a few times because the DNA evidence seems to show otherwise (though I also suspect that “native” Southerners are pretty unlikely to pay $100 or whatever it is for the 23AndMe test).

    Anyway that sort of thing was always thought of as cool when I was growing up. Same environment where having an arrowhead hanging on a leather thong to wear around your neck looked awesome.

    As an aside I do not and never have lived around a large Indian reservation like are present in the West. But as a Southerner I’ve always wondered about you West coast and Western guys in general complaining about Mexicans and Indians being drunkards. Mainly because I’ve never noticed Mexicans drinking any more than white people.

    Or maybe there is a difference between West Virginia type whites and you guys. Gonna have to pop a cold one and think about whose side I’m on.

    But just to say wanting to believe you have Indian ancestry isn’t the same thing as not wanting to be white, at least not in all areas of the country.

    Oh and as another anecdote, something I always heard was if you had trouble growing a beard, you probably had Indian blood. And the Tequila thing.

    • Replies: @Mr. Blank
    @Sunbeam

    Yeah, I'm a Southerner, and I've heard that before: That a lot of Southern families have acquired a fake "Indian" ancestry because it was once considered cool to have "Indian blood."

    I admit I've never looked into it, and it wouldn't exactly surprise me to find my "Cherokee" ancestry was bullshit. A relative who's done extensive digging into our family history insists it's legit, though, and my grandmother (from whose branch of the family I purportedly got my "Cherokee blood") had noticeably Indian-looking facial features — enough that she used to get asked about it.

    So I don't really know. But it's a charming little story that's been in my family forever.

    I could probably do the 23andme thing to find out for sure, but I just never had strong feelings about it either way. Nobody's ever going to mistake ME for a Cherokee, so why bother? :)

  64. @International Jew

    the prevailing view has been that most whites fail to notice their own whiteness. In a society dominated by white people, whiteness simply fades into the background.
     
    This is certainly not the case in the SF Bay Area. On my commuter train car, I'm usually the only white guy for the first 5-6 stops (everyone else is Indian).

    At work I can't fail to notice the difficulty of verbal and written communication with people who think verb tense, mood and number don't matter.

    Maybe at the university departments where these deep thinkers teach, it's still a white club.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Maybe at the university departments where these deep thinkers teach, it’s still a white club.

    Do you sincerely consider them to be deep thinkers?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Opinionator

    Um, I think IJ was being sarcastic.

  65. @Jack D
    So "white identity" is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of "non-white identity" - everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn't whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here's another idea - let's all have an identity as "Americans". Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let's get rid of it. It doesn't mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as "Americans". Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    "White identity" can't really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same - a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both "white" but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further "flight from white" - first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the "white identity" folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become "Latinos", etc., etc. until "whites" are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break "white" down even further - Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well - it makes their job much easier.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Mr. Blank, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @melendwyr, @Anonym, @NOTA, @bored identity

    >Here’s another idea – let’s all have an identity as “Americans”.

    Won’t work because “American” doesn’t mean anything any more. Back in the 1940s, there was a dominant WASP culture, a common European ancestry and almost no non-European immigration. We were culturally and genetically very similar – in not perfectly so. We also made citizenship difficult to attain and thus worth something.

    We were an exclusive club of like-minded and genetically similar people.

    That’s dead. I repeat, dead. It will never come back. Monty Python Parrot Dead!

    Here’s the situation today:

    1. No dominant culture
    2. Open borders, i.e. zero exclusiveness to this club
    3. Different genetics
    4. Different – really different not some BS Protestant/Catholic gap – religions
    5. Disdain for the people who founded and built the country

    The United States is an economic zone with a boarding house on it. It’s just a place where people work. What does being an “American” even mean?

    Is it freedom-loving?
    Lots of countries have democracies. Big deal, especially when open borders constantly devalues my vote. Also, I can get fired for publicly stating verifiable facts about race. Is that freedom-loving? The govt forces me to live with people that I don’t want to live around. Is that freedom-loving. The gov discriminates against me because of my race. Is that freedom-loving?

    Americans have no shared race, no shared culture, no shared religion, no shared ethnicity. Therefore, the term American means nothing.

    Whatever America was is dead, and it ain’t coming back. I’m not American. I’m white, and I’ll look out for my people, my nation. Citizenship only means something if it’s based on blood, because all other definitions can – and eventually will – be manipulated.

    • Replies: @mosquito
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    The United States is an economic zone with a boarding house on it. It’s just a place where people work.
     
    New Class types have begun describing themselves with a new term: "I'm based out of London." "I'm based out of San Francisco." "I'm based out of Dubai." As opposed to "I'm from X" or "I live in X" or "My home is X." It's a badge of pride to disconnect yourself. "Yeah, if America doesn't work out for me I'll change my base somewhere else."

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  66. @International Jew
    In a funny way, this rise of white identity in America reminds me of the rise of Zionism in 19th century Europe.

    The Jews had of course always had a separate identity, but for close to 2000 years it had been a religious one. So when in the mid-1800s, with the Hungarians, Romanians, Ukrainians, Czechs, Slovaks, etc keen to establish their own states — membership in which pointedly excluded the Jews — so too did more and more Jews start thinking along the same lines.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Randal

    Was it closure to jews or was it the openness to them seen in the 19th C that triggered Zionism (which rose in the 19th C)?

    Many Zionists were afraid of intermarriage.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Opinionator

    Not in the east (ie Hungary, Romania and the Slavic countries). There was next to no intermarriage there before 1918, and that's where 90% of European Jews lived and where the Zionist movement flourished.

    In the West — Germany, France Britain — assimilation was indeed a concern. And the most famous Zionist of them all, Theodor Herzl, was Western.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  67. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    My father-in-law played the tuba on the Bozo the Clown TV show. When the dog on the show would get retired, he'd bring him home to the farm for the kids to take care of.

    Replies: @josh, @melendwyr

    Is that an euphemism? I’m genuinely uncertain.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @melendwyr

    Actually, my in-laws did take in dozens of people's dogs at their farm in the country. They were city workers who moved to a farm in 1970 while continuing to mostly work in Chicago. So their city coworkers were always pawning pet dogs who had become inconvenient off on them. They usually had five or six dogs around the farm.

