The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
NYT: "The New Face of Racism in Germany"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

From the New York Times op-ed section:

The New Face of Racism in Germany
Anna Sauerbrey DEC. 29, 2015

Berlin — GERMANY is not lacking in right-wing sentiment these days, but most people are careful about how they deploy their anti-immigrant rhetoric. And then there’s Björn Höcke.

Last month Mr. Höcke, a leading figure of the right-wing populist party Alternative für Deutschland, gave an openly racist speech on the “differing reproductive strategies” of Africans and Europeans. It was not the first time he had drawn on National Socialist themes, but this time he caused uproar, even in his own party, which has asked him to resign his membership.

Or maybe Hocke was reading the Washington Post, which published this graph:

But of course, if a white person notices it, it turns into a HateGraph. If a German white person notices it, it’s a NaziHateGraph.

Same with my graph based on the 2015 United Nations World Population Prospects:

But graphs are hateful and are only looked at by the hate-filled.

Whatever happens to Mr. Höcke, though, his willingness to use overtly racist language has revived an age-old fear in Germany. He is, by all accounts, a typical German, an upright middle-class citizen — what we call a “Biedermann.” They are the core of our national self-perception. If they turn to the dark side, what does that say about Germany?

For years, racism and hate in Germany mostly came with clear social mar kers. In the minds of most, racists wore their heads shaved, feet heavily booted and arms rune-tattooed. They lived on the fringes of society, often in public housing, and made their living illicitly.

Not so Mr. Höcke. As a young man, he was a member of “Junge Union,” the youth organization of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s center-right Christian Democrats. He’s a high school history teacher on leave and a married father of four. He lives in the countryside and is invariably well dressed, though never in a showy way.

Is this the new face of hate in Germany?

You know, if you want to have a good debate on a crucial policy that will determine the future of Germany, it’s probably a wise idea to have both sides be represented by respectable people offering informed views.

But if you don’t want to have a real debate and just want to impose your policy autocratically, then it’s ideal to restrict the side you want to lose to being represented by soccer hooligans.

Of course, that raises the worry that if all the respectable people aren’t allowed to discuss in public the fate of the nation, then the only ones who can participate in this crucial policy debate, the hooligans, might just win the debate and come to power.

Is that worth risking over migration policy? Apparently, a lot of respectable people in Germany think so.

 
Hide 136 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. George Pataki withdrew from the race today. 5 Republicans in total so far have dropped out and yet the number of candidates in the Republican presidential field is still in the double digits. How crazy is that?

    • Replies: @Realist
    "How crazy is that?"

    Very crazy considering none is worthy.
  2. What happens when ‘well-dressed’ white people stop cringing and cowering at any mention of the words ‘hate’ and ‘waycist’…?

  3. Proposition nations fail. Everything else is details.

    Until you can say simply, “That person doesn’t belong here because they are not a part of our tribe,” you are done for.

    Definitions can be manipulated. Blood cannot.

    The United States and Western Europe are done for. How long and in what way are unknown, but the final destination is not.

    I say this as a father.

    • Replies: @Zach
    Speaking of tribes, the Nooksacks in NW Washington state are fighting to keep the right to disenroll tribal members. From the Seattle Times:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest/native-lawyer-takes-on-tribes-that-kick-members-out/

    Every tribe has different and often complicated enrollment rules. In the Nooksack case, there isn’t agreement on what the rules are, although they are generally understood to include one-quarter Indian blood quantum and proof of lineage to a Nooksack on a 1942 Census roll or to one who received a federal land allotment.

    Michelle Roberts, spokeswoman for the 306 (facing disenrollment), insists her family knows where it comes from, noting her grandmother took great pride in being a Nooksack. “We don’t want to lose her history,” she says.

    (snip)

    Commenting on disenrollment (in general) Reyn Leno, Grand Ronde tribal council chair, said his tribe had disenrolled 80 members because “There was a feeling that people were receiving benefits that shouldn’t have been.” Leno says.

    Leno also notes “Blood gives you the right to what we have.”
    ------------------

    Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    Until you can say simply, “That person doesn’t belong here because they are not a part of our tribe,” you are done for.
     
    The American Colonization Society tried to make that point in the 19th century. They met their stiffest resistance in multicolored kumbaya Dixie.
  4. I saw this ridiculous piece a few minutes earlier. Does the Times let us comment on it? You make quite well all the necessary points. They really want to get rid of free speech and democracy, which remains our only hope.

    • Replies: @boogerbently
    Vox, Slate, HuffPost, and MANY others have "push" articles but require you to sign in to FaceBook or Twitter to "comment".

    That says a lot about THEIR credibility, as well as FB and Twitter.
  5. _”For years, racism and hate in Germany mostly came with clear social mar kers. In the minds of most, racists wore their heads shaved, feet heavily booted and arms rune-tattooed. They lived on the fringes of society, often in public housing, and made their living illicitly.”

    So Whites living in public housing makes them a part of the fringes of society. Does that also apply to Muslims in Germany who live in public housing? Can they also be considered fringe and not part of mainstream German society?

    • Replies: @Wifman
    Oh, but those are only in public housing because of the racism of well-dressed high-school teachers and all the rest of the well-dressed, blonde, blue-eyed, or generally just lighter-shade-of-white population of Germany (formerly known as "Germans").
    , @DevilDocNowCiv
    Jeff, you make a good point about the low-class White Germans called fringe when they express anti Muslim ideas, and poor Muslims not called fringe, or hate-and as we know, called troubled or oppressed. As they anti Muslim Germans and similar Americans try to figure out how to get an outlet for their opinions, the PC elite leadership of politics and media in Germany can get them arrested for holding a non PC sign, or making a non PC speech.

    So far, that's not done in America - oh, except where we train all of our middle class and elites; on our Campuses. Ominously, only slightly non PC conservo and very non PC truly conservo sites discuss that. Fox and AM radio sometimes discuss the American campus PC fascism, but not all the time so as to retain audiences beyond that specific interest (like me!). Almost zero coverage of this on mainstream media, and supportive coverage on lib cable TV.

    Germany's elites have now imported by foot approx 1 million Muslims in 2015, and are only discussing changes in 2016 in response to opposition that those elites are aware of from below. Like all people, most of those elites are either trying to do the right thing, or pragmatically playing along in whatever system they're part of, and looking for their best advantage. That fits America's elites, too. It explains how I and many Repubs bought into the idea of leaving our current immigration system in place, for instance, because nowhere had I read the history of it or how it spells total cultural change for us.

    That, the mainstream conservo joining liberal press opposition to Trumps "Muslim Importation Halt" and doing so with equal insluting language, should be an eye opener to all Americans who are truly conservo, and want to get back to traditional legal ideas and freedoms. We've had a PC leaning SCOTUS for some time now. Unless we get Trump-or much weaker, but only tolerable second choice, Cruz, we are American version of the German anti Muslim guy in the article, who has zero chance to fix things.
  6. It’s like migration is the German establishment’s first priority.

    George Will recently wrote an uncharacteristically vituperative article in National Review insisting that the first priority for the GOP has to be eliminating Trump. Otherwise he’ll destroy conservatism forever. Or something.

    But you know, if that was really the first priority, then maybe there would be just a little more ideological diversity on the stage of those Republican debates and just a few more mainstream GOP politicians willing to espouse a view which is closer to their voting constituency than to the Democratic party platform.

    That probably would have stopped Trump, if indeed stopping Trump was the first priority. But it seems something else has an even higher priority.

    That reminds me of Ace’s GOP priority list. Number 27 on the list is, “The base, aka ‘The Garbage People Who Embarrass Us So’.”

    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "George Will recently wrote an uncharacteristically vituperative article in National Review insisting that the first priority for the GOP has to be eliminating Trump. Otherwise he’ll destroy conservatism forever. Or something."

    The GOP Establishment has already destroyed Conservatism forever. George W. Bush was a disaster of a president. So why should Donald Trump take the blame for that?

    During George W. Bush's 8 years in office, his immigration policies have created way more future Democrat voters, not more future Republican voters.

    40 percent of Americans call themselves Conservative, yet when Dubya left office his approval rating was in the low 20s. That means a whole lot of Conservative voters felt Dubya stabbed them in the back. Dubya is not a real Texas Redneck and he is not a real Conservative. It was all an act. In reality he is a Liberal Republican from Connecticut.

    , @AndrewR
    Yuck.

    I stopped reading as soon as he called Putin a “murderer and war criminal.”

    I don’t care enough to research this but I highly doubt he’s used such words about any US president, all of whom except maybe Carter have more blood on their hands than Putin does.
  7. That Sauerbrey woman is so bloody annoying, typical “good German”.
    Höcke is a bit of an idiot, has a tendency for theatralic and somewhat ridiculous behaviour that may be counter-productive. But at least he’s trying to do something and he’s right about the core issues.
    The situation in Germany is really bad though, the last few months have really shocked me. This country may be messed up beyond saving by its insane self-conception and total naivite about the world. It’s insane also how religious and moralistic public discourse has become. Much Islamophilia on display, especially by stupid Christians. Just yesterday I read an interview with a professor for medieval history who advocated making Eid a public holiday in Germany. Had the displeasure of hearing that guy a few years ago at a conference…back then he had invited a speaker from Cameroon who basically lambasted the audience (who all politely clapped which I refused to do) for “racism” and went on and on how horrible “fortress Europe” is.
    Really insane, I’m disgusted with this country.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    @ German_reader: How prevalent are your views? Do many share your opinions, but are too afraid to publicly discuss? Or have they really swallowed all this propaganda and believe it to be true?
    , @nglaer
    German Reader, why did Alternative for DLand feel it have to jettison this guy for saying something fairly obvious? It's not like it's obviously inciteful. Or not true, or not an obvious social fact--as Steve's post demonstrated. Was he an embarrassment before? I can see what Marine Le Pen felt the need to ditch her Dad, but this seems a mystery.
    , @Anon
    German Reader;

    I applaud you for NOT applauding. Nice to know not all Germans are stupid. And what right does some African from Cameroon think he has inviting himself to Europe.
  8. @nglaer
    I saw this ridiculous piece a few minutes earlier. Does the Times let us comment on it? You make quite well all the necessary points. They really want to get rid of free speech and democracy, which remains our only hope.

    Vox, Slate, HuffPost, and MANY others have “push” articles but require you to sign in to FaceBook or Twitter to “comment”.

    That says a lot about THEIR credibility, as well as FB and Twitter.

  9. “But of course, if a white person notices it, it’s a Hate Graph. If a German white person notices it, it’s a Nazi Hate Graph.”

    If an Italian person notices it, it’s a Mafia Hate Graph.

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    Wouldn't it be a Fascismo Hate Graph? The Mafia were for the Allies.
    , @Reg Cæsar

    If an Italian person notices it, it’s a Mafia Hate Graph.
     
    Or Graphiti.
  10. Fortunately people like the jerk are in a dwindling minority.

    Only old white men do not like diversity because they cannot compete with masculine men

    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    it is funny. One day lefties say to right-wing guys: oh come on, how dare you criticize mass immigration, those are all little innocent, helpless children, you are so strong and big, you can and have to take care of them. The other day they say: how dare you criticize mass immigration, those are big, strong masculine men, they will come and get you, they will come in masses, and nothing will withstand anyway.
    , @anon
    The young who've been through integrated schools will become the new Afrikaners - it's just a question of what percentage is the tipping point.
    , @Olorin
    Morris Dees, is that you?

    Come out, come out--and show us your Haitian toyboy!
  11. Eustace Tilley (not) [AKA "Schiller/Nietzsche"] says:

    Maybe the new Alternative Right should do Mr. Trump a favor and start a genuine self-described Fascist Party (the logo could be the reverse of the beautiful old silver Mercury Dime). Go for it: black armbands with fasces embroidered thereon, torchlight parades, even the occasional “n” word for shock value. Just stay 10 cm on the right side of the laws.

    Trump will then be magically transformed into a responsible, well-dressed man of the Moderate Right, who goes out of his way to reject “hate” in all its ugly forms.

    (Needless to say, there will still be no pleasing the New York Times.)

    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    but that´s not what the West needs. What the West needs now is that for the first time in decades, at least in one single western country, at least in one central issue and at least once a political party, person, policy or an opinion is successful WITHOUT differentiating itself strongly from the right-wing politics or even being the most leftist champion in place.
    Trump or Front National or AfD etc. have to be successful not despite but because they are right-wing. Only that will chance anything. Otherwise the claustrophobic and disastrous conformity of antiracism would continue to frame the public discourse
  12. Did he say anything actually controversial? Not that I saw quoted in the NYT column. The “differing reproductive strategies” between the contemporary populations of Europe and sub-Saharan Africa is a reasonably well established fact, widely reported throughout the media, including the NYT itself. If anyone has contradicted it, I haven’t noticed.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    When someone responds to an argument or discussion by shouting about how offensive or problematic it is, that's usually a red flag that they don't have much of an argument to offer. "How dare you raise the issue" is a good way of avoiding talking about the issue.
  13. Part of me says that HBD will become a lot more obvious when every country in Europe has a black underclass. On the other hand, it’s pretty obvious now, and it doesn’t seem to matter.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Although European blacks end up poor like American blacks, there is one huge difference in behavior. Blacks in Europe marry/cohabitate with whites while only a small percentage of blacks outmarry in the US. This makes HBD less visible and maybe after several generations barely visible.
    , @Anonymous Nephew
    Oliver Letwin, David Cameron's chief policy adviser, has just been forced to recant his hateful views :

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

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/30/oliver-letwin-blocked-help-for-black-youth-after-1985-riots


    "Downing Street files released on Wednesday by the National Archives include a confidential joint paper by Letwin and Booth in which they told Thatcher that “lower-class unemployed white people had lived for years in appalling slums without a breakdown of public order on anything like the present scale”.

    The men also warned Thatcher that setting up a £10m communities programme to tackle inner-city problems would do little more than “subsidise Rastafarian arts and crafts workshops”.

    Their intervention followed a warning from the home secretary, Douglas Hurd, that alienated youth, predominantly black, in the inner cities represented “a grave threat to the social fabric” of the country. The two persuaded Thatcher to dismiss suggestions from Hurd and two other cabinet ministers, Kenneth Baker and Lord Young, to tackle the problem, and instead insisted what was needed was measures to tackle absent fathers, moral education and an end to state funding of leftwing activists.

    Hurd told Thatcher in a confidential minute that the government might have to reconcile itself to the fact that “a number of our cities now contain a pool of several hundred young people who we have not educated, whom it may not be possible to employ, and who are antagonistic to all authority. We need to think hard to prevent the pool being constantly replenished.”

    “The root of social malaise is not poor housing, or youth ‘alienation’ or the lack of a middle class,” they advised Thatcher. “Lower-class unemployed white people had lived for years in appalling slums without a breakdown of public order on anything like the present scale; in the midst of depression, people in Brixton went out, leaving their grocery money in a bag at the front door, and expecting to see groceries when they got back.

    “Riots, criminality and social disintegration are caused solely by individual characters and attitudes. So long as bad moral attitudes remain, all efforts to improve the inner cities will founder. David Young’s new entrepreneurs will set up in the disco and drug trade.”

    Instead their prescription was to reinforce the family through the law and tax, to set up “old-fashioned independent religious schools” and to change attitudes to personal responsibility, honesty, and the police from an early age including a new moral “youth corps”.

    In a statement on Tuesday night Letwin said: “I want to make clear that some parts of a private memo I wrote nearly 30 years ago were both badly worded and wrong. I apologise unreservedly for any offence these comments have caused and wish to make clear that none was intended.” "
     

    , @Erik Sieven
    in a way it makes it even more visible. The big differences of sexual attraction in the interracial partner market at least are even more obvious given the high degree of out-marrying of Subsaharans in Europe.
  14. @Handle
    It's like migration is the German establishment's first priority.

    George Will recently wrote an uncharacteristically vituperative article in National Review insisting that the first priority for the GOP has to be eliminating Trump. Otherwise he'll destroy conservatism forever. Or something.

    But you know, if that was really the first priority, then maybe there would be just a little more ideological diversity on the stage of those Republican debates and just a few more mainstream GOP politicians willing to espouse a view which is closer to their voting constituency than to the Democratic party platform.

    That probably would have stopped Trump, if indeed stopping Trump was the first priority. But it seems something else has an even higher priority.

    That reminds me of Ace's GOP priority list. Number 27 on the list is, "The base, aka 'The Garbage People Who Embarrass Us So'."

    “George Will recently wrote an uncharacteristically vituperative article in National Review insisting that the first priority for the GOP has to be eliminating Trump. Otherwise he’ll destroy conservatism forever. Or something.”

    The GOP Establishment has already destroyed Conservatism forever. George W. Bush was a disaster of a president. So why should Donald Trump take the blame for that?

    During George W. Bush’s 8 years in office, his immigration policies have created way more future Democrat voters, not more future Republican voters.

    40 percent of Americans call themselves Conservative, yet when Dubya left office his approval rating was in the low 20s. That means a whole lot of Conservative voters felt Dubya stabbed them in the back. Dubya is not a real Texas Redneck and he is not a real Conservative. It was all an act. In reality he is a Liberal Republican from Connecticut.

  15. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/spying-israel-congress-netanyahu-217207#ixzz3vl47enYt

    Clever spin on the news.

    Main issue should be ‘US politicians acting as whores to Israel that spies on an ally’.

    But instead, we get ‘US violates trust and spies on ally Israel’.

    A story can be spun in so many ways.

    Those who spin are sure to win.

    • Replies: @NOTA
    Also, NSA is spying on Congressmen. My guess is, this explains the extremely deferential and minimal oversight Congress gives them--everyone knows that they've got the dirt on everyone, and so nobody wants to ask too many hard questions that might lead to some reporter mysteriously getting a copy of the credit card receipts from that little getaway with that 19 year old campaign worker.

    The biggest story of Obama's first term (which was reported day-to-day, but not with much depth) was the massive way he caved in on everything he said he was going to do to rein in the intelligence agencies and pentagon. I've always assumed this was mainly because he never meant any of that stuff anyway, since politicians lie whenever their mouths are moving. But it's also possible he simply realized that the intelligence agencies were just too powerful to take on.
  16. This is basically District 9 played out in real life. It’s also what happens when political elites no longer feel their country’s culture and institutions are worth defending. We are so hosed.

  17. @German_reader
    That Sauerbrey woman is so bloody annoying, typical "good German".
    Höcke is a bit of an idiot, has a tendency for theatralic and somewhat ridiculous behaviour that may be counter-productive. But at least he's trying to do something and he's right about the core issues.
    The situation in Germany is really bad though, the last few months have really shocked me. This country may be messed up beyond saving by its insane self-conception and total naivite about the world. It's insane also how religious and moralistic public discourse has become. Much Islamophilia on display, especially by stupid Christians. Just yesterday I read an interview with a professor for medieval history who advocated making Eid a public holiday in Germany. Had the displeasure of hearing that guy a few years ago at a conference...back then he had invited a speaker from Cameroon who basically lambasted the audience (who all politely clapped which I refused to do) for "racism" and went on and on how horrible "fortress Europe" is.
    Really insane, I'm disgusted with this country.

    @ German_reader: How prevalent are your views? Do many share your opinions, but are too afraid to publicly discuss? Or have they really swallowed all this propaganda and believe it to be true?

    • Replies: @German_reader
    Can't really tell. I'm probably much farther to the right than most people, but there seems to be widespread disaffection with Merkel's open borders policy. Opinion polls indicate somewhat more than 50% are against it, but there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it's wonderful...many Germans really are that stupid.
    Public discourse, that is most of the media, statements by politicians, business leaders, church leaders etc. is still very much pro Merkel's policy; it's really depressing how totally irrational and moralistic published opinion is.
    The right-wing AfD which Höcke belongs to has been steadily rising in polls during the last few months (predictably the established parties and the media try everything in their power against them, the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats even changing laws to cripple the AfD's party finances; there's also an intimidation campaign by antifas), on the federal level they currently poll at 9% (and some observers think this estimate will turn out to be too low because many people won't admit to having sympathies for the AfD when asked). Next March there are elections in three states, we'll see what happens then. Hopefully the Christian Democrats will suffer serious losses and the AfD will enter state parliaments, that seems to be the only way of affecting change.
  18. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Proposition nations fail. Everything else is details.

    Until you can say simply, "That person doesn't belong here because they are not a part of our tribe," you are done for.

    Definitions can be manipulated. Blood cannot.

    The United States and Western Europe are done for. How long and in what way are unknown, but the final destination is not.

    I say this as a father.

    Speaking of tribes, the Nooksacks in NW Washington state are fighting to keep the right to disenroll tribal members. From the Seattle Times:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest/native-lawyer-takes-on-tribes-that-kick-members-out/

    Every tribe has different and often complicated enrollment rules. In the Nooksack case, there isn’t agreement on what the rules are, although they are generally understood to include one-quarter Indian blood quantum and proof of lineage to a Nooksack on a 1942 Census roll or to one who received a federal land allotment.

    Michelle Roberts, spokeswoman for the 306 (facing disenrollment), insists her family knows where it comes from, noting her grandmother took great pride in being a Nooksack. “We don’t want to lose her history,” she says.

    (snip)

    Commenting on disenrollment (in general) Reyn Leno, Grand Ronde tribal council chair, said his tribe had disenrolled 80 members because “There was a feeling that people were receiving benefits that shouldn’t have been.” Leno says.

    Leno also notes “Blood gives you the right to what we have.”
    ——————

    Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans.

    • Replies: @Curle
    "Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans."

    The German people do think like Native Americans. The difference is that the German people have a powerful ruling class intimidating them into pretending to think something different. Intimidation is a powerful tool.
    , @Bill P
    Wonder whether that has anything to do with the recent sudden closure of the Nooksack Casino.
    , @Pure and Easy
    The Germans thought like that to a horrible extreme not so long ago. It came to an awful consequence.
    , @Oliver Cromwell
    Didn't they? As best I can tell the ideology of the third world - and of third world elements in Western countries - is indistinguishable from National Socialism.

    In fairness to National Socialism's opponents, the third world is not a good advertisement for National Socialism.
  19. To my mind, this is a perfect description of how Trump has risen to prominence. Does he say some nasty stuff? Yep. Does he say some factually all-wrong stuff? Yep.

    So, how has he gotten this far? Because there are real issues that:

    a. Nobody close to the mainstream is addressing

    b. Neither wing of the ruling class has any credibility in addressing.

    c. Many voters care about.

    The requirements of keeping on the good side of the media and the donor class have effectively prevented these issues from being addressed. And along comes Trump, who by virtue of being both rich and mediagenic doesn’t have to care about those constraints. And he’s frankly pretty lousy as a representative–he routinely says whatever pops into his mind, he often doesn’t seem to know basic stuff about whatever topic he’s discussing, and many of his policy proposals are really awful ideas. His history gives no reason to think he means what he’s saying right now, or that he won’t change his mind again tomorrow, or that he has anything more than his own wealth and power and fame in mind.

    But at least he’s talking about some of these issues, and offending and upsetting a lot of the elites who have been running the country into a ditch for the last several decades, so he gets some pretty enthusiastic supporters. He’s conning them of course–politicians are basically con men by trade, and Trump is the slick con man from the big city up against a bunch of local used car salesmen like ¡Jeb! and Marco Rubio.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    So, how has he gotten this far? Because there are real issues that:
    a. Nobody close to the mainstream is addressing

    Years ago, on a neo-con site, I would frequently bring up the immigration issue. Regular commenters would dismiss my concerns, telling me it wasn't an important issue because no one was bringing it up.

  20. @Robert Abrahamsen
    Did he say anything actually controversial? Not that I saw quoted in the NYT column. The "differing reproductive strategies" between the contemporary populations of Europe and sub-Saharan Africa is a reasonably well established fact, widely reported throughout the media, including the NYT itself. If anyone has contradicted it, I haven't noticed.

    When someone responds to an argument or discussion by shouting about how offensive or problematic it is, that’s usually a red flag that they don’t have much of an argument to offer. “How dare you raise the issue” is a good way of avoiding talking about the issue.

  21. @NOTA
    To my mind, this is a perfect description of how Trump has risen to prominence. Does he say some nasty stuff? Yep. Does he say some factually all-wrong stuff? Yep.

    So, how has he gotten this far? Because there are real issues that:

    a. Nobody close to the mainstream is addressing

    b. Neither wing of the ruling class has any credibility in addressing.

    c. Many voters care about.

    The requirements of keeping on the good side of the media and the donor class have effectively prevented these issues from being addressed. And along comes Trump, who by virtue of being both rich and mediagenic doesn't have to care about those constraints. And he's frankly pretty lousy as a representative--he routinely says whatever pops into his mind, he often doesn't seem to know basic stuff about whatever topic he's discussing, and many of his policy proposals are really awful ideas. His history gives no reason to think he means what he's saying right now, or that he won't change his mind again tomorrow, or that he has anything more than his own wealth and power and fame in mind.

    But at least he's talking about some of these issues, and offending and upsetting a lot of the elites who have been running the country into a ditch for the last several decades, so he gets some pretty enthusiastic supporters. He's conning them of course--politicians are basically con men by trade, and Trump is the slick con man from the big city up against a bunch of local used car salesmen like ¡Jeb! and Marco Rubio.

    So, how has he gotten this far? Because there are real issues that:
    a. Nobody close to the mainstream is addressing

    Years ago, on a neo-con site, I would frequently bring up the immigration issue. Regular commenters would dismiss my concerns, telling me it wasn’t an important issue because no one was bringing it up.

    • Replies: @nglaer
    Years ago, on a neo-con site, I would frequently bring up the immigration issue. Regular commenters would dismiss my concerns, telling me it wasn’t an important issue because no one was bringing it up.

    In the 90's, the neocons made a sustained and fairly successful effort to get conservative journalists who worried about immigration fired from their jobs. Letter writing campaigns, imputations of anti-Semitism (because restrictionism in the 20's impacted Jews), the whole works. That campaign was less successful in than it might have been in stifling the issue because of the emergence of the internet, but it did waste twenty years during which the Republican mainstream might have forged a better immigration policy.
    , @Olorin
    During my short stint working at Ground Zero of Big Green, I used to bring up immigration as a key issue in "sustainability" and "environmentalism." I got the same reaction--it's not an issue, if it were, Ford and Alton Jones and Surdna and Packard and the Rocks and Goldman and Joyce would be giving out money for programming.

    Then they called me a racist for suggesting that maybe nations had a right to determine who crosses their borders.

    This is a powerful transnational/global secular religion we're dealing with.
  22. @Anon
    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/spying-israel-congress-netanyahu-217207#ixzz3vl47enYt

    Clever spin on the news.

    Main issue should be 'US politicians acting as whores to Israel that spies on an ally'.

    But instead, we get 'US violates trust and spies on ally Israel'.

    A story can be spun in so many ways.

    Those who spin are sure to win.

    Also, NSA is spying on Congressmen. My guess is, this explains the extremely deferential and minimal oversight Congress gives them–everyone knows that they’ve got the dirt on everyone, and so nobody wants to ask too many hard questions that might lead to some reporter mysteriously getting a copy of the credit card receipts from that little getaway with that 19 year old campaign worker.

    The biggest story of Obama’s first term (which was reported day-to-day, but not with much depth) was the massive way he caved in on everything he said he was going to do to rein in the intelligence agencies and pentagon. I’ve always assumed this was mainly because he never meant any of that stuff anyway, since politicians lie whenever their mouths are moving. But it’s also possible he simply realized that the intelligence agencies were just too powerful to take on.

    • Replies: @Flip
    Well, Mr. Kennedy was going to rein in the CIA and the military and I hear things didn't work out so well for him or his brother.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Good observations. Spying might also explain some unusual Supreme Court votes. In the "bad old days," J. Edgar Hoover's FBI had "the goods" on some many Members of Congress and political appointees that he could do basically everything he wanted to. Now that power may lie within NSA.
    , @DCThrowback
    I remember a certain Senator McCarthy going after communists in the CIA in '54, how'd things work out for him?

    And Frank Church got re-elected, right?
    , @AndrewR
    Anyone who doubts the existence of the Deep State simply is not paying attention.
  23. ” … They are the core of our national self-perception. If they turn to the dark side, what does that say about Germany?”

    What is with the constant references to the dark and darkness?

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    What is with the constant references to the dark and darkness?
     
    Because so much of social and political discussion these days seems to come from a place where the sun doesn't shine.
  24. @Jefferson
    "But of course, if a white person notices it, it’s a Hate Graph. If a German white person notices it, it’s a Nazi Hate Graph."

    If an Italian person notices it, it's a Mafia Hate Graph.

    Wouldn’t it be a Fascismo Hate Graph? The Mafia were for the Allies.

  25. If some Whites spent as much time making babies as they do talking about others making babies…

    And I understand its much more fun.”

    Greg Gutfeld calls himself a “Conservative”, yet he is 51 years old with no kids and he admits he never plans to have any because it involves too much responsibility and he is too lazy to raise children. And he could easily afford to with his fat Fox News salary. How does that make him any different from a SWPL Liberal?

    So-called “Conservatives” who never plan to start a family are pretty much worthless to the Right Wing cause.

  26. @iSteveFan
    @ German_reader: How prevalent are your views? Do many share your opinions, but are too afraid to publicly discuss? Or have they really swallowed all this propaganda and believe it to be true?

    Can’t really tell. I’m probably much farther to the right than most people, but there seems to be widespread disaffection with Merkel’s open borders policy. Opinion polls indicate somewhat more than 50% are against it, but there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it’s wonderful…many Germans really are that stupid.
    Public discourse, that is most of the media, statements by politicians, business leaders, church leaders etc. is still very much pro Merkel’s policy; it’s really depressing how totally irrational and moralistic published opinion is.
    The right-wing AfD which Höcke belongs to has been steadily rising in polls during the last few months (predictably the established parties and the media try everything in their power against them, the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats even changing laws to cripple the AfD’s party finances; there’s also an intimidation campaign by antifas), on the federal level they currently poll at 9% (and some observers think this estimate will turn out to be too low because many people won’t admit to having sympathies for the AfD when asked). Next March there are elections in three states, we’ll see what happens then. Hopefully the Christian Democrats will suffer serious losses and the AfD will enter state parliaments, that seems to be the only way of affecting change.

    • Replies: @Anon
    "..many Germans really are that stupid."

    I wonder if brainwashed might not be a better word then stupid. I think many Germans may unconsciously feel they have to prove something along the "I'm not a racist "mantra. I guess this is a sad leftover from the last war. When does Germany get to stop paying the 'holocaust tax'? Especially to people who were not its victims or from people who were not its perpetrators?
    , @Diversity Heretic
    If English is your second language, you have learned it extremely well. I've always been a Germanophile myself, but it seems Germany is on a ethnomasochistic suicide course.
    , @reiner Tor

    there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it’s wonderful…many Germans really are that stupid
     
    Or are afraid to tell anything else to the pollsters. Or the opinion poll questions are distorted. Etc. etc. I don't follow opinion polls in other countries, but in Hungary the 'rightist' pollsters consistently measured Fidesz stronger and the left weaker, and vice versa. The difference was often over 5%, and there was no room to use loaded questions, because all the pollsters used the exact same question. ('If elections were held this Sunday, who would you vote for?') Now if you want to ask people about something more complicated, you can use loaded questions. Also, if the question itself is seen more as a moral issue than just choosing one party over the other (since, at least in theory, all parties accept that voters who vote for another party can also be moral beings), this could affect things in general.

    I'd guess that if it's 30-35% who are still for #refugeeswelcome, then in reality it might be maybe 20% or so.
  27. What is by far the most effective way to prevent refugees, genocides and environmental destruction?

    Birth control.

    1 billion women would accept a $500 incentive to get on long-term birth control.

    ($500 incentive + $500 birth control) * (1 billion women) = $1 trillion

    • Replies: @Demon for Truth
    Right you are, but try telling it to White Breeding Factory overseers like Jefferson @ 25 above. He and his gang want to challenge the Third World to a duel -- wombs at dawn.
    , @Kat Grey
    If a sweeping programme of birth control is not implemented in Africa like tomorrow morning at the latest Europe will continue to be the dumping ground for Africa's sexual overspill in the decades to come. The burden to feed and accomodate these unwanted hordes will naturally fall on whitey who will be so heavily taxed by the "humanitarian liberal" state that he or she will no longer be able to afford a family. Translate that into: no rosy white babies in the hospital nursery wards. And even if they did have children where would they raise them? Immigrants and their swarm of offspring are first in the housing queue.

    The flood of migrants from sub-Saharan lands will only come to a halt when Africans have achieved demographic majority within western Europe and they themselves decide there just "ain't enuff goodies no mo for their brothahs and sistahs in Africa".
  28. @Zach
    Speaking of tribes, the Nooksacks in NW Washington state are fighting to keep the right to disenroll tribal members. From the Seattle Times:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest/native-lawyer-takes-on-tribes-that-kick-members-out/

    Every tribe has different and often complicated enrollment rules. In the Nooksack case, there isn’t agreement on what the rules are, although they are generally understood to include one-quarter Indian blood quantum and proof of lineage to a Nooksack on a 1942 Census roll or to one who received a federal land allotment.

    Michelle Roberts, spokeswoman for the 306 (facing disenrollment), insists her family knows where it comes from, noting her grandmother took great pride in being a Nooksack. “We don’t want to lose her history,” she says.

    (snip)

    Commenting on disenrollment (in general) Reyn Leno, Grand Ronde tribal council chair, said his tribe had disenrolled 80 members because “There was a feeling that people were receiving benefits that shouldn’t have been.” Leno says.

    Leno also notes “Blood gives you the right to what we have.”
    ------------------

    Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans.

    “Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans.”

    The German people do think like Native Americans. The difference is that the German people have a powerful ruling class intimidating them into pretending to think something different. Intimidation is a powerful tool.

  29. @NOTA
    Also, NSA is spying on Congressmen. My guess is, this explains the extremely deferential and minimal oversight Congress gives them--everyone knows that they've got the dirt on everyone, and so nobody wants to ask too many hard questions that might lead to some reporter mysteriously getting a copy of the credit card receipts from that little getaway with that 19 year old campaign worker.

    The biggest story of Obama's first term (which was reported day-to-day, but not with much depth) was the massive way he caved in on everything he said he was going to do to rein in the intelligence agencies and pentagon. I've always assumed this was mainly because he never meant any of that stuff anyway, since politicians lie whenever their mouths are moving. But it's also possible he simply realized that the intelligence agencies were just too powerful to take on.

    Well, Mr. Kennedy was going to rein in the CIA and the military and I hear things didn’t work out so well for him or his brother.

  30. @Zach
    Speaking of tribes, the Nooksacks in NW Washington state are fighting to keep the right to disenroll tribal members. From the Seattle Times:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest/native-lawyer-takes-on-tribes-that-kick-members-out/

    Every tribe has different and often complicated enrollment rules. In the Nooksack case, there isn’t agreement on what the rules are, although they are generally understood to include one-quarter Indian blood quantum and proof of lineage to a Nooksack on a 1942 Census roll or to one who received a federal land allotment.

    Michelle Roberts, spokeswoman for the 306 (facing disenrollment), insists her family knows where it comes from, noting her grandmother took great pride in being a Nooksack. “We don’t want to lose her history,” she says.

    (snip)

    Commenting on disenrollment (in general) Reyn Leno, Grand Ronde tribal council chair, said his tribe had disenrolled 80 members because “There was a feeling that people were receiving benefits that shouldn’t have been.” Leno says.

    Leno also notes “Blood gives you the right to what we have.”
    ------------------

    Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans.

    Wonder whether that has anything to do with the recent sudden closure of the Nooksack Casino.

  31. @Harry Baldwin
    So, how has he gotten this far? Because there are real issues that:
    a. Nobody close to the mainstream is addressing

    Years ago, on a neo-con site, I would frequently bring up the immigration issue. Regular commenters would dismiss my concerns, telling me it wasn't an important issue because no one was bringing it up.

    Years ago, on a neo-con site, I would frequently bring up the immigration issue. Regular commenters would dismiss my concerns, telling me it wasn’t an important issue because no one was bringing it up.

    In the 90’s, the neocons made a sustained and fairly successful effort to get conservative journalists who worried about immigration fired from their jobs. Letter writing campaigns, imputations of anti-Semitism (because restrictionism in the 20’s impacted Jews), the whole works. That campaign was less successful in than it might have been in stifling the issue because of the emergence of the internet, but it did waste twenty years during which the Republican mainstream might have forged a better immigration policy.

    • Replies: @Henry Bowman

    but it did waste twenty years during which the Republican mainstream might have forged a better immigration policy.
     
    Well, the Neo Cons are done, and will limit immigration, and if the Cultural Marxist do not like it, they can kill themselves.
  32. @German_reader
    That Sauerbrey woman is so bloody annoying, typical "good German".
    Höcke is a bit of an idiot, has a tendency for theatralic and somewhat ridiculous behaviour that may be counter-productive. But at least he's trying to do something and he's right about the core issues.
    The situation in Germany is really bad though, the last few months have really shocked me. This country may be messed up beyond saving by its insane self-conception and total naivite about the world. It's insane also how religious and moralistic public discourse has become. Much Islamophilia on display, especially by stupid Christians. Just yesterday I read an interview with a professor for medieval history who advocated making Eid a public holiday in Germany. Had the displeasure of hearing that guy a few years ago at a conference...back then he had invited a speaker from Cameroon who basically lambasted the audience (who all politely clapped which I refused to do) for "racism" and went on and on how horrible "fortress Europe" is.
    Really insane, I'm disgusted with this country.

    German Reader, why did Alternative for DLand feel it have to jettison this guy for saying something fairly obvious? It’s not like it’s obviously inciteful. Or not true, or not an obvious social fact–as Steve’s post demonstrated. Was he an embarrassment before? I can see what Marine Le Pen felt the need to ditch her Dad, but this seems a mystery.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    They haven't jettisoned him yet, and it's doubtful they can. The thing with the AfD is, there are several factions and Höcke is one of the leaders of the more explicitly nationalist faction. There has been feuding in the AfD for quite some time and one of the party's founders Bernd Lucke and his followers actually left the party last summer because they thought Höcke's wing was getting too powerful (they more or less claimed the party had been infiltrated by crypto-Nazis, though what they cited as evidence was mostly pretty ridiculous). Now there's feuding between the new party leader Frauke Petry (who defenestrated Lucke with Höcke's aid) and Höcke. To some degree criticism of Höcke may even be justified, he isn't a Nazi, but he's a German nationalist who strongly dislikes many aspects of Germany's "Westernization" (though those "values" like multiculturalism etc. are probably also strongly disliked by many people in "Western" core nations like Britain, France and the US...), that's of course a big no-go in Germany. He also has a tendency for silly theatrics and wants the AfD to be a "Fundamentalopposition", that is in total opposition to the existing political system (which doesn't look like a strategy for success...). And his stuff about r- and k-strategies is almost universally seen as crude biological racism (anti-racism in public discourse may be even stronger in Germany than in the US though in personal interactions Germans are probably more "racist" and xenophobic than white Americans). I'm somewhat ambivalent about the issue...I don't like how some people from the AfD enthusiastiacally distance themselves from Höcke, that reeks of cowardice and political correctness; on the other hand, Höcke might eventually really go too far and turn out to be a hindrance to further success.
  33. But if you don’t want to have a real debate and just want to impose your policy autocratically, then it’s ideal to restrict the side you want to lose to being represented by soccer hooligans.

    Of course, that raises the worry that if all the respectable people aren’t allowed to discuss in public the fate of the nation, then the only ones who can participate in this crucial policy debate, the hooligans, might just win the debate and come to power.

    Isn’t that a historically normal thing? Hasn’t respectability always been defined by adherence to the consensus of the ruling elite?

    To me, it seems that “respectable” and “dissident” are mutually exclusive, and always have been. Differing on the details is another matter, but we’re past that point, and that means conflict is inevitable. Not that I want to be a part of it, but when these things get started it’s hard to get out of the way.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Hasn’t respectability always been defined by adherence to the consensus of the ruling elite?
     
    Yes, but in the past the élites were often, well, élite. Now they're the scum of the earth.
    , @andy russia

    Hasn’t respectability always been defined by adherence to the consensus of the ruling elite?
     
    one of the things critical theory and cultmarx got right.
    the theory works, it's just the ends it's being put to...
  34. @Hepp
    Part of me says that HBD will become a lot more obvious when every country in Europe has a black underclass. On the other hand, it's pretty obvious now, and it doesn't seem to matter.

    Although European blacks end up poor like American blacks, there is one huge difference in behavior. Blacks in Europe marry/cohabitate with whites while only a small percentage of blacks outmarry in the US. This makes HBD less visible and maybe after several generations barely visible.

    • Replies: @Hepp
    I doubt that. There is still an identifiably black underclass in countries like Brazil, which have been race mixing forever. The Middle East too.
    , @Anon
    "European blacks"?

    Sorry but there is no such thing. There may be blacks living in Europe, but they are not and never will be "European".
  35. “You know, if you want to have a good debate on a crucial policy that will determine the future of Germany, it’s probably a wise idea to have both sides be represented by respectable people offering informed views.”

    Its sentences such as this one in particular that won’t be looked at too kindly by the likes of Anna Sauerbrey. I mean, this is way too much nuance to add to the Narrative of “Historical Germany = Nazi overtones” and “Those immigrants from who knows where that were invited in are automatically good, productive and useful to their new home nations”. People might get confused if they were to think too long about this.

    Rational debate and discussion about the issues of the day? What’s that anyway? Just one more stale leftover from that evil White Privilege, which obviously must be stopped before it goes too far.

    Germany today, tomorrow…who knows where?

    And, is there some way that Ms. Sauerbrey can tie Trump into all this talk of Nazis; far-right whackjobs; etc. etc. That’s the real question for 2016 that the NYT will soon have to provide an answer.

  36. @Anonymous
    Although European blacks end up poor like American blacks, there is one huge difference in behavior. Blacks in Europe marry/cohabitate with whites while only a small percentage of blacks outmarry in the US. This makes HBD less visible and maybe after several generations barely visible.

    I doubt that. There is still an identifiably black underclass in countries like Brazil, which have been race mixing forever. The Middle East too.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    At the end of slavery, Brazil had a very significant portion of its population that was black.

    Europe simply doesn't have enough blacks to maintain anything approaching a multigenerational endogamous black caste.
  37. @Zach
    Speaking of tribes, the Nooksacks in NW Washington state are fighting to keep the right to disenroll tribal members. From the Seattle Times:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest/native-lawyer-takes-on-tribes-that-kick-members-out/

    Every tribe has different and often complicated enrollment rules. In the Nooksack case, there isn’t agreement on what the rules are, although they are generally understood to include one-quarter Indian blood quantum and proof of lineage to a Nooksack on a 1942 Census roll or to one who received a federal land allotment.

    Michelle Roberts, spokeswoman for the 306 (facing disenrollment), insists her family knows where it comes from, noting her grandmother took great pride in being a Nooksack. “We don’t want to lose her history,” she says.

    (snip)

    Commenting on disenrollment (in general) Reyn Leno, Grand Ronde tribal council chair, said his tribe had disenrolled 80 members because “There was a feeling that people were receiving benefits that shouldn’t have been.” Leno says.

    Leno also notes “Blood gives you the right to what we have.”
    ------------------

    Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans.

    The Germans thought like that to a horrible extreme not so long ago. It came to an awful consequence.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Pure and Easy, you have a lot of studying-up to do on what really happened in 20th century history.
    , @AndrewR
    Winners write the history books.

    Do your own research and you'll probably come to realize that maybe the official story we are sold may not be the exact truth of what happened.
  38. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Isn’t it about time for everyone to just say ‘we are all race-ists’?

    The world would be far more honest.

    Liberals, Libertarians, Socialists, and so-called Conzos are all hiding behind abstract principles of justice and blah blah. But only fools TRULY believe in abstract principles and such nonsense and pursue them to the end of the world. And such sucker folks never amount to anything cuz one cannot build or gain power based on such nonsense.
    People with real minds and real sense pursue power for tribal and/or individual reasons. That’s it. It’s either about the ethno or it’s about the ego.
    Of course, it’s generally bad form nowadays to wave the national flag or admit to one’s own ambition and ‘greed’, so the smart and savvy cover up their egoism and ethnocentrism behind lofty rhetoric of universalism. That Zucky who made billions from Facebook and is a very proud Jew pretends to care soooooo much about those poor poor Muslims!!

    Furthermore, power will always be problematic since it can never be equally shared among every individual and among every ethnic group. Some individuals are smarter, luckier, and more ambitious. Others are dumb or lazy. So, some will rise much higher than others. A Libertarian will say that is justice since the winners deserved to win. But the envious mob will never accept this and always look for excuses to blame the rich for having benefited with unfair advantages. (In some ways, such whining has a way of advantaging the powerful. If the NYT went HBD and said, “well, the reason why so many blacks and browns lag is because they have lower IQ and there is NOTHING that can be done about it.” This will make blacks and browns angry and frustrated and filled with bitter resentment. They might get violent. But as long as NYT keeps offering hope after hope, the lagging mob is fooled and calmed with the promise that, gee, maybe the next program will finally bridge the gap and perform miracles. HBD has a finality about it. It says ‘you are dumb and doomed to fail’. Without hope, people can get very angry and bitter, and NY elites don’t want that.)
    Also, even if the rich did rise meritocratically, their children are born to privilege. Also, the rich get to buy politicians and do all the nefarious things that come with money and privilege.
    So, is leftism the answer? No. Leftism is like a prison system that forces all to be equal. Imagine a race where everyone is made to pass the finish line together as co-winners. That is equal but coercive and bogus. Worse, in time, the elites of a leftist order become like the commie elites that became the new pigs like in Orwell’s Animal Farm.

    Also, only suckers pursue abstract principles of universality with dimwit sincerity. Power is about gaining advantage for the individual or the nation/tribe. You cannot gain power for everyone around the world. Power is never universal. All power comes at the expense of others. While some tides can lift many boats, some boats will always rise much much higher, and some will inevitably sink. There’s no way to have Israel without hurting Palestinians. There’s no way to appease blacks in the US without hurting whites. There’s no way to satisfy homos without offending others, and so on. So, there is no such thing as power for all. Power is always about a contest of ‘more for us, and less for you’.