    I think they also took in various Chelveston the Ducks from the Bozo the Clown TV show:

    https://www.pinterest.com/pin/535506211912188106/

  68. @Wilkey
    FWIW, on census forms I identify as white, but on forms at work and my last application for a mortgage I identified as black Hispanic. Our loan officer chuckled a bit when she saw that, but she didn't change the form.

    The census data is where they draw the numbers for the quotas, set asides, etc., so you never want to misrepresent yourself on that. Reported race and ethnicity at work is how your employer hits their target, so lie away. They probably won't change it, and they almost certainly cannot fire you for it. Who the hell is going to start questioning all that data? Who are they to question how you identify racially? If Elizabeth Warren can get away with it why can't I?

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Opinionator

    If I was 18-year-old without a track record, I’d list Hispanic on everything but the census. Fuck this corrupt system.

    We’re all Jews now. I hold no allegiance to system that openly discriminates against me.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    If we were all Jews, we could at least get a damn border wall.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    , @Wilkey
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    "If I was 18-year-old without a track record, I’d list Hispanic on everything but the census."

    There's really no reason you can't start now. It's not like they're ever going to start looking through the paper trail on how you've identified racially and ethnically. If they dare to question you then get all riled up and ask them why how you "choose to identify" is any business of theirs.

    "Hi, I'm Wilkey, and I'm a black Hispanic. Ignore the blond(ish) hair and blue eyes."

  69. @Wilkey
    FWIW, on census forms I identify as white, but on forms at work and my last application for a mortgage I identified as black Hispanic. Our loan officer chuckled a bit when she saw that, but she didn't change the form.

    The census data is where they draw the numbers for the quotas, set asides, etc., so you never want to misrepresent yourself on that. Reported race and ethnicity at work is how your employer hits their target, so lie away. They probably won't change it, and they almost certainly cannot fire you for it. Who the hell is going to start questioning all that data? Who are they to question how you identify racially? If Elizabeth Warren can get away with it why can't I?

    Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country, @Opinionator

    Any person growing up in Southern California nowadays probably has a legitimate claim to being classified as Hispanic.

  70. But our data provide some of the clearest evidence that ongoing demographic changes in the United States are increasing white racial identity. White identity, in turn, is pushing white Americans to support Trump.

    Gosh, using identity politics against the interests of whites pushes whites to seek to push back with their own identity grouping. Who’d have thought that would happen, eh?

    When we talk about white identity, we’re not referring to the alt-right fringe, the white nationalist movement or others who espouse racist beliefs

    Yes, you wouldn’t want to give any credit to the people who, often at considerable personal cost, pointed out that what you have now noticed is happening would happen, if policies weren’t changed.

    More than any other group, Hispanics have been in the Trump campaign’s crosshairs.

    Is this anything more than an outright lie? As far as I can see Trump hasn’t ever “targeted Hispanics” – he’s opposed uncontrolled immigration. Then again, I’m not American and it’s perfectly possible I haven’t noticed it.

  71. @International Jew
    In a funny way, this rise of white identity in America reminds me of the rise of Zionism in 19th century Europe.

    The Jews had of course always had a separate identity, but for close to 2000 years it had been a religious one. So when in the mid-1800s, with the Hungarians, Romanians, Ukrainians, Czechs, Slovaks, etc keen to establish their own states — membership in which pointedly excluded the Jews — so too did more and more Jews start thinking along the same lines.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Randal

    I’ve always regarded Zionism as jewish nationalism. Is that even controversial? I’m not sure what counts as “anti-Semitic” these days.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Randal

    Before Zionism, the Jewish model for long-term survival was to keep our heads down and hope the gentiles leave us alone. Retaking our ancestral land — Israel — was on the back burner, something that would happen when the messiah arrived.

    Now as long as the external, ie nonjewish, society was focussed on its Christianity, we didn't care to have any part of it. But when, in the 1800s, the Christians started talking about universal values and liberalism, well, that sounded good and we wanted in. Unfortunately they didn't want us in.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  72. @Jack D
    So "white identity" is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of "non-white identity" - everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn't whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here's another idea - let's all have an identity as "Americans". Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let's get rid of it. It doesn't mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as "Americans". Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    "White identity" can't really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same - a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both "white" but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further "flight from white" - first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the "white identity" folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become "Latinos", etc., etc. until "whites" are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break "white" down even further - Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well - it makes their job much easier.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Mr. Blank, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @melendwyr, @Anonym, @NOTA, @bored identity

    Yes, we’d all be better off if we all identified as Americans first. But not everyone is doing that. And that puts those that do, at a disadvantage. Sure, the way to win the Repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma is to cooperate – but what happens when you’re paired with someone who refuses to realize that?

    Defect, baby, defect.

    • Replies: @Marcus
    @melendwyr

    I'd oppose proposition national-identity on principle, but it's also impractical: for a generation now, all "minority" students have imbibed a steady diet of the (((Howard Zinn))) version of history, there's no way they will see America as anything other than a means to exact revenge on whitey.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  73. @Jack D
    @Anon

    I think you misunderstand the racial dynamics in S. America. In Brazil (and Chile, etc.) there are a lot of people who in American terms are "not white" and who have extensive Amerindian or Black ancestry but who identify completely as being "Brazilian" or even white. These people are often shocked when the come to the US and are considered "not white". To us, it's almost comical because these people are so "not white" in American terms but when they look at themselves in the mirror, they just don't see it. (But then again Liz Warren can see her imaginary Amerindian "high cheek bones" - the self delusion process works both ways. Often (as Steve has mentioned) in Michael Jackson fashion, people actually physically transform themselves into looking less black than they really are, especially if they are economically successful. The hair gets straightened and bleached, they have plastic surgery, etc. Because the advantage in their culture is on being part of the majority, not the minority.


    The strategy of the Conquistadors was not "divide and conquer" but completely wiping out the native identity and creating a hybrid identity that was mostly European defined (and centered on religion). Whatever vestiges of the native culture remained were incorporated into the mainstream culture and religion - native gods became Catholic saints, native holiday rituals became part of Catholic holidays. Later, after the colonial powers left (along with almost all the 100% white people), you had some pure whit(ish) immigrants such as the Lebanese who came in and formed the economic ruling class because they were smarter than the hybrids that the Spanish/Portuguese had left behind.

    This is very different than the modern American situation where people are attempting to define themselves as anything BUT the majority culture. It really doesn't look like we are headed to a situation where everyone will be sort of vaguely brownish.

    Replies: @dc.sunsets, @Dumbo

    With millions of low class Mexicans, it will be at least in large part “vaguely brownish”.

    I don’t think that Conquistadores in Latin America had any plan, other than making money. It was a colony, they never thought of it as a country. They mixed with indians and blacks because there were not so many white women around.

    Most whites in Brazil, Argentina etc are the result of later European migration to South America (German, Spanish, Italian) in the 19th century.

    So for the Globalist elites of today, I think that it doesn’t matter for them if there not a lot of race mixing, is large scale immigration of mixed race people plus low white birth rate achieves the same result, only faster.

  74. @Anonymous
    "WGN also broadcast near-constant Bozo the Clown, as I recall."

    I ate my elementary school breakfast cereal watching Bozo the Clown on WGN in the 80s in Texas.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Father O'Hara

    Did you get the REAL Bozo,namely Bob Bell,or the secondary Bozo? If not Bob Bell,sorry,it wasn’t the true,pure Bozo.

  75. @melendwyr
    @Jack D

    Yes, we'd all be better off if we all identified as Americans first. But not everyone is doing that. And that puts those that do, at a disadvantage. Sure, the way to win the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma is to cooperate - but what happens when you're paired with someone who refuses to realize that?

    Defect, baby, defect.

    Replies: @Marcus

    I’d oppose proposition national-identity on principle, but it’s also impractical: for a generation now, all “minority” students have imbibed a steady diet of the (((Howard Zinn))) version of history, there’s no way they will see America as anything other than a means to exact revenge on whitey.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Marcus

    Is the Howard Zinn view at odds with a proposition nation mentality?

    Replies: @Marcus

  76. @Opinionator
    @ic1000

    acclaimed award winning NYT bestsellers about how the author loathes members of a distinct group

    Cite?

    Replies: @ic1000

    Steve reviewed Ta-Nehesi Coates’ Between the World and Me when it came out, about a year ago. Well written and worth a read. But a bit depressing that Coates’ wisdom is considered mainstream, as I’d prefer to live in a ‘Citizenist’nation.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @ic1000

    Which is well-written, Steve's review or Coates's book?

  77. @TWS
    @Anonym

    If you have never heard an illegal murder your friend or watched them chasing down someone with machetes or had one burst into your daughter's birthday party while fleeing the police, you might be forgiven for a fuzzy sense of the differences and buying the narrative. Having to walk your ten year old daughter to the corner grocery because the illegals leer and make obscene comments and gestures or try to proposition her gives you a sense there's something different.

    If on the other hand you live in proximity to a big group like say those parents at a high school on Long Island in NY where MS-13 has taken over the town and five children have been beaten to death by Obama's 'dreamers' then you damn well are aware of the differences.

    You have to be a moron, SJW or cuck to fail to see the differences if you live near them.

    Replies: @Ivy

    Sweden and Germany are seeing daily the horrible consequences of their immigration/refugee policies. At some point, there may be some SJW/SWPL crossover reporting on international news that makes the domestic idiots take more notice.

  78. @27 year old
    There is a great documentary on the Scots Irish White Identity and the impact they had on shaping what we used to think of as the American identity. I think it's called "Born Fighting: The Scots Irish Story in America". It's narrated (and IIRC, produced) by Jim Webb. I highly recommend buying a copy to encourage the production of more White content. If buying plastic discs isn't your thing, it's also available for streaming on the Smithsonian (!) channel.

    Edit- I'm no longer sock filtered. Weird.

    Replies: @Opinionator, @Je Suis Charlie Martel

    It is also a book, by Jim Webb. I once bought several copies and I give them to people at work and in my neighborhood after discussing “so, where are you from? where is your family from? etc.”
    Lots of Scots-Irish are just glad to have made out of the Hollers and onto the Cul-de-sac and don’t know about or think highly of their contribution to the making of this country. I am not Scots-Irish myself, but I think they’re cool and have been denigrated

  79. @Anonym
    Seems like an article that warrants more discussion than an opportunity to talk about baseball and missed opportunities in real estate (interesting though it is).

    It provides evidence for what I've known personally - exposure to high concentrations of non-whites breeds a feeling of white identity. This is perhaps the most calm, non-judgmental and rational look at this phenomenon and where it is headed I have read in a mainstreamy publication.

    Normally this sort of research is composed with leading questions, being designed to pathologize white identity e.g. The Authoritarian Personality. Instead, we get Lee Kwan Yew validated by the research. Kind of ironic/funny that the Frankfurt School has ultimately encouraged white identity.

    It seems very odd though that at the highest level of white identity, Trump probability of support ends at 0.5. Must have sampled in a heavily blue area perhaps.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Jason Liu, @TWS, @Mike Zwick, @JohnnyWalker123

    You watch that game, Donut?

    • Replies: @Anonym
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Donut? I am certainly not Donut. Maybe I need to sleep more before posting if getting confused for Donut.

    I rarely watch sports. Yeah, I know the Cubs and their record, before this year too.

  80. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Wilkey

    If I was 18-year-old without a track record, I'd list Hispanic on everything but the census. Fuck this corrupt system.

    We're all Jews now. I hold no allegiance to system that openly discriminates against me.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123, @Wilkey

    If we were all Jews, we could at least get a damn border wall.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Whites should give serious consideration to converting en mass to Judaism.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Anonymous

  81. @Hidden Cat
    The NYT sent me a Breaking News email (!) that the FBI latest revelations have had no effect, all parties are welded in... etc., and more etc. HOWEVER, McClatchy which, IMO, is a lot more trust worthy and reputable as a news reporting agency.... says different:

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article112106442.html

    Independents leaning toward Trump in polls after FBI furor erupts


    WASHINGTON The furor over the FBI probe of Hillary Clinton’s emails is helping
    Donald Trump among independent voters in key swing states. ....