    Blacks talk about justice but they just want more power for blacks, and black individuals want more power for themselves. They don’t care about every brother and sister. Look at black athletes and rappers. Do they share their wealth? No.
    Jews talk about equality all the time, but they get richer and richer while rest fall behind. Homos are all about homo power. Mexicans talk the talk of ‘inclusion’ and ‘diversity is our strength’, but their main reason for pushing open borders is MORE MEXICANS FOR MORE MEXICAN POWER. It’s just how it is. All such groups hide behind the rhetoric of universalism to push their own tribal or individual agenda.
    And white urban gentry are subconsciously quasi-tribalist and/or egoist. They are so into themselves. Outwardly, they are far more ‘sensitive’ and ‘caring’ than their parents and grandparents who were more like Archie Bunkers. But in their personal lives, they are far more choosy, finicky, perfectionist, and exclusive. Archie Bunker may not be very ‘nice’, but he was happy to marry a nice ordinary woman. And Ralph and Alice Kramden may not be the most sensitive saints, but they are happy with one another. But look at urban gentry types. They talk the talk of ‘sensitivity’ but in their personal lives, almost no one is good enough for them. And even in the stuff they buy, they can’t just go to some regular store. They gotta go to some specialty store. I’ve went shopping with some of these friends, and I wanna strangle them. They are so PC but they refuse to shop where the schmoes shop.
    And what is all that Section 8 stuff about? These Libs don’t fool me. It really comes to ‘more blacks for you, less for us.’ But of course, they hide this agenda behind lofty rhetoric of ‘inclusion’ and ‘integration'(for others).

    This is why race-ism and fascism are the most honest ideology. We can at least let’s be honest about what we want.
    After all, even liberals and leftists who claim to be totally colorblind have their preferences and biases. Notice how some on the Left(of the BDS community) get all riled up about evil Zionists but are utterly silent about a lot of other tyranny around the world.
    And in the 80s, remember how most Libs prioritized blacks in South Africa while remaining mum about Palestinians.
    Notice how white libs generally favor blacks and homos over all other groups. When blacks riot and burn down cities(and messed up the store of the victim of Michael Brown), do you hear white libs ever complain about the violence? No. So, they have their Bias of Compassion too. Certain groups get more of their compassion than others do. Many Arab Christians have been getting slaughtered since Iraq War, but there’s been near total silence in the progressive community.

    Bias of Compassion is a kind of tribalism or projected tribalism.
    If American Conservatives outsource their tribalism to Israel, American White Liberals outsource their repressed tribalism to certain groups that are favored over other groups. After all, we almost never see White Liberals express equal compassion for everyone around the world. Instead, certain groups get MORE compassion and support, especially based on the ‘cool’ factor. Why do Jews, Negroes, and Homos get more support and compassion? A lot of Libs admire Jewish comedians and writers. A lot of Libs find black musicians and athletes badass. A lot of Libs find homo to be so ‘creative’. So, even though Libs claim to be about ‘equality’, they favor certain groups for extra compassion based on their signs of superiority.

    But what about suffering Iranians due to US-enforced sanctions? The hell with them since they are ‘uncool’.
    All forms of compassion are unfair since they favor some over others.
    During the 80s, many of us felt compassion for brave Mujahadeen warriors who were fighting the Soviet Empire. But what we were not told was that these warriors targeted many innocent victims such as school girls whose education was seen as blasphemy according to arch-Islamic law.
    Also, many Leftists in the 60s felt compassion for the Vietnamese communists as brave warriors but overlooked all the victims of communist atrocities. That’s how compassion works. One may take leave of one’s own tribalism in feeling compassion for others people, but in a divided world, one cannot equally feel compassion for all because to side with people is to side against another people who are at odds with the ones you’ve sided with. This is why Lawrence of Arabia goes batty. It’s like the scene where he has to kill the dumb ragger. Lawrence got to like him and earlier, even saved him from the hot desert at great risk to himself. But he has to side with the idea of Arab unity, and so he has to kill the poor slob. Also, his siding with Arabs makes him hostile to Turks, and he must feel no sympathy for them even as they mowed down mercilessly.
    Same with animal world.If you sympathize with lions, you have to overlook the fact that lions ruthlessly destroy OTHER creatures.

    Also, there is the power of narrative. Though Liberal Narrative claims to favor the victimized and oppressed, all historical narratives are extremely selective and distorted. Also, which Narrative gets special attention depends on who has control over the media and academia. White Americans killed many more American Indians and Vietnamese than blacks, but blacks get more compassion because the controlled Narrative favors them. And many more Conservatives were blacklisted and destroyed by PC than commies were destroyed by McCarthy, but the ‘victims’ of McCarthy have gotten far more compassion since the controlled Narrative lionizes them.

    And of course, if we look behind all these narratives, they are really controlled to serve certain ETHNIC interests. They are not for serving all people. After all, some of those victims of McCarthy supported Stalin who killed millions of Ukrainians. But that is conveniently swept under the rug since it serves a certain ethnic group better to make McCarthy out to have been worse than Stalin.

    • Replies: @TangoMan
    Anon says:

    Isn’t it about time for everyone to just say ‘we are all race-ists’?

    The world would be far more honest.
     
    Now that's funny. You can't even write under a pseudonym and hide behind Anon but you want everyone to say that they are racist.
    , @Clyde
    very good
  39. “German white person”

    Redundant?

  40. There’s a translation of what he actually said here. He talked about r/K selection theory, which Rushton used to describe racial differences:

    In Africa the so-called small r strategy prevails, which aims for as high a growth rate as possible. There the so-called dissemination type dominates. And in Europe generally the large K strategy is followed that tries to make optimal use of the capacities of the living space. Here is where the placeholder type lives. Simply stated, evolution has given Africa and Europe two different reproduction strategies, very easily understandable for any biologist. The difference between the African and European birthrates will be strengthened further by the spirit of decadence that has Europe firmly in its grip. In short, in the 21st century, the life-affirming African dissemination type meets the self-abnegating European placeholder type. This insight calls for a fundamental re-orientation of the asylum and immigration policies of Germany and Europe.

    My own opinion is that it’s unfortunate he would have brought this up. It might be true, but western societies are a *long* way away from being able to talk about it. Whereas, if he had just stuck to the facts on the ground about the different reproductive rates, maybe the reactions wouldn’t have been so vociferous.

    That’s not to say he deserves anything like the smearing he’s getting from the NYT — of course he doesn’t.

  41. “[I]f all the respectable people aren’t allowed to discuss in public the fate of the nation, then the only ones who can participate in this crucial policy debate, the hooligans, might just win the debate and come to power.”

    So very well said.

  42. @German_reader
    That Sauerbrey woman is so bloody annoying, typical "good German".
    Höcke is a bit of an idiot, has a tendency for theatralic and somewhat ridiculous behaviour that may be counter-productive. But at least he's trying to do something and he's right about the core issues.
    The situation in Germany is really bad though, the last few months have really shocked me. This country may be messed up beyond saving by its insane self-conception and total naivite about the world. It's insane also how religious and moralistic public discourse has become. Much Islamophilia on display, especially by stupid Christians. Just yesterday I read an interview with a professor for medieval history who advocated making Eid a public holiday in Germany. Had the displeasure of hearing that guy a few years ago at a conference...back then he had invited a speaker from Cameroon who basically lambasted the audience (who all politely clapped which I refused to do) for "racism" and went on and on how horrible "fortress Europe" is.
    Really insane, I'm disgusted with this country.

    German Reader;

    I applaud you for NOT applauding. Nice to know not all Germans are stupid. And what right does some African from Cameroon think he has inviting himself to Europe.

  43. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “But of course, if a white person notices it, it turns into a HateGraph. If a German white person notices it, it’s a NaziHateGraph.

    Same with my graph based on the 2015 United Nations World Population Prospects:” they become hateful when taken out of context…
    http://www.valuewalk.com/2013/09/fertility-rate-africa/
    http://rationalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/muslim-demographics-debunked.html
    http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2011/01/27/will-pew-muslim-birth-rate-study-finally-silence-the-eurabia-claim/
    Ignoring the slow down Mr racist?
    Yes turns out your graph is bullshit:http://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2015/05/whats-west-central-africas-youthful-demographics-high-desired-family-size/

    • Replies: @Paco Wové
    You know, if you just learn to use your words, rather than spewing a pile of links and insults, you might have more of an impact. How, precisely, is Sailer's graph "bullshit"? Surely you know the difference between a reduction in rate of increase and an actual reduction in quantity?
  44. @Anonymous
    Although European blacks end up poor like American blacks, there is one huge difference in behavior. Blacks in Europe marry/cohabitate with whites while only a small percentage of blacks outmarry in the US. This makes HBD less visible and maybe after several generations barely visible.

    “European blacks”?

    Sorry but there is no such thing. There may be blacks living in Europe, but they are not and never will be “European”.

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    There are some Blacks, though.

    There is an ancient fable that Wulfricus Niger, otherwise known as Wulfric the Black circa 980, received his name after blackening his face in order to pass undetected through his enemies.

    Adam Black of Edinburgh (1784 - 1874), a publisher, acquired the rights to the Encyclopedia Britannica in 1827.

    No fewer than ten Coats of Arms were granted to families of this name. Those borne by Gilbert Black, Dean of the Guild of Aberdeen (1672), depict a black saltire between a red mullet in chief and a red crescent in base, on a silver shield with a black chief. A demi lion proper is on the Crest, and the Motto, Non Crux, sed lux, translates as, Not the cross, but its light.
  45. @Jefferson
    George Pataki withdrew from the race today. 5 Republicans in total so far have dropped out and yet the number of candidates in the Republican presidential field is still in the double digits. How crazy is that?

    “How crazy is that?”

    Very crazy considering none is worthy.

  46. Anon • Disclaimer says:
    @German_reader
    Can't really tell. I'm probably much farther to the right than most people, but there seems to be widespread disaffection with Merkel's open borders policy. Opinion polls indicate somewhat more than 50% are against it, but there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it's wonderful...many Germans really are that stupid.
    Public discourse, that is most of the media, statements by politicians, business leaders, church leaders etc. is still very much pro Merkel's policy; it's really depressing how totally irrational and moralistic published opinion is.
    The right-wing AfD which Höcke belongs to has been steadily rising in polls during the last few months (predictably the established parties and the media try everything in their power against them, the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats even changing laws to cripple the AfD's party finances; there's also an intimidation campaign by antifas), on the federal level they currently poll at 9% (and some observers think this estimate will turn out to be too low because many people won't admit to having sympathies for the AfD when asked). Next March there are elections in three states, we'll see what happens then. Hopefully the Christian Democrats will suffer serious losses and the AfD will enter state parliaments, that seems to be the only way of affecting change.

    “..many Germans really are that stupid.”

    I wonder if brainwashed might not be a better word then stupid. I think many Germans may unconsciously feel they have to prove something along the “I’m not a racist “mantra. I guess this is a sad leftover from the last war. When does Germany get to stop paying the ‘holocaust tax’? Especially to people who were not its victims or from people who were not its perpetrators?

    • Replies: @ABN
    Also, when do the Allied powers get to stop paying the Holocaust Tax?
    , @Friedrich
    Since it's mostly about muslims, it s laughable to call it racism. Not because muslims aren't so distinguished biologically that they don't amount to a race (you can easily spot muslims in Germany, France, etc. from afar), but because muslims themselves are racist. They despise us, they hate the west. I went to a multicultural schhool in Germany, and racist attacks against germans were rampant. I had a turkish "friend"* during my school years, and wanted to join his soccer club that was composed of only turks (even sporting a turkish name). As soon as I arrived, the turks there made clear to me they don't want any germans in their club ("only for turks").

    * I later learnt that he simply exploited me.

    So those germans who most likely never had real contact with muslims but claim to not be racist can't be taken seriously. They are weaklings, traitors even.
  47. That map is encouraging. Egypt, Bangladesh, Brazil, Pakistan, Indonesia and South Africa are not known for having high IQ populations, or great wealth, but still have low fertility.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "That map is encouraging."

    Right. Sub-Saharan Africa is the big problem left with overpopulation, but since disaster appears to have been averted in much of the world, it's reasonable to assume it can be averted in Sub-Saharan Africa, too, if we bother to try. It won't be easy but it is doable, if we wake up in time.

    , @5371
    Encouraging because false. In reality, Pakistan has very high fertility, Egypt high, only Brazil of your list genuinely low.
  48. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Proposition nations fail. Everything else is details.

    Until you can say simply, "That person doesn't belong here because they are not a part of our tribe," you are done for.

    Definitions can be manipulated. Blood cannot.

    The United States and Western Europe are done for. How long and in what way are unknown, but the final destination is not.

    I say this as a father.

    Until you can say simply, “That person doesn’t belong here because they are not a part of our tribe,” you are done for.

    The American Colonization Society tried to make that point in the 19th century. They met their stiffest resistance in multicolored kumbaya Dixie.

    • Replies: @Curle
    "They met their stiffest resistance in multicolored kumbaya Dixie."

    Slaves didn't want to play ball. Many of the freed slaves that went to Liberia met an unpleasant fate at the hands of their distant relatives. Plus, constructing an European society in Africa using freed slaves was a harder proposition than perhaps it first appeared. Word got out among the black population, our homies don't want us. Apparently, there are some things worse than the southern slave system though never speak such things to a tenured academic.
    , @ABN
    Yes, a lot of opponents of slavery supported Colonization. I recall reading a quote from a Lincoln speech to the effect of, "One or the other race has to be dominant in this country, and I naturally prefer that it be the white race." (I'm paraphrasing.)

    For so long, we've thought that people can just be individuals in a diverse, democratic society. Lincoln himself has long since been retconned into a liberal and/or neocon.

    Now we're seeing the truth of Lincoln's observation; the multicultural democracy has become a giant pissing contest, and all our public debates are increasingly underlain by the potentially explosive metapolitical subtext of who-whom.
  49. @Bill P

    But if you don’t want to have a real debate and just want to impose your policy autocratically, then it’s ideal to restrict the side you want to lose to being represented by soccer hooligans.

    Of course, that raises the worry that if all the respectable people aren’t allowed to discuss in public the fate of the nation, then the only ones who can participate in this crucial policy debate, the hooligans, might just win the debate and come to power.
     
    Isn't that a historically normal thing? Hasn't respectability always been defined by adherence to the consensus of the ruling elite?

    To me, it seems that "respectable" and "dissident" are mutually exclusive, and always have been. Differing on the details is another matter, but we're past that point, and that means conflict is inevitable. Not that I want to be a part of it, but when these things get started it's hard to get out of the way.

    Hasn’t respectability always been defined by adherence to the consensus of the ruling elite?

    Yes, but in the past the élites were often, well, élite. Now they’re the scum of the earth.

  50. @Anonymous
    " ... They are the core of our national self-perception. If they turn to the dark side, what does that say about Germany?"

    What is with the constant references to the dark and darkness?

    What is with the constant references to the dark and darkness?

    Because so much of social and political discussion these days seems to come from a place where the sun doesn’t shine.

  51. @Jefferson
    "But of course, if a white person notices it, it’s a Hate Graph. If a German white person notices it, it’s a Nazi Hate Graph."

    If an Italian person notices it, it's a Mafia Hate Graph.

    If an Italian person notices it, it’s a Mafia Hate Graph.

    Or Graphiti.

  52. Careful there New York Times. Search through your photo archives and you might find a picture of former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer wearing a hoodie with his face contorted in anger and his fist inches from the face of a German police officer. Before John Kerry was an immaculately coiffed gigolo in a bespoke suit he was a scruffy street fighting man. Go back in time and many of today’s leftist establishment figures looked more like the crowd at a Grateful Dead concert than the Beltway or Brussels insider of today!

  53. Its the Calvinism stupid. Calvinism is the Crack Cocaine for White people. The way the Crack Epidemic started off a wave of ultra violence in the Black community? Because Black people really, really liked getting high off cocaine? And would pay for it? Well Calvinism, the idea that some White people are innately, selected by God or Destiny, better than other White people and predestined for Heaven or History? Well that is the Crack Cocaine for White people. No one seems to able to stop it.

    The status one-upmanship among White people makes us uniquely vulnerable to Calvinism, allowing us a sense of belonging to a predestined group of “saved” shown by their material success to have God’s or History’s favor, and igniting instead of simple status rivalry a desire to destroy. Utterly. Because God and History are on their side. Instead of just being this year’s champions.

    As noted above in the thread, Muslims and Africans in public housing and the like are “vibrant” and the “soul of the community” but Whites in public housing are loser scum to be eliminated. How very … Calvinist.

    Of course, racism is just the result of White people living with non-Whites with radically and incompatibly different ideas of how to live. Whites and Chinese and Koreans, don’t have much conflict in places like Portland or Seattle or Vancouver because their values while different are not incompatible — Christmas is celebrated in Japan and China and Korea, not as extensively as here but they like a party. Needless to say the Muslim No Fun League does not celebrate Christmas nor really do Africans who can’t get the idea of the Winter Solstice.

    There are not many Calvinists in places like Alabama, while ultra White Vermont is Bernie (Calvinist) Sanders country. Put enough non Whites in Germany, and you’ll get a nation of Paul Kerseys or Outlaw Josey Wales. Not neo Nazis but even worse for Calvinists — Old West Style Outlaws who just don’t give a damn.

    There is a reason millions of people around the world mourned the death of Lemmy of Motorhead. For those without the Pajamboy Gene or Blue Haired Fattie Feminist leanings, being an Outlaw is the easier and often default choice. Harley Davidson does not exactly push a conformist image.

  54. @Anonymous
    That map is encouraging. Egypt, Bangladesh, Brazil, Pakistan, Indonesia and South Africa are not known for having high IQ populations, or great wealth, but still have low fertility.

    “That map is encouraging.”

    Right. Sub-Saharan Africa is the big problem left with overpopulation, but since disaster appears to have been averted in much of the world, it’s reasonable to assume it can be averted in Sub-Saharan Africa, too, if we bother to try. It won’t be easy but it is doable, if we wake up in time.

    • Replies: @TangoMan
    The last population group to quit the overbreeding game is the one that rides the momentum they've created long into the future in that they upset and distort the global population balance and they shape future humanity. That Star Trek future is going to be disproportionately filled with Africans - imagine an Affirmative Action JaaQuon Toomarvelous Kirk, Captain of the pimped out Enterprise.

    The world, and the future, would have been better off if Africans had been the first on the sub-replacement fertility bandwagon rather than the last ones.

  55. Off Topic

    UK government minister’s 30 year old non PeeCee truth-bomb, explodes – UK Daily Telegraph – Government policy chief dragged into race row over 1980s memo drawing comparisons with white communities

  56. @NOTA
    Also, NSA is spying on Congressmen. My guess is, this explains the extremely deferential and minimal oversight Congress gives them--everyone knows that they've got the dirt on everyone, and so nobody wants to ask too many hard questions that might lead to some reporter mysteriously getting a copy of the credit card receipts from that little getaway with that 19 year old campaign worker.

    The biggest story of Obama's first term (which was reported day-to-day, but not with much depth) was the massive way he caved in on everything he said he was going to do to rein in the intelligence agencies and pentagon. I've always assumed this was mainly because he never meant any of that stuff anyway, since politicians lie whenever their mouths are moving. But it's also possible he simply realized that the intelligence agencies were just too powerful to take on.

    Good observations. Spying might also explain some unusual Supreme Court votes. In the “bad old days,” J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI had “the goods” on some many Members of Congress and political appointees that he could do basically everything he wanted to. Now that power may lie within NSA.

  57. @Anonymous
    That map is encouraging. Egypt, Bangladesh, Brazil, Pakistan, Indonesia and South Africa are not known for having high IQ populations, or great wealth, but still have low fertility.

    Encouraging because false. In reality, Pakistan has very high fertility, Egypt high, only Brazil of your list genuinely low.

  58. @German_reader
    Can't really tell. I'm probably much farther to the right than most people, but there seems to be widespread disaffection with Merkel's open borders policy. Opinion polls indicate somewhat more than 50% are against it, but there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it's wonderful...many Germans really are that stupid.
    Public discourse, that is most of the media, statements by politicians, business leaders, church leaders etc. is still very much pro Merkel's policy; it's really depressing how totally irrational and moralistic published opinion is.
    The right-wing AfD which Höcke belongs to has been steadily rising in polls during the last few months (predictably the established parties and the media try everything in their power against them, the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats even changing laws to cripple the AfD's party finances; there's also an intimidation campaign by antifas), on the federal level they currently poll at 9% (and some observers think this estimate will turn out to be too low because many people won't admit to having sympathies for the AfD when asked). Next March there are elections in three states, we'll see what happens then. Hopefully the Christian Democrats will suffer serious losses and the AfD will enter state parliaments, that seems to be the only way of affecting change.

    If English is your second language, you have learned it extremely well. I’ve always been a Germanophile myself, but it seems Germany is on a ethnomasochistic suicide course.

  59. @Anon
    Isn't it about time for everyone to just say 'we are all race-ists'?

    The world would be far more honest.

    Liberals, Libertarians, Socialists, and so-called Conzos are all hiding behind abstract principles of justice and blah blah. But only fools TRULY believe in abstract principles and such nonsense and pursue them to the end of the world. And such sucker folks never amount to anything cuz one cannot build or gain power based on such nonsense.
    People with real minds and real sense pursue power for tribal and/or individual reasons. That's it. It's either about the ethno or it's about the ego.
    Of course, it's generally bad form nowadays to wave the national flag or admit to one's own ambition and 'greed', so the smart and savvy cover up their egoism and ethnocentrism behind lofty rhetoric of universalism. That Zucky who made billions from Facebook and is a very proud Jew pretends to care soooooo much about those poor poor Muslims!!

    Furthermore, power will always be problematic since it can never be equally shared among every individual and among every ethnic group. Some individuals are smarter, luckier, and more ambitious. Others are dumb or lazy. So, some will rise much higher than others. A Libertarian will say that is justice since the winners deserved to win. But the envious mob will never accept this and always look for excuses to blame the rich for having benefited with unfair advantages. (In some ways, such whining has a way of advantaging the powerful. If the NYT went HBD and said, "well, the reason why so many blacks and browns lag is because they have lower IQ and there is NOTHING that can be done about it." This will make blacks and browns angry and frustrated and filled with bitter resentment. They might get violent. But as long as NYT keeps offering hope after hope, the lagging mob is fooled and calmed with the promise that, gee, maybe the next program will finally bridge the gap and perform miracles. HBD has a finality about it. It says 'you are dumb and doomed to fail'. Without hope, people can get very angry and bitter, and NY elites don't want that.)
    Also, even if the rich did rise meritocratically, their children are born to privilege. Also, the rich get to buy politicians and do all the nefarious things that come with money and privilege.
    So, is leftism the answer? No. Leftism is like a prison system that forces all to be equal. Imagine a race where everyone is made to pass the finish line together as co-winners. That is equal but coercive and bogus. Worse, in time, the elites of a leftist order become like the commie elites that became the new pigs like in Orwell's Animal Farm.

    Also, only suckers pursue abstract principles of universality with dimwit sincerity. Power is about gaining advantage for the individual or the nation/tribe. You cannot gain power for everyone around the world. Power is never universal. All power comes at the expense of others. While some tides can lift many boats, some boats will always rise much much higher, and some will inevitably sink. There's no way to have Israel without hurting Palestinians. There's no way to appease blacks in the US without hurting whites. There's no way to satisfy homos without offending others, and so on. So, there is no such thing as power for all. Power is always about a contest of 'more for us, and less for you'.