    In Wisconsin, among independent voters, Clinton was up by 7 over Trump
    on Wednesday and Thursday. Friday, Trump jumped to a 10 point
    advantage, then back to 8 in Saturday through Monday interviews. ....

    “Within partisan identifiers, there is evidence that some undecided
    Republicans moved to support of Trump over the survey period and that
    independents shifted from a Clinton advantage to a Trump advantage,
    though all the shifts are inside the margin of error.”

     

    Replies: @Anonym

    Interesting how even slashdot, which leans Democrat or libertarian, rarely Repub let alone alt-right, is responding to the election. Outstanding comments in related posts are mostly realistic about Clinton.

    http://m.slashdot.org/story/318309/outstanding

    http://m.slashdot.org/story/318299

    Heck, even the poll has a lot of very salient points about the election and especially HRC corruption.

    http://m.slashdot.org/poll/3011/outstanding

    Yes, Hillary beats Trump 29% to 21%. But it’s slashdot.

  82. @Jack D
    So "white identity" is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of "non-white identity" - everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn't whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here's another idea - let's all have an identity as "Americans". Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let's get rid of it. It doesn't mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as "Americans". Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    "White identity" can't really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same - a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both "white" but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further "flight from white" - first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the "white identity" folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become "Latinos", etc., etc. until "whites" are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break "white" down even further - Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well - it makes their job much easier.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Mr. Blank, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @melendwyr, @Anonym, @NOTA, @bored identity

    That ship has sailed, Jack. We look the other way on reddit when they have their “I’m a Mexican/ Asian/ LGBTWTFBBQ for Trump!” However, Citizenism is just the (much) lesser evil we vote for today. I don’t have a non-white bolthole to flee to, and I am not going to pretend to be something else like some beta loser. Whites are European and Western Civilization would not exist without us. No apologies for being white.

  83. @Jack D
    So "white identity" is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of "non-white identity" - everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn't whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here's another idea - let's all have an identity as "Americans". Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let's get rid of it. It doesn't mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as "Americans". Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    "White identity" can't really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same - a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both "white" but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further "flight from white" - first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the "white identity" folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become "Latinos", etc., etc. until "whites" are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break "white" down even further - Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well - it makes their job much easier.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Mr. Blank, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @melendwyr, @Anonym, @NOTA, @bored identity

    Ethnic identity politics works out really badly for the voters. I’d rather we try to forge an American identity. This is, however, the opposite of the direction in which the country seems to be moving.

  84. @JohnnyWalker123
    @Anonym

    You watch that game, Donut?

    Replies: @Anonym

    Donut? I am certainly not Donut. Maybe I need to sleep more before posting if getting confused for Donut.

    I rarely watch sports. Yeah, I know the Cubs and their record, before this year too.

  85. @J.Ross
    Just posted at 4chan and relevant to this post:
    Binyamin Appelbaum tweeted:
    the FBI just happens to be largely a lot of white [gentile] men.
    An anonymous poster who shall remained unnamed with average-sized hands:
    So are our Special Forces, our inventors, and our Founding Fathers.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Someone needs to be logging all of this ugly anti-Gentilism.

  86. @ic1000
    @Opinionator

    Steve reviewed Ta-Nehesi Coates' Between the World and Me when it came out, about a year ago. Well written and worth a read. But a bit depressing that Coates' wisdom is considered mainstream, as I'd prefer to live in a 'Citizenist'nation.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Which is well-written, Steve’s review or Coates’s book?

  87. @JohnnyWalker123
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    If we were all Jews, we could at least get a damn border wall.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Whites should give serious consideration to converting en mass to Judaism.

    • Replies: @snorlax
    @Opinionator

    The WASP-Jew corporate merger (intermarriage) has been proceeding apace for the last ~40 years in my neck of the woods.

    , @Anonymous
    @Opinionator

    I personally think that would be awesome, but I'm afraid adult circumcision is a bridge too far for most people. And if you go the Orthodox route, you might miss pork and shellfish. But please do it and marry the yentas.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  88. @Marcus
    @melendwyr

    I'd oppose proposition national-identity on principle, but it's also impractical: for a generation now, all "minority" students have imbibed a steady diet of the (((Howard Zinn))) version of history, there's no way they will see America as anything other than a means to exact revenge on whitey.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Is the Howard Zinn view at odds with a proposition nation mentality?

    • Replies: @Marcus
    @Opinionator

    I just use him as an example of the kind of anti-white garbage that is imbibed by young Americans: "minorities" are interested in payback for alleged wrongs, not a meritocracy.

  89. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Wilkey

    If I was 18-year-old without a track record, I'd list Hispanic on everything but the census. Fuck this corrupt system.

    We're all Jews now. I hold no allegiance to system that openly discriminates against me.

    Replies: @JohnnyWalker123, @Wilkey

    “If I was 18-year-old without a track record, I’d list Hispanic on everything but the census.”

    There’s really no reason you can’t start now. It’s not like they’re ever going to start looking through the paper trail on how you’ve identified racially and ethnically. If they dare to question you then get all riled up and ask them why how you “choose to identify” is any business of theirs.

    “Hi, I’m Wilkey, and I’m a black Hispanic. Ignore the blond(ish) hair and blue eyes.”

  90. The other day I picked up a copy of the local weekly black newspaper. Its front page was dominated by a large (as wide as the page, and about a third as long) photo of Hillary with a big bright rainbow flags waving proudly in the background.

    (The black paper is bigger and thicker than the local daily paper, and carries glossy advertising inserts from companies such as Wal-Mart. This proves that advertisers are racist beyond belief.)

    A feature article on millennials’ voting habits (or lack thereof) included this interesting quote from a student-of-color:

    “Trump and Clinton are both politically intolerable choices who will continue the devastation of marginalized communities … [t]he difference is only one of rhetoric and not of policy. Trump says he will deport immigrants. Hillary supports the deportation of immigrants. Trump says he will deport Muslims; Hillary says she will create a terror watch list and enlist Muslim-Americans to spy on one another.”

    So Hillary isn’t radical enough for the up-and-coming talented-tenthers now working their way through the academic grind. In the brave new world of tomorrow, when the kids take their place among the ranks of the Democratic party hacks, they’ll make sure that reactionary honky witches like Clinton will never get the nomination.

    I, for one, can’t wait!

  91. @Wilkey
    "...a local welfare grandmother violently shoved our executive vice-president because he was trying to get off the train when she wanted to get on it."

    In defense of your executive veep's masculinity, he was probably about 52 while the welfare grandma was probably around 32.

    Replies: @bored identity, @bored identity

    You just missed the whole point.

    Due to his gentleman and a scholar nature, Steve failed again to become a recipient of MacArthur ‘Genius Grant’.

    He could have written a 160-page letter to Corporate-American community lamenting over the hoodized mistreatment of corporate vice president bodies:


    Letter to My Veep

    “Here is what I would like for you to know: In America, it is traditional to destroy the corporate executive body—it is heritage.”

    Perhaps you remember that time we went to see a White Sox game in Comiskey Park, on a company outing in 1983. You were almost 60 years old. The compartment was crowded, and as we came off the El at S. 35th St., you were moving at the dawdling speed of an elderly person.

    A local welfare grandmother pushed you and said, “Come on!”

    Many things now happened at once. There was the reaction of any co-worker when a stranger puts a hand on the body of their boss.

    And there was my own insecurity in my ability to protect your corporate body.

    And more: There was my sense that this woman was pulling rank.
    I knew, for instance, that she would not have pushed out a high-ranked corporate executive on my part of Lincoln Park, because she would be afraid there and would sense, if not know, that there would be a penalty for such an action.

    But I was not out on my part of Lincoln Park. And I was not in North Side of Chicago.

    I forgot all of that. I was only aware that someone had invoked their right over the body of executive vice-president of Information Resources, Inc.

    I turned and spoke to this woman, and my words were hot with all of the moment and all of my history. She shrank back, shocked. A black man standing nearby spoke up in her defense. I experienced this as his attempt to rescue the damsel from the beast.

    He had made no such attempt on behalf of my EVP. And he was now supported by other black people in the assembling crowd. The man came closer. He grew louder. I pushed him away.

    He said, “I could have you polar-beared!”

    I did not care. I told him this, and the desire to do much more was hot in my throat. This desire was only controllable because I remembered someone standing off to the side there, bearing witness to more fury than he had ever seen from me—you.

    I came home shook. It was a mix of shame for having gone back to the law of the streets, and rage—“I could have you polar-beared!”

    Which is to say: “I could take your body.”

    I have told this story many times, not out of bravado, but out of a need for absolution. But more than any shame I felt, my greatest regret was that in seeking to defend you I was, in fact, endangering you.

    Ste-Helvetia Sailer

  92. @melendwyr
    @Steve Sailer

    Is that an euphemism? I'm genuinely uncertain.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    Actually, my in-laws did take in dozens of people’s dogs at their farm in the country. They were city workers who moved to a farm in 1970 while continuing to mostly work in Chicago. So their city coworkers were always pawning pet dogs who had become inconvenient off on them. They usually had five or six dogs around the farm.

    I think they also took in various Chelveston the Ducks from the Bozo the Clown TV show:

    https://www.pinterest.com/pin/535506211912188106/

  93. @Sunbeam
    @Mr. Blank

    "I have a small amount of Cherokee ancestry, and I’ve noticed that within the past decade or so there’s been a surge of interest among younger members of my extended family about our “Native American heritage.” Funny, but that just never came up much when I was a kid, even though everybody knew about it.

    I don’t think these folks are consciously following a “flight from white” strategy — at least not YET. But it seems pretty clear that they’re just following the signals they’re receiving from the culture: They receive the message that their white ancestry isn’t something to be proud of, so they’re looking for something in their ancestry that they are permitted to be proud of."

    This is just an anecdote, but it's been a thing in the South for a long time to be proud you had Indian Blood (using my native vernacular). So much so it's been mocked here a few times because the DNA evidence seems to show otherwise (though I also suspect that "native" Southerners are pretty unlikely to pay $100 or whatever it is for the 23AndMe test).

    Anyway that sort of thing was always thought of as cool when I was growing up. Same environment where having an arrowhead hanging on a leather thong to wear around your neck looked awesome.

    As an aside I do not and never have lived around a large Indian reservation like are present in the West. But as a Southerner I've always wondered about you West coast and Western guys in general complaining about Mexicans and Indians being drunkards. Mainly because I've never noticed Mexicans drinking any more than white people.

    Or maybe there is a difference between West Virginia type whites and you guys. Gonna have to pop a cold one and think about whose side I'm on.

    But just to say wanting to believe you have Indian ancestry isn't the same thing as not wanting to be white, at least not in all areas of the country.

    Oh and as another anecdote, something I always heard was if you had trouble growing a beard, you probably had Indian blood. And the Tequila thing.

    Replies: @Mr. Blank

    Yeah, I’m a Southerner, and I’ve heard that before: That a lot of Southern families have acquired a fake “Indian” ancestry because it was once considered cool to have “Indian blood.”

    I admit I’ve never looked into it, and it wouldn’t exactly surprise me to find my “Cherokee” ancestry was bullshit. A relative who’s done extensive digging into our family history insists it’s legit, though, and my grandmother (from whose branch of the family I purportedly got my “Cherokee blood”) had noticeably Indian-looking facial features — enough that she used to get asked about it.

    So I don’t really know. But it’s a charming little story that’s been in my family forever.