    Blacks talk about justice but they just want more power for blacks, and black individuals want more power for themselves. They don't care about every brother and sister. Look at black athletes and rappers. Do they share their wealth? No.
    Jews talk about equality all the time, but they get richer and richer while rest fall behind. Homos are all about homo power. Mexicans talk the talk of 'inclusion' and 'diversity is our strength', but their main reason for pushing open borders is MORE MEXICANS FOR MORE MEXICAN POWER. It's just how it is. All such groups hide behind the rhetoric of universalism to push their own tribal or individual agenda.
    And white urban gentry are subconsciously quasi-tribalist and/or egoist. They are so into themselves. Outwardly, they are far more 'sensitive' and 'caring' than their parents and grandparents who were more like Archie Bunkers. But in their personal lives, they are far more choosy, finicky, perfectionist, and exclusive. Archie Bunker may not be very 'nice', but he was happy to marry a nice ordinary woman. And Ralph and Alice Kramden may not be the most sensitive saints, but they are happy with one another. But look at urban gentry types. They talk the talk of 'sensitivity' but in their personal lives, almost no one is good enough for them. And even in the stuff they buy, they can't just go to some regular store. They gotta go to some specialty store. I've went shopping with some of these friends, and I wanna strangle them. They are so PC but they refuse to shop where the schmoes shop.
    And what is all that Section 8 stuff about? These Libs don't fool me. It really comes to 'more blacks for you, less for us.' But of course, they hide this agenda behind lofty rhetoric of 'inclusion' and 'integration'(for others).

    This is why race-ism and fascism are the most honest ideology. We can at least let's be honest about what we want.
    After all, even liberals and leftists who claim to be totally colorblind have their preferences and biases. Notice how some on the Left(of the BDS community) get all riled up about evil Zionists but are utterly silent about a lot of other tyranny around the world.
    And in the 80s, remember how most Libs prioritized blacks in South Africa while remaining mum about Palestinians.
    Notice how white libs generally favor blacks and homos over all other groups. When blacks riot and burn down cities(and messed up the store of the victim of Michael Brown), do you hear white libs ever complain about the violence? No. So, they have their Bias of Compassion too. Certain groups get more of their compassion than others do. Many Arab Christians have been getting slaughtered since Iraq War, but there's been near total silence in the progressive community.

    Bias of Compassion is a kind of tribalism or projected tribalism.
    If American Conservatives outsource their tribalism to Israel, American White Liberals outsource their repressed tribalism to certain groups that are favored over other groups. After all, we almost never see White Liberals express equal compassion for everyone around the world. Instead, certain groups get MORE compassion and support, especially based on the 'cool' factor. Why do Jews, Negroes, and Homos get more support and compassion? A lot of Libs admire Jewish comedians and writers. A lot of Libs find black musicians and athletes badass. A lot of Libs find homo to be so 'creative'. So, even though Libs claim to be about 'equality', they favor certain groups for extra compassion based on their signs of superiority.

    But what about suffering Iranians due to US-enforced sanctions? The hell with them since they are 'uncool'.
    All forms of compassion are unfair since they favor some over others.
    During the 80s, many of us felt compassion for brave Mujahadeen warriors who were fighting the Soviet Empire. But what we were not told was that these warriors targeted many innocent victims such as school girls whose education was seen as blasphemy according to arch-Islamic law.
    Also, many Leftists in the 60s felt compassion for the Vietnamese communists as brave warriors but overlooked all the victims of communist atrocities. That's how compassion works. One may take leave of one's own tribalism in feeling compassion for others people, but in a divided world, one cannot equally feel compassion for all because to side with people is to side against another people who are at odds with the ones you've sided with. This is why Lawrence of Arabia goes batty. It's like the scene where he has to kill the dumb ragger. Lawrence got to like him and earlier, even saved him from the hot desert at great risk to himself. But he has to side with the idea of Arab unity, and so he has to kill the poor slob. Also, his siding with Arabs makes him hostile to Turks, and he must feel no sympathy for them even as they mowed down mercilessly.
    Same with animal world.If you sympathize with lions, you have to overlook the fact that lions ruthlessly destroy OTHER creatures.

    Also, there is the power of narrative. Though Liberal Narrative claims to favor the victimized and oppressed, all historical narratives are extremely selective and distorted. Also, which Narrative gets special attention depends on who has control over the media and academia. White Americans killed many more American Indians and Vietnamese than blacks, but blacks get more compassion because the controlled Narrative favors them. And many more Conservatives were blacklisted and destroyed by PC than commies were destroyed by McCarthy, but the 'victims' of McCarthy have gotten far more compassion since the controlled Narrative lionizes them.

    And of course, if we look behind all these narratives, they are really controlled to serve certain ETHNIC interests. They are not for serving all people. After all, some of those victims of McCarthy supported Stalin who killed millions of Ukrainians. But that is conveniently swept under the rug since it serves a certain ethnic group better to make McCarthy out to have been worse than Stalin.

    Anon says:

    Isn’t it about time for everyone to just say ‘we are all race-ists’?

    The world would be far more honest.

    Now that’s funny. You can’t even write under a pseudonym and hide behind Anon but you want everyone to say that they are racist.

    • Replies: @Anon
    You should say "I am Anonycus."
  60. @Steve Sailer
    "That map is encouraging."

    Right. Sub-Saharan Africa is the big problem left with overpopulation, but since disaster appears to have been averted in much of the world, it's reasonable to assume it can be averted in Sub-Saharan Africa, too, if we bother to try. It won't be easy but it is doable, if we wake up in time.

    The last population group to quit the overbreeding game is the one that rides the momentum they’ve created long into the future in that they upset and distort the global population balance and they shape future humanity. That Star Trek future is going to be disproportionately filled with Africans – imagine an Affirmative Action JaaQuon Toomarvelous Kirk, Captain of the pimped out Enterprise.

    The world, and the future, would have been better off if Africans had been the first on the sub-replacement fertility bandwagon rather than the last ones.

  61. @Hepp
    Part of me says that HBD will become a lot more obvious when every country in Europe has a black underclass. On the other hand, it's pretty obvious now, and it doesn't seem to matter.

    Oliver Letwin, David Cameron’s chief policy adviser, has just been forced to recant his hateful views :

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

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/30/oliver-letwin-blocked-help-for-black-youth-after-1985-riots

    “Downing Street files released on Wednesday by the National Archives include a confidential joint paper by Letwin and Booth in which they told Thatcher that “lower-class unemployed white people had lived for years in appalling slums without a breakdown of public order on anything like the present scale”.

    The men also warned Thatcher that setting up a £10m communities programme to tackle inner-city problems would do little more than “subsidise Rastafarian arts and crafts workshops”.

    Their intervention followed a warning from the home secretary, Douglas Hurd, that alienated youth, predominantly black, in the inner cities represented “a grave threat to the social fabric” of the country. The two persuaded Thatcher to dismiss suggestions from Hurd and two other cabinet ministers, Kenneth Baker and Lord Young, to tackle the problem, and instead insisted what was needed was measures to tackle absent fathers, moral education and an end to state funding of leftwing activists.

    Hurd told Thatcher in a confidential minute that the government might have to reconcile itself to the fact that “a number of our cities now contain a pool of several hundred young people who we have not educated, whom it may not be possible to employ, and who are antagonistic to all authority. We need to think hard to prevent the pool being constantly replenished.”

    “The root of social malaise is not poor housing, or youth ‘alienation’ or the lack of a middle class,” they advised Thatcher. “Lower-class unemployed white people had lived for years in appalling slums without a breakdown of public order on anything like the present scale; in the midst of depression, people in Brixton went out, leaving their grocery money in a bag at the front door, and expecting to see groceries when they got back.

    “Riots, criminality and social disintegration are caused solely by individual characters and attitudes. So long as bad moral attitudes remain, all efforts to improve the inner cities will founder. David Young’s new entrepreneurs will set up in the disco and drug trade.”

    Instead their prescription was to reinforce the family through the law and tax, to set up “old-fashioned independent religious schools” and to change attitudes to personal responsibility, honesty, and the police from an early age including a new moral “youth corps”.

    In a statement on Tuesday night Letwin said: “I want to make clear that some parts of a private memo I wrote nearly 30 years ago were both badly worded and wrong. I apologise unreservedly for any offence these comments have caused and wish to make clear that none was intended.” ”

    • Replies: @Curle
    'Hateful' translates to unpleasantly true.
  62. @Bill P

    But if you don’t want to have a real debate and just want to impose your policy autocratically, then it’s ideal to restrict the side you want to lose to being represented by soccer hooligans.

    Of course, that raises the worry that if all the respectable people aren’t allowed to discuss in public the fate of the nation, then the only ones who can participate in this crucial policy debate, the hooligans, might just win the debate and come to power.
     
    Isn't that a historically normal thing? Hasn't respectability always been defined by adherence to the consensus of the ruling elite?

    To me, it seems that "respectable" and "dissident" are mutually exclusive, and always have been. Differing on the details is another matter, but we're past that point, and that means conflict is inevitable. Not that I want to be a part of it, but when these things get started it's hard to get out of the way.

    Hasn’t respectability always been defined by adherence to the consensus of the ruling elite?

    one of the things critical theory and cultmarx got right.
    the theory works, it’s just the ends it’s being put to…

  63. @German_reader
    Can't really tell. I'm probably much farther to the right than most people, but there seems to be widespread disaffection with Merkel's open borders policy. Opinion polls indicate somewhat more than 50% are against it, but there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it's wonderful...many Germans really are that stupid.
    Public discourse, that is most of the media, statements by politicians, business leaders, church leaders etc. is still very much pro Merkel's policy; it's really depressing how totally irrational and moralistic published opinion is.
    The right-wing AfD which Höcke belongs to has been steadily rising in polls during the last few months (predictably the established parties and the media try everything in their power against them, the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats even changing laws to cripple the AfD's party finances; there's also an intimidation campaign by antifas), on the federal level they currently poll at 9% (and some observers think this estimate will turn out to be too low because many people won't admit to having sympathies for the AfD when asked). Next March there are elections in three states, we'll see what happens then. Hopefully the Christian Democrats will suffer serious losses and the AfD will enter state parliaments, that seems to be the only way of affecting change.

    there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it’s wonderful…many Germans really are that stupid

    Or are afraid to tell anything else to the pollsters. Or the opinion poll questions are distorted. Etc. etc. I don’t follow opinion polls in other countries, but in Hungary the ‘rightist’ pollsters consistently measured Fidesz stronger and the left weaker, and vice versa. The difference was often over 5%, and there was no room to use loaded questions, because all the pollsters used the exact same question. (‘If elections were held this Sunday, who would you vote for?’) Now if you want to ask people about something more complicated, you can use loaded questions. Also, if the question itself is seen more as a moral issue than just choosing one party over the other (since, at least in theory, all parties accept that voters who vote for another party can also be moral beings), this could affect things in general.

    I’d guess that if it’s 30-35% who are still for #refugeeswelcome, then in reality it might be maybe 20% or so.

    • Replies: @Romanian
    There's even a book describing this stuff - "Private Truths, Public Lies" by Timur Kuran

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


    "The idea of preference falsification was put forth by the social scientist Timur Kuran in his book Private Truth, Public Lies as part of his theory of how people's stated preferences are responsive to social influences. It laid the foundation for his theory of why unanticipated revolutions can occur. It is related to ideas of social proof as well as choice blindness. The theory states that individuals convey preferences that differ from what they genuinely want.

    According to the theory, in articulating preferences, individuals frequently tailor their choices to what appears socially acceptable. In other words, they convey preferences that differ from what they genuinely want. Kuran calls the resulting misrepresentation “preference falsification.” In his 1995 book, Private Truths, Public Lies, he argues that the phenomenon is ubiquitous and that it has huge social and political consequences. These consequences all hinge on interdependencies between individual decisions as to what preference to convey publicly. A person who hides his discontent about a fashion, policy, or political regime makes it harder for others to express discontent.

    One socially significant consequence of preference falsification is widespread public support for social options that would be rejected decisively in a vote taken by secret ballot. Privately unpopular policies may be retained indefinitely as people reproduce conformist social pressures through individual acts of preference falsification.

    In falsifying preferences, people hide the knowledge on which it rests. In the process, they distort, corrupt, and impoverish the knowledge in the public domain. They make it harder for others to become informed about the drawbacks of existing arrangements and the merits of their alternatives. Another consequence of preference falsification is thus widespread ignorance about the advantages of change. Over long periods, preference falsification can dampen a community’s capacity to want change by bringing about intellectual narrowness and ossification.

    The first of these consequences is driven by people’s need for social approval, the second by their reliance on each other for information."
  64. it is my impression that Germans are pretty ignorant about HBD (and s*x realism, for that matter), partly because they’re social democrats at heart (the good, old, “we want a 40 hours week” kind) and thus are not cynical enough (Leftism has a huge social-romanticist component) and partly because of the language barrier, because so much stuff simply doesn’t get translated.

    I remember reading Heartiste-type stuff in Russian in the early naughties.

    • Replies: @andy russia
    Germany doesn't seem to have that extreme White underclass problem as do the UK (chavs) and Russia (gopniks.)
    I wonder why that is, i.e. if it's something about the German character or the public policy.
    I read Dalrymple a lot. I can't imagine that sort of thing in Germany, at least not to that extent.


    The spiritual impoverishment of the population seems to them worse than anything they have ever known in their own countries. And what they see is all the worse, of course, because it should be so much better. (...)

    "On the whole," said one Filipino doctor to me, "life is preferable in the slums of Manila." He said it without any illusions as to the quality of life in Manila.

  65. @andy russia
    it is my impression that Germans are pretty ignorant about HBD (and s*x realism, for that matter), partly because they're social democrats at heart (the good, old, "we want a 40 hours week" kind) and thus are not cynical enough (Leftism has a huge social-romanticist component) and partly because of the language barrier, because so much stuff simply doesn't get translated.

    I remember reading Heartiste-type stuff in Russian in the early naughties.

    Germany doesn’t seem to have that extreme White underclass problem as do the UK (chavs) and Russia (gopniks.)
    I wonder why that is, i.e. if it’s something about the German character or the public policy.
    I read Dalrymple a lot. I can’t imagine that sort of thing in Germany, at least not to that extent.

    The spiritual impoverishment of the population seems to them worse than anything they have ever known in their own countries. And what they see is all the worse, of course, because it should be so much better. (…)

    “On the whole,” said one Filipino doctor to me, “life is preferable in the slums of Manila.” He said it without any illusions as to the quality of life in Manila.

  66. “It was not the first time he had drawn on National Socialist themes, but this time he caused uproar”
    If anything Höcke´s statement regarding reproducing strategies stands in the anglo-american, colonial western tradition of so called “racism”. It has certainly nothing to do with the middle-european, national socialist ideology. Nazis almost never thought about Subsaharan Africans at all.
    what is needed in this context is more empirical work I guess, something like that
    http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-race-r-k-theory-rushton-meisenberg-personality-individual-differences-7-2013.pdf

    • Replies: @German_reader
    "Nazis almost never thought about Subsaharan Africans at all."

    They did consider them as racially inferior though, and there were some movies with colonial themes that depicted Africans as savages. France's use of coloured troops during the Ruhr occupation of the 1920s was also considered as especially humiliating, and Hitler wrote about this in "Mein Kampf" (only skimmed through it once for a few minutes, but IIRC he also claimed that France was "negroizing" rapidly - of course for him the Jews were behind it). And there were some cases of blacks living in Europe during the 1940s who were unfortunate enough to end up in concentration camps and were murdered there (I think I even read once about some black American engineer from Chicago who had married a German woman and was murdered in Auschwitz; there are also recent studies claiming that German troops, especially the Waffen-SS, killed large numbers of the French's black troops in 1940 out of racism, though this might be exaggerated somewhat). So no doubt that the Nazis were anti-black racists. But I think you're right however that it was much less prominent as a theme than antisemitism and racism against Eastern Europeans.
    But the morality play that's going on in Germany today has very little to do anyway in my opinion with any serious "lessons" drawn from the 1940s...what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display. The closest equivalents today to victims of Nazism are the various non-Islamic minorities like Christians, Yazidis or other heterodox groups whom the Islamists want to subjugate or genocide...but there is very little real concern about the specific fate of those groups in Germany as far as I can tell. Instead we hear endless lectures about the glories of Islam (which has nothing to do with Islamism). That's just bizarre.
  67. @Anonymous
    Fortunately people like the jerk are in a dwindling minority.

    Only old white men do not like diversity because they cannot compete with masculine men

    it is funny. One day lefties say to right-wing guys: oh come on, how dare you criticize mass immigration, those are all little innocent, helpless children, you are so strong and big, you can and have to take care of them. The other day they say: how dare you criticize mass immigration, those are big, strong masculine men, they will come and get you, they will come in masses, and nothing will withstand anyway.

  68. @Eustace Tilley (not)


    Maybe the new Alternative Right should do Mr. Trump a favor and start a genuine self-described Fascist Party (the logo could be the reverse of the beautiful old silver Mercury Dime). Go for it: black armbands with fasces embroidered thereon, torchlight parades, even the occasional "n" word for shock value. Just stay 10 cm on the right side of the laws.

    Trump will then be magically transformed into a responsible, well-dressed man of the Moderate Right, who goes out of his way to reject "hate" in all its ugly forms.

    (Needless to say, there will still be no pleasing the New York Times.)

    but that´s not what the West needs. What the West needs now is that for the first time in decades, at least in one single western country, at least in one central issue and at least once a political party, person, policy or an opinion is successful WITHOUT differentiating itself strongly from the right-wing politics or even being the most leftist champion in place.
    Trump or Front National or AfD etc. have to be successful not despite but because they are right-wing. Only that will chance anything. Otherwise the claustrophobic and disastrous conformity of antiracism would continue to frame the public discourse

  69. @Hepp
    Part of me says that HBD will become a lot more obvious when every country in Europe has a black underclass. On the other hand, it's pretty obvious now, and it doesn't seem to matter.

    in a way it makes it even more visible. The big differences of sexual attraction in the interracial partner market at least are even more obvious given the high degree of out-marrying of Subsaharans in Europe.

    • Replies: @Hepp

    The big differences of sexual attraction in the interracial partner market at least are even more obvious given the high degree of out-marrying of Subsaharans in Europe.

     

    You have to ask who Africans take women from. Not the elites, who make policy. And not the most aggressive among lower class whites (a potential revolutionary base), because those guys can have sex anyway. The biggest losers will be guys who are both lower class and low-T, the most powerless segment of society who will never be able to affect any kind of change.

    If East Asia ever decides to commit suicide, however, it would be very interesting to see the dynamics, as Asian men are the least attractive to the opposite sex by a wide margin.
  70. @nglaer
    Years ago, on a neo-con site, I would frequently bring up the immigration issue. Regular commenters would dismiss my concerns, telling me it wasn’t an important issue because no one was bringing it up.

    In the 90's, the neocons made a sustained and fairly successful effort to get conservative journalists who worried about immigration fired from their jobs. Letter writing campaigns, imputations of anti-Semitism (because restrictionism in the 20's impacted Jews), the whole works. That campaign was less successful in than it might have been in stifling the issue because of the emergence of the internet, but it did waste twenty years during which the Republican mainstream might have forged a better immigration policy.

    but it did waste twenty years during which the Republican mainstream might have forged a better immigration policy.

    Well, the Neo Cons are done, and will limit immigration, and if the Cultural Marxist do not like it, they can kill themselves.

  71. @nglaer
    German Reader, why did Alternative for DLand feel it have to jettison this guy for saying something fairly obvious? It's not like it's obviously inciteful. Or not true, or not an obvious social fact--as Steve's post demonstrated. Was he an embarrassment before? I can see what Marine Le Pen felt the need to ditch her Dad, but this seems a mystery.

    They haven’t jettisoned him yet, and it’s doubtful they can. The thing with the AfD is, there are several factions and Höcke is one of the leaders of the more explicitly nationalist faction. There has been feuding in the AfD for quite some time and one of the party’s founders Bernd Lucke and his followers actually left the party last summer because they thought Höcke’s wing was getting too powerful (they more or less claimed the party had been infiltrated by crypto-Nazis, though what they cited as evidence was mostly pretty ridiculous). Now there’s feuding between the new party leader Frauke Petry (who defenestrated Lucke with Höcke’s aid) and Höcke. To some degree criticism of Höcke may even be justified, he isn’t a Nazi, but he’s a German nationalist who strongly dislikes many aspects of Germany’s “Westernization” (though those “values” like multiculturalism etc. are probably also strongly disliked by many people in “Western” core nations like Britain, France and the US…), that’s of course a big no-go in Germany. He also has a tendency for silly theatrics and wants the AfD to be a “Fundamentalopposition”, that is in total opposition to the existing political system (which doesn’t look like a strategy for success…). And his stuff about r- and k-strategies is almost universally seen as crude biological racism (anti-racism in public discourse may be even stronger in Germany than in the US though in personal interactions Germans are probably more “racist” and xenophobic than white Americans). I’m somewhat ambivalent about the issue…I don’t like how some people from the AfD enthusiastiacally distance themselves from Höcke, that reeks of cowardice and political correctness; on the other hand, Höcke might eventually really go too far and turn out to be a hindrance to further success.

    • Replies: @Friedrich
    "And his stuff about r- and k-strategies is almost universally seen as crude biological racism"

    Which is bollocks since Eysenck praised Rushton's book. Eysenck was a full-blown hardcore scientist of the highest order, no lightweight. Murray prasied it too, as did Lynn and Jensen. These are respected scholars. Is Volkmar Weiss a racist? His magnum opus ("Die Intelligenz und ihre Feinde") even seemed rather politically correct to me, even bordering on race creationism. Andreas Vonderach has a better grasp on the topic of race, I think.
    , @reiner Tor

    I’m somewhat ambivalent about the issue…I don’t like how some people from the AfD enthusiastiacally distance themselves from Höcke, that reeks of cowardice and political correctness; on the other hand, Höcke might eventually really go too far and turn out to be a hindrance to further success.
     
    In other words, you're supportive of his views (and might even be to the right of him), but you are afraid that his strategy will be counter-productive.

    The problem with it is that by not revealing your preferences, you are essentially making others believe that you are also supportive of the narrative, which in turn will make others even less willing to come out of the closet with their less than PC political views.

    I propose you read Romanian's comment below or this Wiki page about how by being afraid of "going too far", people actually help maintain a consensus nobody agrees with any longer.

    I'm not too brave personally to break the consensus (although I do push what's acceptable), but I'm also happy that others are willing to do my work and publicly support views which are closer to my views than theirs. By pushing the limits so hard, this guy might be opening the range of what's acceptable in public discourse. Maybe what he's saying won't become acceptable, but probably some views previously unspeakable might become normal and accepted (and he's also providing ammunition to guys slightly to his left to say "Look! He's the real evil racist! We aren't!").

    anti-racism in public discourse may be even stronger in Germany than in the US though in personal interactions Germans are probably more “racist” and xenophobic than white Americans
     
    This means this anti-racism might actually be more fragile in Germany than in the US. In other words, it's probably an even better strategy in Germany to publicly and rudely question the consensus than it is in the US.
  72. If they turn to the dark side, what does that say about Germany?

    So it’s like Star Wars now? “I feel the Dark Side is strong with this one.” Dreadful newspaper.

  73. @Zach
    Speaking of tribes, the Nooksacks in NW Washington state are fighting to keep the right to disenroll tribal members. From the Seattle Times:

    http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/northwest/native-lawyer-takes-on-tribes-that-kick-members-out/

    Every tribe has different and often complicated enrollment rules. In the Nooksack case, there isn’t agreement on what the rules are, although they are generally understood to include one-quarter Indian blood quantum and proof of lineage to a Nooksack on a 1942 Census roll or to one who received a federal land allotment.

    Michelle Roberts, spokeswoman for the 306 (facing disenrollment), insists her family knows where it comes from, noting her grandmother took great pride in being a Nooksack. “We don’t want to lose her history,” she says.

    (snip)

    Commenting on disenrollment (in general) Reyn Leno, Grand Ronde tribal council chair, said his tribe had disenrolled 80 members because “There was a feeling that people were receiving benefits that shouldn’t have been.” Leno says.

    Leno also notes “Blood gives you the right to what we have.”
    ------------------

    Imagine if Germans thought like Native Americans.

    Didn’t they? As best I can tell the ideology of the third world – and of third world elements in Western countries – is indistinguishable from National Socialism.

    In fairness to National Socialism’s opponents, the third world is not a good advertisement for National Socialism.

  74. “Openly racist” is a funny phrase that the “tolerant” people like to use quite a lot here in Finland. Usually it’s used to describe people who vehemently deny being racist.

  75. @TangoMan
    Anon says:

    Isn’t it about time for everyone to just say ‘we are all race-ists’?

    The world would be far more honest.
     
    Now that's funny. You can't even write under a pseudonym and hide behind Anon but you want everyone to say that they are racist.

    You should say “I am Anonycus.”

  76. @Anonymous
    Fortunately people like the jerk are in a dwindling minority.

    Only old white men do not like diversity because they cannot compete with masculine men

    The young who’ve been through integrated schools will become the new Afrikaners – it’s just a question of what percentage is the tipping point.

  77. How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow? This case is a perfect example – a fairly moderate white school teacher tries to initiate a discussion, but then is immediately branded a NeoNazi by the NYT.

    The problem is that most widely known historical examples of a white ethnic/racial movements are associated with some kind of genocide/segregation/apartheid. In the minds of most people, white/ethnic pride movements are synonymous with those things. I suppose that the Renaissance/Humanism could be considered a white racial/ethnic pride movement, but that is mostly associated with rebellion from the Church.

    Trump is slowly starting to make it possible to have those discussions here, but its still limited to the fringes. I suppose I see Trump as a kind of political John-the-Baptist. His purpose is not to bring redemption to the white/middle class America, but rather to prepare the way for the One Who Will.

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    White pride is a loaded term. How about white self-respect?

    "I, a white man, respect myself and my kind enough to say that I'm sick and tired of hearing that all the evils in the world are my fault and that I have to bend over for every non-white who wants a free piece of what I've worked my ass off to get. So from now on, I'm focusing on my own welfare, and that of other whites. If that makes me racist, then so be it."

    That's not "Rah rah rah I AM WHITE HEAR ME ROAR!" It's "I'm white, and I'm going to defend my interests, in the same way that blacks, Hispanics, and Asians defend their interests."
    , @TangoMan
    How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow?

    Hang the crimes of the Holodomor, the Killing Fields, the Gulags on those who advocate for a progressive tax system and other measures designed to eliminate class distinctions. When they respond that your criticism is stupid, you respond "precisely, stupid just like your criticism was stupid."
    , @ben tillman

    How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow?
     
    You don't. You tell them that what they fear is already happening . . . but to Whites, not their non-White pets. In other words, fear of possible genocide is a pathetic excuse for complicity in an actual genocide in progress.
  78. The western world is being cleansed from the bottom up with the bottom 1/3 targeted first.

    Hence why anti-immigration sentiment was dominated by that demographic.

    Now we’re moving into the phase where the middle 1/3 are cleansed so the mid-point of the anti-immigration demographic will shift upwards.

  79. @Reg Cæsar

    Until you can say simply, “That person doesn’t belong here because they are not a part of our tribe,” you are done for.
     
    The American Colonization Society tried to make that point in the 19th century. They met their stiffest resistance in multicolored kumbaya Dixie.

    “They met their stiffest resistance in multicolored kumbaya Dixie.”

    Slaves didn’t want to play ball. Many of the freed slaves that went to Liberia met an unpleasant fate at the hands of their distant relatives. Plus, constructing an European society in Africa using freed slaves was a harder proposition than perhaps it first appeared. Word got out among the black population, our homies don’t want us. Apparently, there are some things worse than the southern slave system though never speak such things to a tenured academic.

  80. @NOTA
    Also, NSA is spying on Congressmen. My guess is, this explains the extremely deferential and minimal oversight Congress gives them--everyone knows that they've got the dirt on everyone, and so nobody wants to ask too many hard questions that might lead to some reporter mysteriously getting a copy of the credit card receipts from that little getaway with that 19 year old campaign worker.

    The biggest story of Obama's first term (which was reported day-to-day, but not with much depth) was the massive way he caved in on everything he said he was going to do to rein in the intelligence agencies and pentagon. I've always assumed this was mainly because he never meant any of that stuff anyway, since politicians lie whenever their mouths are moving. But it's also possible he simply realized that the intelligence agencies were just too powerful to take on.

    I remember a certain Senator McCarthy going after communists in the CIA in ’54, how’d things work out for him?

    And Frank Church got re-elected, right?

  81. @Erik Sieven
    "It was not the first time he had drawn on National Socialist themes, but this time he caused uproar"
    If anything Höcke´s statement regarding reproducing strategies stands in the anglo-american, colonial western tradition of so called "racism". It has certainly nothing to do with the middle-european, national socialist ideology. Nazis almost never thought about Subsaharan Africans at all.
    what is needed in this context is more empirical work I guess, something like that
    http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-race-r-k-theory-rushton-meisenberg-personality-individual-differences-7-2013.pdf

    “Nazis almost never thought about Subsaharan Africans at all.”

    They did consider them as racially inferior though, and there were some movies with colonial themes that depicted Africans as savages. France’s use of coloured troops during the Ruhr occupation of the 1920s was also considered as especially humiliating, and Hitler wrote about this in “Mein Kampf” (only skimmed through it once for a few minutes, but IIRC he also claimed that France was “negroizing” rapidly – of course for him the Jews were behind it). And there were some cases of blacks living in Europe during the 1940s who were unfortunate enough to end up in concentration camps and were murdered there (I think I even read once about some black American engineer from Chicago who had married a German woman and was murdered in Auschwitz; there are also recent studies claiming that German troops, especially the Waffen-SS, killed large numbers of the French’s black troops in 1940 out of racism, though this might be exaggerated somewhat). So no doubt that the Nazis were anti-black racists. But I think you’re right however that it was much less prominent as a theme than antisemitism and racism against Eastern Europeans.
    But the morality play that’s going on in Germany today has very little to do anyway in my opinion with any serious “lessons” drawn from the 1940s…what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display. The closest equivalents today to victims of Nazism are the various non-Islamic minorities like Christians, Yazidis or other heterodox groups whom the Islamists want to subjugate or genocide…but there is very little real concern about the specific fate of those groups in Germany as far as I can tell. Instead we hear endless lectures about the glories of Islam (which has nothing to do with Islamism). That’s just bizarre.

    • Replies: @nglaer
    what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display.

    To what extent is this a sort of anti-Semitic (or anti-Jewish) vengeance, perhaps subconsciously acknowledged at most? A generation ago, it seemed "no accident", if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.
    , @Erik Sieven
    then again there was anti-racist Nazi propaganda, bashing the USA for mistreating blacks. Concerning the lessons which should be learned I think you are absolutely right, those lessons are not learned. Just think of the gruesome anti-jewish terror and acts of violence in recent years in Belgium and France, all perpetrate by muslim immigrants.
    All in all modern anti-racism in Germany not have much to do with the Nazi era anyway. The Martin / Zimmerman case, Ferguson, Eric Garner all were big news with big think-pieces in relevant newspapers without any direct connection to Europe and european history.
  82. He’s a high school history teacher on leave and a married father of four.

    He will not be working as a teacher in Germany again.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/07/germany-s-triumph-ruins-war-how-new-european-empire-was-built

    Two of the American founding fathers, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, diagnosed this condition more than 200 years ago. They looked at the “federal system” of the “Germanic empire” and found it to be “a nerveless body, incapable of regulating its own members, insecure against external dangers, and agitated with unceasing fermentations in its own bowels”. “Military preparations,” they noted, “must be preceded by so many tedious discussions, arising from the jealousies, pride, separate views, and clashing pretensions, of sovereign bodies, that before the diet can settle the arrangements, the enemy are in the field . . .” By contrast, the federalists praised the Anglo-Scottish Union of 1707, by which the two parties, formerly so divided, had come together to “resist all [their] enemies” by creating a common debt, ­common parliamentary representation and common foreign and security policy. This served as the model for the United States. […] This did not much bother Germans, especially after the collapse of communism, because the expansion of the EU and Nato eastwards left Germany, for the first time in her long history, surrounded only by friends; her interest in security matters, … began to lapse. […] Instead of anchoring the common currency in joint parliamentary representation and a strong state capable of efficient revenue extraction as is the case in the United Kingdom and the United States, Berlin is attempting to run it through the acceptance of German “rules” and political culture. Instead of a single foreign policy and military capable of deterring aggressors, we have a perpetual palaver that reminds one of nothing so much as the equivocations of the Holy Roman empire in the face of Turkish or French threats..

    The future holds four possibilities. The first and most likely, in the short term, is more of the same, in which Germany enforces the eurozone “rules” and everyone else acquiesces to them.

    Given that Germany is now for the first time surrounded by friendly countries and only has a image problem as a demanding creditor in relation to Greece and pettifogging over EU rules ect, mass importing a million non European migrants into Germany for a generation is an ingenious ploy. With the refugees Merkel has embarked on a soft power blitzkrieg that will make the German state not only masters of Europe, but moral exemplars. The BBC often says that Britain (already most London children are black or south Asian) has not taken as many refugees as Sweden and Germany.

    • Replies: @gdpbull
    A quibble with your quote from the newstateman.com, or I guess I should say a quibble with our founding fathers, if the quote is correct. When the US was founded, there really was no German empire. They were of course referring to the Holy Roman Empire. That entity was really just a confederation. The so-called emperor had very few powers. The individual mostly very small states and city-states could defy the emperor pretty much at will. It was great for freedom, well relative freedom for that time anyway. It was a great political construct for fostering competition among the principalities and many believe it fostered a golden age in the arts and sciences. BUT, the founding fathers were right about no defense. Other countries ran rough-shod over them. And Napoleon finally dismantled the HRE completely in 1805 I think. My personal opinion is that period is what gave the Germans their military bent for the next few centuries.
  83. @Pure and Easy
    The Germans thought like that to a horrible extreme not so long ago. It came to an awful consequence.

    Pure and Easy, you have a lot of studying-up to do on what really happened in 20th century history.

    • Replies: @Pure and Easy
    Like what?
  84. @reiner Tor

    there also seems to be a sizable part of the population (maybe one third, difficult to say) that still thinks it’s wonderful…many Germans really are that stupid
     
    Or are afraid to tell anything else to the pollsters. Or the opinion poll questions are distorted. Etc. etc. I don't follow opinion polls in other countries, but in Hungary the 'rightist' pollsters consistently measured Fidesz stronger and the left weaker, and vice versa. The difference was often over 5%, and there was no room to use loaded questions, because all the pollsters used the exact same question. ('If elections were held this Sunday, who would you vote for?') Now if you want to ask people about something more complicated, you can use loaded questions. Also, if the question itself is seen more as a moral issue than just choosing one party over the other (since, at least in theory, all parties accept that voters who vote for another party can also be moral beings), this could affect things in general.

    I'd guess that if it's 30-35% who are still for #refugeeswelcome, then in reality it might be maybe 20% or so.

    There’s even a book describing this stuff – “Private Truths, Public Lies” by Timur Kuran

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

    [MORE]

    “The idea of preference falsification was put forth by the social scientist Timur Kuran in his book Private Truth, Public Lies as part of his theory of how people’s stated preferences are responsive to social influences. It laid the foundation for his theory of why unanticipated revolutions can occur. It is related to ideas of social proof as well as choice blindness. The theory states that individuals convey preferences that differ from what they genuinely want.

    According to the theory, in articulating preferences, individuals frequently tailor their choices to what appears socially acceptable. In other words, they convey preferences that differ from what they genuinely want. Kuran calls the resulting misrepresentation “preference falsification.” In his 1995 book, Private Truths, Public Lies, he argues that the phenomenon is ubiquitous and that it has huge social and political consequences. These consequences all hinge on interdependencies between individual decisions as to what preference to convey publicly. A person who hides his discontent about a fashion, policy, or political regime makes it harder for others to express discontent.

    One socially significant consequence of preference falsification is widespread public support for social options that would be rejected decisively in a vote taken by secret ballot. Privately unpopular policies may be retained indefinitely as people reproduce conformist social pressures through individual acts of preference falsification.

    In falsifying preferences, people hide the knowledge on which it rests. In the process, they distort, corrupt, and impoverish the knowledge in the public domain. They make it harder for others to become informed about the drawbacks of existing arrangements and the merits of their alternatives. Another consequence of preference falsification is thus widespread ignorance about the advantages of change. Over long periods, preference falsification can dampen a community’s capacity to want change by bringing about intellectual narrowness and ossification.

    The first of these consequences is driven by people’s need for social approval, the second by their reliance on each other for information.”

  85. @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    What is by far the most effective way to prevent refugees, genocides and environmental destruction?

    Birth control.

    1 billion women would accept a $500 incentive to get on long-term birth control.

    ($500 incentive + $500 birth control) * (1 billion women) = $1 trillion

    Right you are, but try telling it to White Breeding Factory overseers like Jefferson @ 25 above. He and his gang want to challenge the Third World to a duel — wombs at dawn.

  86. @Anonymous
    "But of course, if a white person notices it, it turns into a HateGraph. If a German white person notices it, it’s a NaziHateGraph.

    Same with my graph based on the 2015 United Nations World Population Prospects:" they become hateful when taken out of context...
    http://www.valuewalk.com/2013/09/fertility-rate-africa/
    http://rationalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/muslim-demographics-debunked.html
    http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2011/01/27/will-pew-muslim-birth-rate-study-finally-silence-the-eurabia-claim/
    Ignoring the slow down Mr racist?
    Yes turns out your graph is bullshit:http://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2015/05/whats-west-central-africas-youthful-demographics-high-desired-family-size/

    You know, if you just learn to use your words, rather than spewing a pile of links and insults, you might have more of an impact. How, precisely, is Sailer’s graph “bullshit”? Surely you know the difference between a reduction in rate of increase and an actual reduction in quantity?

  87. @Anon
    "European blacks"?

    Sorry but there is no such thing. There may be blacks living in Europe, but they are not and never will be "European".

    There are some Blacks, though.

    There is an ancient fable that Wulfricus Niger, otherwise known as Wulfric the Black circa 980, received his name after blackening his face in order to pass undetected through his enemies.

    Adam Black of Edinburgh (1784 – 1874), a publisher, acquired the rights to the Encyclopedia Britannica in 1827.

    No fewer than ten Coats of Arms were granted to families of this name. Those borne by Gilbert Black, Dean of the Guild of Aberdeen (1672), depict a black saltire between a red mullet in chief and a red crescent in base, on a silver shield with a black chief. A demi lion proper is on the Crest, and the Motto, Non Crux, sed lux, translates as, Not the cross, but its light.

  88. @DCThrowback
    How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow? This case is a perfect example - a fairly moderate white school teacher tries to initiate a discussion, but then is immediately branded a NeoNazi by the NYT.

    The problem is that most widely known historical examples of a white ethnic/racial movements are associated with some kind of genocide/segregation/apartheid. In the minds of most people, white/ethnic pride movements are synonymous with those things. I suppose that the Renaissance/Humanism could be considered a white racial/ethnic pride movement, but that is mostly associated with rebellion from the Church.

    Trump is slowly starting to make it possible to have those discussions here, but its still limited to the fringes. I suppose I see Trump as a kind of political John-the-Baptist. His purpose is not to bring redemption to the white/middle class America, but rather to prepare the way for the One Who Will.

    White pride is a loaded term. How about white self-respect?

    “I, a white man, respect myself and my kind enough to say that I’m sick and tired of hearing that all the evils in the world are my fault and that I have to bend over for every non-white who wants a free piece of what I’ve worked my ass off to get. So from now on, I’m focusing on my own welfare, and that of other whites. If that makes me racist, then so be it.”

    That’s not “Rah rah rah I AM WHITE HEAR ME ROAR!” It’s “I’m white, and I’m going to defend my interests, in the same way that blacks, Hispanics, and Asians defend their interests.”

  89. @DCThrowback
    How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow? This case is a perfect example - a fairly moderate white school teacher tries to initiate a discussion, but then is immediately branded a NeoNazi by the NYT.

    The problem is that most widely known historical examples of a white ethnic/racial movements are associated with some kind of genocide/segregation/apartheid. In the minds of most people, white/ethnic pride movements are synonymous with those things. I suppose that the Renaissance/Humanism could be considered a white racial/ethnic pride movement, but that is mostly associated with rebellion from the Church.

    Trump is slowly starting to make it possible to have those discussions here, but its still limited to the fringes. I suppose I see Trump as a kind of political John-the-Baptist. His purpose is not to bring redemption to the white/middle class America, but rather to prepare the way for the One Who Will.

    How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow?

    Hang the crimes of the Holodomor, the Killing Fields, the Gulags on those who advocate for a progressive tax system and other measures designed to eliminate class distinctions. When they respond that your criticism is stupid, you respond “precisely, stupid just like your criticism was stupid.”

  90. @Erik Sieven
    in a way it makes it even more visible. The big differences of sexual attraction in the interracial partner market at least are even more obvious given the high degree of out-marrying of Subsaharans in Europe.

    The big differences of sexual attraction in the interracial partner market at least are even more obvious given the high degree of out-marrying of Subsaharans in Europe.

    You have to ask who Africans take women from. Not the elites, who make policy. And not the most aggressive among lower class whites (a potential revolutionary base), because those guys can have sex anyway. The biggest losers will be guys who are both lower class and low-T, the most powerless segment of society who will never be able to affect any kind of change.

    If East Asia ever decides to commit suicide, however, it would be very interesting to see the dynamics, as Asian men are the least attractive to the opposite sex by a wide margin.

    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    do you actually think western male so called elites will continue to do OK on the partner market? I doubt so...I have the impression that increasingly the only relevant question is low-T / high-T, money etc. seems not to matter anymore.

    East Asia has a huge problem, and with international English teachers who suddenly turn into supreme Don Juans as soon as they reach East Asian soil spilling over in every chinese province town with more than 100.000 inhabitants the problem gets only bigger.
  91. @Anonymous Nephew
    Oliver Letwin, David Cameron's chief policy adviser, has just been forced to recant his hateful views :

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

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/30/oliver-letwin-blocked-help-for-black-youth-after-1985-riots


    "Downing Street files released on Wednesday by the National Archives include a confidential joint paper by Letwin and Booth in which they told Thatcher that “lower-class unemployed white people had lived for years in appalling slums without a breakdown of public order on anything like the present scale”.

    The men also warned Thatcher that setting up a £10m communities programme to tackle inner-city problems would do little more than “subsidise Rastafarian arts and crafts workshops”.

    Their intervention followed a warning from the home secretary, Douglas Hurd, that alienated youth, predominantly black, in the inner cities represented “a grave threat to the social fabric” of the country. The two persuaded Thatcher to dismiss suggestions from Hurd and two other cabinet ministers, Kenneth Baker and Lord Young, to tackle the problem, and instead insisted what was needed was measures to tackle absent fathers, moral education and an end to state funding of leftwing activists.

    Hurd told Thatcher in a confidential minute that the government might have to reconcile itself to the fact that “a number of our cities now contain a pool of several hundred young people who we have not educated, whom it may not be possible to employ, and who are antagonistic to all authority. We need to think hard to prevent the pool being constantly replenished.”

    “The root of social malaise is not poor housing, or youth ‘alienation’ or the lack of a middle class,” they advised Thatcher. “Lower-class unemployed white people had lived for years in appalling slums without a breakdown of public order on anything like the present scale; in the midst of depression, people in Brixton went out, leaving their grocery money in a bag at the front door, and expecting to see groceries when they got back.

    “Riots, criminality and social disintegration are caused solely by individual characters and attitudes. So long as bad moral attitudes remain, all efforts to improve the inner cities will founder. David Young’s new entrepreneurs will set up in the disco and drug trade.”

    Instead their prescription was to reinforce the family through the law and tax, to set up “old-fashioned independent religious schools” and to change attitudes to personal responsibility, honesty, and the police from an early age including a new moral “youth corps”.

    In a statement on Tuesday night Letwin said: “I want to make clear that some parts of a private memo I wrote nearly 30 years ago were both badly worded and wrong. I apologise unreservedly for any offence these comments have caused and wish to make clear that none was intended.” "
     

    ‘Hateful’ translates to unpleasantly true.

  92. @Hepp

    The big differences of sexual attraction in the interracial partner market at least are even more obvious given the high degree of out-marrying of Subsaharans in Europe.

     

    You have to ask who Africans take women from. Not the elites, who make policy. And not the most aggressive among lower class whites (a potential revolutionary base), because those guys can have sex anyway. The biggest losers will be guys who are both lower class and low-T, the most powerless segment of society who will never be able to affect any kind of change.

    If East Asia ever decides to commit suicide, however, it would be very interesting to see the dynamics, as Asian men are the least attractive to the opposite sex by a wide margin.

    do you actually think western male so called elites will continue to do OK on the partner market? I doubt so…I have the impression that increasingly the only relevant question is low-T / high-T, money etc. seems not to matter anymore.

    East Asia has a huge problem, and with international English teachers who suddenly turn into supreme Don Juans as soon as they reach East Asian soil spilling over in every chinese province town with more than 100.000 inhabitants the problem gets only bigger.

    • Replies: @Hepp

    do you actually think western male so called elites will continue to do OK on the partner market? I doubt so…I have the impression that increasingly the only relevant question is low-T / high-T, money etc. seems not to matter anymore.

     

    Charles Murray has written that for the elite, their behavior with regards to marriage and monogamy are still in the 1950s, just less fertile. The guys I know who went to good schools are either in monogamous relationships or so socially awkward that they're not getting women anyway. I don't know any women who are with blacks and I think research has shown that marrying or cohabitating with black men only happens among lower class women.

    Feminism and modernity have to an extent poisoned relationships between the sexes among the upper class. But it has led to celibacy, not a phenomenon of black men taking quality white women.
  93. @German_reader
    "Nazis almost never thought about Subsaharan Africans at all."

    They did consider them as racially inferior though, and there were some movies with colonial themes that depicted Africans as savages. France's use of coloured troops during the Ruhr occupation of the 1920s was also considered as especially humiliating, and Hitler wrote about this in "Mein Kampf" (only skimmed through it once for a few minutes, but IIRC he also claimed that France was "negroizing" rapidly - of course for him the Jews were behind it). And there were some cases of blacks living in Europe during the 1940s who were unfortunate enough to end up in concentration camps and were murdered there (I think I even read once about some black American engineer from Chicago who had married a German woman and was murdered in Auschwitz; there are also recent studies claiming that German troops, especially the Waffen-SS, killed large numbers of the French's black troops in 1940 out of racism, though this might be exaggerated somewhat). So no doubt that the Nazis were anti-black racists. But I think you're right however that it was much less prominent as a theme than antisemitism and racism against Eastern Europeans.
    But the morality play that's going on in Germany today has very little to do anyway in my opinion with any serious "lessons" drawn from the 1940s...what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display. The closest equivalents today to victims of Nazism are the various non-Islamic minorities like Christians, Yazidis or other heterodox groups whom the Islamists want to subjugate or genocide...but there is very little real concern about the specific fate of those groups in Germany as far as I can tell. Instead we hear endless lectures about the glories of Islam (which has nothing to do with Islamism). That's just bizarre.

    what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display.