    I could probably do the 23andme thing to find out for sure, but I just never had strong feelings about it either way. Nobody’s ever going to mistake ME for a Cherokee, so why bother? 🙂

  94. @Opinionator
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Whites should give serious consideration to converting en mass to Judaism.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Anonymous

    The WASP-Jew corporate merger (intermarriage) has been proceeding apace for the last ~40 years in my neck of the woods.

  95. @Opinionator
    @27 year old

    Heartiste posited long ago that if America is saved, its saviors will be the Scots Irish.

    Trump is of Scottish ancestry.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Trump’s mother was a Highland Scot. The Scots Irish are descended mostly from lowland Scots who lived near the border with England who left to settle Ireland in the 16th and 17th centuries.

    • Replies: @mosquito
    @Anonymous

    You're right to distinguish Trump's mother from the Scots-Irish.

    But actually she's beyond Highlander, she's Islander. Mary Anne MacLeod Trump (1912–2000) is from near Stornoway in the Outer Hebrides. That's about as NW European as it gets, a gray land of stern Presbyterianism.

    Cool local connection: in today's Stornoway the big stories are about Muslim-convert moms whose daughters get abducted by the estranged Pakistani father.

  96. @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    Maybe at the university departments where these deep thinkers teach, it’s still a white club.

    Do you sincerely consider them to be deep thinkers?

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Um, I think IJ was being sarcastic.

  97. @Opinionator
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Whites should give serious consideration to converting en mass to Judaism.

    Replies: @snorlax, @Anonymous

    I personally think that would be awesome, but I’m afraid adult circumcision is a bridge too far for most people. And if you go the Orthodox route, you might miss pork and shellfish. But please do it and marry the yentas.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @Anonymous

    I personally think that would be awesome, but I’m afraid adult circumcision is a bridge too far for most people.

    Surely jews could discover a workaround. Have they ever failed to find an exception to a rule?

  98. @Opinionator
    @Marcus

    Is the Howard Zinn view at odds with a proposition nation mentality?

    Replies: @Marcus

    I just use him as an example of the kind of anti-white garbage that is imbibed by young Americans: “minorities” are interested in payback for alleged wrongs, not a meritocracy.

  99. @Anonymous
    @Opinionator

    I personally think that would be awesome, but I'm afraid adult circumcision is a bridge too far for most people. And if you go the Orthodox route, you might miss pork and shellfish. But please do it and marry the yentas.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    I personally think that would be awesome, but I’m afraid adult circumcision is a bridge too far for most people.

    Surely jews could discover a workaround. Have they ever failed to find an exception to a rule?

  100. @Jack D
    So "white identity" is fundamentally a reactionary movement to the rise of "non-white identity" - everyone else gets to have an identity and do identity politics and receive identity privileges, so why shouldn't whites get in on the gravy train too?

    Here's another idea - let's all have an identity as "Americans". Instead of joining in the racial spoils system (which is really just crumbs tossed by our elites as part of a divide and conquer strategy) let's get rid of it. It doesn't mean that we have to give up our religion or ethnicity but it should be secondary to our main identity as "Americans". Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first.

    "White identity" can't really hold up anyway because whites are not all the same - a Boston Brahmin and a good old boy in Mississippi are both "white" but their differences are big enough that their ancestors fought a war with each other. The logic of identity politics means that there will be a further "flight from white" - first Middle Easterners are no longer white, then Jews can decide that they are not white anymore (and this would make a lot of the "white identity" folks happy anyway), then a lot of whites would do an Elizabeth Warren and decide that they were really American Indians, white Cubans would become "Latinos", etc., etc. until "whites" are just one more small minority. Then maybe we can break "white" down even further - Catholic White and Protestant White, Southern White and Northern White. If you slice and dice whites finely enough, no white category will be bigger than black or Hispanic. Oligarchs love it when they can play one minority off the other, maybe gin up some sectarian violence to distract people when the economy is not going well - it makes their job much easier.

    Replies: @BenKenobi, @Mr. Blank, @Citizen of a Silly Country, @melendwyr, @Anonym, @NOTA, @bored identity


    “…Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first…”

    The kind of movies and the wars that makes Jack D’s juices running on and on and on…

    Tzadk, you do understand that people are massively voting for Trump because they don’t want any new war movies based on the old war movies false narratives?

    “….they were all Americans first. “

    Question:
    How many Sailerites would elect Lindbergh over Morgenthau Jr. on any given day?

    Late voting booths are open!

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @bored identity

    Tzadk, you do understand that people are massively voting for Trump because they don’t want any new war movies based on the old war movies false narratives?

    Not true.

    Replies: @bored identity

  101. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    @Jack D

    >Here’s another idea – let’s all have an identity as “Americans”.

    Won't work because "American" doesn't mean anything any more. Back in the 1940s, there was a dominant WASP culture, a common European ancestry and almost no non-European immigration. We were culturally and genetically very similar - in not perfectly so. We also made citizenship difficult to attain and thus worth something.

    We were an exclusive club of like-minded and genetically similar people.

    That's dead. I repeat, dead. It will never come back. Monty Python Parrot Dead!

    Here's the situation today:

    1. No dominant culture
    2. Open borders, i.e. zero exclusiveness to this club
    3. Different genetics
    4. Different - really different not some BS Protestant/Catholic gap - religions
    5. Disdain for the people who founded and built the country

    The United States is an economic zone with a boarding house on it. It's just a place where people work. What does being an "American" even mean?

    Is it freedom-loving?
    Lots of countries have democracies. Big deal, especially when open borders constantly devalues my vote. Also, I can get fired for publicly stating verifiable facts about race. Is that freedom-loving? The govt forces me to live with people that I don't want to live around. Is that freedom-loving. The gov discriminates against me because of my race. Is that freedom-loving?

    Americans have no shared race, no shared culture, no shared religion, no shared ethnicity. Therefore, the term American means nothing.

    Whatever America was is dead, and it ain't coming back. I'm not American. I'm white, and I'll look out for my people, my nation. Citizenship only means something if it's based on blood, because all other definitions can - and eventually will - be manipulated.

    Replies: @mosquito

    The United States is an economic zone with a boarding house on it. It’s just a place where people work.

    New Class types have begun describing themselves with a new term: “I’m based out of London.” “I’m based out of San Francisco.” “I’m based out of Dubai.” As opposed to “I’m from X” or “I live in X” or “My home is X.” It’s a badge of pride to disconnect yourself. “Yeah, if America doesn’t work out for me I’ll change my base somewhere else.”

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @mosquito

    I'm based out of Extended Stay Globomerica.

  102. @Randal
    @International Jew

    I've always regarded Zionism as jewish nationalism. Is that even controversial? I'm not sure what counts as "anti-Semitic" these days.

    Replies: @International Jew

    Before Zionism, the Jewish model for long-term survival was to keep our heads down and hope the gentiles leave us alone. Retaking our ancestral land — Israel — was on the back burner, something that would happen when the messiah arrived.

    Now as long as the external, ie nonjewish, society was focussed on its Christianity, we didn’t care to have any part of it. But when, in the 1800s, the Christians started talking about universal values and liberalism, well, that sounded good and we wanted in. Unfortunately they didn’t want us in.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    But when, in the 1800s, the Christians started talking about universal values and liberalism, well, that sounded good and we wanted in. Unfortunately they didn’t want us in.

    They let you in. But you did not reciprocate. You did not let them in, that is, welcome them into Judaism or the jewish community. You are really turning history on its head here.

  103. @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    Was it closure to jews or was it the openness to them seen in the 19th C that triggered Zionism (which rose in the 19th C)?

    Many Zionists were afraid of intermarriage.

    Replies: @International Jew

    Not in the east (ie Hungary, Romania and the Slavic countries). There was next to no intermarriage there before 1918, and that’s where 90% of European Jews lived and where the Zionist movement flourished.

    In the West — Germany, France Britain — assimilation was indeed a concern. And the most famous Zionist of them all, Theodor Herzl, was Western.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    Well, Jabotinsky was anxious about intermarriage, and he became involved in Zionism well before 1918.

    Replies: @International Jew

  104. @Wilkey
    "...a local welfare grandmother violently shoved our executive vice-president because he was trying to get off the train when she wanted to get on it."

    In defense of your executive veep's masculinity, he was probably about 52 while the welfare grandma was probably around 32.

    Replies: @bored identity, @bored identity

    You just missed the whole point,Wilkey;

    Due to his gentleman and a scholar nature, our Steve just had failed again to become a recipient of MacArthur’s Genius Grant.

    He could have written and published in ” The Pacific” his 160-page letter to Corporate-American community lamenting over the instituhoodized mistreatment of corporate vice president bodies:


    Letter to My Veep

    “Here is what I would like for you to know: In America, it is traditional to destroy the corporate executive body—it is heritage.”

    Perhaps you remember that time we went to see a White Sox game in Comiskey Park, on a company outing in 1983. You were almost 60 years old. The compartment was crowded, and as we came off the El at S. 35th St., you were moving at the dawdling speed of an elderly person.

    A local welfare grandmother pushed you and said, “Come on!”

    Many things now happened at once. There was the reaction of any co-worker when a stranger puts a hand on the body of their boss.

    And there was my own insecurity in my ability to protect your corporate body.

    And more: There was my sense that this woman was pulling rank.
    I knew, for instance, that she would not have pushed out a high-ranked corporate executive on my part of Lincoln Park, because she would be afraid there and would sense, if not know, that there would be a penalty for such an action.

    But I was not out on my part of Lincoln Park. And I was not in North Side of Chicago.

    I forgot all of that. I was only aware that someone had invoked their right over the body of executive vice-president of the Information Resources, Inc.

    I turned and spoke to this woman, and my words were hot with all of the moment and all of my history. She shrank back, shocked. A black man standing nearby spoke up in her defense. I experienced this as his attempt to rescue the damsel from the beast.

    He had made no such attempt on behalf of my EVP. And he was now supported by other black people in the assembling crowd. The man came closer. He grew louder. I pushed him away.

    He said, “I could have you polar-beared!”

    I did not care. I told him this, and the desire to do much more was hot in my throat. This desire was only controllable because I remembered someone standing off to the side there, bearing witness to more fury than he had ever seen from me—you.

    I came home shook. It was a mix of shame for having gone back to the law of the streets, and rage—“I could have you polar-beared!”

    Which is to say: “I could take your body.”

    I have told this story many times, not out of bravado, but out of a need for absolution. But more than any shame I felt, my greatest regret was that in seeking to defend you I was, in fact, endangering you.

    Ste-Helvetia Sailer

  105. @whorefinder
    Americans had white identity for many generations, but the post WW2 Civil Rights movement and beyond was a slow, meandering destruction of white identity.

    In this era, the Left first forcibly attacked Dixie (i.e. Scots-Irish) white identity, forcing integration, using movies and TV shows to smear Southern heritage and people, and blackmailing Hoover's FBI to infiltrate the Klan and other Southern groups to get them locked up or disbanded. Heck, the Left even used false flag church bombings and such to garner sympathy for their movement and hatred for Dixie (Scots-Irish) identity.

    Meanwhile, the Left used the Ike's Interstate Highway System to plow through traditional working-class ethnic white neighborhoods in cities. The Old West End in Boston, for example, was thoroughly demolished by the construction of I-93, (which runs through the heart of Boston), though it had been home to generations of Irish and Italian immigrants.

    But that wasn't enough. They got Affirmative Action, Civil Right's legislation, and open borders passed. They enforced bussing even outside of Jim Crow places, so that even de facto segregation was "wrong." By the late 1960s, the rioting by blacks started, and, outside of unions, there were few white groups to fight back. A few places held out (South Boston, famously), but most white people fled to the suburbs and beyond and lost their ethnic roots.

    By the 1980s and 1990s, Affirmative Action had put the blacks into power in many places and taken over cities the left turned to attacking white identity in schools. Now blacks were not equal, but held as "superior", and white unity was described as racist. White kids were programmed not to feel pride in their ethnicity, but shame over slavery.

    Now they're banning last remnants of white in-group identity: the Confederate flag is being disappeared from history. Don't be surprised if the left starts claiming that St. Patrick's day celebrations/Italian saint festivals are evil/racist, and then move to ban them.