    To what extent is this a sort of anti-Semitic (or anti-Jewish) vengeance, perhaps subconsciously acknowledged at most? A generation ago, it seemed “no accident”, if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.

    • Replies: @Erik Sieven
    following the Gottfredson model of genocide the pro-Islam / antiracist movement has actually a lot of similarities to antisemitism
    , @German_reader
    Probably can't be excluded, there's certainly a lot of anti-Israel sentiment in Germany (just as there was with the left-wing terrorists you mentioned; one has only to think of the Entebbe hijacking where the German terrorists were blatantly antisemitic), though there's also the opposite sentiment (Merkel is pro-Israel to a degree that is also quite irrational in my view).
    In any case it seems very odd to pretend that Sunni Muslims are the "new Jews".
    , @fnn

    A generation ago, it seemed “no accident”, if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.
     
    If it were to be examined closely, Baader-Meinhof would be considered unacceptably right-wing by today's standards:
    http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/the-baader-meinhof-complex/#comment-794

    Their bombings of US army buildings in Heidelberg were explicitly presented as a revenge for Dresden and Hamburg. Ulrike Meinhof in her pre-terrorist life as a celebrated journalist wrote a famous article commemorating the destruction of Dresden and putting it in a line with Auschwitz, Hiroshima, and Vietnam. That happened while the official version, especially of Germany’s center-rightists and conservatives, was that the USA liberated Germany from Hitler (and mirror image version was held up in the GDR, with the Soviets playing the part of liberators) and were West Germany’s best friend. There is no racial white self-hate aspect involved in RAF at all (deracination, yes); it just would have made no sense to them.
     
    , @Steve Sailer
    "A generation ago, it seemed “no accident”, if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2."

    Rock bands came from the winners in WWII, upscale terrorist groups from the losers in WWII?
  94. @Erik Sieven
    do you actually think western male so called elites will continue to do OK on the partner market? I doubt so...I have the impression that increasingly the only relevant question is low-T / high-T, money etc. seems not to matter anymore.

    East Asia has a huge problem, and with international English teachers who suddenly turn into supreme Don Juans as soon as they reach East Asian soil spilling over in every chinese province town with more than 100.000 inhabitants the problem gets only bigger.

    do you actually think western male so called elites will continue to do OK on the partner market? I doubt so…I have the impression that increasingly the only relevant question is low-T / high-T, money etc. seems not to matter anymore.

    Charles Murray has written that for the elite, their behavior with regards to marriage and monogamy are still in the 1950s, just less fertile. The guys I know who went to good schools are either in monogamous relationships or so socially awkward that they’re not getting women anyway. I don’t know any women who are with blacks and I think research has shown that marrying or cohabitating with black men only happens among lower class women.

    Feminism and modernity have to an extent poisoned relationships between the sexes among the upper class. But it has led to celibacy, not a phenomenon of black men taking quality white women.

  95. @nglaer
    what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display.

    To what extent is this a sort of anti-Semitic (or anti-Jewish) vengeance, perhaps subconsciously acknowledged at most? A generation ago, it seemed "no accident", if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.

    following the Gottfredson model of genocide the pro-Islam / antiracist movement has actually a lot of similarities to antisemitism

    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    Are you suggesting that the anti-Semites in Europe have adopted the Chinese Needle Snakes approach?
  96. @German_reader
    "Nazis almost never thought about Subsaharan Africans at all."

    They did consider them as racially inferior though, and there were some movies with colonial themes that depicted Africans as savages. France's use of coloured troops during the Ruhr occupation of the 1920s was also considered as especially humiliating, and Hitler wrote about this in "Mein Kampf" (only skimmed through it once for a few minutes, but IIRC he also claimed that France was "negroizing" rapidly - of course for him the Jews were behind it). And there were some cases of blacks living in Europe during the 1940s who were unfortunate enough to end up in concentration camps and were murdered there (I think I even read once about some black American engineer from Chicago who had married a German woman and was murdered in Auschwitz; there are also recent studies claiming that German troops, especially the Waffen-SS, killed large numbers of the French's black troops in 1940 out of racism, though this might be exaggerated somewhat). So no doubt that the Nazis were anti-black racists. But I think you're right however that it was much less prominent as a theme than antisemitism and racism against Eastern Europeans.
    But the morality play that's going on in Germany today has very little to do anyway in my opinion with any serious "lessons" drawn from the 1940s...what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display. The closest equivalents today to victims of Nazism are the various non-Islamic minorities like Christians, Yazidis or other heterodox groups whom the Islamists want to subjugate or genocide...but there is very little real concern about the specific fate of those groups in Germany as far as I can tell. Instead we hear endless lectures about the glories of Islam (which has nothing to do with Islamism). That's just bizarre.

    then again there was anti-racist Nazi propaganda, bashing the USA for mistreating blacks. Concerning the lessons which should be learned I think you are absolutely right, those lessons are not learned. Just think of the gruesome anti-jewish terror and acts of violence in recent years in Belgium and France, all perpetrate by muslim immigrants.
    All in all modern anti-racism in Germany not have much to do with the Nazi era anyway. The Martin / Zimmerman case, Ferguson, Eric Garner all were big news with big think-pieces in relevant newspapers without any direct connection to Europe and european history.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    "then again there was anti-racist Nazi propaganda, bashing the USA for mistreating blacks."

    Are you sure? It's true that Nazi Germany made some efforts at stirring up "coloured" populations in the British empire (the contacts with Arabs are well known, but also Indians like Chandra Bose), but I've never heard of Nazi propaganda positively referring to blacks in the US. Wasn't the "official" line more that the US was degenerate because of "race mixing" (Hitler of course both admired and feared the US, and was impressed by American eugenics programmes and writers like Madison Grant)?
    I agree though with you about German media's reporting about things like BLM...totally worthless, it's like it's always 1960 (or maybe rather 1915...), with white racists terrorising American blacks. Really bizarre, and supposedly conservative media like the FAZ are no exception. Sad thing is, many Germans seem to believe that nonsense.
  97. @nglaer
    what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display.

    To what extent is this a sort of anti-Semitic (or anti-Jewish) vengeance, perhaps subconsciously acknowledged at most? A generation ago, it seemed "no accident", if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.

    Probably can’t be excluded, there’s certainly a lot of anti-Israel sentiment in Germany (just as there was with the left-wing terrorists you mentioned; one has only to think of the Entebbe hijacking where the German terrorists were blatantly antisemitic), though there’s also the opposite sentiment (Merkel is pro-Israel to a degree that is also quite irrational in my view).
    In any case it seems very odd to pretend that Sunni Muslims are the “new Jews”.

  98. @nglaer
    what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display.

    To what extent is this a sort of anti-Semitic (or anti-Jewish) vengeance, perhaps subconsciously acknowledged at most? A generation ago, it seemed "no accident", if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.

    A generation ago, it seemed “no accident”, if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.

    If it were to be examined closely, Baader-Meinhof would be considered unacceptably right-wing by today’s standards:
    http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/the-baader-meinhof-complex/#comment-794

    Their bombings of US army buildings in Heidelberg were explicitly presented as a revenge for Dresden and Hamburg. Ulrike Meinhof in her pre-terrorist life as a celebrated journalist wrote a famous article commemorating the destruction of Dresden and putting it in a line with Auschwitz, Hiroshima, and Vietnam. That happened while the official version, especially of Germany’s center-rightists and conservatives, was that the USA liberated Germany from Hitler (and mirror image version was held up in the GDR, with the Soviets playing the part of liberators) and were West Germany’s best friend. There is no racial white self-hate aspect involved in RAF at all (deracination, yes); it just would have made no sense to them.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    "Their bombings of US army buildings in Heidelberg were explicitly presented as a revenge for Dresden and Hamburg. "

    Pretty silly given that it was the Royal air force that was responsible for those bombings.
    Baader-Meinhof were really scum, sadly their murders of GIs and German policemen are hardly commemorated in Germany, it's always about their assassinations of prominent politicians and bankers. The elites only care about their own.
  99. @Anon
    Isn't it about time for everyone to just say 'we are all race-ists'?

    The world would be far more honest.

    Liberals, Libertarians, Socialists, and so-called Conzos are all hiding behind abstract principles of justice and blah blah. But only fools TRULY believe in abstract principles and such nonsense and pursue them to the end of the world. And such sucker folks never amount to anything cuz one cannot build or gain power based on such nonsense.
    People with real minds and real sense pursue power for tribal and/or individual reasons. That's it. It's either about the ethno or it's about the ego.
    Of course, it's generally bad form nowadays to wave the national flag or admit to one's own ambition and 'greed', so the smart and savvy cover up their egoism and ethnocentrism behind lofty rhetoric of universalism. That Zucky who made billions from Facebook and is a very proud Jew pretends to care soooooo much about those poor poor Muslims!!

    Furthermore, power will always be problematic since it can never be equally shared among every individual and among every ethnic group. Some individuals are smarter, luckier, and more ambitious. Others are dumb or lazy. So, some will rise much higher than others. A Libertarian will say that is justice since the winners deserved to win. But the envious mob will never accept this and always look for excuses to blame the rich for having benefited with unfair advantages. (In some ways, such whining has a way of advantaging the powerful. If the NYT went HBD and said, "well, the reason why so many blacks and browns lag is because they have lower IQ and there is NOTHING that can be done about it." This will make blacks and browns angry and frustrated and filled with bitter resentment. They might get violent. But as long as NYT keeps offering hope after hope, the lagging mob is fooled and calmed with the promise that, gee, maybe the next program will finally bridge the gap and perform miracles. HBD has a finality about it. It says 'you are dumb and doomed to fail'. Without hope, people can get very angry and bitter, and NY elites don't want that.)
    Also, even if the rich did rise meritocratically, their children are born to privilege. Also, the rich get to buy politicians and do all the nefarious things that come with money and privilege.
    So, is leftism the answer? No. Leftism is like a prison system that forces all to be equal. Imagine a race where everyone is made to pass the finish line together as co-winners. That is equal but coercive and bogus. Worse, in time, the elites of a leftist order become like the commie elites that became the new pigs like in Orwell's Animal Farm.

    Also, only suckers pursue abstract principles of universality with dimwit sincerity. Power is about gaining advantage for the individual or the nation/tribe. You cannot gain power for everyone around the world. Power is never universal. All power comes at the expense of others. While some tides can lift many boats, some boats will always rise much much higher, and some will inevitably sink. There's no way to have Israel without hurting Palestinians. There's no way to appease blacks in the US without hurting whites. There's no way to satisfy homos without offending others, and so on. So, there is no such thing as power for all. Power is always about a contest of 'more for us, and less for you'.

    Blacks talk about justice but they just want more power for blacks, and black individuals want more power for themselves. They don't care about every brother and sister. Look at black athletes and rappers. Do they share their wealth? No.
    Jews talk about equality all the time, but they get richer and richer while rest fall behind. Homos are all about homo power. Mexicans talk the talk of 'inclusion' and 'diversity is our strength', but their main reason for pushing open borders is MORE MEXICANS FOR MORE MEXICAN POWER. It's just how it is. All such groups hide behind the rhetoric of universalism to push their own tribal or individual agenda.
    And white urban gentry are subconsciously quasi-tribalist and/or egoist. They are so into themselves. Outwardly, they are far more 'sensitive' and 'caring' than their parents and grandparents who were more like Archie Bunkers. But in their personal lives, they are far more choosy, finicky, perfectionist, and exclusive. Archie Bunker may not be very 'nice', but he was happy to marry a nice ordinary woman. And Ralph and Alice Kramden may not be the most sensitive saints, but they are happy with one another. But look at urban gentry types. They talk the talk of 'sensitivity' but in their personal lives, almost no one is good enough for them. And even in the stuff they buy, they can't just go to some regular store. They gotta go to some specialty store. I've went shopping with some of these friends, and I wanna strangle them. They are so PC but they refuse to shop where the schmoes shop.
    And what is all that Section 8 stuff about? These Libs don't fool me. It really comes to 'more blacks for you, less for us.' But of course, they hide this agenda behind lofty rhetoric of 'inclusion' and 'integration'(for others).

    This is why race-ism and fascism are the most honest ideology. We can at least let's be honest about what we want.
    After all, even liberals and leftists who claim to be totally colorblind have their preferences and biases. Notice how some on the Left(of the BDS community) get all riled up about evil Zionists but are utterly silent about a lot of other tyranny around the world.
    And in the 80s, remember how most Libs prioritized blacks in South Africa while remaining mum about Palestinians.
    Notice how white libs generally favor blacks and homos over all other groups. When blacks riot and burn down cities(and messed up the store of the victim of Michael Brown), do you hear white libs ever complain about the violence? No. So, they have their Bias of Compassion too. Certain groups get more of their compassion than others do. Many Arab Christians have been getting slaughtered since Iraq War, but there's been near total silence in the progressive community.

    Bias of Compassion is a kind of tribalism or projected tribalism.
    If American Conservatives outsource their tribalism to Israel, American White Liberals outsource their repressed tribalism to certain groups that are favored over other groups. After all, we almost never see White Liberals express equal compassion for everyone around the world. Instead, certain groups get MORE compassion and support, especially based on the 'cool' factor. Why do Jews, Negroes, and Homos get more support and compassion? A lot of Libs admire Jewish comedians and writers. A lot of Libs find black musicians and athletes badass. A lot of Libs find homo to be so 'creative'. So, even though Libs claim to be about 'equality', they favor certain groups for extra compassion based on their signs of superiority.

    But what about suffering Iranians due to US-enforced sanctions? The hell with them since they are 'uncool'.
    All forms of compassion are unfair since they favor some over others.
    During the 80s, many of us felt compassion for brave Mujahadeen warriors who were fighting the Soviet Empire. But what we were not told was that these warriors targeted many innocent victims such as school girls whose education was seen as blasphemy according to arch-Islamic law.
    Also, many Leftists in the 60s felt compassion for the Vietnamese communists as brave warriors but overlooked all the victims of communist atrocities. That's how compassion works. One may take leave of one's own tribalism in feeling compassion for others people, but in a divided world, one cannot equally feel compassion for all because to side with people is to side against another people who are at odds with the ones you've sided with. This is why Lawrence of Arabia goes batty. It's like the scene where he has to kill the dumb ragger. Lawrence got to like him and earlier, even saved him from the hot desert at great risk to himself. But he has to side with the idea of Arab unity, and so he has to kill the poor slob. Also, his siding with Arabs makes him hostile to Turks, and he must feel no sympathy for them even as they mowed down mercilessly.
    Same with animal world.If you sympathize with lions, you have to overlook the fact that lions ruthlessly destroy OTHER creatures.

    Also, there is the power of narrative. Though Liberal Narrative claims to favor the victimized and oppressed, all historical narratives are extremely selective and distorted. Also, which Narrative gets special attention depends on who has control over the media and academia. White Americans killed many more American Indians and Vietnamese than blacks, but blacks get more compassion because the controlled Narrative favors them. And many more Conservatives were blacklisted and destroyed by PC than commies were destroyed by McCarthy, but the 'victims' of McCarthy have gotten far more compassion since the controlled Narrative lionizes them.

    And of course, if we look behind all these narratives, they are really controlled to serve certain ETHNIC interests. They are not for serving all people. After all, some of those victims of McCarthy supported Stalin who killed millions of Ukrainians. But that is conveniently swept under the rug since it serves a certain ethnic group better to make McCarthy out to have been worse than Stalin.

    very good

  100. I wonder what country will fall to complete ruin first? Sweden, France, or Germany? Place your bets.

    Kinda OT: This is the type of hate crimes Muslims in America have to deal with. Such a oppressed minortity. San Bernardino? Old news. Authorities must focus on these cases. Yup.

    http://thesmokinggun.com/buster/bacon/bacon-vandalism-at-oklahoma-mosque-698731

    According to cops, the defacement of the Masjid Tawheed mosque occurred around 3:15 AM Sunday. Video captured a man first placing bacon on the handle of the mosque’s rear door. The vandal then walked to the mosque’s main entrance and stringed several pieces of bacon across the front door handles (as seen in the adjacent photo).

    The bacon was discovered hours later by worshipers arriving at the mosque for early morning prayers. Muslims are prohibited from touching or consuming bacon and other pork products.

    Based on surveillance video, the suspect, who wore a baseball cap and glasses, appears to be a white male with a mustache, goatee, and long sideburns. It is unclear how he arrived at the mosque in Spring Valley, a town two miles from the Las Vegas Strip.

  101. Boy, this stuff triggers the hell out of me.

    The Left is playing an incredibly dangerous game here. They are deploying their most potent slurs against thoughtful middle-class people who happen, for some strange reason, not to want their people dispossessed in their own homeland.

    I’m a fairly representative twentysomething from an upper-middle-class background. I’m from a blue-state suburb, I went to a fancy-pants university, and many of my friends are Jewish or Asian. My family is Republican in a pretty mainstream Fox News way. I’m a Catholic, albeit not as observant as I should be. My father is a well-assimilated immigrant from India; my mother’s family has deep roots in a small Appalachian city.

    The point is, I’m not a political radical by nature, and I couldn’t be a white nationalist even if I wished to be. And yet, over the years, I’ve watched the Leftist establishment and their cuckservative allies vilify white politicians, journalists, and intellectuals for the crime of caring about their people’s future. It’s disgusting.

    With all due respect to Steve, the danger is not that soccer hooligans will take over. The danger is that, by the time sane, patriotic people retake control of their countries (assuming we are fortunate enough to see that day), they will have (with some justification) run out of the patience necessary to treat their enemies kindly.

    • Agree: This Is Our Home
  102. @Erik Sieven
    then again there was anti-racist Nazi propaganda, bashing the USA for mistreating blacks. Concerning the lessons which should be learned I think you are absolutely right, those lessons are not learned. Just think of the gruesome anti-jewish terror and acts of violence in recent years in Belgium and France, all perpetrate by muslim immigrants.
    All in all modern anti-racism in Germany not have much to do with the Nazi era anyway. The Martin / Zimmerman case, Ferguson, Eric Garner all were big news with big think-pieces in relevant newspapers without any direct connection to Europe and european history.

    “then again there was anti-racist Nazi propaganda, bashing the USA for mistreating blacks.”

    Are you sure? It’s true that Nazi Germany made some efforts at stirring up “coloured” populations in the British empire (the contacts with Arabs are well known, but also Indians like Chandra Bose), but I’ve never heard of Nazi propaganda positively referring to blacks in the US. Wasn’t the “official” line more that the US was degenerate because of “race mixing” (Hitler of course both admired and feared the US, and was impressed by American eugenics programmes and writers like Madison Grant)?
    I agree though with you about German media’s reporting about things like BLM…totally worthless, it’s like it’s always 1960 (or maybe rather 1915…), with white racists terrorising American blacks. Really bizarre, and supposedly conservative media like the FAZ are no exception. Sad thing is, many Germans seem to believe that nonsense.

    • Replies: @fnn
    I read somewhere that the Japanese made overtures to the black community in the US, but not the Germans . But it's also true that both Jesse Owens and W.E.B. Du Bois said they were treated better in Germany than they were back home. The NS regime obviously wanted favorable stories in the negro press.
  103. @fnn

    A generation ago, it seemed “no accident”, if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.
     
    If it were to be examined closely, Baader-Meinhof would be considered unacceptably right-wing by today's standards:
    http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/the-baader-meinhof-complex/#comment-794

    Their bombings of US army buildings in Heidelberg were explicitly presented as a revenge for Dresden and Hamburg. Ulrike Meinhof in her pre-terrorist life as a celebrated journalist wrote a famous article commemorating the destruction of Dresden and putting it in a line with Auschwitz, Hiroshima, and Vietnam. That happened while the official version, especially of Germany’s center-rightists and conservatives, was that the USA liberated Germany from Hitler (and mirror image version was held up in the GDR, with the Soviets playing the part of liberators) and were West Germany’s best friend. There is no racial white self-hate aspect involved in RAF at all (deracination, yes); it just would have made no sense to them.
     

    “Their bombings of US army buildings in Heidelberg were explicitly presented as a revenge for Dresden and Hamburg. ”

    Pretty silly given that it was the Royal air force that was responsible for those bombings.
    Baader-Meinhof were really scum, sadly their murders of GIs and German policemen are hardly commemorated in Germany, it’s always about their assassinations of prominent politicians and bankers. The elites only care about their own.

    • Replies: @fnn
    "Pretty silly given that it was the Royal air force that was responsible for those bombings."

    Well, the Brits and the Americans were unusually close allies-even before FDR was able to get into the war.
  104. @Anon
    "..many Germans really are that stupid."

    I wonder if brainwashed might not be a better word then stupid. I think many Germans may unconsciously feel they have to prove something along the "I'm not a racist "mantra. I guess this is a sad leftover from the last war. When does Germany get to stop paying the 'holocaust tax'? Especially to people who were not its victims or from people who were not its perpetrators?

    Also, when do the Allied powers get to stop paying the Holocaust Tax?

  105. @Reg Cæsar

    Until you can say simply, “That person doesn’t belong here because they are not a part of our tribe,” you are done for.
     
    The American Colonization Society tried to make that point in the 19th century. They met their stiffest resistance in multicolored kumbaya Dixie.

    Yes, a lot of opponents of slavery supported Colonization. I recall reading a quote from a Lincoln speech to the effect of, “One or the other race has to be dominant in this country, and I naturally prefer that it be the white race.” (I’m paraphrasing.)

    For so long, we’ve thought that people can just be individuals in a diverse, democratic society. Lincoln himself has long since been retconned into a liberal and/or neocon.

    Now we’re seeing the truth of Lincoln’s observation; the multicultural democracy has become a giant pissing contest, and all our public debates are increasingly underlain by the potentially explosive metapolitical subtext of who-whom.

  106. @Sean

    He’s a high school history teacher on leave and a married father of four.
     
    He will not be working as a teacher in Germany again.

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/07/germany-s-triumph-ruins-war-how-new-european-empire-was-built

    Two of the American founding fathers, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, diagnosed this condition more than 200 years ago. They looked at the “federal system” of the “Germanic empire” and found it to be “a nerveless body, incapable of regulating its own members, insecure against external dangers, and agitated with unceasing fermentations in its own bowels”. “Military preparations,” they noted, “must be preceded by so many tedious discussions, arising from the jealousies, pride, separate views, and clashing pretensions, of sovereign bodies, that before the diet can settle the arrangements, the enemy are in the field . . .” By contrast, the federalists praised the Anglo-Scottish Union of 1707, by which the two parties, formerly so divided, had come together to “resist all [their] enemies” by creating a common debt, ­common parliamentary representation and common foreign and security policy. This served as the model for the United States. [...] This did not much bother Germans, especially after the collapse of communism, because the expansion of the EU and Nato eastwards left Germany, for the first time in her long history, surrounded only by friends; her interest in security matters, ... began to lapse. [...] Instead of anchoring the common currency in joint parliamentary representation and a strong state capable of efficient revenue extraction as is the case in the United Kingdom and the United States, Berlin is attempting to run it through the acceptance of German “rules” and political culture. Instead of a single foreign policy and military capable of deterring aggressors, we have a perpetual palaver that reminds one of nothing so much as the equivocations of the Holy Roman empire in the face of Turkish or French threats..

    The future holds four possibilities. The first and most likely, in the short term, is more of the same, in which Germany enforces the eurozone “rules” and everyone else acquiesces to them.
     

    Given that Germany is now for the first time surrounded by friendly countries and only has a image problem as a demanding creditor in relation to Greece and pettifogging over EU rules ect, mass importing a million non European migrants into Germany for a generation is an ingenious ploy. With the refugees Merkel has embarked on a soft power blitzkrieg that will make the German state not only masters of Europe, but moral exemplars. The BBC often says that Britain (already most London children are black or south Asian) has not taken as many refugees as Sweden and Germany.

    A quibble with your quote from the newstateman.com, or I guess I should say a quibble with our founding fathers, if the quote is correct. When the US was founded, there really was no German empire. They were of course referring to the Holy Roman Empire. That entity was really just a confederation. The so-called emperor had very few powers. The individual mostly very small states and city-states could defy the emperor pretty much at will. It was great for freedom, well relative freedom for that time anyway. It was a great political construct for fostering competition among the principalities and many believe it fostered a golden age in the arts and sciences. BUT, the founding fathers were right about no defense. Other countries ran rough-shod over them. And Napoleon finally dismantled the HRE completely in 1805 I think. My personal opinion is that period is what gave the Germans their military bent for the next few centuries.

    • Replies: @Wifman
    That is correct.

    Napoleon's troops devastated the parts of Germany they invaded. In South West Germany, for example, they raped a good half million young women to death - I mean, how do you even do that, rape someone to death? No, I don't want to know, thanks - and about 2 million young men were drafted into his military and killed subsequently somewhere in Russia.

    The German youth subsequently decided they no longer wanted to be the playball of the larger nation states in the vicinity, and demanded that the German countries unite, despite elite interests, and be a power in Europe.

    The German flag (black, red, gold) is actually fashioned after the uniform of their militia (as well as after the seal of Charlemagne), and they gave it a little motto as well:

    "In the black night of tyranny, we shed our red blood for the golden morning of freedom!"

    They also fashioned the "Deutschland, Deutschland ueber alles" hymn, which is often misunderstood abroad. As a matter of fact, Germany is not supposed to go above other countries, it is supposed to rise above the German "Kleinstaaterei", the "small stated-ness", where local lords preferred their import/export tax revenue over the security of the population.

    It still took another 50 to 60 years until the united Germany became a reality, but eventually it did. Twice.
  107. @nglaer
    what is totally baffling to me is the extreme amount of Islamophilia on display.

    To what extent is this a sort of anti-Semitic (or anti-Jewish) vengeance, perhaps subconsciously acknowledged at most? A generation ago, it seemed "no accident", if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.

    “A generation ago, it seemed “no accident”, if rarely explored, that the serious terror groups came from countries which were the losers in WW2.”

    Rock bands came from the winners in WWII, upscale terrorist groups from the losers in WWII?

  108. @DCThrowback
    How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow? This case is a perfect example - a fairly moderate white school teacher tries to initiate a discussion, but then is immediately branded a NeoNazi by the NYT.

    The problem is that most widely known historical examples of a white ethnic/racial movements are associated with some kind of genocide/segregation/apartheid. In the minds of most people, white/ethnic pride movements are synonymous with those things. I suppose that the Renaissance/Humanism could be considered a white racial/ethnic pride movement, but that is mostly associated with rebellion from the Church.

    Trump is slowly starting to make it possible to have those discussions here, but its still limited to the fringes. I suppose I see Trump as a kind of political John-the-Baptist. His purpose is not to bring redemption to the white/middle class America, but rather to prepare the way for the One Who Will.

    How do we make the argument in our social circles that a white racial/ethnic pride movement doesn’t have to result in National Socialism, Apartheid, or Jim Crow?

    You don’t. You tell them that what they fear is already happening . . . but to Whites, not their non-White pets. In other words, fear of possible genocide is a pathetic excuse for complicity in an actual genocide in progress.

  109. @Anonymous
    Pure and Easy, you have a lot of studying-up to do on what really happened in 20th century history.

    Like what?

  110. @Anonymous
    Fortunately people like the jerk are in a dwindling minority.

    Only old white men do not like diversity because they cannot compete with masculine men

    Morris Dees, is that you?

    Come out, come out–and show us your Haitian toyboy!

  111. @Harry Baldwin
    So, how has he gotten this far? Because there are real issues that:
    a. Nobody close to the mainstream is addressing

    Years ago, on a neo-con site, I would frequently bring up the immigration issue. Regular commenters would dismiss my concerns, telling me it wasn't an important issue because no one was bringing it up.

    During my short stint working at Ground Zero of Big Green, I used to bring up immigration as a key issue in “sustainability” and “environmentalism.” I got the same reaction–it’s not an issue, if it were, Ford and Alton Jones and Surdna and Packard and the Rocks and Goldman and Joyce would be giving out money for programming.

    Then they called me a racist for suggesting that maybe nations had a right to determine who crosses their borders.

    This is a powerful transnational/global secular religion we’re dealing with.

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    What's ground zero of Big Green?? The EPA?

    I'd be interested to hear more of your story here.

    I briefly was into anarcho-primitivism after reading a cogent book by Derrick Jensen. He had/has a forum that I joined but I was driven away by the SJW agenda (I got lectured for saying "crazy bitch" when referring to a certifiably insane ex of mine).

    I didn't last long enough on the forum to ever bring up ethnicity but I'm sure their views on that were completely in line with the ruling elites.
  112. @German_reader
    They haven't jettisoned him yet, and it's doubtful they can. The thing with the AfD is, there are several factions and Höcke is one of the leaders of the more explicitly nationalist faction. There has been feuding in the AfD for quite some time and one of the party's founders Bernd Lucke and his followers actually left the party last summer because they thought Höcke's wing was getting too powerful (they more or less claimed the party had been infiltrated by crypto-Nazis, though what they cited as evidence was mostly pretty ridiculous). Now there's feuding between the new party leader Frauke Petry (who defenestrated Lucke with Höcke's aid) and Höcke. To some degree criticism of Höcke may even be justified, he isn't a Nazi, but he's a German nationalist who strongly dislikes many aspects of Germany's "Westernization" (though those "values" like multiculturalism etc. are probably also strongly disliked by many people in "Western" core nations like Britain, France and the US...), that's of course a big no-go in Germany. He also has a tendency for silly theatrics and wants the AfD to be a "Fundamentalopposition", that is in total opposition to the existing political system (which doesn't look like a strategy for success...). And his stuff about r- and k-strategies is almost universally seen as crude biological racism (anti-racism in public discourse may be even stronger in Germany than in the US though in personal interactions Germans are probably more "racist" and xenophobic than white Americans). I'm somewhat ambivalent about the issue...I don't like how some people from the AfD enthusiastiacally distance themselves from Höcke, that reeks of cowardice and political correctness; on the other hand, Höcke might eventually really go too far and turn out to be a hindrance to further success.

    “And his stuff about r- and k-strategies is almost universally seen as crude biological racism”

    Which is bollocks since Eysenck praised Rushton’s book. Eysenck was a full-blown hardcore scientist of the highest order, no lightweight. Murray prasied it too, as did Lynn and Jensen. These are respected scholars. Is Volkmar Weiss a racist? His magnum opus (“Die Intelligenz und ihre Feinde”) even seemed rather politically correct to me, even bordering on race creationism. Andreas Vonderach has a better grasp on the topic of race, I think.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    Most people don't know about these things, and frankly I don't care myself that much about HBD, IQ etc. All I need to know is that I want Germany to stay majority German/European, and that the very high fertility rates in Africa and some failed societies of the Islamic world are a threat.
    One should keep it simple, no need to get overly complicated in politics.
  113. @Anon
    "..many Germans really are that stupid."

    I wonder if brainwashed might not be a better word then stupid. I think many Germans may unconsciously feel they have to prove something along the "I'm not a racist "mantra. I guess this is a sad leftover from the last war. When does Germany get to stop paying the 'holocaust tax'? Especially to people who were not its victims or from people who were not its perpetrators?

    Since it’s mostly about muslims, it s laughable to call it racism. Not because muslims aren’t so distinguished biologically that they don’t amount to a race (you can easily spot muslims in Germany, France, etc. from afar), but because muslims themselves are racist. They despise us, they hate the west. I went to a multicultural schhool in Germany, and racist attacks against germans were rampant. I had a turkish “friend”* during my school years, and wanted to join his soccer club that was composed of only turks (even sporting a turkish name). As soon as I arrived, the turks there made clear to me they don’t want any germans in their club (“only for turks”).

    * I later learnt that he simply exploited me.

    So those germans who most likely never had real contact with muslims but claim to not be racist can’t be taken seriously. They are weaklings, traitors even.

    • Replies: @Wifman
    Ah, you were young and naive, weren't you?

    I generally like the leftists, and their attitude towards Muslims. My aunt for example, is working for the ministry of foreign affairs, and as such she and her husband are not only very wealthy, they also have to move to a lot of different places.

    When moving to Berlin - a multicultural hell-hole, if you ask me - they looked long and hard at where to move by canvassing local schools. They finally picked one in East Berlin, and paid a good amount of money to buy a flat close by.

    My mum then went ahead and asked on of their daughters why they liked that particular school. Answer "Because it didn't have so many weird people" - my mum "Turks?" - "Yeah..."

    Needless to say, now the daughter is much wiser, and at a recent family gathering, the whole family cornered my (Spanish) husband to "educate" him on the benefits of all those Turks living in Germany. Obviously from me, he had heard lots of bad stuff, so he questioned me afterwards. I just laughed and related the above story.

    Leftists - pro multiculti, but not in their own neighbourhood! :D
  114. @Jefferson
    _"For years, racism and hate in Germany mostly came with clear social mar kers. In the minds of most, racists wore their heads shaved, feet heavily booted and arms rune-tattooed. They lived on the fringes of society, often in public housing, and made their living illicitly."

    So Whites living in public housing makes them a part of the fringes of society. Does that also apply to Muslims in Germany who live in public housing? Can they also be considered fringe and not part of mainstream German society?

    Oh, but those are only in public housing because of the racism of well-dressed high-school teachers and all the rest of the well-dressed, blonde, blue-eyed, or generally just lighter-shade-of-white population of Germany (formerly known as “Germans”).

  115. @Friedrich
    Since it's mostly about muslims, it s laughable to call it racism. Not because muslims aren't so distinguished biologically that they don't amount to a race (you can easily spot muslims in Germany, France, etc. from afar), but because muslims themselves are racist. They despise us, they hate the west. I went to a multicultural schhool in Germany, and racist attacks against germans were rampant. I had a turkish "friend"* during my school years, and wanted to join his soccer club that was composed of only turks (even sporting a turkish name). As soon as I arrived, the turks there made clear to me they don't want any germans in their club ("only for turks").

    * I later learnt that he simply exploited me.

    So those germans who most likely never had real contact with muslims but claim to not be racist can't be taken seriously. They are weaklings, traitors even.

    Ah, you were young and naive, weren’t you?

    I generally like the leftists, and their attitude towards Muslims. My aunt for example, is working for the ministry of foreign affairs, and as such she and her husband are not only very wealthy, they also have to move to a lot of different places.

    When moving to Berlin – a multicultural hell-hole, if you ask me – they looked long and hard at where to move by canvassing local schools. They finally picked one in East Berlin, and paid a good amount of money to buy a flat close by.

    My mum then went ahead and asked on of their daughters why they liked that particular school. Answer “Because it didn’t have so many weird people” – my mum “Turks?” – “Yeah…”

    Needless to say, now the daughter is much wiser, and at a recent family gathering, the whole family cornered my (Spanish) husband to “educate” him on the benefits of all those Turks living in Germany. Obviously from me, he had heard lots of bad stuff, so he questioned me afterwards. I just laughed and related the above story.

    Leftists – pro multiculti, but not in their own neighbourhood! 😀

  116. @gdpbull
    A quibble with your quote from the newstateman.com, or I guess I should say a quibble with our founding fathers, if the quote is correct. When the US was founded, there really was no German empire. They were of course referring to the Holy Roman Empire. That entity was really just a confederation. The so-called emperor had very few powers. The individual mostly very small states and city-states could defy the emperor pretty much at will. It was great for freedom, well relative freedom for that time anyway. It was a great political construct for fostering competition among the principalities and many believe it fostered a golden age in the arts and sciences. BUT, the founding fathers were right about no defense. Other countries ran rough-shod over them. And Napoleon finally dismantled the HRE completely in 1805 I think. My personal opinion is that period is what gave the Germans their military bent for the next few centuries.

    That is correct.

    Napoleon’s troops devastated the parts of Germany they invaded. In South West Germany, for example, they raped a good half million young women to death – I mean, how do you even do that, rape someone to death? No, I don’t want to know, thanks – and about 2 million young men were drafted into his military and killed subsequently somewhere in Russia.

    The German youth subsequently decided they no longer wanted to be the playball of the larger nation states in the vicinity, and demanded that the German countries unite, despite elite interests, and be a power in Europe.

    The German flag (black, red, gold) is actually fashioned after the uniform of their militia (as well as after the seal of Charlemagne), and they gave it a little motto as well:

    “In the black night of tyranny, we shed our red blood for the golden morning of freedom!”

    They also fashioned the “Deutschland, Deutschland ueber alles” hymn, which is often misunderstood abroad. As a matter of fact, Germany is not supposed to go above other countries, it is supposed to rise above the German “Kleinstaaterei”, the “small stated-ness”, where local lords preferred their import/export tax revenue over the security of the population.

    It still took another 50 to 60 years until the united Germany became a reality, but eventually it did. Twice.

    • Replies: @gdpbull
    Thank you for that additional insight.
  117. @German_reader
    "Their bombings of US army buildings in Heidelberg were explicitly presented as a revenge for Dresden and Hamburg. "

    Pretty silly given that it was the Royal air force that was responsible for those bombings.
    Baader-Meinhof were really scum, sadly their murders of GIs and German policemen are hardly commemorated in Germany, it's always about their assassinations of prominent politicians and bankers. The elites only care about their own.

    “Pretty silly given that it was the Royal air force that was responsible for those bombings.”

    Well, the Brits and the Americans were unusually close allies-even before FDR was able to get into the war.

  118. @Friedrich
    "And his stuff about r- and k-strategies is almost universally seen as crude biological racism"

    Which is bollocks since Eysenck praised Rushton's book. Eysenck was a full-blown hardcore scientist of the highest order, no lightweight. Murray prasied it too, as did Lynn and Jensen. These are respected scholars. Is Volkmar Weiss a racist? His magnum opus ("Die Intelligenz und ihre Feinde") even seemed rather politically correct to me, even bordering on race creationism. Andreas Vonderach has a better grasp on the topic of race, I think.

    Most people don’t know about these things, and frankly I don’t care myself that much about HBD, IQ etc. All I need to know is that I want Germany to stay majority German/European, and that the very high fertility rates in Africa and some failed societies of the Islamic world are a threat.
    One should keep it simple, no need to get overly complicated in politics.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    One should keep it simple, no need to get overly complicated in politics.
     
    The way I think it works is the following.

    Most people don't have very strong convictions on... basically anything. Most people aren't sure if the Sun revolves around the Earth or vice versa. They mostly take their clues from learned people around them. Most people don't know personally too many university professors, but everybody knows some people who are more learned than themselves. Ultimately, the belief that Science disproved 'racism' might have started with very learned people, but slowly it trickled down to the lower rungs of society.

    The way it works is that whenever confronted, 'anti-racists' will start asking questions, like "would you accept a Syrian university professor?", or "if you gave a Syrian proper education, he would be just as learned, on average, as a German, correct?", and without HBD foundations, you will lose the argument after a certain point, because you will have to concede that Syrian university professors might benefit Germany, and that of course Syrians could also be educated to have as many university professors per capita as Germans. If you are unwilling to say out loudly that "no, Syrians on average are considerably dumber than Germans, and that has genetic reasons so it's impossible to cure", you are doomed, because you will be reduced to arguments like culture ("but, sure, people's culture could change enormously - think about how different German culture was just a few generations ago!"), which will quickly be demolished. The Right has ceded the intellectual ground to the left, and the result is that it will always come up against situations when it will have no arguments. It's not much of an argument that "we need more time to absorb the refugees" and that "they shouldn't come illegally, we should collect them in the refugee camps in Turkey". (These were what Seehofer said a few weeks or months ago.) Well, he couldn't say that "Syrians, practicing cousin marriage, are evolutionarily adapted to a low trust clannish society with very strict controls over female sexuality, and they are also genetically dumber than Germans. This means, while they are significantly dumber, their males are sexual predators who see no problem with raping kaffir German women, and their clans will stick together and will be ideally suited to commit crimes. In short, they are as beneficial to German society as Yersinia pestis was back in the 14th century."

    Steven Pinker (and I think Jared Diamond, too) said that we shouldn't make 'anti-racism' conditional on scientific findings, for example it would be wrong to enslave blacks even if they really had significantly lower IQs for genetic reasons. Well, that's true to an extent: slavery is certainly wrong. But it's only wrong because blacks are, lower IQs (and a host over other personality traits) notwithstanding, still uncomfortably close to us. Chimpanzees are also our relatives (albeit more distant ones than blacks), and I don't think enslaving or even killing them is always wrong, for example I think it's OK to do that for medical research.

    So, actually Pinker and Diamond are wrong about that (and the majority of SJWs are right): 'anti-racism' does crucially depend on scientific findings. The same thing for ethnonationalism or immigration patriotism. Many people will change their thinking once they find that immigrants are impossible to integrate, while they might find simply mean the idea that we shouldn't accept "refugees" who are essentially Germans (or Americans) under their skins, once they get 10,000 hours of German (or American) education.

    That's why HBD matters.
  119. @German_reader
    "then again there was anti-racist Nazi propaganda, bashing the USA for mistreating blacks."

    Are you sure? It's true that Nazi Germany made some efforts at stirring up "coloured" populations in the British empire (the contacts with Arabs are well known, but also Indians like Chandra Bose), but I've never heard of Nazi propaganda positively referring to blacks in the US. Wasn't the "official" line more that the US was degenerate because of "race mixing" (Hitler of course both admired and feared the US, and was impressed by American eugenics programmes and writers like Madison Grant)?
    I agree though with you about German media's reporting about things like BLM...totally worthless, it's like it's always 1960 (or maybe rather 1915...), with white racists terrorising American blacks. Really bizarre, and supposedly conservative media like the FAZ are no exception. Sad thing is, many Germans seem to believe that nonsense.

    I read somewhere that the Japanese made overtures to the black community in the US, but not the Germans . But it’s also true that both Jesse Owens and W.E.B. Du Bois said they were treated better in Germany than they were back home. The NS regime obviously wanted favorable stories in the negro press.

  120. But of course, if a white person notices it, it turns into a HateGraph. If a German white person notices it, it’s a NaziHateGraph.

    Repeating crap doesn’t make it truer, it only shows that you’re either an idiot or a dedicated liar.
    Thomas de Maizière mentioned it in a speech at a migration conference in April 2015.

    In July pretty much all major German news outlets carried the news about predicted African population growth. From left: http://www.zeit.de/2014/07/szenario-schrumpfende-weltbevoelkerung/seite-3
    to right: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/gesellschaft/rapides-bevoelkerungswachstum-in-afrika-wird-es-eng-13725733.html
    The German migration authority published a similar study already in 2010: http://www.migration-info.de/artikel/2010-02-20/bamf-studie-hohes-migrationspotenzial-afrika
    You want to tell us they are all run by non-whites?

    Of course they don’t necessarily draw the same conclusions as you might want them to, but that doesn’t mean they don’t talk about it (or are not allowed to).

  121. @German_reader
    They haven't jettisoned him yet, and it's doubtful they can. The thing with the AfD is, there are several factions and Höcke is one of the leaders of the more explicitly nationalist faction. There has been feuding in the AfD for quite some time and one of the party's founders Bernd Lucke and his followers actually left the party last summer because they thought Höcke's wing was getting too powerful (they more or less claimed the party had been infiltrated by crypto-Nazis, though what they cited as evidence was mostly pretty ridiculous). Now there's feuding between the new party leader Frauke Petry (who defenestrated Lucke with Höcke's aid) and Höcke. To some degree criticism of Höcke may even be justified, he isn't a Nazi, but he's a German nationalist who strongly dislikes many aspects of Germany's "Westernization" (though those "values" like multiculturalism etc. are probably also strongly disliked by many people in "Western" core nations like Britain, France and the US...), that's of course a big no-go in Germany. He also has a tendency for silly theatrics and wants the AfD to be a "Fundamentalopposition", that is in total opposition to the existing political system (which doesn't look like a strategy for success...). And his stuff about r- and k-strategies is almost universally seen as crude biological racism (anti-racism in public discourse may be even stronger in Germany than in the US though in personal interactions Germans are probably more "racist" and xenophobic than white Americans). I'm somewhat ambivalent about the issue...I don't like how some people from the AfD enthusiastiacally distance themselves from Höcke, that reeks of cowardice and political correctness; on the other hand, Höcke might eventually really go too far and turn out to be a hindrance to further success.

    I’m somewhat ambivalent about the issue…I don’t like how some people from the AfD enthusiastiacally distance themselves from Höcke, that reeks of cowardice and political correctness; on the other hand, Höcke might eventually really go too far and turn out to be a hindrance to further success.

    In other words, you’re supportive of his views (and might even be to the right of him), but you are afraid that his strategy will be counter-productive.

    The problem with it is that by not revealing your preferences, you are essentially making others believe that you are also supportive of the narrative, which in turn will make others even less willing to come out of the closet with their less than PC political views.

    I propose you read Romanian’s comment below or this Wiki page about how by being afraid of “going too far”, people actually help maintain a consensus nobody agrees with any longer.

    I’m not too brave personally to break the consensus (although I do push what’s acceptable), but I’m also happy that others are willing to do my work and publicly support views which are closer to my views than theirs. By pushing the limits so hard, this guy might be opening the range of what’s acceptable in public discourse. Maybe what he’s saying won’t become acceptable, but probably some views previously unspeakable might become normal and accepted (and he’s also providing ammunition to guys slightly to his left to say “Look! He’s the real evil racist! We aren’t!”).

    anti-racism in public discourse may be even stronger in Germany than in the US though in personal interactions Germans are probably more “racist” and xenophobic than white Americans

    This means this anti-racism might actually be more fragile in Germany than in the US. In other words, it’s probably an even better strategy in Germany to publicly and rudely question the consensus than it is in the US.

    • Replies: @German_reader
    Just saw your comments today...sorry I didn't reply earlier. You make good points and I'm inclined to see things the same way...at same point you have to speak your mind and make it clear that you don't accept the phoney consensus. It's not easy though since in the present cilmate you can easily ruin your personal life...a difficult decision.
  122. @German_reader
    Most people don't know about these things, and frankly I don't care myself that much about HBD, IQ etc. All I need to know is that I want Germany to stay majority German/European, and that the very high fertility rates in Africa and some failed societies of the Islamic world are a threat.
    One should keep it simple, no need to get overly complicated in politics.

    One should keep it simple, no need to get overly complicated in politics.

    The way I think it works is the following.

    Most people don’t have very strong convictions on… basically anything. Most people aren’t sure if the Sun revolves around the Earth or vice versa. They mostly take their clues from learned people around them. Most people don’t know personally too many university professors, but everybody knows some people who are more learned than themselves. Ultimately, the belief that Science disproved ‘racism’ might have started with very learned people, but slowly it trickled down to the lower rungs of society.

    The way it works is that whenever confronted, ‘anti-racists’ will start asking questions, like “would you accept a Syrian university professor?”, or “if you gave a Syrian proper education, he would be just as learned, on average, as a German, correct?”, and without HBD foundations, you will lose the argument after a certain point, because you will have to concede that Syrian university professors might benefit Germany, and that of course Syrians could also be educated to have as many university professors per capita as Germans. If you are unwilling to say out loudly that “no, Syrians on average are considerably dumber than Germans, and that has genetic reasons so it’s impossible to cure”, you are doomed, because you will be reduced to arguments like culture (“but, sure, people’s culture could change enormously – think about how different German culture was just a few generations ago!”), which will quickly be demolished. The Right has ceded the intellectual ground to the left, and the result is that it will always come up against situations when it will have no arguments. It’s not much of an argument that “we need more time to absorb the refugees” and that “they shouldn’t come illegally, we should collect them in the refugee camps in Turkey”. (These were what Seehofer said a few weeks or months ago.) Well, he couldn’t say that “Syrians, practicing cousin marriage, are evolutionarily adapted to a low trust clannish society with very strict controls over female sexuality, and they are also genetically dumber than Germans. This means, while they are significantly dumber, their males are sexual predators who see no problem with raping kaffir German women, and their clans will stick together and will be ideally suited to commit crimes. In short, they are as beneficial to German society as Yersinia pestis was back in the 14th century.”

    Steven Pinker (and I think Jared Diamond, too) said that we shouldn’t make ‘anti-racism’ conditional on scientific findings, for example it would be wrong to enslave blacks even if they really had significantly lower IQs for genetic reasons. Well, that’s true to an extent: slavery is certainly wrong. But it’s only wrong because blacks are, lower IQs (and a host over other personality traits) notwithstanding, still uncomfortably close to us. Chimpanzees are also our relatives (albeit more distant ones than blacks), and I don’t think enslaving or even killing them is always wrong, for example I think it’s OK to do that for medical research.

    So, actually Pinker and Diamond are wrong about that (and the majority of SJWs are right): ‘anti-racism’ does crucially depend on scientific findings. The same thing for ethnonationalism or immigration patriotism. Many people will change their thinking once they find that immigrants are impossible to integrate, while they might find simply mean the idea that we shouldn’t accept “refugees” who are essentially Germans (or Americans) under their skins, once they get 10,000 hours of German (or American) education.

    That’s why HBD matters.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Another point is that being related to someone is a very strong motivating force. I know that some people don't understand it, but there is a reason why for example Hungarian nationalists are talking about "our Hungarian brothers in Romania" - this metaphor is powerful. Most people do care about their relatives. Now, it turns out, that actually members of ethnic groups also have some fuzzy genetic relations to each other, so that on average, a Hungarian might be more related to another Hungarian than to a Romanian.

    I think it's very important to note that most intellectually accomplished people tend to dismiss that notion of brotherhood with their co-ethnics. (At least that's my experience in Hungary and my limited experience in Western Europe is similar.) I think it's a very powerful tool to show that they are actually very wrong in an intellectual sense - that football hooligans can be more correct in the scientific sense than they (the 'anti-racists') are.

    I also think it has interesting implications regarding petty nationalism. For example Hungarians and Slovakians are pretty closely related, and even our distance to Romanians is not that high. Is it worth hating each other, when it might seem they are actually our close relatives? As opposed to, say, Syrians. So, racial groups might be more potent sources of loyalty, once it's well understood, because ethnic brotherhood might be partly metaphoric and partly literal, but racial brotherhood is absolutely literal - other whites are almost surely more closely related to me than members of any other racial groups.

    Many HBDers don't seem to grasp these implications at all, that proving genetic distance is actually a way of creating (or dissolving) loyalty and emotional attachment to others. Just like - to use Frank Salter's example - a genetic test proving that a fourteen-year-old boy from an ex-girlfriend not seen for fifteen years is actually my son would create very strong attachment to that boy on my part.

  123. @reiner Tor

    One should keep it simple, no need to get overly complicated in politics.
     
    The way I think it works is the following.

    Most people don't have very strong convictions on... basically anything. Most people aren't sure if the Sun revolves around the Earth or vice versa. They mostly take their clues from learned people around them. Most people don't know personally too many university professors, but everybody knows some people who are more learned than themselves. Ultimately, the belief that Science disproved 'racism' might have started with very learned people, but slowly it trickled down to the lower rungs of society.

    The way it works is that whenever confronted, 'anti-racists' will start asking questions, like "would you accept a Syrian university professor?", or "if you gave a Syrian proper education, he would be just as learned, on average, as a German, correct?", and without HBD foundations, you will lose the argument after a certain point, because you will have to concede that Syrian university professors might benefit Germany, and that of course Syrians could also be educated to have as many university professors per capita as Germans. If you are unwilling to say out loudly that "no, Syrians on average are considerably dumber than Germans, and that has genetic reasons so it's impossible to cure", you are doomed, because you will be reduced to arguments like culture ("but, sure, people's culture could change enormously - think about how different German culture was just a few generations ago!"), which will quickly be demolished. The Right has ceded the intellectual ground to the left, and the result is that it will always come up against situations when it will have no arguments. It's not much of an argument that "we need more time to absorb the refugees" and that "they shouldn't come illegally, we should collect them in the refugee camps in Turkey". (These were what Seehofer said a few weeks or months ago.) Well, he couldn't say that "Syrians, practicing cousin marriage, are evolutionarily adapted to a low trust clannish society with very strict controls over female sexuality, and they are also genetically dumber than Germans. This means, while they are significantly dumber, their males are sexual predators who see no problem with raping kaffir German women, and their clans will stick together and will be ideally suited to commit crimes. In short, they are as beneficial to German society as Yersinia pestis was back in the 14th century."

    Steven Pinker (and I think Jared Diamond, too) said that we shouldn't make 'anti-racism' conditional on scientific findings, for example it would be wrong to enslave blacks even if they really had significantly lower IQs for genetic reasons. Well, that's true to an extent: slavery is certainly wrong. But it's only wrong because blacks are, lower IQs (and a host over other personality traits) notwithstanding, still uncomfortably close to us. Chimpanzees are also our relatives (albeit more distant ones than blacks), and I don't think enslaving or even killing them is always wrong, for example I think it's OK to do that for medical research.

    So, actually Pinker and Diamond are wrong about that (and the majority of SJWs are right): 'anti-racism' does crucially depend on scientific findings. The same thing for ethnonationalism or immigration patriotism. Many people will change their thinking once they find that immigrants are impossible to integrate, while they might find simply mean the idea that we shouldn't accept "refugees" who are essentially Germans (or Americans) under their skins, once they get 10,000 hours of German (or American) education.

    That's why HBD matters.

    Another point is that being related to someone is a very strong motivating force. I know that some people don’t understand it, but there is a reason why for example Hungarian nationalists are talking about “our Hungarian brothers in Romania” – this metaphor is powerful. Most people do care about their relatives. Now, it turns out, that actually members of ethnic groups also have some fuzzy genetic relations to each other, so that on average, a Hungarian might be more related to another Hungarian than to a Romanian.

    I think it’s very important to note that most intellectually accomplished people tend to dismiss that notion of brotherhood with their co-ethnics. (At least that’s my experience in Hungary and my limited experience in Western Europe is similar.) I think it’s a very powerful tool to show that they are actually very wrong in an intellectual sense – that football hooligans can be more correct in the scientific sense than they (the ‘anti-racists’) are.

    I also think it has interesting implications regarding petty nationalism. For example Hungarians and Slovakians are pretty closely related, and even our distance to Romanians is not that high. Is it worth hating each other, when it might seem they are actually our close relatives? As opposed to, say, Syrians. So, racial groups might be more potent sources of loyalty, once it’s well understood, because ethnic brotherhood might be partly metaphoric and partly literal, but racial brotherhood is absolutely literal – other whites are almost surely more closely related to me than members of any other racial groups.

    Many HBDers don’t seem to grasp these implications at all, that proving genetic distance is actually a way of creating (or dissolving) loyalty and emotional attachment to others. Just like – to use Frank Salter’s example – a genetic test proving that a fourteen-year-old boy from an ex-girlfriend not seen for fifteen years is actually my son would create very strong attachment to that boy on my part.

    • Replies: @ren



    I also think it has interesting implications regarding petty nationalism. For example Hungarians and Slovakians are pretty closely related, and even our distance to Romanians is not that high. Is it worth hating each other, when it might seem they are actually our close relatives?
     
    Do you really think having citizenship means that you hate everyone else?

    Hell, no, Romanians should not be able to cross the border and squat and expect Magyars to support them. Romanians should have to try they game with their own countrymen. No, foreigners should not be able to just go to another country and live for free off its people. That is not hate. If you think it is, please just send me a few grand because I just want some of your money, if you don't then you hate hispanic Americans.
  124. @reiner Tor
    Another point is that being related to someone is a very strong motivating force. I know that some people don't understand it, but there is a reason why for example Hungarian nationalists are talking about "our Hungarian brothers in Romania" - this metaphor is powerful. Most people do care about their relatives. Now, it turns out, that actually members of ethnic groups also have some fuzzy genetic relations to each other, so that on average, a Hungarian might be more related to another Hungarian than to a Romanian.

    I think it's very important to note that most intellectually accomplished people tend to dismiss that notion of brotherhood with their co-ethnics. (At least that's my experience in Hungary and my limited experience in Western Europe is similar.) I think it's a very powerful tool to show that they are actually very wrong in an intellectual sense - that football hooligans can be more correct in the scientific sense than they (the 'anti-racists') are.

    I also think it has interesting implications regarding petty nationalism. For example Hungarians and Slovakians are pretty closely related, and even our distance to Romanians is not that high. Is it worth hating each other, when it might seem they are actually our close relatives? As opposed to, say, Syrians. So, racial groups might be more potent sources of loyalty, once it's well understood, because ethnic brotherhood might be partly metaphoric and partly literal, but racial brotherhood is absolutely literal - other whites are almost surely more closely related to me than members of any other racial groups.

    Many HBDers don't seem to grasp these implications at all, that proving genetic distance is actually a way of creating (or dissolving) loyalty and emotional attachment to others. Just like - to use Frank Salter's example - a genetic test proving that a fourteen-year-old boy from an ex-girlfriend not seen for fifteen years is actually my son would create very strong attachment to that boy on my part.

    I also think it has interesting implications regarding petty nationalism. For example Hungarians and Slovakians are pretty closely related, and even our distance to Romanians is not that high. Is it worth hating each other, when it might seem they are actually our close relatives?

    Do you really think having citizenship means that you hate everyone else?

    Hell, no, Romanians should not be able to cross the border and squat and expect Magyars to support them. Romanians should have to try they game with their own countrymen. No, foreigners should not be able to just go to another country and live for free off its people. That is not hate. If you think it is, please just send me a few grand because I just want some of your money, if you don’t then you hate hispanic Americans.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    I don't think you fully understood what I wrote, I hope only because you were reading it superficially and not because what I wrote was so easy to misunderstand.

    Please just note that I am Hungarian myself and that I might be quite familiar with Hungarian-Romanian relations, which for the past century have ranged from exceptionally cool to highly hostile. It has nothing to do with recent immigration (although in the case of Transylvania both parties will claim the other came later), it's caused by a territorial dispute which Romania won in the first half of the 20th century and which left roughly 1.5 million Hungarians under Romanian rule. (The numbers are dwindling, as is Romania's or, for that matter, Hungary's population in general.)

    As I already wrote to the commentator Romanian, Hungarians for the past century have viewed Romania as our main enemy. I personally find that hostility understandable, but since we have no chance of redrawing borders, but a huge chance of losing even rump Hungary left after the world wars, where cooperation with Romania - both in protecting the borders and voting within the EU - might be crucial, I also think our hostility vis-à-vis Romania is ultimately fruitless under the present circumstances.

    I hope it gives you some background as to why I wrote what I did.
  125. @ren



    I also think it has interesting implications regarding petty nationalism. For example Hungarians and Slovakians are pretty closely related, and even our distance to Romanians is not that high. Is it worth hating each other, when it might seem they are actually our close relatives?
     
    Do you really think having citizenship means that you hate everyone else?

    Hell, no, Romanians should not be able to cross the border and squat and expect Magyars to support them. Romanians should have to try they game with their own countrymen. No, foreigners should not be able to just go to another country and live for free off its people. That is not hate. If you think it is, please just send me a few grand because I just want some of your money, if you don't then you hate hispanic Americans.

    I don’t think you fully understood what I wrote, I hope only because you were reading it superficially and not because what I wrote was so easy to misunderstand.

    Please just note that I am Hungarian myself and that I might be quite familiar with Hungarian-Romanian relations, which for the past century have ranged from exceptionally cool to highly hostile. It has nothing to do with recent immigration (although in the case of Transylvania both parties will claim the other came later), it’s caused by a territorial dispute which Romania won in the first half of the 20th century and which left roughly 1.5 million Hungarians under Romanian rule. (The numbers are dwindling, as is Romania’s or, for that matter, Hungary’s population in general.)

    As I already wrote to the commentator Romanian, Hungarians for the past century have viewed Romania as our main enemy. I personally find that hostility understandable, but since we have no chance of redrawing borders, but a huge chance of losing even rump Hungary left after the world wars, where cooperation with Romania – both in protecting the borders and voting within the EU – might be crucial, I also think our hostility vis-à-vis Romania is ultimately fruitless under the present circumstances.

    I hope it gives you some background as to why I wrote what I did.

  126. @Pittsburgh Thatcherite
    What is by far the most effective way to prevent refugees, genocides and environmental destruction?

    Birth control.

    1 billion women would accept a $500 incentive to get on long-term birth control.

    ($500 incentive + $500 birth control) * (1 billion women) = $1 trillion

    If a sweeping programme of birth control is not implemented in Africa like tomorrow morning at the latest Europe will continue to be the dumping ground for Africa’s sexual overspill in the decades to come. The burden to feed and accomodate these unwanted hordes will naturally fall on whitey who will be so heavily taxed by the “humanitarian liberal” state that he or she will no longer be able to afford a family. Translate that into: no rosy white babies in the hospital nursery wards. And even if they did have children where would they raise them? Immigrants and their swarm of offspring are first in the housing queue.

    The flood of migrants from sub-Saharan lands will only come to a halt when Africans have achieved demographic majority within western Europe and they themselves decide there just “ain’t enuff goodies no mo for their brothahs and sistahs in Africa”.

  127. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:
    @Erik Sieven
    following the Gottfredson model of genocide the pro-Islam / antiracist movement has actually a lot of similarities to antisemitism

    Are you suggesting that the anti-Semites in Europe have adopted the Chinese Needle Snakes approach?

  128. @Jefferson
    _"For years, racism and hate in Germany mostly came with clear social mar kers. In the minds of most, racists wore their heads shaved, feet heavily booted and arms rune-tattooed. They lived on the fringes of society, often in public housing, and made their living illicitly."

    So Whites living in public housing makes them a part of the fringes of society. Does that also apply to Muslims in Germany who live in public housing? Can they also be considered fringe and not part of mainstream German society?

    Jeff, you make a good point about the low-class White Germans called fringe when they express anti Muslim ideas, and poor Muslims not called fringe, or hate-and as we know, called troubled or oppressed. As they anti Muslim Germans and similar Americans try to figure out how to get an outlet for their opinions, the PC elite leadership of politics and media in Germany can get them arrested for holding a non PC sign, or making a non PC speech.

    So far, that’s not done in America – oh, except where we train all of our middle class and elites; on our Campuses. Ominously, only slightly non PC conservo and very non PC truly conservo sites discuss that. Fox and AM radio sometimes discuss the American campus PC fascism, but not all the time so as to retain audiences beyond that specific interest (like me!). Almost zero coverage of this on mainstream media, and supportive coverage on lib cable TV.

    Germany’s elites have now imported by foot approx 1 million Muslims in 2015, and are only discussing changes in 2016 in response to opposition that those elites are aware of from below. Like all people, most of those elites are either trying to do the right thing, or pragmatically playing along in whatever system they’re part of, and looking for their best advantage. That fits America’s elites, too. It explains how I and many Repubs bought into the idea of leaving our current immigration system in place, for instance, because nowhere had I read the history of it or how it spells total cultural change for us.

    That, the mainstream conservo joining liberal press opposition to Trumps “Muslim Importation Halt” and doing so with equal insluting language, should be an eye opener to all Americans who are truly conservo, and want to get back to traditional legal ideas and freedoms. We’ve had a PC leaning SCOTUS for some time now. Unless we get Trump-or much weaker, but only tolerable second choice, Cruz, we are American version of the German anti Muslim guy in the article, who has zero chance to fix things.

  129. @Wifman
    That is correct.

    Napoleon's troops devastated the parts of Germany they invaded. In South West Germany, for example, they raped a good half million young women to death - I mean, how do you even do that, rape someone to death? No, I don't want to know, thanks - and about 2 million young men were drafted into his military and killed subsequently somewhere in Russia.

    The German youth subsequently decided they no longer wanted to be the playball of the larger nation states in the vicinity, and demanded that the German countries unite, despite elite interests, and be a power in Europe.

    The German flag (black, red, gold) is actually fashioned after the uniform of their militia (as well as after the seal of Charlemagne), and they gave it a little motto as well:

    "In the black night of tyranny, we shed our red blood for the golden morning of freedom!"

    They also fashioned the "Deutschland, Deutschland ueber alles" hymn, which is often misunderstood abroad. As a matter of fact, Germany is not supposed to go above other countries, it is supposed to rise above the German "Kleinstaaterei", the "small stated-ness", where local lords preferred their import/export tax revenue over the security of the population.

    It still took another 50 to 60 years until the united Germany became a reality, but eventually it did. Twice.

    Thank you for that additional insight.

  130. @Pure and Easy
    The Germans thought like that to a horrible extreme not so long ago. It came to an awful consequence.

    Winners write the history books.

    Do your own research and you’ll probably come to realize that maybe the official story we are sold may not be the exact truth of what happened.

    • Replies: @Pure and easy
    I've done plenty of research. My guess is you're a clown.
  131. @Olorin
    During my short stint working at Ground Zero of Big Green, I used to bring up immigration as a key issue in "sustainability" and "environmentalism." I got the same reaction--it's not an issue, if it were, Ford and Alton Jones and Surdna and Packard and the Rocks and Goldman and Joyce would be giving out money for programming.

    Then they called me a racist for suggesting that maybe nations had a right to determine who crosses their borders.

    This is a powerful transnational/global secular religion we're dealing with.

    What’s ground zero of Big Green?? The EPA?

    I’d be interested to hear more of your story here.

    I briefly was into anarcho-primitivism after reading a cogent book by Derrick Jensen. He had/has a forum that I joined but I was driven away by the SJW agenda (I got lectured for saying “crazy bitch” when referring to a certifiably insane ex of mine).

    I didn’t last long enough on the forum to ever bring up ethnicity but I’m sure their views on that were completely in line with the ruling elites.

  132. @NOTA
    Also, NSA is spying on Congressmen. My guess is, this explains the extremely deferential and minimal oversight Congress gives them--everyone knows that they've got the dirt on everyone, and so nobody wants to ask too many hard questions that might lead to some reporter mysteriously getting a copy of the credit card receipts from that little getaway with that 19 year old campaign worker.

    The biggest story of Obama's first term (which was reported day-to-day, but not with much depth) was the massive way he caved in on everything he said he was going to do to rein in the intelligence agencies and pentagon. I've always assumed this was mainly because he never meant any of that stuff anyway, since politicians lie whenever their mouths are moving. But it's also possible he simply realized that the intelligence agencies were just too powerful to take on.

    Anyone who doubts the existence of the Deep State simply is not paying attention.

  133. @Hepp
    I doubt that. There is still an identifiably black underclass in countries like Brazil, which have been race mixing forever. The Middle East too.

    At the end of slavery, Brazil had a very significant portion of its population that was black.

    Europe simply doesn’t have enough blacks to maintain anything approaching a multigenerational endogamous black caste.

  134. @Handle
    It's like migration is the German establishment's first priority.

    George Will recently wrote an uncharacteristically vituperative article in National Review insisting that the first priority for the GOP has to be eliminating Trump. Otherwise he'll destroy conservatism forever. Or something.

    But you know, if that was really the first priority, then maybe there would be just a little more ideological diversity on the stage of those Republican debates and just a few more mainstream GOP politicians willing to espouse a view which is closer to their voting constituency than to the Democratic party platform.

    That probably would have stopped Trump, if indeed stopping Trump was the first priority. But it seems something else has an even higher priority.

    That reminds me of Ace's GOP priority list. Number 27 on the list is, "The base, aka 'The Garbage People Who Embarrass Us So'."

    Yuck.

    I stopped reading as soon as he called Putin a “murderer and war criminal.”

    I don’t care enough to research this but I highly doubt he’s used such words about any US president, all of whom except maybe Carter have more blood on their hands than Putin does.

  135. @reiner Tor

    I’m somewhat ambivalent about the issue…I don’t like how some people from the AfD enthusiastiacally distance themselves from Höcke, that reeks of cowardice and political correctness; on the other hand, Höcke might eventually really go too far and turn out to be a hindrance to further success.
     
    In other words, you're supportive of his views (and might even be to the right of him), but you are afraid that his strategy will be counter-productive.

    The problem with it is that by not revealing your preferences, you are essentially making others believe that you are also supportive of the narrative, which in turn will make others even less willing to come out of the closet with their less than PC political views.

    I propose you read Romanian's comment below or this Wiki page about how by being afraid of "going too far", people actually help maintain a consensus nobody agrees with any longer.

    I'm not too brave personally to break the consensus (although I do push what's acceptable), but I'm also happy that others are willing to do my work and publicly support views which are closer to my views than theirs. By pushing the limits so hard, this guy might be opening the range of what's acceptable in public discourse. Maybe what he's saying won't become acceptable, but probably some views previously unspeakable might become normal and accepted (and he's also providing ammunition to guys slightly to his left to say "Look! He's the real evil racist! We aren't!").

    anti-racism in public discourse may be even stronger in Germany than in the US though in personal interactions Germans are probably more “racist” and xenophobic than white Americans
     
    This means this anti-racism might actually be more fragile in Germany than in the US. In other words, it's probably an even better strategy in Germany to publicly and rudely question the consensus than it is in the US.

    Just saw your comments today…sorry I didn’t reply earlier. You make good points and I’m inclined to see things the same way…at same point you have to speak your mind and make it clear that you don’t accept the phoney consensus. It’s not easy though since in the present cilmate you can easily ruin your personal life…a difficult decision.

  136. @AndrewR
    Winners write the history books.

    Do your own research and you'll probably come to realize that maybe the official story we are sold may not be the exact truth of what happened.

    I’ve done plenty of research. My guess is you’re a clown.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2