    If you observe it with a keen eye, you'll note that the Left's attack on white identity in the last half-century closely mirrors the integration/demoralization tactics the U.S. government used on Native American populations once they were put on reservations.

    P.S> The Left was probably inspired by the near-total eradication of German-American ethnic pride in the WW1 and WW2 years. Defeating that group's pride let them know they could do it to others.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Anon, @Ripple Earthdevil, @RonaldB

    To be credible, you have to give at least a little documentation for really wild claims, such as “false flag church bombings”. Otherwise, your posting is just so much hot air.

  106. @mosquito
    @Citizen of a Silly Country


    The United States is an economic zone with a boarding house on it. It’s just a place where people work.
     
    New Class types have begun describing themselves with a new term: "I'm based out of London." "I'm based out of San Francisco." "I'm based out of Dubai." As opposed to "I'm from X" or "I live in X" or "My home is X." It's a badge of pride to disconnect yourself. "Yeah, if America doesn't work out for me I'll change my base somewhere else."

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    I’m based out of Extended Stay Globomerica.

  107. @International Jew
    @Opinionator

    Not in the east (ie Hungary, Romania and the Slavic countries). There was next to no intermarriage there before 1918, and that's where 90% of European Jews lived and where the Zionist movement flourished.

    In the West — Germany, France Britain — assimilation was indeed a concern. And the most famous Zionist of them all, Theodor Herzl, was Western.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Well, Jabotinsky was anxious about intermarriage, and he became involved in Zionism well before 1918.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Opinionator

    Which, if true, by itself establishes nothing. But if, in support of your career in trolling, you take up the study of Jewish history as a hobby, that's fine and dandy.

    Replies: @Opinionator

  108. @International Jew
    @Randal

    Before Zionism, the Jewish model for long-term survival was to keep our heads down and hope the gentiles leave us alone. Retaking our ancestral land — Israel — was on the back burner, something that would happen when the messiah arrived.

    Now as long as the external, ie nonjewish, society was focussed on its Christianity, we didn't care to have any part of it. But when, in the 1800s, the Christians started talking about universal values and liberalism, well, that sounded good and we wanted in. Unfortunately they didn't want us in.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    But when, in the 1800s, the Christians started talking about universal values and liberalism, well, that sounded good and we wanted in. Unfortunately they didn’t want us in.

    They let you in. But you did not reciprocate. You did not let them in, that is, welcome them into Judaism or the jewish community. You are really turning history on its head here.

  109. @bored identity
    @Jack D



    "...Just like the old war movies where the platoon had an Irish guy from Boston and a Southerner and a farm boy from Iowa and a Jewish guy from Brooklyn, etc. but they were all Americans first..."

     

    The kind of movies and the wars that makes Jack D's juices running on and on and on...

    Tzadk, you do understand that people are massively voting for Trump because they don't want any new war movies based on the old war movies false narratives?

    "....they were all Americans first. "

    Question:
    How many Sailerites would elect Lindbergh over Morgenthau Jr. on any given day?

    Late voting booths are open!

    Replies: @Opinionator

    Tzadk, you do understand that people are massively voting for Trump because they don’t want any new war movies based on the old war movies false narratives?

    Not true.

    • Replies: @bored identity
    @Opinionator

    see @comment 110.

  110. The unbearable lightness of your laconic two-words reply kept me awake all night…not really.

    Why dont we just wait together for that big fat Hollywood blockbuster in which David Brooks’ son leads platoon packed with, in a real life improbable mixture* of Rodriguez-Chong-Sanjay-Lashawn-Dwayne-Ameer extras; while single-handedly sticking the Old Glory in the rubble of the The Winter Palace…?

    If you bring your obvious good will, I would bring the glow-in-the-dark popcorn to our cozy underground shelter.

    *http://www.nytimes.com/images/blogs/freakonomics/posts/Enlisted2.jpg

    Bonus*:
    As of March 1, 2008, there were 2,964 white fatalities in Iraq, representing 74.8 percent of the total; in the general population, meanwhile, whites in that age cohort make up about 62 percent of the population, so whites are overrepresented among Iraqi fatalities. Blacks and Hispanics, meanwhile, are both underrepresented; the same is true in Afghanistan.

  111. @Anonymous
    @Opinionator

    Trump's mother was a Highland Scot. The Scots Irish are descended mostly from lowland Scots who lived near the border with England who left to settle Ireland in the 16th and 17th centuries.

    Replies: @mosquito

    You’re right to distinguish Trump’s mother from the Scots-Irish.

    But actually she’s beyond Highlander, she’s Islander. Mary Anne MacLeod Trump (1912–2000) is from near Stornoway in the Outer Hebrides. That’s about as NW European as it gets, a gray land of stern Presbyterianism.

    Cool local connection: in today’s Stornoway the big stories are about Muslim-convert moms whose daughters get abducted by the estranged Pakistani father.

  112. @Opinionator
    @bored identity

    Tzadk, you do understand that people are massively voting for Trump because they don’t want any new war movies based on the old war movies false narratives?

    Not true.

    Replies: @bored identity

    see @comment 110.

  113. @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    Well, Jabotinsky was anxious about intermarriage, and he became involved in Zionism well before 1918.

    Replies: @International Jew

    Which, if true, by itself establishes nothing. But if, in support of your career in trolling, you take up the study of Jewish history as a hobby, that’s fine and dandy.

    • Replies: @Opinionator
    @International Jew

    It is evidence that Eastern European Zionist jews were fearful of intermarriage. And that undermines your claim.

    (Of course, Torah and the Talmud also tend to undermine your claim.)

  114. @International Jew
    @Opinionator

    Which, if true, by itself establishes nothing. But if, in support of your career in trolling, you take up the study of Jewish history as a hobby, that's fine and dandy.

    Replies: @Opinionator

    It is evidence that Eastern European Zionist jews were fearful of intermarriage. And that undermines your claim.

    (Of course, Torah and the Talmud also tend to undermine your claim.)

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS