RSS
From the New York Times:
The Long Struggle for America’s Soul
Apparently, the self-evident truth that all people deserve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is far from settled.
By Andrew Delbanco, Nov. 2, 2018
Andrew Delbanco is a professor of American studies at Columbia and the author, most recently, of “The War Before the War: Fugitive Slaves and the Struggle for America’s Soul From the Revolution to the Civil War,” from which this essay draws.Like many Americans, I’ve been following events at our southern border — the separation of children from their parents; the president’s denigration of nonwhite migrants as criminals, rapists and animals; his bluster about denying birthright citizenship to their children; and his pledge to send federal troops to intercept a dwindling caravan of frantic refugees.
To my ears, it all sounds eerily familiar. This is not the first time America has been torn apart over how to respond to people of color desperate to escape inhuman conditions. Nor is it the first time a president has threatened to deploy federal troops to return them to the horrors from which they fled.
I’m thinking, of course, of African-Americans, who were regarded for much of American history not as human beings but as a species of animate property no different from cattle and sheep.
And then about a thousand words on how black slavery was bad.
… But the strongest “rhyme” between fugitive slaves in the 19th century and illegal immigrants today is their shared anguish — the “degenerating sense of nobodiness,” in the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s devastating phrase — inflicted by a society that treats them as non-persons. People demeaned in this way forced Americans then, and force us now, to confront the central question of our history: Who is — or isn’t — recognized as fully human? Our Declaration of Independence was supposed to answer this question with the proposition that “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights,” including “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
The Preamble says the purpose of the Constitution is to do good things for “ourselves and our posterity,” but who can remember 55 words?
At certain decisive moments in our history, attempts have been made to extend this principle beyond the cadre of the propertied white males who first articulated it. …
But if we’ve learned anything in the age of Trump, it’s that rights can also be constricted and rescinded. The self-evident truth that all people deserve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a long way from settled in the American mind. The question of who is considered fully human has returned with a vengeance.
So, it’s dehumanizing to not let somebody move to America just because they are not an American citizen.
The struggle against bigotry and hate is a struggle against law.
Wasn’t ‘genocide’ of Indians, the original people, the biggest crime of America?
Imperialism led to ‘genocide’, and mass-immigration was part of that imperialism.
So, it seems that if whites have a moral-historical obligation, it is to revive the Indian community. After all, America was their land for 10,000s of yrs.
And on the matter of slavery, whites owe something to blacks.
How are Indians and blacks served by mass-immigration-invasion of non-whites who have NO MORAL claim on whites or America?
How did Jews, as Immigrant-Americans, play a clever lawyer trick that convinced so many Americans that Jews and immigrants have the greatest moral claim on America even though white Americans did them no wrong. America was taken from Jews. (If anything, the US aided Jews in doing to Palestinians what was done to Indians in America. Jews had it great in America. I understand why Jews value America. It made them rich and powerful. But they have no moral claim on America.)
According to the Current Narrative, Jews(the eternal Ellis-Islanders) and Immigrants are more deserving of America than whites(who founded and built it), Indians(who had the land for 10,000s before mass-white-immigration), and blacks(who were brought to work as slaves). Incredible! How did such a twisted logic take over America?
Seems like a statute of limitations would have kicked in by now, since those who directly practiced the institution have receded into history. And the implication from the grievers is that this is some sort of compensate-able damage, but a satisfactory and closing deal is never suggested; this is just a constant reminder that resources are scarce, groups have interests, and there is a constant juggling between cooperation and antagonism.
We must immediately bomb Guatemala and Honduras. Strike up the hymn of the republic, we must liberate Guatemalans and Hondurans from slavery!
With a generation of work, it could all be as nice as Costa Rica.
Did Andrew Delbanco just say Latin America is a shithole where people suffer like slaves?
Let’s start a caravan to Malibu.
If this twink is so enraged over slavery, why whine about slavery that was abolished 150 years ago in the USA ?
Go do something about ongoing slavery. Islamic Republic of Mauritania is the slavery capital of planet earth. 20% of the population lives in conditions of chattel slavery. Stop virtue signalling and get to work ending slavery. Im sure the Muslims will quickly end slavery when you inform them that they are your intersectional allies !!!!!
52 words, not 55.
“The self-evident truth that all people deserve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a long way from settled in the American mind.”
Perhaps this they is not American?
mass immigration for cheap labor is the replacement for slavery
It may appear primitive today, but it's an argument long forgotten as the conditions of employment have improved. In the race to cheap labor, there's a history about wage labor worth revisiting.
That’s always the unspoken and unacknowledged reality. There’s been no natural disaster or war or anything else the Central American caravan is escaping from. The disaster they’re trying to escape from is having to live around others like themselves. Unfortunately, Americans will have no place to seek asylum from them.
Well, at least this guy is a cretinous Italian for once rather than another moronic Jew. The fact that his last name means “of the white” shows definite proof of intellectual regression in his line!
Ummm, his last name is Delbanco. It tranlsates to "the white" but "the bank."
The only other person named Delbanco with a Wikipedia entry is Nicholas Delbanco, who is described as being "the son of German Jewish parents." And Andrew Delbanco looks a lot more Jewish than Italian or Spanish.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/03/04/andrewDelbanco.html
Every. Single. Time. Tm
Why is the answer to the two biggest sins of White America the importation of third worlders? First, we are told that we stole this land from the Native Americans. Because of this we have no right to prevent others from coming. We are also told we enslaved blacks and that preventing others from coming is akin to our treatment of blacks before the era of civil rights.
What I don’t get is how the importation of third worlders addresses those two sins. In the case of the Native Americans how does inviting in the entire world bring them any closer to the possibility of regaining their land?
In the case of blacks how does the importation of third worlders benefit their station in life? It seems it just puts them into more competition for affirmative action and diversity set asides that they would not have had to share, except with the small number of Native Americans. Even twitter troll Tariq Nasheed is taking note:
Right, the White Guilt Gambit. People think 'white guilt' is anti-white, but it can be used for white interests. It depends on how white people concede to 'white guilt'. In the context of American History, the notion of 'white guilt' says historical whites must make amends to Indians and Blacks. After all, 'guilt' is always specific. Someone is guilty of something, not everything. A murderer is guilty of the person he murdered, not for ALL murders.
So, if the creation of America harmed the Indians and enslaved the blacks, then 'white guilt', properly understood and defined, must apply only to those groups.
Atoning for American 'sins' with mass-immigration is without moral logic. It is like saying a person guilty of murder of a certain person must make amends to ALL THE FAMILIES OF MURDER VICTIMS, even though he only killed one specific person. Moral logic says he must make amends to the family of the person he murdered.
In any case, I've always drawn the opposite moral from the experience of the Native Americans.
They failed to stop the white people from coming. Look what happened to them.
Physically, the current territory of the United States could easily support a billion people. Leave the gates open, and people will keep coming -- and from an ever-expanding list of increasingly exotic locales. Why should a Bangladeshi peasant stay in Bangladesh to continue to strive desperately to barely avoid starvation if getting into the United States becomes a tangible, real possibility? Would you, if you were in his shoes?
Eventually, of course, the US will sink until it is no more attractive than Bangladesh, or Nigeria, or Haiti, or whatever other hellholes you choose to name. Of course by then the US will be a heaving, bubbling, vibrant cess-pit of a hundred different contending groups -- and I wouldn't count on anyone thinking to set aside reservations for the remaining white people.
We'll wind up envying the Native Americans if we can't learn from what happened to them.
This pompous bozo seems confused about what was bad about American slavery. It was not that they were “people of color” it was that they were … wait for it … enslaved! I.e. working without choice.
But more broadly he’s spewing the deliberate confusion that’s at the heart of the minoritarian project.
Essetially that the struggles of people doing the materially productive labor upon which their society dependsto have political rights (slaves, serfs) or get a fair shake (factory workers) is somehow akin to the demand of an outsider or minority to get in to where he wants–a country club, Harvard, a neighborhood or a nation.
These are two completely different things, both factually and logically and in terms of fairness and moral claim.
In fact, these are darn near opposite claims. If i tie you to the land and force you to grow my food, the person oppressed is … you. But if you bust into my country club or university or neighborhood or nation, against my will, the person being oppressed is … me.
This concept is not exactly rocket science either. It’s the basic idea of “liberty”.
There is a pretty clear objective precept that demonstrates it--separation,
Essentially another who-whom. Who is dependent upon whom? Who is demanded that whom work for them. You can always establish morality by the simple question of "Who is demanding stuff from the other guy?"
The way i could tell that we were "the good guys" in the Cold War--that i wasn't just imbibing my sides propaganda was that the commies would not let their people leave. Essentially the commies had turned the workers of their nations into serfs. The work to support the state--the commies.
At root this is the minoritarian project is the same. Sure a random individual may be allowed to leave. (And go where?) But white gentiles are not entitled to just work for themselves and have their own stuff, their own space. You French people want to have France for yourselves? Hell no! You WASPs want to enjoy your country club with your own manners and culture? Hell no! You Americans want to keep America American and have you kids enjoy the rule of law and prosperity you and your ancestors built? Hell no!
Morality here is that simple: If some people are willing to be separate--work for themselves, take care of themselves--but some other people try to glom on, to force themselves in, force association, or demand labor, then it is the later group who are the oppressors.
There is no natural right to demand that other people associate with you or give you their stuff. That's the morality of the rapist--i.e. no morality at all.
We need conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take on the minoritarian project head on and call out it's fundamental character for what it is.
(((they))) be funny
https://www.linguee.com/spanish-english/translation/nombre+del+banco.html
OT
Flight Attendant Faye?
Are You Actually an M.D.?’: A Black Doctor Is Questioned as She Intervenes on a Delta Flight
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/us/delta-black-doctor-racial-profiling.html
I think that they were very tactful. They didn’t want to come out and say, “OK, yeah, you’re an M.D., but you’re a black M.D., which means you’re substantially less capable than a white or Asian M.D., we’ve seen the MCAT scores. We’d like to keep looking to see if we could maybe find a Jewish nurse or EMT instead, someone more qualified than you.”
Basically the point of having black doctors is to encourage black patients to seek medical care when they need it. But they are getting uppity and starting to think that they can treat white patients also.
After all, Dr. Bill Cosby is officially a Doctor (of Education (... & on TV)).
Dr. Maya Angelou is officially a Doctor (Honorary) and she could be notoriously insistent that others use that honorific for her despite the fact that she never went even to college (not that there's anything wrong with that ... I mean the no college, not the insisting on an unearned title).
And then there's this old favorite, who really is a medical doctor ... of dermatology not surgery, which didn't stop her from putting many patients under her knife.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5821419/Defiant-Dancing-Doctor-speaks-license-suspended.html
So it can be confusing, when people say they are "doctors" what that actually means.
When someone's life is medically on the line, asking to see medical credentials is not unreasonable.
Of course, since a POC felt disrespected, this common sense precaution will be another casualty of the War on Noticing, the War on Logic and the War on Beckys. Indeed, it sounds like it already was a casualty in Delta's official policy but they forgot to tell the Republic stewardesses.
And now, a little light comic relief, with perhaps a side helping of inadvertent Jewish asabiyya.
https://youtu.be/UlpbU5ZC6Uc
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/im-your-doctor-so-why-are-you-calling-me-miss/2018/11/02/179d319e-d638-11e8-aeb7-ddcad4a0a54e_story.html
Good to see more pro-life opinion in the Times…
Ctrl-F “Roe vs Wade”
0 results returned
Oh…
Some more Delbanco for your Saturday night:
“In the book, Delbanco explores how recent arguments for diversity in the classroom are extensions of early beliefs that “people from different backgrounds can learn from one another. Such classrooms can serve as a rehearsal for democracy, a space where students learn the difference between argument and opinion, how to listen carefully to others, how an unanticipated idea can change how we think and act. A good college opens minds, introducing students to art and literature and the natural world. It makes the space between our ears a more interesting place for us to spend the rest of our lives.”
“proggtards united will never be defeated”
https://www.neh.gov/about/awards/national-humanities-medals/andrew-delbanco
What I don't get is how the importation of third worlders addresses those two sins. In the case of the Native Americans how does inviting in the entire world bring them any closer to the possibility of regaining their land?
In the case of blacks how does the importation of third worlders benefit their station in life? It seems it just puts them into more competition for affirmative action and diversity set asides that they would not have had to share, except with the small number of Native Americans. Even twitter troll Tariq Nasheed is taking note:
https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1058139188611043328
Europeans who did not come from immigrants, displaced no Indians, and established no exploitative colonies, like Swedes, are told the same propaganda as us in the same terms.
Germany also has the war guilt which seems to translate into giving financial, diplomatic and military aid to the more country that most resembles Nazi Germany because it was set up by Jews and having open doors to countries Germany never invaded and colonised whilst being morally superior enough to destroy Greece despite it's debts to German banks being smaller than the reparations they wiggled out of paying to them. I suppose the Poles do take advance of the access to the German labour market, but then they were also the only ones who got some real reparations in ethnically cleansing 1 million German-speaking Slavs and Balts and getting some very nice new real estate. (Though joining the EEA did massacre Polish industry when it had to compete with Germany in a free trade environment) Also in Spain and Italy it's mostly the Caravan-style, 'they're poor, just let them in'. No real explanation.In Sweden, Norway and Switzerland it's a guilt trip based on how 'lucky' people there are and how unfortunate the others are. (Plus the standard self-loathing about how 'boring' said countries are without foreigners you barely talk to or interact with but who are somehow 'enriching' to ones life. Making everyone feel less comfortable in public spaces absolutely makes for a more dynamic place!) Along with Austria these countries were hit with the first big waves of 'asylum seekers' who never went home from the Balkans. Similar sentiment was in Denmark but the Danish Peoples Party managed to inexplicably save the country from the worst of global migration and introduce some clever little laws that deters even EU migration. Denmark also demonstrates both that immigration feeds on itself.And I don't know what they say in Finland, nobody knows what happens in Finland.
So the emphasis on “democracy” is just a desire for “mob rule” because ((they))) have already hired the mob?
Okay….. if migrating to the US is now a human right, then what is not a human right?
Surely access to Beckys nether regions is a human right too.
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/10/17/globohomos-next-target-sexual-racism/
It’s possible that the lawsuit brought by caravan migrants who demand their constitutional right to come to the USA might have been one step too far. When my liberal wife heard the story on the news, she laughed and said “But that’s ridiculous! They don’t have any constitutional rights! They’re not even Americans!”
I thought it was bad for people of color to travel to America; something about sharks still haunting the sealanes of the Middle Passage looking for meals of black bodies, and African Americans all having high blood pressure from the salty food and brackish water forced on them by the slave traders. Surely we have a positive duty to make sure evil white Americans never get another chance to import people of color and exploit them!
I genuinely wish the United States would conquer everything down to Columbia. Pretty sure they wish it too.
With a generation of work, it could all be as nice as Costa Rica.
To anyone with any modicum of consciousness, it is obvious that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for some people may depend on the exclusion of other people.
This guy is a liberal arts professor? Really?
https://twitter.com/drvox/status/1058473742207115264
Of course none of this has anything to do with border protection and immigration, but sjws glom on to anything to get riled up over evil fat heartless privileged car-driving white Americans.
Place people are willing to walk thousands of miles to escape from.
Lol! I'm sure it does, David "I Learned All I Know About Suburbia From Watching American Beauty" Roberts.
The fact that so many of the men who founded the United States owned slaves shows that weren’t just talented and accomplished enough to create a new nation from scratch. Their slave-holding also shows that they were bad-asses. Modern white American men would go nowhere near to enslaving anyone now.
In fact you have to wonder if the apparent secular decline in intelligence since the Industrial Revolution tracks the movement away from slavery because both derive from the same causes.
White men didn't build that. They bought their black slaves from black slavers.
You know, with elections coming up this issue has been in the news more than usual. But I’m wondering has any state ever gone from blue to red?
That’s not even possible, is it? My own state, once reliably red, is now permanently blue thanks to a lethal combination of mass third-world immigration, felon voting and an influx of internal migration from other blue states. It’s forever, isn’t it.
Naturally I’m excepting occasional flukes among states near the tipping point.
Arkansas was the most reliably Democratic state from the end of Reconstruction until recently. Only a few years ago the races for Senate, Governor and some of the congressional races were quite competitive. Nor is Arkansas the only southern state like that. Oklahoma used to be staunchly Democratic as well.
Now Arkansas and Oklahoma are two of the most Republican states. No Democrats in the congressional delegation or in statewide office.
In the Midwest, Wisconsin has at least temporarily flipped. 10 years ago the Democrats controlled both houses of the state legislature, had all the statewide offices, Senate seats and most of the congressional districts. Now the Republicans control both houses, most congressional districts, one of the two Senate seats and all statewide offices except Sec of State. The state also went for a GOP candidate for President in 2016 for the first time in a long time. To be fair, the governor race is a toss-up this year, and Democrat Tammy Baldwin has a commanding lead in her re-election campaign for Senate. To be even more fair, there was once a time when Wisconsin was the most reliably Republican state in the Union— from about 1854 until over 100 years later when the progressive wing of the GOP left for the Democratic Party because McCarthy and his followers had taken over the GOP. In effect, the state has swung back and forth between slightly Republican and slightly Democratic ever since.
So yes, plenty of states have gone from blue to red. Otherwise the GOP would not control all three branches of the federal government and most states when not too long ago the Democrats did the same.
Living in another country is literally slavery!
See also:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/05/world/europe/france-italy-migrants-smuggling.html
(My better half adds: “presumably he lets them have sex with his wife too”)
What I don't get is how the importation of third worlders addresses those two sins. In the case of the Native Americans how does inviting in the entire world bring them any closer to the possibility of regaining their land?
In the case of blacks how does the importation of third worlders benefit their station in life? It seems it just puts them into more competition for affirmative action and diversity set asides that they would not have had to share, except with the small number of Native Americans. Even twitter troll Tariq Nasheed is taking note:
https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1058139188611043328
Why is the answer to the two biggest sins of White America the importation of third worlders? First, we are told that we stole this land from the Native Americans. Because of this we have no right to prevent others from coming. We are also told we enslaved blacks and that preventing others from coming is akin to our treatment of blacks before the era of civil rights.
Right, the White Guilt Gambit. People think ‘white guilt’ is anti-white, but it can be used for white interests. It depends on how white people concede to ‘white guilt’. In the context of American History, the notion of ‘white guilt’ says historical whites must make amends to Indians and Blacks. After all, ‘guilt’ is always specific. Someone is guilty of something, not everything. A murderer is guilty of the person he murdered, not for ALL murders.
So, if the creation of America harmed the Indians and enslaved the blacks, then ‘white guilt’, properly understood and defined, must apply only to those groups.
Atoning for American ‘sins’ with mass-immigration is without moral logic. It is like saying a person guilty of murder of a certain person must make amends to ALL THE FAMILIES OF MURDER VICTIMS, even though he only killed one specific person. Moral logic says he must make amends to the family of the person he murdered.
But more broadly he's spewing the deliberate confusion that's at the heart of the minoritarian project.
Essetially that the struggles of people doing the materially productive labor upon which their society dependsto have political rights (slaves, serfs) or get a fair shake (factory workers) is somehow akin to the demand of an outsider or minority to get in to where he wants--a country club, Harvard, a neighborhood or a nation.
These are two completely different things, both factually and logically and in terms of fairness and moral claim.
In fact, these are darn near opposite claims. If i tie you to the land and force you to grow my food, the person oppressed is ... you. But if you bust into my country club or university or neighborhood or nation, against my will, the person being oppressed is ... me.
This concept is not exactly rocket science either. It's the basic idea of "liberty".
Please watch your step sir. Your brand of clear thinking will not endear you to the Ruling Class in this country.
This is more arch hypocrisy from NYT.
The meta ideology of NYT is that whites are illegitimate, genetic defectives who deserve to be replaced.
Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness for white people is a non-starter at NYT.
The era of slavery cannot be judged by current feelings about human dignity. It was the Industrial Revolution that ended slavery by making labor surplus. (Yes, a new type of slave-wage servitude has taken its place, one that importing millions more huddled masses of laborers doesn't help.) Whatever historic injustice is alleged, it cannot morally, legally, or sensibly be taken out on living citizens.
OT:
from Vdare:
Why Does Dr. Aprile Benner Want To Blame Whites For Minority Problems Obviously Caused By Low IQ?
By Lance Welton on 2018-11-03 22:25:00 -0400
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/02/opinions/nic-robertson-opinion-intl/index.html
https://catmacros.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/myworldischanging.jpg
This Eddie Haskell steals five bases and pulls three fast ones per sentence.
My first reading I was assigned upon finally making it to the Ivy League was by this clown. In the back of my mind I suspected something was amiss but my enthusiasm and excitement told me maybe I was missing something.
Once I realized it was almost all Delbancos I knew the awful truth.
I 100% support this. They should all go to Rob Reiner and Barbra Streisand’s houses.
What I don't get is how the importation of third worlders addresses those two sins. In the case of the Native Americans how does inviting in the entire world bring them any closer to the possibility of regaining their land?
In the case of blacks how does the importation of third worlders benefit their station in life? It seems it just puts them into more competition for affirmative action and diversity set asides that they would not have had to share, except with the small number of Native Americans. Even twitter troll Tariq Nasheed is taking note:
https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1058139188611043328
The point is not restitution to the victims of wrongdoing, but redemption of the eternal soul by means of temporarily self-destruction.
To the business interests, it's all about cheap labor.
To the Democrats, it's all about importing a population which votes for a living.
To the left, it's all about destroying the hated Western Civ and the White people who made it.
Only to the SJW is it a replacement for traditional religion.
But more broadly he's spewing the deliberate confusion that's at the heart of the minoritarian project.
Essetially that the struggles of people doing the materially productive labor upon which their society dependsto have political rights (slaves, serfs) or get a fair shake (factory workers) is somehow akin to the demand of an outsider or minority to get in to where he wants--a country club, Harvard, a neighborhood or a nation.
These are two completely different things, both factually and logically and in terms of fairness and moral claim.
In fact, these are darn near opposite claims. If i tie you to the land and force you to grow my food, the person oppressed is ... you. But if you bust into my country club or university or neighborhood or nation, against my will, the person being oppressed is ... me.
This concept is not exactly rocket science either. It's the basic idea of "liberty".
You make a good point, here. My sense is that sometime in the history of American race relations, black political demands morphed from the former to the latter, probably during the CRM. In both cases, there is a demand for integration with Whites.
What I don't get is how the importation of third worlders addresses those two sins. In the case of the Native Americans how does inviting in the entire world bring them any closer to the possibility of regaining their land?
In the case of blacks how does the importation of third worlders benefit their station in life? It seems it just puts them into more competition for affirmative action and diversity set asides that they would not have had to share, except with the small number of Native Americans. Even twitter troll Tariq Nasheed is taking note:
https://twitter.com/tariqnasheed/status/1058139188611043328
‘…First, we are told that we stole this land from the Native Americans. Because of this we have no right to prevent others from coming…’
In any case, I’ve always drawn the opposite moral from the experience of the Native Americans.
They failed to stop the white people from coming. Look what happened to them.
Physically, the current territory of the United States could easily support a billion people. Leave the gates open, and people will keep coming — and from an ever-expanding list of increasingly exotic locales. Why should a Bangladeshi peasant stay in Bangladesh to continue to strive desperately to barely avoid starvation if getting into the United States becomes a tangible, real possibility? Would you, if you were in his shoes?
Eventually, of course, the US will sink until it is no more attractive than Bangladesh, or Nigeria, or Haiti, or whatever other hellholes you choose to name. Of course by then the US will be a heaving, bubbling, vibrant cess-pit of a hundred different contending groups — and I wouldn’t count on anyone thinking to set aside reservations for the remaining white people.
We’ll wind up envying the Native Americans if we can’t learn from what happened to them.
Immigration proponents act like there are a finite amount of people to move, and then everything will be all right. They don't seem to grok the ability of the womb to raise up any number of people to overwhelm whatever level of resources one can muster.
If so, I would I would join the Bangledesh First party and demand the navy turn away the American refugee rafts.
As I've pointed out, by simple math\logic "nation of immigrants" == turning your nation into a hellhole that no one else in the world wants to come to. It is by definition a recipe for making your nation one of the worst places on earth. (This is of course obvious. Really nice places that people have put work into and want to keep nice tend to have fences, gates, locks, admission fees, security staff, etc.)
One is tempted to say something snaky about the perils of being ruled (and lectured to) by a verbally oriented and math phobic elite ... but i think we all know this evil nonsense isn't driven mostly by mathematically incompetence, but from hate.
This is not the first time America has been torn apart over how to respond to people of color desperate to escape inhuman conditions.
IOW, they are desperate to escape countries filled with people just like themselves.
There are 7,600 million people on planet earth. The 7,300 million of them who don’t live in the United States can’t all live here.
The earth has a total land area of 57,510,000 square miles. Fortunately the United States is only 3,532,000 of those square miles, so those 7.3 billion people don’t have to.
Physiognomy is real and even losing an eye cannot change it.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/snl-mocks-ex-navy-seal-candidate-dan-crenshaw-i-know-he-lost-his-eye-in-war-or-whatever
https://postimg.cc/Nym5GMSy
The oversized orange shirt he’s wearing is not a prison uniform, it’s an orange shirt. Guess he’s a hunter.
Ask someone to name a country not founded on those two bright virtue signals of shitlibs: genocide and slavery.
Well, at least this guy is a cretinous Italian for once rather than another moronic Jew. The fact that his last name means “of the white” shows definite proof of intellectual regression in his line!
Ummm, his last name is Delbanco. It tranlsates to “the white” but “the bank.”
The only other person named Delbanco with a Wikipedia entry is Nicholas Delbanco, who is described as being “the son of German Jewish parents.” And Andrew Delbanco looks a lot more Jewish than Italian or Spanish.
Well then, another stereotype validated yet again! I naturally assumed that with his last name he was Italian -although I also saw an "l" that wasn't there- "Deblanco", but it's "Debanco".
It's rather amazing how predictive stereotypes can be, although that's rapidly becoming a capital offense in Amerika.
This truth is settled in the minds of the people who established this principle. What’s being challenged with “that’s not who we are” is that the people who established this principle are entitled to the fruits of their own labor. In other words, with waves of people who neither understand nor embrace this principle, but rather seek the fruit of our labor, this principle itself is under assault.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/03/amazon-second-headquarters-crystal-city-arlington-virginia-dc
Bezos is putting the new Amazon HQ in D.C.
Smart man. Why use lobbyists when you can go straight in and bribe the politicians over lunch….
Who--other than gullible media mavens and politicians--thinks the concept of a "second headquarters" makes any sense, in any way, in any description, in any logic... Pure deception.
Bezos has the WaPo, a massive CIA cloud contract (I believe the front-runner for a massive DOD contract), and obviously internet/communications/FCC and DOJ anti-trust lobbying needs--and he's gonna what, put this "2nd HQ" in Atlanta, Austin or Nashville?? LOL.
So he believes that countries founded and run by non whites aren’t capable of enabling people to enjoy life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
And, he believes that only the US, a country founded and built by white men, is capable of providing that combo.
That sounds like real white supremacist talk and at the same time a great rationale for white nationalism.
Side note: when I come across the phrase “in the age of Trump” I know immediately that I have come across a virtue signaling fraud who is advocating something that is disastrous for the US.
“Delbanco was born in New York in 1952 to German-Jewish parents who had emigrated after the rise of Nazism, first to Britain, then, after World War II, to the United States.”
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/03/04/andrewDelbanco.html
Every. Single. Time. Tm
“Let the Jews mass immigrate,” they said. “It’ll be fine,” they said.
Imperialism led to 'genocide', and mass-immigration was part of that imperialism.
So, it seems that if whites have a moral-historical obligation, it is to revive the Indian community. After all, America was their land for 10,000s of yrs.
And on the matter of slavery, whites owe something to blacks.
How are Indians and blacks served by mass-immigration-invasion of non-whites who have NO MORAL claim on whites or America?
How did Jews, as Immigrant-Americans, play a clever lawyer trick that convinced so many Americans that Jews and immigrants have the greatest moral claim on America even though white Americans did them no wrong. America was taken from Jews. (If anything, the US aided Jews in doing to Palestinians what was done to Indians in America. Jews had it great in America. I understand why Jews value America. It made them rich and powerful. But they have no moral claim on America.)
According to the Current Narrative, Jews(the eternal Ellis-Islanders) and Immigrants are more deserving of America than whites(who founded and built it), Indians(who had the land for 10,000s before mass-white-immigration), and blacks(who were brought to work as slaves). Incredible! How did such a twisted logic take over America?
Should this really be a thing? It was not illegal at the time; slavery is a historically common arrangement: if modern sensibilities demand condemnation of one group for the practice, we are compelled to condemn all groups who practiced it, such as other Blacks.
Seems like a statute of limitations would have kicked in by now, since those who directly practiced the institution have receded into history. And the implication from the grievers is that this is some sort of compensate-able damage, but a satisfactory and closing deal is never suggested; this is just a constant reminder that resources are scarce, groups have interests, and there is a constant juggling between cooperation and antagonism.
http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/mxp/speeches/mxt24.htmlThere were about 4,000,000 slaves in the USA in 1860. Suppose each should have earned 10,000 in today's dollars. That's $40,000,000,000 reparations due for 1860. Going back 250 years, you'd have fewer slaves per year and so fewer dollars, but the absolute Upper limit is $10,000,000,000,000.Had we spent the trillions wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan on repArations to blacks who could show descent from slaves, we would be better off, if paired with an end to affirmative action. At least most of that money would have been spent here at home, instead of blown to smithereens in the Middle East.Instead, we created a system that allows rich whites and canny blacks to skim dollars and positions, and doesn't benefit the majority of descendants of slaves at all. Rich, elite whites benefit because it is not they who pay the price in denied admission to top colleges but the marginal whites who don't have the advantages of wealth, legacy, or parents who can pay the money to develop the sports talent that places like Harvard seem to like. Canny blacks can take advantage in any number of ways. It's the white and black lower middle and working classes that get screwed.This was designed this way, to funnel wealth and preserve privileges of the "New Class." Reparations paired with an end to diversicrats ends their scam.
Has any group benefited more from slavery than American blacks?
In any case, I've always drawn the opposite moral from the experience of the Native Americans.
They failed to stop the white people from coming. Look what happened to them.
Physically, the current territory of the United States could easily support a billion people. Leave the gates open, and people will keep coming -- and from an ever-expanding list of increasingly exotic locales. Why should a Bangladeshi peasant stay in Bangladesh to continue to strive desperately to barely avoid starvation if getting into the United States becomes a tangible, real possibility? Would you, if you were in his shoes?
Eventually, of course, the US will sink until it is no more attractive than Bangladesh, or Nigeria, or Haiti, or whatever other hellholes you choose to name. Of course by then the US will be a heaving, bubbling, vibrant cess-pit of a hundred different contending groups -- and I wouldn't count on anyone thinking to set aside reservations for the remaining white people.
We'll wind up envying the Native Americans if we can't learn from what happened to them.
This is the endgame we’re facing.
Immigration proponents act like there are a finite amount of people to move, and then everything will be all right. They don’t seem to grok the ability of the womb to raise up any number of people to overwhelm whatever level of resources one can muster.
The Swedes had a few colonies, including one in New Jersey.
Log cabins? Invented by Finns who brought it to the New World in New Sweden.
A much more serious case against Sweden for invasive colonization and imperialism could be made vis-a-vis Finland, where Sweden took land on which Swedes still live today, and Germany, which Gustavus Adolphus invaded and ravaged during the Thirty Years War. Of course, whites can never be victims of colonization nor recipients of reparatory benefits, so these facts don't exist.
Also, Finns and Germans aren't crying to be let into Sweden, so they don't need to fabricate ex post facto rationalizations. Or if you prefer Judeo-centric theories, moving Finns and Germans into Sweden wouldn't harm it, so there is no (((call))) for such immigration to take place.
With a generation of work, it could all be as nice as Costa Rica.
Don’t be ridiculous . Puerto Rico on a vastly larger scale is what we would be with a white minority and a murder rate that would make South Africa seem safe . A dangerous wild animal does not make a good house pet .
It's a big stretch, to put it mildly, but it's a stretch that is more interesting to me than curling up in our shells and acting like we're not being colonized by Mestizos anyway. Can you think of a good reason why the United States shouldn't govern Central America? Our ancestors certainly didn't think this way about the Native American tribes.
I suppose it's because their governments have international legitimacy, and nations prefer to follow the golden rule about military action. But we invaded Iraq, remember? We were not following the golden rule then, and just about every other nation opposed it, until it had already happened. That was an illegitimate war that we wasted untold treasure on, got nothing in return for, and yet we are still here.
How much legitimacy do Central American gov'ts really have, when we all know their citizens would welcome US soldiers with open arms? You might say that they would only welcome us because they all want transfer payments. That might be true, but frankly I can think of worse ways to destroy transfer payment systems than overloading them.
I understand the Central American population would be a burden for a long time, but they don't even have to have Congressional representation for a long time, and I think you should ask yourself how much the land and natural resources are worth. Are they taking full advantage of them? No. Mexico should by all rights be one of the wealthiest nations of the Earth, and yet it is not. That is because it has nobody competent and honest to manage its resources. Your descendants could be the first who manage them successfully.
No , let’s send Rob Reiner and Barbra Streisand to them instead .
With a generation of work, it could all be as nice as Costa Rica.
As I’ve said before, Costa Rica has been described as “No Indios, No Negroes, No Problemo”.
More proof Twinkie MUST raise his most religious daughter to be a second Isabella!
If our cultural cold war becomes hot, we will be grateful to Twinkie, because his progeny is on our side. :-)
In any case, I've always drawn the opposite moral from the experience of the Native Americans.
They failed to stop the white people from coming. Look what happened to them.
Physically, the current territory of the United States could easily support a billion people. Leave the gates open, and people will keep coming -- and from an ever-expanding list of increasingly exotic locales. Why should a Bangladeshi peasant stay in Bangladesh to continue to strive desperately to barely avoid starvation if getting into the United States becomes a tangible, real possibility? Would you, if you were in his shoes?
Eventually, of course, the US will sink until it is no more attractive than Bangladesh, or Nigeria, or Haiti, or whatever other hellholes you choose to name. Of course by then the US will be a heaving, bubbling, vibrant cess-pit of a hundred different contending groups -- and I wouldn't count on anyone thinking to set aside reservations for the remaining white people.
We'll wind up envying the Native Americans if we can't learn from what happened to them.
Depends. Would I be transformed into a Bangledeshi, or would I be just me? Would my countrymen be Bangledeshis, or would they be other white Americans also undergoing the same thought experiment? Would America be inhabited by our own dopplegangers, or would the displaced Bangledeshis be in America?
If so, I would I would join the Bangledesh First party and demand the navy turn away the American refugee rafts.
In his first sentence he speaks about the “self-evident” truth etc. Traditional scientists (i.e. “fallibilists” in the tradition of Karl Popper) would be aghast.
Popper called our knowledge “a web of assumptions” and would have called our ethics “a web of proposals”.
My personal concern in this times is the ousting of traditional agreement ethics (or discourse ethics) by “revelation ethics”: Every leftist thinks his ideas about e.g. human rights are “evident” (i.e. not for the masses, but for God’s enlightened adepts).
LOL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcnyWATTxYI
(Ok, so it was more like marxist manoeuver warfare)
Geez i feel for this poor, mad guy. I wonder if he lives in a tent and travels only by bicycle. Probably mad that Americans have electricity and antibiotics too.
Of course none of this has anything to do with border protection and immigration, but sjws glom on to anything to get riled up over evil fat heartless privileged car-driving white Americans.
Yes, states have gone from blue to red.
Arkansas was the most reliably Democratic state from the end of Reconstruction until recently. Only a few years ago the races for Senate, Governor and some of the congressional races were quite competitive. Nor is Arkansas the only southern state like that. Oklahoma used to be staunchly Democratic as well.
Now Arkansas and Oklahoma are two of the most Republican states. No Democrats in the congressional delegation or in statewide office.
In the Midwest, Wisconsin has at least temporarily flipped. 10 years ago the Democrats controlled both houses of the state legislature, had all the statewide offices, Senate seats and most of the congressional districts. Now the Republicans control both houses, most congressional districts, one of the two Senate seats and all statewide offices except Sec of State. The state also went for a GOP candidate for President in 2016 for the first time in a long time. To be fair, the governor race is a toss-up this year, and Democrat Tammy Baldwin has a commanding lead in her re-election campaign for Senate. To be even more fair, there was once a time when Wisconsin was the most reliably Republican state in the Union— from about 1854 until over 100 years later when the progressive wing of the GOP left for the Democratic Party because McCarthy and his followers had taken over the GOP. In effect, the state has swung back and forth between slightly Republican and slightly Democratic ever since.
So yes, plenty of states have gone from blue to red. Otherwise the GOP would not control all three branches of the federal government and most states when not too long ago the Democrats did the same.
Exactly my thought. If conditions are so dire in those countries, the UN should intervene. Shouldn’t we be carpet-bombing Honduras and El Salvador like we did to other “rogue” states? You know, wage a good old fashioned “humanitarian” war, NATO style?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/us/delta-black-doctor-racial-profiling.htmlI think that they were very tactful. They didn't want to come out and say, "OK, yeah, you're an M.D., but you're a black M.D., which means you're substantially less capable than a white or Asian M.D., we've seen the MCAT scores. We'd like to keep looking to see if we could maybe find a Jewish nurse or EMT instead, someone more qualified than you."Basically the point of having black doctors is to encourage black patients to seek medical care when they need it. But they are getting uppity and starting to think that they can treat white patients also.
America is truly dead when this shit is news. Also NYT is cancer of cancer.
Allow me to correct that.
The notion that all people deserve life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in America is far from settled and is not a “self-evident truth.”
Definition of shithole country:
Place people are willing to walk thousands of miles to escape from.
In Ireland you’re told it’s payback for emigration, though with Dublin proper being less than half Irish at this point I’ve yet to see anyone checking the numbers to see when this due has been paid or why it’s being paid to countries no Irishman ever went to.
In Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium and France it’s colonialism. (Though again, why it’s being paid more and more to places they had no real colonial history with is left unexplained)
In Italy and Germany it’s to keep the working age population at a certain level for no particularly valid reason despite mass productivity increases that just keep coming and mass migration just exasperating the birth rate. (Outside those Muslim cohorts who have more children than they can afford)
Germany also has the war guilt which seems to translate into giving financial, diplomatic and military aid to the more country that most resembles Nazi Germany because it was set up by Jews and having open doors to countries Germany never invaded and colonised whilst being morally superior enough to destroy Greece despite it’s debts to German banks being smaller than the reparations they wiggled out of paying to them. I suppose the Poles do take advance of the access to the German labour market, but then they were also the only ones who got some real reparations in ethnically cleansing 1 million German-speaking Slavs and Balts and getting some very nice new real estate. (Though joining the EEA did massacre Polish industry when it had to compete with Germany in a free trade environment)
Also in Spain and Italy it’s mostly the Caravan-style, ‘they’re poor, just let them in’. No real explanation.
In Sweden, Norway and Switzerland it’s a guilt trip based on how ‘lucky’ people there are and how unfortunate the others are. (Plus the standard self-loathing about how ‘boring’ said countries are without foreigners you barely talk to or interact with but who are somehow ‘enriching’ to ones life. Making everyone feel less comfortable in public spaces absolutely makes for a more dynamic place!) Along with Austria these countries were hit with the first big waves of ‘asylum seekers’ who never went home from the Balkans. Similar sentiment was in Denmark but the Danish Peoples Party managed to inexplicably save the country from the worst of global migration and introduce some clever little laws that deters even EU migration. Denmark also demonstrates both that immigration feeds on itself.
And I don’t know what they say in Finland, nobody knows what happens in Finland.
The suburbs of Helsinki, a lovely capital, are being enriched with headscarves, strollers, and noisy groups of youths of indeterminate ancestry.
But I'm right too, and my backwards quibble points up that these people have no problem whatsoever with a pan-European "white" identity, so long as it's always the bad guy. Non-colonial powers benefitted from an overall state of affairs which partially originated in the colonial activities of other countries, they calumniate with an anger that shakes and induces weeping, and so Sweden must pay for what Cecil Rhodes did.
Yet it gets even less logical than that, and in analyzing propaganda, "illogical" is not a dismissal: one of the important points here is the inevitability. This is inevitable, therefore, there can be no resistance.
The lady doth protest too much methinks
“The struggle against bigotry and hate is a struggle against law.”
Correct. The ‘civil rights’ movement is a struggle against law, which means it is a struggle for antinomianism, which means it is a struggle to arrange things so that the amoral men and women with the most successes in battering others and stealing from them come to control everything.
Bezos is putting the new Amazon HQ in D.C.
Smart man. Why use lobbyists when you can go straight in and bribe the politicians over lunch....
Damn there go my local tax dollars
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/us/delta-black-doctor-racial-profiling.htmlI think that they were very tactful. They didn't want to come out and say, "OK, yeah, you're an M.D., but you're a black M.D., which means you're substantially less capable than a white or Asian M.D., we've seen the MCAT scores. We'd like to keep looking to see if we could maybe find a Jewish nurse or EMT instead, someone more qualified than you."Basically the point of having black doctors is to encourage black patients to seek medical care when they need it. But they are getting uppity and starting to think that they can treat white patients also.
In defense of the Flight Attendant Fayes, it can be confusing.
After all, Dr. Bill Cosby is officially a Doctor (of Education (… & on TV)).
Dr. Maya Angelou is officially a Doctor (Honorary) and she could be notoriously insistent that others use that honorific for her despite the fact that she never went even to college (not that there’s anything wrong with that … I mean the no college, not the insisting on an unearned title).
And then there’s this old favorite, who really is a medical doctor … of dermatology not surgery, which didn’t stop her from putting many patients under her knife.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5821419/Defiant-Dancing-Doctor-speaks-license-suspended.html
So it can be confusing, when people say they are “doctors” what that actually means.
When someone’s life is medically on the line, asking to see medical credentials is not unreasonable.
Of course, since a POC felt disrespected, this common sense precaution will be another casualty of the War on Noticing, the War on Logic and the War on Beckys. Indeed, it sounds like it already was a casualty in Delta’s official policy but they forgot to tell the Republic stewardesses.
And now, a little light comic relief, with perhaps a side helping of inadvertent Jewish asabiyya.
And a, real to this day, hyper-oppressive one in Minnesota.
their problem is themselves and the only way to fix it is genetics – the route denied by people like delbanco because they want a planet of 85 IQ slave-cattle to rule over.
Better arm up, because there’s a lot of hostile tent cities and other slums between you and there.
My wife wanted to buy a Swedish house for sale in South Jersey, an original dwelling that had been expanded. This was a few years ago. Was maybe $250k. Small but a bit of history.
Surely access to Beckys nether regions is a human right too.
They’re working on that…
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/10/17/globohomos-next-target-sexual-racism/
The most recent example is West Virginia.
Did she mention the African Exclusion Act 1807? One of the most racist acts of the slave owning white Andro-American Thomas Jefferson goes unnoticed to this day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_Prohibiting_Importation_of_Slaves
I think an apology is owed to Capt Nathaniel Gordon, hung for his tireless work to bring African immigrants to the US. The wicked people of the time, the aptly named American Colonization Society, went so far as to deport the Africans Capt Gordon so fearlessly aided in their Atlantic passage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Gordon
Refugee laws are based on the assumption that most countries are stable and with governments that are in control of their territory. It may be time to revisit that assumption, since Central America seems to be in perpetual state of anarchy.
Of course, the other aspect of it is that people who are not really refugees are trying to game the system to get into the US and have a better life.
However, the US has been very inconsistent on this. Why are we still allowing Cubans into the country ad lib when they have universal health care at home and very little crime? The effects of the Mariel boatlift of 1980 are still being worked out in Florida.
Where was Trump in 1980? Still working on getting the permits to build Trump Tower with Polish workers, and married to his resident-alien wife from communist Czechoslovakia.
Maurice River. Some nice old houses.
Here it is:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_Hoskins_Log_Cabin
Via catapult.
With a generation of work, it could all be as nice as Costa Rica.
I believe that the greatest crime in modern history is that white European nations have not used their technological, political, legal and cultural prowess to forcibly relocate the entire black population of e.g. Bermuda and the Bahamas, Detroit and Gary and any other desirable locale on the globe and to then repopulate these places with white Europeans.
Not to do so is a violation of the Laws of Nature. It is counter-evolutionary. It must backfire and ultimately hurt both the Euro-people and humanity as a whole. There is no place for timidity in Nature. Our self doubt is standing in the way of genuine human progress.
Our earlier attempts failed in Africa because we didn’t sufficiently ethnically cleanse the areas of interest to us. Colonization is not viable if the native population is allowed to coexist in the desired land. They must be relocated. This is not a call for genocide or a blood bath. The locals shall be peacefully relocated, given a remittance and our blessings.
With our wealth we could easily purchase a 200 mile x 200 mile chunk of land from adjoining African nations. We would build airstrips which could easily handle dozens of flights per day thereby efficiently repatriating Africans to their native continent.
Any other resource rich land should be treated in the same way. If it is useful to us we should appropriate it. Locals shown the door. Pandering to their whining is not useful nor does it serve Nature’s higher purpose. We are, like it or not, acknowledged or not, the bearers of higher culture. It is our duty to push on, to step over those who impede us.
We cut down trees to make violins to play symphonies. The tree is valuable, but good timber management is not, in itself, the end product, rather, it serves the higher attainments of our civilized cultural arts.
As the greatest, most novel thinker the human race has produced, Aristotle, said, what something is should be seen and defined and understood in terms of what it can and will become, it’s ultimate destiny. We have lost sight of this, the greatest insight the human mind has produced. Some modern thinkers recoil from “teleology” but that is simply the current intellectual fad, a product of their inborn cowardice and timidity. Ultimately, the Truth must and will prevail or Nature will play tricks on us and have her way in the end.
We cannot escape our Destiny. We cannot, like Achilles, take refuge by hiding amongst the women, hoping to avoid battle. That may serve for some among us but it is not the way of men. In our European culture, there is a wily Odysseus who will ferret us out and drag us to our duty, our destiny.
I agree with you that it is a tragedy such large amounts of land and natural resources in Latin America and Africa go under-utilized, supporting nothing but rural villages and gigantic urban slums. The problem with colonization is that it wasn't done hard enough. I don't advocate for genocide, which is evil, but if people cannot effectively govern themselves then they are not entitled to try. Relatively it is more unethical to let them try.
This attitude will see a resurgence in my lifetime (probably late in it). The resurgence will come because advances in genomic science will 100% validate human biodiversity, and most common preconceptions about race,. Most people will stop listening to authorities who say otherwise. It remains to be seen whether Western nations will still be intact, practically speaking, at that point. Renewed attempts at colonization will be impossible if there is no longer any shared political capital in the West.
“Deserve.”
I don’t disagree at all. Sure, they deserve it.
If they build it. I might even be persuaded to help, in what limited way I can, provided they ask me nicely.
Do they deserve the “right” to enter our territory, grab our stuff? Are we obligated to provide them with what they deserve?
No.
But the (((NYT))) is correct – all that crap they’ve spent years pretending is self-evident?
It’s mostly self-evidently wrong. Glad to hear reality is finally penetrating their thick skulls.
Imperialism led to 'genocide', and mass-immigration was part of that imperialism.
So, it seems that if whites have a moral-historical obligation, it is to revive the Indian community. After all, America was their land for 10,000s of yrs.
And on the matter of slavery, whites owe something to blacks.
How are Indians and blacks served by mass-immigration-invasion of non-whites who have NO MORAL claim on whites or America?
How did Jews, as Immigrant-Americans, play a clever lawyer trick that convinced so many Americans that Jews and immigrants have the greatest moral claim on America even though white Americans did them no wrong. America was taken from Jews. (If anything, the US aided Jews in doing to Palestinians what was done to Indians in America. Jews had it great in America. I understand why Jews value America. It made them rich and powerful. But they have no moral claim on America.)
According to the Current Narrative, Jews(the eternal Ellis-Islanders) and Immigrants are more deserving of America than whites(who founded and built it), Indians(who had the land for 10,000s before mass-white-immigration), and blacks(who were brought to work as slaves). Incredible! How did such a twisted logic take over America?
They didn’t. They bought the microphone. It’s dedication, money, and power, behind their successful indoctrination campaign.
It’s not really a feat of cleverness. When you escape the indoctrination and examine it in the cold light of reason, you see how altogether shabby it is. There’s no “there” there. No artful construction. There’s not so much a great deal of talent or ingenuity involved – it’s just money and effort.
It’s like going into the kitchen of your favorite restaurant, and seeing cockroaches scurrying about.
You’d think (((NYT))) would’ve done a better job of hiring goy front men, down through the years, but Jews have really been emboldened by the lack of resistance (AKA, “ANTI-SEMITISM!!!”), these last few generations.
*Facepalm*
Another "Bad Jew" (not to be confused with Bad White). There are so very, very many.
In fact you have to wonder if the apparent secular decline in intelligence since the Industrial Revolution tracks the movement away from slavery because both derive from the same causes.
This is levels of appropriation that shouldn’t even be possible.
White men didn’t build that. They bought their black slaves from black slavers.
In any case, I've always drawn the opposite moral from the experience of the Native Americans.
They failed to stop the white people from coming. Look what happened to them.
Physically, the current territory of the United States could easily support a billion people. Leave the gates open, and people will keep coming -- and from an ever-expanding list of increasingly exotic locales. Why should a Bangladeshi peasant stay in Bangladesh to continue to strive desperately to barely avoid starvation if getting into the United States becomes a tangible, real possibility? Would you, if you were in his shoes?
Eventually, of course, the US will sink until it is no more attractive than Bangladesh, or Nigeria, or Haiti, or whatever other hellholes you choose to name. Of course by then the US will be a heaving, bubbling, vibrant cess-pit of a hundred different contending groups -- and I wouldn't count on anyone thinking to set aside reservations for the remaining white people.
We'll wind up envying the Native Americans if we can't learn from what happened to them.
To clarify, the Red man fought hard against White encroachment. The Red man took an awful lot of scalps trying to keep the White man out of Red man territory, prevent integration between White man and Red man.
So the historical lesson I take from the Red man is Hell and gone from “surrender immediately.”
On a side note, the Red men who have the most prominent and enduring place in the White man’s memory (as commemorated in names given to sports teams, military vehicles and weapons platforms, etc.) were the ones who fought hardest.
Maybe, but I’m not so sure. A lot of things that, only ten short years ago, were considered ridiculous notions, even by liberals, are now part of mainstream liberal (and, in some quarters, so-called “conservative”) thought.
There is simply nothing to engage with here intellectually. He lasts about a half a sentence before launching into full on lies and propaganda.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/snl-mocks-ex-navy-seal-candidate-dan-crenshaw-i-know-he-lost-his-eye-in-war-or-whatever
https://postimg.cc/Nym5GMSy
The oversized orange shirt he's wearing is not a prison uniform, it's an orange shirt. Guess he's a hunter.
We redpill enough of these guys and we win.
From what I’ve read, said lawsuit was filed by the company which rents out the ankle bracelets which are put on the people being allowed out of physical detention. Follow the money.
And yet, Costa Rica is not a paradise. When my family and I were visiting Costa Rica years ago and were naively walking around the market place with a camera or two around our necks, a concerned local came up to us and advised us to, for our own safety, put the cameras away.
A few days later, we walked outside from a brief visit with a family friend at his home to find that our rented truck (locked) had been broken into with a slim jim and all items taken. So I’m not overly impressed with a lot of aspects of Costa Rica, although, it is vastly better than its neighbors, which is no doubt due to its higher percentage of non-criminal population.
Immigration proponents act like there are a finite amount of people to move, and then everything will be all right. They don't seem to grok the ability of the womb to raise up any number of people to overwhelm whatever level of resources one can muster.
NPCs don’t think. That’s what makes them NPCs.
Seems like a statute of limitations would have kicked in by now, since those who directly practiced the institution have receded into history. And the implication from the grievers is that this is some sort of compensate-able damage, but a satisfactory and closing deal is never suggested; this is just a constant reminder that resources are scarce, groups have interests, and there is a constant juggling between cooperation and antagonism.
Imagine if, in1965, the US government had decided to make a 1-time payment of reparations to descendants of former slaves, who were basically all the black people of the USA. No affirmative action, no constant bickering over race.
Take Malcolm X’s call for reparations:
http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/mxp/speeches/mxt24.html
There were about 4,000,000 slaves in the USA in 1860. Suppose each should have earned 10,000 in today’s dollars. That’s $40,000,000,000 reparations due for 1860. Going back 250 years, you’d have fewer slaves per year and so fewer dollars, but the absolute Upper limit is $10,000,000,000,000.
Had we spent the trillions wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan on repArations to blacks who could show descent from slaves, we would be better off, if paired with an end to affirmative action. At least most of that money would have been spent here at home, instead of blown to smithereens in the Middle East.
Instead, we created a system that allows rich whites and canny blacks to skim dollars and positions, and doesn’t benefit the majority of descendants of slaves at all. Rich, elite whites benefit because it is not they who pay the price in denied admission to top colleges but the marginal whites who don’t have the advantages of wealth, legacy, or parents who can pay the money to develop the sports talent that places like Harvard seem to like. Canny blacks can take advantage in any number of ways. It’s the white and black lower middle and working classes that get screwed.
This was designed this way, to funnel wealth and preserve privileges of the “New Class.” Reparations paired with an end to diversicrats ends their scam.
* OK, that'd be if we did this in 2000. It would be something else now.
No, the point is using a complex system to create niches for the connected and the High-IQ grifters.
Immigration proponents act like there are a finite amount of people to move, and then everything will be all right. They don't seem to grok the ability of the womb to raise up any number of people to overwhelm whatever level of resources one can muster.
‘This is the endgame we’re facing.
Immigration proponents act like there are a finite amount of people to move’
What they refuse to face is that there are seven billion people in the world; twenty foreigners for every American. Worse, a good six billion of them live under conditions that would make a move to America attractive.
Even aside from the desperately poor, most people live under conditions that are substantially worse than those the average American lives under. I’ve seen how the average Chilean and the average Turk lives; there’s no acute deprivation, but you wouldn’t trade. Your hot water can be a pathetic trickle from an electric heating element screwed into the light fixture. Really.
Even in Japan — a notionally wealthy country — the average citizen lives under conditions that are materially about equivalent to that of an American welfare recipient. His apartment is tiny, and in a delapidated building, with cracked windows. He has aging appliances. He can’t afford a car. It’s not so alluring.
Now, keep the gates open, and an awful lot of those people are eventually going to discover America. They’re going to keep discovering it until conditions here have sunk to where they are no better than they are there. Ultimately, they will come.
We can let that happen, or we can prevent it. It’s our choice. We’re making it right now. We’re letting them keep coming; and every year, more people in more places have relatives that have gotten into America — and are telling everyone back home about it. I have a car! I bought a house! They’re not going to stop coming until this is no longer so easy in America either.
Do we want that? Apparently, we do.
Why aren’t the Americans living in dense, close-in, walkable neighborhoods? Oh, that’s right: moving back to the areas their ancestors abandoned would be gentrification and wrong.
The God Emperor Trump is driving a wedge into the Democratic party!
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/03/donald-trump-is-womens-rights-champion-in-transgender-dispute-say-pro-woman-activists/
What it’s about depends who’s making the argument.
To the business interests, it’s all about cheap labor.
To the Democrats, it’s all about importing a population which votes for a living.
To the left, it’s all about destroying the hated Western Civ and the White people who made it.
Only to the SJW is it a replacement for traditional religion.
Aren’t these screeds just auditions for greater opportunities for a (((hack))) like Andrew!
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/10/17/globohomos-next-target-sexual-racism/
Heartiste went full WN when I wasn’t looking. I knew he had leanings but when did the full-blown thing happen?
Arkansas was the most reliably Democratic state from the end of Reconstruction until recently. Only a few years ago the races for Senate, Governor and some of the congressional races were quite competitive. Nor is Arkansas the only southern state like that. Oklahoma used to be staunchly Democratic as well.
Now Arkansas and Oklahoma are two of the most Republican states. No Democrats in the congressional delegation or in statewide office.
In the Midwest, Wisconsin has at least temporarily flipped. 10 years ago the Democrats controlled both houses of the state legislature, had all the statewide offices, Senate seats and most of the congressional districts. Now the Republicans control both houses, most congressional districts, one of the two Senate seats and all statewide offices except Sec of State. The state also went for a GOP candidate for President in 2016 for the first time in a long time. To be fair, the governor race is a toss-up this year, and Democrat Tammy Baldwin has a commanding lead in her re-election campaign for Senate. To be even more fair, there was once a time when Wisconsin was the most reliably Republican state in the Union— from about 1854 until over 100 years later when the progressive wing of the GOP left for the Democratic Party because McCarthy and his followers had taken over the GOP. In effect, the state has swung back and forth between slightly Republican and slightly Democratic ever since.
So yes, plenty of states have gone from blue to red. Otherwise the GOP would not control all three branches of the federal government and most states when not too long ago the Democrats did the same.
You’re missing the point– he didn’t mean examples of states where the parties switched places post-60s (e.g. Massachusetts or Georgia), he was talking about the electorate becoming more right-wing rather than less. Democrat voters in Oklahoma were more conservative than in the Midwest overall. Bill Clinton was a centrist governor who loved executing people.
I can think of only one modern example of increased conservatism, Alaska, which is likely an effect of the military and the declining trade through Anchorage.
The theory that “birthplace of the GOP” Wisconsin is becoming a red state is unproven and hard to take seriously if you have even a Wayne’s-World-level familiarity with the history of the state.
After all, Dr. Bill Cosby is officially a Doctor (of Education (... & on TV)).
Dr. Maya Angelou is officially a Doctor (Honorary) and she could be notoriously insistent that others use that honorific for her despite the fact that she never went even to college (not that there's anything wrong with that ... I mean the no college, not the insisting on an unearned title).
And then there's this old favorite, who really is a medical doctor ... of dermatology not surgery, which didn't stop her from putting many patients under her knife.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5821419/Defiant-Dancing-Doctor-speaks-license-suspended.html
So it can be confusing, when people say they are "doctors" what that actually means.
When someone's life is medically on the line, asking to see medical credentials is not unreasonable.
Of course, since a POC felt disrespected, this common sense precaution will be another casualty of the War on Noticing, the War on Logic and the War on Beckys. Indeed, it sounds like it already was a casualty in Delta's official policy but they forgot to tell the Republic stewardesses.
And now, a little light comic relief, with perhaps a side helping of inadvertent Jewish asabiyya.
https://youtu.be/UlpbU5ZC6Uc
If there is an in-flight emergency and the flight attendants ask for a doctor, there is a kind of honor system here that you don’t answer the call if you are “not a real doctor.” For example, Dr. Cosby would never administer pills to anyone.
Would he?
"Ladies and Gentlemen, is there a Doctor on board?"
"Yes, Doctor Reverend Martin Luther King, Junior, how can I help one of by brothas?"
10 minutes later:
"Ladies and Gentlemen, is there a Reverend on board?"
"Yes, Doctor Reverend Martin ..."
BTW, to A.M., I don't think Delta will discontinue the policy, as these airlines require a medical professional to be available before the Flight Attendants are supposed to open up that emergency medical kit.
That’s increasingly what it looks like. Whenever a sh!tlib says “democracy”, now you can pretty much just sub “mob rule–our mob” right in there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Sweden
Log cabins? Invented by Finns who brought it to the New World in New Sweden.
Finland in general was more similar to America than England - severe winters, heavily forested, etc. so the Finnish settlers knew what to do when they got here, unlike the Brits who were sort of clueless on how to cope with American conditions at first and suffered as a result. Both the Finns and the American Indians used slash and burn agriculture to clear forest areas (essentially the entire eastern US) for farming while this was unknown to the British.
Popper called our knowledge "a web of assumptions" and would have called our ethics "a web of proposals".
My personal concern in this times is the ousting of traditional agreement ethics (or discourse ethics) by "revelation ethics": Every leftist thinks his ideas about e.g. human rights are "evident" (i.e. not for the masses, but for God's enlightened adepts).
It’s been about 130 years but utopian/futuristic rhetoric has again become a pregnant quality of the American left. I suspect that info-age technology has lately demonstrated a lot of unappealing characteristics of humanity in spite of the best-loved lefty notions about Rousseauian noble savagery, so they are demanding hair of the dog that bit them. “We won’t have to feel so bad about [Injuns/Nazis/Emmett Till/Matthew Shepard] if we concentrate on Current Year–the right side of history will save us, Allahu Akbar or whatever you’re supposed to say now”
I think that’s why J.Ross put the “no exploitative” modifier in there. The few Swedish colonies in the New World were tiny trading entrepôts that Sweden didn’t have the naval muscle to back up when push came to shove.
A much more serious case against Sweden for invasive colonization and imperialism could be made vis-a-vis Finland, where Sweden took land on which Swedes still live today, and Germany, which Gustavus Adolphus invaded and ravaged during the Thirty Years War. Of course, whites can never be victims of colonization nor recipients of reparatory benefits, so these facts don’t exist.
Also, Finns and Germans aren’t crying to be let into Sweden, so they don’t need to fabricate ex post facto rationalizations. Or if you prefer Judeo-centric theories, moving Finns and Germans into Sweden wouldn’t harm it, so there is no (((call))) for such immigration to take place.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(history)
There are onion problems in Pune:
Twitter Dump:
More immigration into the onion-rich West is probably called for. We still have onions and distribution networks, but also “governments who are busy elsewhere”, including with their navel and other body parts.
OT,
If the 40% figure is anything like accurate, isn’t it pretty likely that Trump’s approval rating among black males is at least 50%?
https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/1059117871203340291
The Dems have really targeted white suburban women in this election and in their usual short-sighted way have neglected other groups including blacks. They have had Oprah and Obama out campaigning but they really don't have a good stick to beat Trump with since Trump reserves most of his racism for Mexicans (whom blacks don't like either) and is, as a Big Man type personality, a good cultural fit for blacks.
Mao walked 1000s of miles to escape oppression and look what happened!
(Ok, so it was more like marxist manoeuver warfare)
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1059101889898430464
If the 40% figure is anything like accurate, isn't it pretty likely that Trump's approval rating among black males is at least 50%?
He’s working on it. 😉
It’s not just cheap labor–it’s cheap labor that you can punish with deportation if you aren’t satisfied with their work.
He didn't realise the contradiction: the moment they no longer fear deportation they will stop working harder and charging less than their native-born competitors. (It's not just greed either--as new citizens they will now have taxes to pay.)
Germany also has the war guilt which seems to translate into giving financial, diplomatic and military aid to the more country that most resembles Nazi Germany because it was set up by Jews and having open doors to countries Germany never invaded and colonised whilst being morally superior enough to destroy Greece despite it's debts to German banks being smaller than the reparations they wiggled out of paying to them. I suppose the Poles do take advance of the access to the German labour market, but then they were also the only ones who got some real reparations in ethnically cleansing 1 million German-speaking Slavs and Balts and getting some very nice new real estate. (Though joining the EEA did massacre Polish industry when it had to compete with Germany in a free trade environment) Also in Spain and Italy it's mostly the Caravan-style, 'they're poor, just let them in'. No real explanation.In Sweden, Norway and Switzerland it's a guilt trip based on how 'lucky' people there are and how unfortunate the others are. (Plus the standard self-loathing about how 'boring' said countries are without foreigners you barely talk to or interact with but who are somehow 'enriching' to ones life. Making everyone feel less comfortable in public spaces absolutely makes for a more dynamic place!) Along with Austria these countries were hit with the first big waves of 'asylum seekers' who never went home from the Balkans. Similar sentiment was in Denmark but the Danish Peoples Party managed to inexplicably save the country from the worst of global migration and introduce some clever little laws that deters even EU migration. Denmark also demonstrates both that immigration feeds on itself.And I don't know what they say in Finland, nobody knows what happens in Finland.
“nobody knows what happens in Finland”
The suburbs of Helsinki, a lovely capital, are being enriched with headscarves, strollers, and noisy groups of youths of indeterminate ancestry.
Caribbean holiday destination of choice for the super rich, St Bart’s, was Swedish for a time. The capital is called Gustavia.
If slavery was bad, then that means that bringing the slaves here in the first place was bad. After we abolished slavery, a lot of people would have preferred shipping them back to Africa, but there were simply way too many for that to be logistically possible.
https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2018/10/17/globohomos-next-target-sexual-racism/
Wow.
Mustapha Mond, I presume?
At some point someone is bound to come up with farms where you can bang white females for a nominal fee, and participation in the program will be mandatory (on both ends) to receive social benefits. It will be like Blacked For the Rest of Us.
I admit Americans would have to have much harder hearts for it to work. Presumably we would be building a lot of prisons and work camps to go along with the new roads and universities. However, it’s no more a stretch to think we could manage it, than to think we would use our military to conquer them.
It’s a big stretch, to put it mildly, but it’s a stretch that is more interesting to me than curling up in our shells and acting like we’re not being colonized by Mestizos anyway. Can you think of a good reason why the United States shouldn’t govern Central America? Our ancestors certainly didn’t think this way about the Native American tribes.
I suppose it’s because their governments have international legitimacy, and nations prefer to follow the golden rule about military action. But we invaded Iraq, remember? We were not following the golden rule then, and just about every other nation opposed it, until it had already happened. That was an illegitimate war that we wasted untold treasure on, got nothing in return for, and yet we are still here.
How much legitimacy do Central American gov’ts really have, when we all know their citizens would welcome US soldiers with open arms? You might say that they would only welcome us because they all want transfer payments. That might be true, but frankly I can think of worse ways to destroy transfer payment systems than overloading them.
I understand the Central American population would be a burden for a long time, but they don’t even have to have Congressional representation for a long time, and I think you should ask yourself how much the land and natural resources are worth. Are they taking full advantage of them? No. Mexico should by all rights be one of the wealthiest nations of the Earth, and yet it is not. That is because it has nobody competent and honest to manage its resources. Your descendants could be the first who manage them successfully.
Just so long as THEY cannot come HERE.Not really. Let them choose. Let them have the consequences of their choice. Let them reconsider in light of the consequences.
It's likely that Mexicans and C. Americans would benefit substantially (+50-100%) with American management. I see nothing wrong with allowing mutual benefit from an administrative arrangement which the natives can terminate with notice. Maybe with enough American memetic and genetic admixture, they can acquire the ability to administer themselves well enough that they are better off without paying our management fee. Just KEEP THEM OUT OF USA.
OT:
Race does not exist, except when it does:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/04/sports/lelisa-desisa-wins-mens-title-at-the-2018-new-york-city-marathon-mary-keitany-wins-the-womens-race.html
Shalane is representin’ on behalf of the white race (assuming that you think that the Irish are white).
Log cabins? Invented by Finns who brought it to the New World in New Sweden.
The idea of stacking logs to build a structure is rather obvious and dates back to ancient times. It appears in many places. Obviously it was more popular in places with old growth forest so you had lots of big straight logs available free for the cutting. This did not include England so the English settlers in America had no custom of building log houses. The Finns did and the English in America copied from them, but by no means did they “invent” the log cabin.
Finland in general was more similar to America than England – severe winters, heavily forested, etc. so the Finnish settlers knew what to do when they got here, unlike the Brits who were sort of clueless on how to cope with American conditions at first and suffered as a result. Both the Finns and the American Indians used slash and burn agriculture to clear forest areas (essentially the entire eastern US) for farming while this was unknown to the British.
But more broadly he's spewing the deliberate confusion that's at the heart of the minoritarian project.
Essetially that the struggles of people doing the materially productive labor upon which their society dependsto have political rights (slaves, serfs) or get a fair shake (factory workers) is somehow akin to the demand of an outsider or minority to get in to where he wants--a country club, Harvard, a neighborhood or a nation.
These are two completely different things, both factually and logically and in terms of fairness and moral claim.
In fact, these are darn near opposite claims. If i tie you to the land and force you to grow my food, the person oppressed is ... you. But if you bust into my country club or university or neighborhood or nation, against my will, the person being oppressed is ... me.
This concept is not exactly rocket science either. It's the basic idea of "liberty".
Further claim: this moral parsing is not just “my opinion”.
There is a pretty clear objective precept that demonstrates it–separation,
Essentially another who-whom. Who is dependent upon whom? Who is demanded that whom work for them. You can always establish morality by the simple question of “Who is demanding stuff from the other guy?”
The way i could tell that we were “the good guys” in the Cold War–that i wasn’t just imbibing my sides propaganda was that the commies would not let their people leave. Essentially the commies had turned the workers of their nations into serfs. The work to support the state–the commies.
At root this is the minoritarian project is the same. Sure a random individual may be allowed to leave. (And go where?) But white gentiles are not entitled to just work for themselves and have their own stuff, their own space. You French people want to have France for yourselves? Hell no! You WASPs want to enjoy your country club with your own manners and culture? Hell no! You Americans want to keep America American and have you kids enjoy the rule of law and prosperity you and your ancestors built? Hell no!
Morality here is that simple: If some people are willing to be separate–work for themselves, take care of themselves–but some other people try to glom on, to force themselves in, force association, or demand labor, then it is the later group who are the oppressors.
There is no natural right to demand that other people associate with you or give you their stuff. That’s the morality of the rapist–i.e. no morality at all.
We need conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take on the minoritarian project head on and call out it’s fundamental character for what it is.
The other case is when what people are attracted to is bad for them. Think North and South Korea. North Korea is widely attacked as dystopian. South Korea is on a terminal decline and will collapse in a couple decades because it has a tfr at about 1. North Koreans want to go to South Korea but if North Korea holds the border for a bit longer eventually South Korea will collapse and the North gets to declare they were right all along and it was foolish for people to want to leave.
(this is assuming nothing changes; however there is no sign of feminism being destroyed and patriarchy reconstituted)
1. You say it's your stuff but I say you stole it. Labor and consumer complaints against capital are often of this character.
2. You and I have a deal to be part of the same country, and our mutual prosperity and security now depend on it, and now you want to separate. I may not let you. The North took this attitude in 1861.
3. We are separate, but you are doing something on your side of the line that damages or threatens me on my side of the line. I may not let you live separate. This is the rationale for many US interventions in other countries.
4. Granted it is your stuff, but you are too weak to hang on to it and it might as well be me that takes it. This was the rationale of taking the land from the Indians.I agree with your principle, am only pointing out it leaves room for interpretation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/us/delta-black-doctor-racial-profiling.htmlI think that they were very tactful. They didn't want to come out and say, "OK, yeah, you're an M.D., but you're a black M.D., which means you're substantially less capable than a white or Asian M.D., we've seen the MCAT scores. We'd like to keep looking to see if we could maybe find a Jewish nurse or EMT instead, someone more qualified than you."Basically the point of having black doctors is to encourage black patients to seek medical care when they need it. But they are getting uppity and starting to think that they can treat white patients also.
Delta might have treble exposure if they called her “Miss” too:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/im-your-doctor-so-why-are-you-calling-me-miss/2018/11/02/179d319e-d638-11e8-aeb7-ddcad4a0a54e_story.html
They’re no match for our POTUS!
In these trial-lawyer-infected times, anybody of whatever race claiming to be a doctor should have to produce a HealthGrades link and current malpractice insurance before “helping out”
Ask Bob Putnam– trust doesn’t cut it any more
A much more serious case against Sweden for invasive colonization and imperialism could be made vis-a-vis Finland, where Sweden took land on which Swedes still live today, and Germany, which Gustavus Adolphus invaded and ravaged during the Thirty Years War. Of course, whites can never be victims of colonization nor recipients of reparatory benefits, so these facts don't exist.
Also, Finns and Germans aren't crying to be let into Sweden, so they don't need to fabricate ex post facto rationalizations. Or if you prefer Judeo-centric theories, moving Finns and Germans into Sweden wouldn't harm it, so there is no (((call))) for such immigration to take place.
There used to be a non-trivial number of Finns emigrating to Sweden, until the 1980’s or so.
“…the president’s denigration of nonwhite migrants as criminals…”
Note the use of the strawman “nonwhite”.
And the comparison between immigrants (illegal or otherwise) and ante-bellum black slaves is, er, a bit of a stretch.
if you think about it "send us your huddled masses...etc" was a few years after the previous source of cheap labor was halted.
The meta ideology of NYT is that whites are illegitimate, genetic defectives who deserve to be replaced.
Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness for white people is a non-starter at NYT.
Agree, and Whites are solely accountable under the sjw invention of historic crime. Since it is possible that an ancestor held a slave, you are accountable, a hundred and fifty years later, for whatever the alleged crime may have been. Never mind the fact that most Whites never even had a slave-owning ancestor, and never mind the fact that some slaves lived better lives that many free whites, who had escaped the oppression of Europe’s ruling class, who treated them no better than slaves.
The era of slavery cannot be judged by current feelings about human dignity. It was the Industrial Revolution that ended slavery by making labor surplus. (Yes, a new type of slave-wage servitude has taken its place, one that importing millions more huddled masses of laborers doesn’t help.) Whatever historic injustice is alleged, it cannot morally, legally, or sensibly be taken out on living citizens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade
Y’know, I originally included Danes, and then thought better of it.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1059101889898430464
If the 40% figure is anything like accurate, isn't it pretty likely that Trump's approval rating among black males is at least 50%?
Every Democrat congressional ad that I see drones on and on about “pre-existing conditions” for health insurance. This is the kind of issue that excites suburban voters, especially white women (who are big lifelong users of the medical system) but which blacks don’t understand and don’t care about.
The Dems have really targeted white suburban women in this election and in their usual short-sighted way have neglected other groups including blacks. They have had Oprah and Obama out campaigning but they really don’t have a good stick to beat Trump with since Trump reserves most of his racism for Mexicans (whom blacks don’t like either) and is, as a Big Man type personality, a good cultural fit for blacks.
BREAKING THE CONDITIONING
https://hispanicheritage.org/50000-generation-z-high-school-students-identify-republican/
>first time voters 46% GOP to 31% Dem
The media and education indoctrination HAS STOPPED WORKING.
That explains it!!
Would the world be better off if the Cold War had never ended? I know we had border jumpers during the Cold War as epitomized by Reagan’s amnesty. But the end of the Cold War seems to have blown the doors off worldwide mass migration and the explosion of globo-homo inc. Also, the Olympics absolutely sucks post Cold War.
>Commies stopping their own people from fleeing, and
>third worlders not fleeing because they expected development to work. This was as often because they lacked the means.
There were cases of mini-Merkelboners, but not on the current scale. Spain lost its African holdings from a Muslim PR stunt.
Furthermore the costs of the Cold War would hardly be worth it.
And the legacy lives on, we are going to be cleaning up nuclear sites like Hanford for decades to come, seems like.
George H W Bush saw a lot of events in his life. In his 92 SOTU, he said:
"But the biggest thing that has happened in the world in my life, in our lives, is this: By the grace of God, America won the cold war."
Now, remember this guy was a Naval Aviator in WWII, saw VE and VJ days, among other events.
FWIW, GHWB doesn't yet get the credit he deserves for keeping the end of the Cold War peaceful other than Romania. The only downside is generally he wanted to avoid victory dances, be respectful of Russian feelings, so the narrative about how the Soviet Union collapsed, inevitable, like a season changing took root rather than, yeah, they got beat fair and square and by Reagan's doing.
There is a pretty clear objective precept that demonstrates it--separation,
Essentially another who-whom. Who is dependent upon whom? Who is demanded that whom work for them. You can always establish morality by the simple question of "Who is demanding stuff from the other guy?"
The way i could tell that we were "the good guys" in the Cold War--that i wasn't just imbibing my sides propaganda was that the commies would not let their people leave. Essentially the commies had turned the workers of their nations into serfs. The work to support the state--the commies.
At root this is the minoritarian project is the same. Sure a random individual may be allowed to leave. (And go where?) But white gentiles are not entitled to just work for themselves and have their own stuff, their own space. You French people want to have France for yourselves? Hell no! You WASPs want to enjoy your country club with your own manners and culture? Hell no! You Americans want to keep America American and have you kids enjoy the rule of law and prosperity you and your ancestors built? Hell no!
Morality here is that simple: If some people are willing to be separate--work for themselves, take care of themselves--but some other people try to glom on, to force themselves in, force association, or demand labor, then it is the later group who are the oppressors.
There is no natural right to demand that other people associate with you or give you their stuff. That's the morality of the rapist--i.e. no morality at all.
We need conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take on the minoritarian project head on and call out it's fundamental character for what it is.
If the Founding Stock Americans wanted a whitopia they should have thought twice before the 1st slave ship unloaded.
I suppose this can be chalked up to profits forcing common sense into the back seat.
From 1600 or so until 1780 (approximately) we were a colony of Britain, and had no say in the legality of slavery. After we won independence, we began a long slow process of undoing slavery. First by disallowing new slave importation, then helping to snuff out the slave trade (the Africa Squadron), free states vs slave states, etc., culminating in the bloodiest war the U.S. ever fought with 650,000 dead- more casualties than all other wars we fought in combined.
Then the long struggle for Civil Rights of over 100 years subsequently.
If the Blacks and others want any more reparations from slavery they should take it up with the British, not the U.S.
"All whites everywhere responsible for slavery forever!"
But while not quite "this has nothing to do with my point", it's really off on a tangent.
My point--adequately stated i believe--is in fact precisely that character of the claim to be made by slaves or serfs who are providing the productive labor upon which a society depends, is both morally and logically completely distinct from the "white man must let us in!" style claims that this Jewish minoritarian project has launched the past 50, and tried--like this Delbanco goon--to propagandize as being the same thing, or part of the same struggle, etc. etc.
Not a complicated point:
-- not letting you into Harvard (or even more laughably not letting you into Harvard at more than 5x your percentage of the population)
-- not letting you into my country club
-- not hiring you into my company
-- not baking you homos a wedding cake
-- not letting you into my nation
etc. etc. etc.
are all simply not--remotely--the same thing as slavery or serfdom, or commies not letting people leave their nations.
And in fact, *making* me do those things against my will, is actually an offense against my liberty--though obviously not one of the magnitude of slavery or serfdom.
~~~
American Jews have propagandized--unfortunately very successfully--this notion that their Jewish/middle-man-minority self-interest--being able to move anywhere in the world and have the society be open, penetrable and welcoming--is somehow "morality" and resistance to this ... oppression ... slavery! racism! Nazism!
It's nonsense. Resistance to this--wanting to live with your own people and culture--is of course completely normal and in no sense "oppression" of anyone what so ever.
David Roberts: “Sometimes I think about America’s sedentary, heart-diseased, fast-food gobbling, car-addicted suburbanites, sitting watching TV in their suburban castles, casually passing judgment on refugees who have walked 1000s of miles to escape oppression, and … well, it makes me mad.”
Lol! I’m sure it does, David “I Learned All I Know About Suburbia From Watching American Beauty” Roberts.
Your wife hasn’t yet received the latest edition of Guide to Goodthink.
After all, Dr. Bill Cosby is officially a Doctor (of Education (... & on TV)).
Dr. Maya Angelou is officially a Doctor (Honorary) and she could be notoriously insistent that others use that honorific for her despite the fact that she never went even to college (not that there's anything wrong with that ... I mean the no college, not the insisting on an unearned title).
And then there's this old favorite, who really is a medical doctor ... of dermatology not surgery, which didn't stop her from putting many patients under her knife.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5821419/Defiant-Dancing-Doctor-speaks-license-suspended.html
So it can be confusing, when people say they are "doctors" what that actually means.
When someone's life is medically on the line, asking to see medical credentials is not unreasonable.
Of course, since a POC felt disrespected, this common sense precaution will be another casualty of the War on Noticing, the War on Logic and the War on Beckys. Indeed, it sounds like it already was a casualty in Delta's official policy but they forgot to tell the Republic stewardesses.
And now, a little light comic relief, with perhaps a side helping of inadvertent Jewish asabiyya.
https://youtu.be/UlpbU5ZC6Uc
Haha. And don’t forget Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.
to do that they would have had to keep out the slave traders
Look, if Booth hadn’t killed Lincoln we could have sent all the ‘liberated’ blacks to work on building the Panama canal and work them to death. Sadly we missed our epic chance for cartoonish supervillany but I still think blaming our ancestors for not committing genocide is an odd grounding for moral complaints.
No, it wouldn’t be better. The 1960s mark the end of the United States- TFR drops below replacement and fertility is worse the more intelligent you are. We have a dark age or a left wing death spiral- there is no happy sunshine future.
This article is a grand unified theory of the zeroth and fourteenth amendments as a whole.
Germany also has the war guilt which seems to translate into giving financial, diplomatic and military aid to the more country that most resembles Nazi Germany because it was set up by Jews and having open doors to countries Germany never invaded and colonised whilst being morally superior enough to destroy Greece despite it's debts to German banks being smaller than the reparations they wiggled out of paying to them. I suppose the Poles do take advance of the access to the German labour market, but then they were also the only ones who got some real reparations in ethnically cleansing 1 million German-speaking Slavs and Balts and getting some very nice new real estate. (Though joining the EEA did massacre Polish industry when it had to compete with Germany in a free trade environment) Also in Spain and Italy it's mostly the Caravan-style, 'they're poor, just let them in'. No real explanation.In Sweden, Norway and Switzerland it's a guilt trip based on how 'lucky' people there are and how unfortunate the others are. (Plus the standard self-loathing about how 'boring' said countries are without foreigners you barely talk to or interact with but who are somehow 'enriching' to ones life. Making everyone feel less comfortable in public spaces absolutely makes for a more dynamic place!) Along with Austria these countries were hit with the first big waves of 'asylum seekers' who never went home from the Balkans. Similar sentiment was in Denmark but the Danish Peoples Party managed to inexplicably save the country from the worst of global migration and introduce some clever little laws that deters even EU migration. Denmark also demonstrates both that immigration feeds on itself.And I don't know what they say in Finland, nobody knows what happens in Finland.
Yep. It’s just like the Old West medicine showmen selling their snake oil. No matter what ails you, whether it’s lumbago, aigue, or dropsy, (whatever those are) Dr. Dealgood’s all-purpose life elixir will fix it.
There is a pretty clear objective precept that demonstrates it--separation,
Essentially another who-whom. Who is dependent upon whom? Who is demanded that whom work for them. You can always establish morality by the simple question of "Who is demanding stuff from the other guy?"
The way i could tell that we were "the good guys" in the Cold War--that i wasn't just imbibing my sides propaganda was that the commies would not let their people leave. Essentially the commies had turned the workers of their nations into serfs. The work to support the state--the commies.
At root this is the minoritarian project is the same. Sure a random individual may be allowed to leave. (And go where?) But white gentiles are not entitled to just work for themselves and have their own stuff, their own space. You French people want to have France for yourselves? Hell no! You WASPs want to enjoy your country club with your own manners and culture? Hell no! You Americans want to keep America American and have you kids enjoy the rule of law and prosperity you and your ancestors built? Hell no!
Morality here is that simple: If some people are willing to be separate--work for themselves, take care of themselves--but some other people try to glom on, to force themselves in, force association, or demand labor, then it is the later group who are the oppressors.
There is no natural right to demand that other people associate with you or give you their stuff. That's the morality of the rapist--i.e. no morality at all.
We need conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take on the minoritarian project head on and call out it's fundamental character for what it is.
That just means the capitalist side is rich and good at propaganda. That has nothing to do with being ‘good guys’- in a hypothetical situation were your opponents are subverting you, encouraging your citizens to do the same and rewarding them if they leave, you’d be smart to shut the borders, even if you aren’t evil.
The other case is when what people are attracted to is bad for them. Think North and South Korea. North Korea is widely attacked as dystopian. South Korea is on a terminal decline and will collapse in a couple decades because it has a tfr at about 1. North Koreans want to go to South Korea but if North Korea holds the border for a bit longer eventually South Korea will collapse and the North gets to declare they were right all along and it was foolish for people to want to leave.
(this is assuming nothing changes; however there is no sign of feminism being destroyed and patriarchy reconstituted)
There is a pretty clear objective precept that demonstrates it--separation,
Essentially another who-whom. Who is dependent upon whom? Who is demanded that whom work for them. You can always establish morality by the simple question of "Who is demanding stuff from the other guy?"
The way i could tell that we were "the good guys" in the Cold War--that i wasn't just imbibing my sides propaganda was that the commies would not let their people leave. Essentially the commies had turned the workers of their nations into serfs. The work to support the state--the commies.
At root this is the minoritarian project is the same. Sure a random individual may be allowed to leave. (And go where?) But white gentiles are not entitled to just work for themselves and have their own stuff, their own space. You French people want to have France for yourselves? Hell no! You WASPs want to enjoy your country club with your own manners and culture? Hell no! You Americans want to keep America American and have you kids enjoy the rule of law and prosperity you and your ancestors built? Hell no!
Morality here is that simple: If some people are willing to be separate--work for themselves, take care of themselves--but some other people try to glom on, to force themselves in, force association, or demand labor, then it is the later group who are the oppressors.
There is no natural right to demand that other people associate with you or give you their stuff. That's the morality of the rapist--i.e. no morality at all.
We need conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take on the minoritarian project head on and call out it's fundamental character for what it is.
Quite right, and well said. The left’s mentality is just that – the mentality of the rapist and the stalker: it’s going to happen, so just lie back and take it – we were meant to be together.
The Dems have really targeted white suburban women in this election and in their usual short-sighted way have neglected other groups including blacks. They have had Oprah and Obama out campaigning but they really don't have a good stick to beat Trump with since Trump reserves most of his racism for Mexicans (whom blacks don't like either) and is, as a Big Man type personality, a good cultural fit for blacks.
Blacks understand it very well, because so many of them have diabetes which requires expensive drugs, and kidney disease which is part of the end stage of diabetes and even more expensive to treat via dialysis. Hypertension is also extremely common in blacks and requires lifelong medication. Pregnancy is also common in black women, but usually ends after a few months, though for some it is a recurring condition. I have seen it said here that 50% of black women have genital herpes (so it may be true). This also requires expensive medication for a long time to reduce the incidence of further outbreaks.
However, many blacks have Medicaid or Medicare, so to that extent don’t care so much about the kind of insurance available to employees.
Of course for most voters of all races, Health Insurance is not much of an issue if you already have it, or have TriCare, Medicare, Medicaid, VA, or whatever, but then most political issues by-pass most people. If you have a stable job and family, even the state of the economy may not be of much interest.
Putting people with pre-existing conditions in the same pool as young healthy people is the same as putting alcoholics in the same auto insurance group as teetotalers - the latter ends up subsidizing the former. The insurance company doesn't really care as long as they make their profit, but it's unfair to certain customers. In the case of pre-existing conditions, it's one more FU from the Baby Boomers to the younger generations. Is there any generation in American history that has screwed their kids in so many different ways?
Democrats attempt to hack election in Atlanta
The Manhattan Phantom Russian Finding Society chides “without evidence”
It sounds like they just have a really bad design.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/04/us/politics/georgia-elections-kemp-voters-hack.html
https://www.ajc.com/news/state–regional-govt–politics/kemp-office-investigates-georgia-democrats-after-alleged-hacking-attempt/
> Not reading at least OWASP recommendationsThose sites are made by total retards. Or "18 year old computer geniuses". Or the lowest bidder. Or a "good friend" of the governor. Or all of those.
A much more serious case against Sweden for invasive colonization and imperialism could be made vis-a-vis Finland, where Sweden took land on which Swedes still live today, and Germany, which Gustavus Adolphus invaded and ravaged during the Thirty Years War. Of course, whites can never be victims of colonization nor recipients of reparatory benefits, so these facts don't exist.
Also, Finns and Germans aren't crying to be let into Sweden, so they don't need to fabricate ex post facto rationalizations. Or if you prefer Judeo-centric theories, moving Finns and Germans into Sweden wouldn't harm it, so there is no (((call))) for such immigration to take place.
Sweden invaded Poland in the mid-1600s. Poles consider that war a disaster for them on the same order as WW2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deluge_(history)
The only restrictions on flood migration I recall special to the Cold War were
>Commies stopping their own people from fleeing, and
>third worlders not fleeing because they expected development to work. This was as often because they lacked the means.
There were cases of mini-Merkelboners, but not on the current scale. Spain lost its African holdings from a Muslim PR stunt.
Furthermore the costs of the Cold War would hardly be worth it.
Nuclear alerts every so often and the ever-present danger of a world-ending US-USSR nuclear war kinda sucked.
OT: Self-proclaimed centimillionaire Ron Unz, IQ 208, getting his grift on. https://www.unz.com/announcement/supporting-the-unz-review/
The stories about him living on ramen noodles in an unfurnished apartment make more sense now.
The answer to that is a very resounding no. The world was horribly warped, killing fields, captive populations/nations, a nuclear arms race that had taken on a life of its own.
And the legacy lives on, we are going to be cleaning up nuclear sites like Hanford for decades to come, seems like.
George H W Bush saw a lot of events in his life. In his 92 SOTU, he said:
“But the biggest thing that has happened in the world in my life, in our lives, is this: By the grace of God, America won the cold war.”
Now, remember this guy was a Naval Aviator in WWII, saw VE and VJ days, among other events.
FWIW, GHWB doesn’t yet get the credit he deserves for keeping the end of the Cold War peaceful other than Romania. The only downside is generally he wanted to avoid victory dances, be respectful of Russian feelings, so the narrative about how the Soviet Union collapsed, inevitable, like a season changing took root rather than, yeah, they got beat fair and square and by Reagan’s doing.
‘The Preamble says the purpose of the Constitution is to do good thing for “ourselves and our posterity,” but who can remember 55 words?’
Here we go again: Article 1 Section 8 clause 4 of the actual text:
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_8_4_citizenships15.html
So, because North American slavery existed — well before the birth of the “Founding Stock Americans”, or the USA as a political entity — ipso facto we are now obligated to let all and sundry in to take our stuff?
The first Africans in the New World came with the Spanish and Portuguese, IIUC. Some were “acquired” when Florida was taken. The first in the English colonies went to Virginia as indentured servants, where the colonial governor noted that they were actually surviving and thriving instead of dying like flies from tropical diseases as the English transportees and Irish were.
I suppose this can be chalked up to profits forcing common sense into the back seat.
A much more serious case against Sweden for invasive colonization and imperialism could be made vis-a-vis Finland, where Sweden took land on which Swedes still live today, and Germany, which Gustavus Adolphus invaded and ravaged during the Thirty Years War. Of course, whites can never be victims of colonization nor recipients of reparatory benefits, so these facts don't exist.
Also, Finns and Germans aren't crying to be let into Sweden, so they don't need to fabricate ex post facto rationalizations. Or if you prefer Judeo-centric theories, moving Finns and Germans into Sweden wouldn't harm it, so there is no (((call))) for such immigration to take place.
In what way were the Dutch or British colonies nearby more exploitive than the Swedish ones?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/67/Bergen_County_Seal.png
1) Plantations worked by slaves. More true in the Caribbean and South America than in say, Manhattan, but details, details....
2) Conflicts with Indian tribes. Also more true further south where the Aztec were totally overthrown and sacked than in say, New England, which endured the frontier friction that is typical of the interface between settled agriculturalists and nomadic hunter-gatherers everywhere and everywhen.
Obviously, both 1) and 2) ignore that there was already plenty of conflict and slavery before any Europeans showed up, and that by objective measures it is hard to say that indigenes and New World Africans are worse off today than if the pre-European status quo had endured, but again, details, details.
In truth, though I enjoy this kind of mental exercise, there is less and less practical use in arguing it. Facts and logic are obsolete, if not actually oppressive. Our death warrants have been written, and we're quibbling over the typeface. In the Current Year, all you need to know is that a white man once harmed the Other, and this justifies the extermination of all whites now and forever. They've declared their genocide, so justification no longer matters. They're just trying to figure out how to implement it.
“I’m thinking, of course, of African-Americans, who were regarded for much of American history not as human beings but as a species of animate property no different from cattle and sheep.”
Gee the valedictorian of my 1940s NYC high school class didn’t know he was “no different from cattle and sheep” nor did his physician father.
That’s why I don’t understand why “pre-existing conditions” is such a big campaign issue. As I understand it, it applies mainly to people in the individual market and not to large employer sponsored plans (which have enough of a large pool of their own to negate adverse selection) nor obviously to those with any kind of government coverage. People in the individual market are a fairly small segment of the population.
Putting people with pre-existing conditions in the same pool as young healthy people is the same as putting alcoholics in the same auto insurance group as teetotalers – the latter ends up subsidizing the former. The insurance company doesn’t really care as long as they make their profit, but it’s unfair to certain customers. In the case of pre-existing conditions, it’s one more FU from the Baby Boomers to the younger generations. Is there any generation in American history that has screwed their kids in so many different ways?
Ummm, his last name is Delbanco. It tranlsates to "the white" but "the bank."
The only other person named Delbanco with a Wikipedia entry is Nicholas Delbanco, who is described as being "the son of German Jewish parents." And Andrew Delbanco looks a lot more Jewish than Italian or Spanish.
Yeah, my mistake. I’ll repost my reply to another who caught this:
Well then, another stereotype validated yet again! I naturally assumed that with his last name he was Italian -although I also saw an “l” that wasn’t there- “Deblanco”, but it’s “Debanco”.
It’s rather amazing how predictive stereotypes can be, although that’s rapidly becoming a capital offense in Amerika.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/03/04/andrewDelbanco.html
Every. Single. Time. Tm
Yeah, I read his last name as “Blanco”. My mistake.
People often seem to not realize that slavery in the U.S. was due to the British.
From 1600 or so until 1780 (approximately) we were a colony of Britain, and had no say in the legality of slavery. After we won independence, we began a long slow process of undoing slavery. First by disallowing new slave importation, then helping to snuff out the slave trade (the Africa Squadron), free states vs slave states, etc., culminating in the bloodiest war the U.S. ever fought with 650,000 dead- more casualties than all other wars we fought in combined.
Then the long struggle for Civil Rights of over 100 years subsequently.
If the Blacks and others want any more reparations from slavery they should take it up with the British, not the U.S.
Ironically Emma Lazarus' family came from that originally Iberian sugar plantation background.
I had not paid much attention to the name till now but after looking up his c.v. it appears Delbanco’s sales pitch/shtick is “the American ideal.” But he does not approach the topic critically as you’d expect a much-honored (see c.v.) professor to do, rather like a Gay 90s socialist minister trying to whoop up missionaries to go civilize the heathen. Delbanco wraps himself in the flag to conceal his engulfing lust for power and retribution. I find this stock figure of Americana to be more tedious than an outright preachy Marxist like his colleague Eric Foner. What a boring fraud Delbanco is.
Much of his bibliography has to do with Unitarianism — worth studying in the context of New England & Midwest lower plains culture of the 19th C. but less than a dead letter today. Who of his students or readers who are not feeble Main Line WASP trust-funders gives a crap about it? He belongs in a museum.
Oh, oh, oh! Here comes Jack D!
“All whites everywhere responsible for slavery forever!”
The danger of nuclear war is still with us, and it’s arguably worse than during the Cold War. The difference is that today no one cares.
Putting people with pre-existing conditions in the same pool as young healthy people is the same as putting alcoholics in the same auto insurance group as teetotalers - the latter ends up subsidizing the former. The insurance company doesn't really care as long as they make their profit, but it's unfair to certain customers. In the case of pre-existing conditions, it's one more FU from the Baby Boomers to the younger generations. Is there any generation in American history that has screwed their kids in so many different ways?
8.8m is small relative to the total population. But if even half of these people are eligible to vote, they could be politically decisive, depending on how changes in Obamacare are affecting them.
Today’s problems for the US are the result of technology, not the end of the Cold War. Cold War+Internet would have been an interesting world to experience. Maybe will be too!
From 1600 or so until 1780 (approximately) we were a colony of Britain, and had no say in the legality of slavery. After we won independence, we began a long slow process of undoing slavery. First by disallowing new slave importation, then helping to snuff out the slave trade (the Africa Squadron), free states vs slave states, etc., culminating in the bloodiest war the U.S. ever fought with 650,000 dead- more casualties than all other wars we fought in combined.
Then the long struggle for Civil Rights of over 100 years subsequently.
If the Blacks and others want any more reparations from slavery they should take it up with the British, not the U.S.
after they were expelled the people who’d run the white slave trade out of Moorish Spain set up new sugar plantations on the Portuguese owned Atlantic islands and started the African slave trade to get the labor needed – hence why the majority of African slaves went to Brazil (as it was a Portuguese colony).
Ironically Emma Lazarus’ family came from that originally Iberian sugar plantation background.
Germany also has the war guilt which seems to translate into giving financial, diplomatic and military aid to the more country that most resembles Nazi Germany because it was set up by Jews and having open doors to countries Germany never invaded and colonised whilst being morally superior enough to destroy Greece despite it's debts to German banks being smaller than the reparations they wiggled out of paying to them. I suppose the Poles do take advance of the access to the German labour market, but then they were also the only ones who got some real reparations in ethnically cleansing 1 million German-speaking Slavs and Balts and getting some very nice new real estate. (Though joining the EEA did massacre Polish industry when it had to compete with Germany in a free trade environment) Also in Spain and Italy it's mostly the Caravan-style, 'they're poor, just let them in'. No real explanation.In Sweden, Norway and Switzerland it's a guilt trip based on how 'lucky' people there are and how unfortunate the others are. (Plus the standard self-loathing about how 'boring' said countries are without foreigners you barely talk to or interact with but who are somehow 'enriching' to ones life. Making everyone feel less comfortable in public spaces absolutely makes for a more dynamic place!) Along with Austria these countries were hit with the first big waves of 'asylum seekers' who never went home from the Balkans. Similar sentiment was in Denmark but the Danish Peoples Party managed to inexplicably save the country from the worst of global migration and introduce some clever little laws that deters even EU migration. Denmark also demonstrates both that immigration feeds on itself.And I don't know what they say in Finland, nobody knows what happens in Finland.
No, my construction was deliberate; there are plenty of examples on Red Ice. I believe the most recent was a Swedish muckity-muck making offhand remarks to press. You are imposing logic where it doesn’t belong instead of letting them not make sense. You aren’t wrong or lying — such campaigns exist, form the local majority thrust, and stick in the mind better because of the tailoring.
But I’m right too, and my backwards quibble points up that these people have no problem whatsoever with a pan-European “white” identity, so long as it’s always the bad guy. Non-colonial powers benefitted from an overall state of affairs which partially originated in the colonial activities of other countries, they calumniate with an anger that shakes and induces weeping, and so Sweden must pay for what Cecil Rhodes did.
Yet it gets even less logical than that, and in analyzing propaganda, “illogical” is not a dismissal: one of the important points here is the inevitability. This is inevitable, therefore, there can be no resistance.
We are the heirs of the greatest political experiment conceived by humanity. We won't accept the script they have written We will defy them. And we will win.
And, and I’m not implying that you’re okay with this, but there was the issue of hundreds of millions of preventable deaths, and a normality of domestically directed state terrorism, and the strangulation of human creativity and dignity. But yeah Bert the Turtle was silly.
Putting people with pre-existing conditions in the same pool as young healthy people is the same as putting alcoholics in the same auto insurance group as teetotalers - the latter ends up subsidizing the former. The insurance company doesn't really care as long as they make their profit, but it's unfair to certain customers. In the case of pre-existing conditions, it's one more FU from the Baby Boomers to the younger generations. Is there any generation in American history that has screwed their kids in so many different ways?
It’s just like evil white people stopping black church ladies from voting: this isn’t really happening the way it’s presented, but it clearly would be morally wrong if it were. The Democrats are offering to save you from the terrible secret of space.
Yeah, that was a great moment when I suddenly realized what the top.fags were up to and nearly fell of my bike.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/02/us/delta-black-doctor-racial-profiling.htmlI think that they were very tactful. They didn't want to come out and say, "OK, yeah, you're an M.D., but you're a black M.D., which means you're substantially less capable than a white or Asian M.D., we've seen the MCAT scores. We'd like to keep looking to see if we could maybe find a Jewish nurse or EMT instead, someone more qualified than you."Basically the point of having black doctors is to encourage black patients to seek medical care when they need it. But they are getting uppity and starting to think that they can treat white patients also.
Ha! She’s only lucky she’s a disrespected black MD! Airlines are much rougher on East Asian doctors!
The Manhattan Phantom Russian Finding Society chides "without evidence"
It sounds like they just have a really bad design.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/04/us/politics/georgia-elections-kemp-voters-hack.html
https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/kemp-office-investigates-georgia-democrats-after-alleged-hacking-attempt/
> 2018
> Not reading at least OWASP recommendations
Those sites are made by total retards. Or “18 year old computer geniuses”. Or the lowest bidder. Or a “good friend” of the governor. Or all of those.
Every story that comes out like this makes me more embarrassed and worried. The sensible and long overdue return to checkable paper ballots was reported by the radio news as a problem, a measure of how bad things have gotten, and not something we ought to have been doing all along.
Gee the valedictorian of my 1940s NYC high school class didn't know he was "no different from cattle and sheep" nor did his physician father.
Are you really 90 years old ??
The earliest arguments against working for a day wage, as a wage laborer, as opposed to working a tenant farm or in some form of a skilled craft, was that it was akin to slavery. Meager wages provided no security as to livelihood, and therefore no liberty. Slaves, while having no liberty, were valuable, therefore usually had a secure livelihood–of food, shelter, and clothing.
It may appear primitive today, but it’s an argument long forgotten as the conditions of employment have improved. In the race to cheap labor, there’s a history about wage labor worth revisiting.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/03/04/andrewDelbanco.html
Every. Single. Time. Tm
Gotta love how he starts out with “Like many Americans…” ie “Dear FWP…”
> Not reading at least OWASP recommendationsThose sites are made by total retards. Or "18 year old computer geniuses". Or the lowest bidder. Or a "good friend" of the governor. Or all of those.
But remember, the danger is Vladimir Vladimirovich himself, and not American political and corporate leadership ignoring their IT departments.
Every story that comes out like this makes me more embarrassed and worried. The sensible and long overdue return to checkable paper ballots was reported by the radio news as a problem, a measure of how bad things have gotten, and not something we ought to have been doing all along.
Arkansas was the most reliably Democratic state from the end of Reconstruction until recently. Only a few years ago the races for Senate, Governor and some of the congressional races were quite competitive. Nor is Arkansas the only southern state like that. Oklahoma used to be staunchly Democratic as well.
Now Arkansas and Oklahoma are two of the most Republican states. No Democrats in the congressional delegation or in statewide office.
In the Midwest, Wisconsin has at least temporarily flipped. 10 years ago the Democrats controlled both houses of the state legislature, had all the statewide offices, Senate seats and most of the congressional districts. Now the Republicans control both houses, most congressional districts, one of the two Senate seats and all statewide offices except Sec of State. The state also went for a GOP candidate for President in 2016 for the first time in a long time. To be fair, the governor race is a toss-up this year, and Democrat Tammy Baldwin has a commanding lead in her re-election campaign for Senate. To be even more fair, there was once a time when Wisconsin was the most reliably Republican state in the Union— from about 1854 until over 100 years later when the progressive wing of the GOP left for the Democratic Party because McCarthy and his followers had taken over the GOP. In effect, the state has swung back and forth between slightly Republican and slightly Democratic ever since.
So yes, plenty of states have gone from blue to red. Otherwise the GOP would not control all three branches of the federal government and most states when not too long ago the Democrats did the same.
Oh yeah, I wasn’t thinking of yellow or blue dog democrats. I mean a state which trended more conservative over some length of time, in the modern era. Most of us know about the southern democrat thing. I did learn that dem states used to be colored red until some unpleasant connotations became apparent.
Of course, because such questions “a long way from settled in the American mind” have only just occurred in the age of Trump.
This guy is a liberal arts professor? Really?
From 1600 or so until 1780 (approximately) we were a colony of Britain, and had no say in the legality of slavery. After we won independence, we began a long slow process of undoing slavery. First by disallowing new slave importation, then helping to snuff out the slave trade (the Africa Squadron), free states vs slave states, etc., culminating in the bloodiest war the U.S. ever fought with 650,000 dead- more casualties than all other wars we fought in combined.
Then the long struggle for Civil Rights of over 100 years subsequently.
If the Blacks and others want any more reparations from slavery they should take it up with the British, not the U.S.
And yet the British got rid of slavery in their remaining Caribbean colonies long before the US (1834) and they didn’t need a Civil War.
Bezos is putting the new Amazon HQ in D.C.
Smart man. Why use lobbyists when you can go straight in and bribe the politicians over lunch....
I thought the DC area was a no-brainer from the get-go. They used the distraction of a “2nd HQ” to distract from establishing a major DC lobbying presence.
Who–other than gullible media mavens and politicians–thinks the concept of a “second headquarters” makes any sense, in any way, in any description, in any logic… Pure deception.
Bezos has the WaPo, a massive CIA cloud contract (I believe the front-runner for a massive DOD contract), and obviously internet/communications/FCC and DOJ anti-trust lobbying needs–and he’s gonna what, put this “2nd HQ” in Atlanta, Austin or Nashville?? LOL.
I’ve heard suggestions that Western elites felt they had to retain the loyalty and confidence of the middle and working classes to fight the Cold War, but no longer GAF how we felt after the collapse of USSR.
So? That doesn’t change the fact that slavery is still the British Empire’s birthday present to the U.S.A.
Who--other than gullible media mavens and politicians--thinks the concept of a "second headquarters" makes any sense, in any way, in any description, in any logic... Pure deception.
Bezos has the WaPo, a massive CIA cloud contract (I believe the front-runner for a massive DOD contract), and obviously internet/communications/FCC and DOJ anti-trust lobbying needs--and he's gonna what, put this "2nd HQ" in Atlanta, Austin or Nashville?? LOL.
Several decades ago, Fred Smith looked around the country to find the ideal logistics hub and came up with Memphis for Fed Ex: near the population center of the country, low wages, no fog to block airports.
Washington DC for Amazon sounds like what a politicized firm like Lockheed came up with: expensive, not central, but close to Power.
The original America Online (AOL) HQ was in Arlington (IIRC) and (deregulation era) long distance carrier MCI was in DC area--two other companies who needed easy lobbying access to the FCC and politicians.
In addition to the mentioned Northrup Grumman and Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics is also in Falls Church, Va area--and why not. The only surprise is that Boeing, instead of Chicago, didn't move to the east coast Washington when they moved their HQ in 2001.
Twitter Dump:More immigration into the onion-rich West is probably called for. We still have onions and distribution networks, but also "governments who are busy elsewhere", including with their navel and other body parts.
This sort of thing never happened when it was the fashion to put an onion in one’s belt for travelling.
The Zeroth Amendment = Matzoh tenement herd.
Yeah but they didn’t and they’re here . They planned for a lot of eventualities but not the fatal one . And it’s not the Negro .
Putting people with pre-existing conditions in the same pool as young healthy people is the same as putting alcoholics in the same auto insurance group as teetotalers - the latter ends up subsidizing the former. The insurance company doesn't really care as long as they make their profit, but it's unfair to certain customers. In the case of pre-existing conditions, it's one more FU from the Baby Boomers to the younger generations. Is there any generation in American history that has screwed their kids in so many different ways?
In that case the pools are not big enough. When I had health insurance through the state of Florida, they did not say things like “Ooh, we cannot insure your wife, because she might be an alcoholic for all we know. No we cannot insure your daughter because she is allergic to strawberries.”
The bigger problem is that commercial insurance is not a good way to fund a health care system for a large industrialized nation. Almost every single developed democracy has a better system. Possibly it might work a bit better if the government said “OK, we will give Medicare to all the diabetics and epileptics, but you insurance companies will have to insure everyone else and we will tell you what the maximum premiums and deductibles in each state will be. You can compete with each other on customer service.”
The difference is that the US is the only major nation where the insurance industry and legislators form an organized crime syndicate.
Trump was elected based on claims that he would fix this and provide affordable health insurance and drugs for all. However, somewhere along the way he fell into a swamp and had to be pulled out.
The only reason Republicans and Democrats fight elections so bitterly is that the candidates know that they are made for life if they can get in on the Washington gravy train.
The way this works in other countries is that healthcare gets rationed. You can have this drug but not that drug. You want some elective surgery - we'll put you on the list and call you in two years if you are still alive. Etc.
My ancient forefathers (and foremothers, of course) trudged across the soggy land-bridge from mainland Europe to Great Britain 10,000 years ago. There was no welcoming party to greet them.
It had become uneconomic and the high cost of providing health care for slaves was cutting into profits.
And the legacy lives on, we are going to be cleaning up nuclear sites like Hanford for decades to come, seems like.
George H W Bush saw a lot of events in his life. In his 92 SOTU, he said:
"But the biggest thing that has happened in the world in my life, in our lives, is this: By the grace of God, America won the cold war."
Now, remember this guy was a Naval Aviator in WWII, saw VE and VJ days, among other events.
FWIW, GHWB doesn't yet get the credit he deserves for keeping the end of the Cold War peaceful other than Romania. The only downside is generally he wanted to avoid victory dances, be respectful of Russian feelings, so the narrative about how the Soviet Union collapsed, inevitable, like a season changing took root rather than, yeah, they got beat fair and square and by Reagan's doing.
GHWBush did certain things I did not like, and I am not an admirer of his, but he was to me less bad by far than his idiot son GW.
To try to keep this on topic of the Zeroth Amendment, does anyone else remember this wretched refuse that Steve has posted on in the past? If you don’t, her picture will probably jog your memory. That might be mean, but then again I didn’t threaten to shoot up a school.
Former Edison Tech student facing deportation after judge denies request for asylum
A federal immigration judge on Friday denied Abigail Hernandez’s asylum request to stay in the country, officials said.
Hernandez, a former Edison Career and Technology High School student, was sentenced to three years of probation in August after pleading guilty to third-degree falsely reporting an incident, a misdemeanor.
The criminal charges stemmed from allegations that she posted a threatening message on the East High School Facebook page on the afternoon of Feb. 15, declaring: “I’m coming tomorrow morning and I’m going to shoot all of ya bitches.”
During a deportation hearing Friday in U.S. Immigration Court in Batavia, a judge found that she had failed to fulfill the criteria for her asylum request and ordered her removed, said Beatriz LeBron, a city school board member who has raised questions about how Hernandez was treated by police and sought ways to help the family.
Hernandez will remain in U.S. custody while her lawyer appeals the decision, LeBron said.
“The Legal Aid Society of Rochester continues to represent Abi and we plan to appeal the judges decision of this afternoon to the Board of Immigration appeals,” said Hernandez’s immigration attorney Hannah Vickner Hough of Legal Aid Society.
Hernandez was born in Mexico and is not a U.S. citizen but has qualified for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status, according to her family. Removal proceedings were initiated shortly after her arrest, and Hernandez has been at the Buffalo Federal Detention Center in Batavia since pleading guilty to the charge in June.
Hernandez has 30 days to appeal the judge’s decision.
Hernandez was a special education student who participated in the Special Olympics and, according to her family, has a developmental disability. She received a non-Regents certificate through the state Alternate Assessment program designed for “students with the most severe disabilities.”
While Hernandez’s parents have offered no specifics about her disability, they say she has special needs and is very dependent on her family.
An Ivy league Jew whose family has been here about 60 years is the NYT’s go-to guy on “America’s Soul.”
People want unlimited health care but they don’t want to pay for it. If you ration what insurance companies charge but not what they must pay for , that is a recipe for driving insurance companies into bankruptcy. Socialism only works until you run out of other people’s money.
The way this works in other countries is that healthcare gets rationed. You can have this drug but not that drug. You want some elective surgery – we’ll put you on the list and call you in two years if you are still alive. Etc.
Note the use of the strawman "nonwhite".
And the comparison between immigrants (illegal or otherwise) and ante-bellum black slaves is, er, a bit of a stretch.
in one sense but from the point of view of people who want unlimited cheap labor mass immigration is effectively the replacement for slavery since slavery was abolished.
if you think about it “send us your huddled masses…etc” was a few years after the previous source of cheap labor was halted.
The era of slavery cannot be judged by current feelings about human dignity. It was the Industrial Revolution that ended slavery by making labor surplus. (Yes, a new type of slave-wage servitude has taken its place, one that importing millions more huddled masses of laborers doesn't help.) Whatever historic injustice is alleged, it cannot morally, legally, or sensibly be taken out on living citizens.
quite – if we’re going to have collective responsibility for past sins then it should apply to every group and not just white people
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade
It may appear primitive today, but it's an argument long forgotten as the conditions of employment have improved. In the race to cheap labor, there's a history about wage labor worth revisiting.
right – my point was simply that from the point of view of people who want unlimited cheap labormass immigration is their replacement for slavery.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States#Colonial_America
I wonder who the judge was?
It's a big stretch, to put it mildly, but it's a stretch that is more interesting to me than curling up in our shells and acting like we're not being colonized by Mestizos anyway. Can you think of a good reason why the United States shouldn't govern Central America? Our ancestors certainly didn't think this way about the Native American tribes.
I suppose it's because their governments have international legitimacy, and nations prefer to follow the golden rule about military action. But we invaded Iraq, remember? We were not following the golden rule then, and just about every other nation opposed it, until it had already happened. That was an illegitimate war that we wasted untold treasure on, got nothing in return for, and yet we are still here.
How much legitimacy do Central American gov'ts really have, when we all know their citizens would welcome US soldiers with open arms? You might say that they would only welcome us because they all want transfer payments. That might be true, but frankly I can think of worse ways to destroy transfer payment systems than overloading them.
I understand the Central American population would be a burden for a long time, but they don't even have to have Congressional representation for a long time, and I think you should ask yourself how much the land and natural resources are worth. Are they taking full advantage of them? No. Mexico should by all rights be one of the wealthiest nations of the Earth, and yet it is not. That is because it has nobody competent and honest to manage its resources. Your descendants could be the first who manage them successfully.
How about “because it’s not good for us””?
In other words, “because it’s good for them.” If we can make it good for US as well, then it would be an arrangement of mutual benefit.
Just so long as THEY cannot come HERE.
Not really. Let them choose. Let them have the consequences of their choice. Let them reconsider in light of the consequences.
It’s likely that Mexicans and C. Americans would benefit substantially (+50-100%) with American management. I see nothing wrong with allowing mutual benefit from an administrative arrangement which the natives can terminate with notice. Maybe with enough American memetic and genetic admixture, they can acquire the ability to administer themselves well enough that they are better off without paying our management fee. Just KEEP THEM OUT OF USA.
There is a pretty clear objective precept that demonstrates it--separation,
Essentially another who-whom. Who is dependent upon whom? Who is demanded that whom work for them. You can always establish morality by the simple question of "Who is demanding stuff from the other guy?"
The way i could tell that we were "the good guys" in the Cold War--that i wasn't just imbibing my sides propaganda was that the commies would not let their people leave. Essentially the commies had turned the workers of their nations into serfs. The work to support the state--the commies.
At root this is the minoritarian project is the same. Sure a random individual may be allowed to leave. (And go where?) But white gentiles are not entitled to just work for themselves and have their own stuff, their own space. You French people want to have France for yourselves? Hell no! You WASPs want to enjoy your country club with your own manners and culture? Hell no! You Americans want to keep America American and have you kids enjoy the rule of law and prosperity you and your ancestors built? Hell no!
Morality here is that simple: If some people are willing to be separate--work for themselves, take care of themselves--but some other people try to glom on, to force themselves in, force association, or demand labor, then it is the later group who are the oppressors.
There is no natural right to demand that other people associate with you or give you their stuff. That's the morality of the rapist--i.e. no morality at all.
We need conservative/nationalist politicians who are willing to take on the minoritarian project head on and call out it's fundamental character for what it is.
This is a good principle, keeping in mind that in practice we will still have to work through these kinds of disagreements.
1. You say it’s your stuff but I say you stole it. Labor and consumer complaints against capital are often of this character.
2. You and I have a deal to be part of the same country, and our mutual prosperity and security now depend on it, and now you want to separate. I may not let you. The North took this attitude in 1861.
3. We are separate, but you are doing something on your side of the line that damages or threatens me on my side of the line. I may not let you live separate. This is the rationale for many US interventions in other countries.
4. Granted it is your stuff, but you are too weak to hang on to it and it might as well be me that takes it. This was the rationale of taking the land from the Indians.
I agree with your principle, am only pointing out it leaves room for interpretation.
Surely access to Beckys nether regions is a human right too.
Self–ownership. Self-defense.
Should have been removed on that basis alone, along with all her family. NOT OUR PROBLEM!
Arkansas was the most reliably Democratic state from the end of Reconstruction until recently. Only a few years ago the races for Senate, Governor and some of the congressional races were quite competitive. Nor is Arkansas the only southern state like that. Oklahoma used to be staunchly Democratic as well.
Now Arkansas and Oklahoma are two of the most Republican states. No Democrats in the congressional delegation or in statewide office.
In the Midwest, Wisconsin has at least temporarily flipped. 10 years ago the Democrats controlled both houses of the state legislature, had all the statewide offices, Senate seats and most of the congressional districts. Now the Republicans control both houses, most congressional districts, one of the two Senate seats and all statewide offices except Sec of State. The state also went for a GOP candidate for President in 2016 for the first time in a long time. To be fair, the governor race is a toss-up this year, and Democrat Tammy Baldwin has a commanding lead in her re-election campaign for Senate. To be even more fair, there was once a time when Wisconsin was the most reliably Republican state in the Union— from about 1854 until over 100 years later when the progressive wing of the GOP left for the Democratic Party because McCarthy and his followers had taken over the GOP. In effect, the state has swung back and forth between slightly Republican and slightly Democratic ever since.
So yes, plenty of states have gone from blue to red. Otherwise the GOP would not control all three branches of the federal government and most states when not too long ago the Democrats did the same.
Those states didn’t go blue to red; they went red to blue. Than the media reversed the meanings of the colors. Since that reversal, has any state gone from blue to red?
An anon analyzes Peter Beinart in the Atlantic. Note: in pic, a protester holds up a sign reading “strength through unity,” whch is reasonable enough, but is also the motto of the bad guys in V for Vendetta. Also, anon depends on somewhat open-minded people reading the Atlantic, which seems a bit extreme.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/anti-semitism-inherent-trumps-nativism/574672/
Normies will have never made this connection prior to reading this.
“Wait. Jews are transforming America for their own preservation?”
This will be the first time normies hear a SINGLE specific argument from Hitler.
Normies: “This author defending Jews received money from a wealthy Jew?” [The author is Jewish, but normies won’t know that.]
“Wait, so white supremacists in the south weren’t actually wrong?”
Obviously. (All sorts of “mistakes were made” in the development of the United States.)
But while not quite “this has nothing to do with my point”, it’s really off on a tangent.
My point–adequately stated i believe–is in fact precisely that character of the claim to be made by slaves or serfs who are providing the productive labor upon which a society depends, is both morally and logically completely distinct from the “white man must let us in!” style claims that this Jewish minoritarian project has launched the past 50, and tried–like this Delbanco goon–to propagandize as being the same thing, or part of the same struggle, etc. etc.
Not a complicated point:
— not letting you into Harvard (or even more laughably not letting you into Harvard at more than 5x your percentage of the population)
— not letting you into my country club
— not hiring you into my company
— not baking you homos a wedding cake
— not letting you into my nation
etc. etc. etc.
are all simply not–remotely–the same thing as slavery or serfdom, or commies not letting people leave their nations.
And in fact, *making* me do those things against my will, is actually an offense against my liberty–though obviously not one of the magnitude of slavery or serfdom.
~~~
American Jews have propagandized–unfortunately very successfully–this notion that their Jewish/middle-man-minority self-interest–being able to move anywhere in the world and have the society be open, penetrable and welcoming–is somehow “morality” and resistance to this … oppression … slavery! racism! Nazism!
It’s nonsense. Resistance to this–wanting to live with your own people and culture–is of course completely normal and in no sense “oppression” of anyone what so ever.
I mean, by way of example, where I live, the land wasn’t even stolen from the Indians. The Dutch bought it (hence the Dutchman shaking hands with the Indian). The the British took it from the Dutch.
Now in credit to the Dutch and the British, they thought that they were doing the right thing by "buying" the land instead of just taking it by force the way that the Spanish did. Some white guy would give you a bunch of beads or something - the Indians must have thought that they were getting a good deal, as if someone told you that they wanted to pay you for the air in your backyard. The white guys thought that they had a good deal because they had just bought Manhattan Island for $26. But in retrospect, there was no real "meeting of the minds" at all.
Twinkie’s daughters are going to ROCK! They have been disabused of Leftist ideology, trained to fight like Viking Beserkers, and focused on the principles of the founding of America.
If our cultural cold war becomes hot, we will be grateful to Twinkie, because his progeny is on our side. 🙂
If so, I would I would join the Bangledesh First party and demand the navy turn away the American refugee rafts.
LOL. Good points.
But I'm right too, and my backwards quibble points up that these people have no problem whatsoever with a pan-European "white" identity, so long as it's always the bad guy. Non-colonial powers benefitted from an overall state of affairs which partially originated in the colonial activities of other countries, they calumniate with an anger that shakes and induces weeping, and so Sweden must pay for what Cecil Rhodes did.
Yet it gets even less logical than that, and in analyzing propaganda, "illogical" is not a dismissal: one of the important points here is the inevitability. This is inevitable, therefore, there can be no resistance.
Of course you are correct. And yet we resist. Somehow, we will not be silent, and you are noisier than most! No, because our allegiance is not to the Big Lie. We have seen the good life, even though we cannot live it. But its presence condemns the petty lies that small minds convey, post, transmit and shout.
We are the heirs of the greatest political experiment conceived by humanity. We won’t accept the script they have written We will defy them. And we will win.
But while not quite "this has nothing to do with my point", it's really off on a tangent.
My point--adequately stated i believe--is in fact precisely that character of the claim to be made by slaves or serfs who are providing the productive labor upon which a society depends, is both morally and logically completely distinct from the "white man must let us in!" style claims that this Jewish minoritarian project has launched the past 50, and tried--like this Delbanco goon--to propagandize as being the same thing, or part of the same struggle, etc. etc.
Not a complicated point:
-- not letting you into Harvard (or even more laughably not letting you into Harvard at more than 5x your percentage of the population)
-- not letting you into my country club
-- not hiring you into my company
-- not baking you homos a wedding cake
-- not letting you into my nation
etc. etc. etc.
are all simply not--remotely--the same thing as slavery or serfdom, or commies not letting people leave their nations.
And in fact, *making* me do those things against my will, is actually an offense against my liberty--though obviously not one of the magnitude of slavery or serfdom.
~~~
American Jews have propagandized--unfortunately very successfully--this notion that their Jewish/middle-man-minority self-interest--being able to move anywhere in the world and have the society be open, penetrable and welcoming--is somehow "morality" and resistance to this ... oppression ... slavery! racism! Nazism!
It's nonsense. Resistance to this--wanting to live with your own people and culture--is of course completely normal and in no sense "oppression" of anyone what so ever.
Agree.
Five or six years ago, Northrop Grumman did the same – moved its corporate headquarters from Century City (a largely commercial, high end development between Santa Monica and Beverly Hills in Los Angeles for the non-SoCal folks reading) to just outside of DC (Falls Church VA, I think), specifically to be closer to its primary customer. It saddened me because NG (via the Northrop component) was the last of the original SoCal aerospace giants to still be headquartered in SoCal; even though NG still has much of its aircraft engineering and manufacturing in there, moving the headquarters elsewhere was the end of an era.
Not to mention the notorious “Tony” of 5Dimes was just found murdered.
The way this works in other countries is that healthcare gets rationed. You can have this drug but not that drug. You want some elective surgery - we'll put you on the list and call you in two years if you are still alive. Etc.
Discussions about healthcare payment systems in America usually degenerate into our status quo versus nationalized systems with rationing like Britain’s, but there are hybrid models that seem better than ours and theirs. France, Singapore, Germany, and other countries seem to have better approaches than us or the UK.
In any case, I've always drawn the opposite moral from the experience of the Native Americans.
They failed to stop the white people from coming. Look what happened to them.
Physically, the current territory of the United States could easily support a billion people. Leave the gates open, and people will keep coming -- and from an ever-expanding list of increasingly exotic locales. Why should a Bangladeshi peasant stay in Bangladesh to continue to strive desperately to barely avoid starvation if getting into the United States becomes a tangible, real possibility? Would you, if you were in his shoes?
Eventually, of course, the US will sink until it is no more attractive than Bangladesh, or Nigeria, or Haiti, or whatever other hellholes you choose to name. Of course by then the US will be a heaving, bubbling, vibrant cess-pit of a hundred different contending groups -- and I wouldn't count on anyone thinking to set aside reservations for the remaining white people.
We'll wind up envying the Native Americans if we can't learn from what happened to them.
Excellent comment Mr. Wright.
As I’ve pointed out, by simple math\logic “nation of immigrants” == turning your nation into a hellhole that no one else in the world wants to come to. It is by definition a recipe for making your nation one of the worst places on earth. (This is of course obvious. Really nice places that people have put work into and want to keep nice tend to have fences, gates, locks, admission fees, security staff, etc.)
One is tempted to say something snaky about the perils of being ruled (and lectured to) by a verbally oriented and math phobic elite … but i think we all know this evil nonsense isn’t driven mostly by mathematically incompetence, but from hate.
Are you nuts? A person can become a citizen of the US and millions do. You must do it legally through the immigration laws of the US. We don’t want millions of free loaders from failed countries and why don’t all of the millions and millions of immigrants stay in their countries and do something for their countries? Why? Because they want to come here and free load in a country that Whites created and built into the greatest nation to ever exist. Many so called immigrants are criminals who see the US as easy pickings. Forget about it.
Not saying I agree, but the standard Left talking points here are:
1) Plantations worked by slaves. More true in the Caribbean and South America than in say, Manhattan, but details, details….
2) Conflicts with Indian tribes. Also more true further south where the Aztec were totally overthrown and sacked than in say, New England, which endured the frontier friction that is typical of the interface between settled agriculturalists and nomadic hunter-gatherers everywhere and everywhen.
Obviously, both 1) and 2) ignore that there was already plenty of conflict and slavery before any Europeans showed up, and that by objective measures it is hard to say that indigenes and New World Africans are worse off today than if the pre-European status quo had endured, but again, details, details.
In truth, though I enjoy this kind of mental exercise, there is less and less practical use in arguing it. Facts and logic are obsolete, if not actually oppressive. Our death warrants have been written, and we’re quibbling over the typeface. In the Current Year, all you need to know is that a white man once harmed the Other, and this justifies the extermination of all whites now and forever. They’ve declared their genocide, so justification no longer matters. They’re just trying to figure out how to implement it.
As I've pointed out, by simple math\logic "nation of immigrants" == turning your nation into a hellhole that no one else in the world wants to come to. It is by definition a recipe for making your nation one of the worst places on earth. (This is of course obvious. Really nice places that people have put work into and want to keep nice tend to have fences, gates, locks, admission fees, security staff, etc.)
One is tempted to say something snaky about the perils of being ruled (and lectured to) by a verbally oriented and math phobic elite ... but i think we all know this evil nonsense isn't driven mostly by mathematically incompetence, but from hate.
One of the benefits of eliminating affirmative action and disparate impact is that we can have REAL entrance requirements for higher education again. Getting rid of the math-phobes at the admissions stage would purge most of those types at the outset, depriving them of the credentials they currently use to make themselves appear credible.
Maybe some of that stems from jealousy of the people who can use math, which of course would be ameliorated by just removing them from the university environment so they aren’t in constant friction with their mental superiors.
What if it works the other way? Maybe the WASPs are behind the curtain using the usual suspects as the face of the movement.
If I wanted to take over the world, it’s hard to imagine a better scapegoat to hide behind than the one everyone already thinks poisons wells, sacrifices children, and hoards gold?
Seems like a statute of limitations would have kicked in by now, since those who directly practiced the institution have receded into history. And the implication from the grievers is that this is some sort of compensate-able damage, but a satisfactory and closing deal is never suggested; this is just a constant reminder that resources are scarce, groups have interests, and there is a constant juggling between cooperation and antagonism.
And on the matter of slavery, whites owe something to blacks.
Has any group benefited more from slavery than American blacks?
Fred Smith grew up in Marks, Mississippi, about 70 miles south of Memphis–so I’ll guess his familiarity was more than a logistically ideal solution. But his idea was sound, in a similar fashion to American Airlines moving from NYC to Dallas/Forth Worth in ’79, beginning the hub and spoke system in ’81.
The original America Online (AOL) HQ was in Arlington (IIRC) and (deregulation era) long distance carrier MCI was in DC area–two other companies who needed easy lobbying access to the FCC and politicians.
In addition to the mentioned Northrup Grumman and Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics is also in Falls Church, Va area–and why not. The only surprise is that Boeing, instead of Chicago, didn’t move to the east coast Washington when they moved their HQ in 2001.
http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/mxp/speeches/mxt24.htmlThere were about 4,000,000 slaves in the USA in 1860. Suppose each should have earned 10,000 in today's dollars. That's $40,000,000,000 reparations due for 1860. Going back 250 years, you'd have fewer slaves per year and so fewer dollars, but the absolute Upper limit is $10,000,000,000,000.Had we spent the trillions wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan on repArations to blacks who could show descent from slaves, we would be better off, if paired with an end to affirmative action. At least most of that money would have been spent here at home, instead of blown to smithereens in the Middle East.Instead, we created a system that allows rich whites and canny blacks to skim dollars and positions, and doesn't benefit the majority of descendants of slaves at all. Rich, elite whites benefit because it is not they who pay the price in denied admission to top colleges but the marginal whites who don't have the advantages of wealth, legacy, or parents who can pay the money to develop the sports talent that places like Harvard seem to like. Canny blacks can take advantage in any number of ways. It's the white and black lower middle and working classes that get screwed.This was designed this way, to funnel wealth and preserve privileges of the "New Class." Reparations paired with an end to diversicrats ends their scam.
I can’t argue with your numbers, Mr. Schmidt, but your logic assumes that black people as a whole would honor the deal that “that is IT”. Have you known very many black people with good spending and saving habits? One, even? I can’t say I do. Once everyone is decked out with free-spinning rims*, and they’ve gone to a few pro-football games and bought new vehicles with delayed payments, the party would be over. The complaints would then continue. “We had a deal!” doesn’t mean anything in today’s world or really any government.
* OK, that’d be if we did this in 2000. It would be something else now.
I can imagine a flight back in the 1960’s when not so many had ever been on airplanes and were much more anxious:
“Ladies and Gentlemen, is there a Doctor on board?”
“Yes, Doctor Reverend Martin Luther King, Junior, how can I help one of by brothas?”
10 minutes later:
“Ladies and Gentlemen, is there a Reverend on board?”
“Yes, Doctor Reverend Martin …”
BTW, to A.M., I don’t think Delta will discontinue the policy, as these airlines require a medical professional to be available before the Flight Attendants are supposed to open up that emergency medical kit.
My thoughts exactly.
Another “Bad Jew” (not to be confused with Bad White). There are so very, very many.
Does the professor say China must open its borders because everyone is fully human?
Does he say Israel must open its borders because everyone is fully human?
He only tells white people in white countries that they must have open borders.
When he says not having open borders is dehumanizing what he MEANS is that WHITES are not fully human.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/67/Bergen_County_Seal.png
The Indians didn’t really have a strong concept of land ownership and it’s hard to say if they really understood what “selling” the land meant. Land to them was, in relation to their population size, a more or less unconstrained resource the way we think of air so there was no need for a system of registering land titles (not to mention that they were illiterate so there was no way to record these things anyway). Agriculture did not take place in any fixed place – they would burn a clearing in the forest, farm it for a year or two and then when the soil wore out they would burn a new clearing. They didn’t have teepees like the Plains Indians but they didn’t have much in the way of permanent structures – they tended to move around with the seasons to follow fishing or hunting opportunities.
Now in credit to the Dutch and the British, they thought that they were doing the right thing by “buying” the land instead of just taking it by force the way that the Spanish did. Some white guy would give you a bunch of beads or something – the Indians must have thought that they were getting a good deal, as if someone told you that they wanted to pay you for the air in your backyard. The white guys thought that they had a good deal because they had just bought Manhattan Island for $26. But in retrospect, there was no real “meeting of the minds” at all.
Now in credit to the Dutch and the British, they thought that they were doing the right thing by "buying" the land instead of just taking it by force the way that the Spanish did. Some white guy would give you a bunch of beads or something - the Indians must have thought that they were getting a good deal, as if someone told you that they wanted to pay you for the air in your backyard. The white guys thought that they had a good deal because they had just bought Manhattan Island for $26. But in retrospect, there was no real "meeting of the minds" at all.
Citation needed
Now in credit to the Dutch and the British, they thought that they were doing the right thing by "buying" the land instead of just taking it by force the way that the Spanish did. Some white guy would give you a bunch of beads or something - the Indians must have thought that they were getting a good deal, as if someone told you that they wanted to pay you for the air in your backyard. The white guys thought that they had a good deal because they had just bought Manhattan Island for $26. But in retrospect, there was no real "meeting of the minds" at all.
Not just the Spanish. Just about every conqueror in recorded history (and probably unrecorded history as well). For instance, you’d be hard-pressed to think of an instance where a Russian, African, Chinese or Muslim ruler purchased land rather had his armies acquire it in the usual manner – at swordpoint.
But these are Russians; they were also told to "beat them up a little" if necessary.
General Dynamics also moved to northern Virginia to be near the Pentagon.
Putting people with pre-existing conditions in the same pool as young healthy people is the same as putting alcoholics in the same auto insurance group as teetotalers - the latter ends up subsidizing the former. The insurance company doesn't really care as long as they make their profit, but it's unfair to certain customers. In the case of pre-existing conditions, it's one more FU from the Baby Boomers to the younger generations. Is there any generation in American history that has screwed their kids in so many different ways?
Who--other than gullible media mavens and politicians--thinks the concept of a "second headquarters" makes any sense, in any way, in any description, in any logic... Pure deception.
Bezos has the WaPo, a massive CIA cloud contract (I believe the front-runner for a massive DOD contract), and obviously internet/communications/FCC and DOJ anti-trust lobbying needs--and he's gonna what, put this "2nd HQ" in Atlanta, Austin or Nashville?? LOL.
Plus there is 10 tons of cheap office space in Crystal City that has been vacant for years (I’m talking entire buildings) since the US PTO left and other DoD offices got BRAC’ed to Fort Belvoir.
I am sure my local politicos are falling all over themselves welcoming Bezos with any kind of public bennies they can throw at him. Fortunately, the Dillon Rule allows them to do only what Virginia lets them, or my taxes would be higher than they already are.
To Bezo’s credit, he has his SJWs (if he has any) under sufficient control so that they don’t screw up his getting CIA/DoD contracts.
Northrup Grumman, General Dynamics, and Lockheed Martin make much more money as Fed contractors than they do building actual things.
"Ladies and Gentlemen, is there a Doctor on board?"
"Yes, Doctor Reverend Martin Luther King, Junior, how can I help one of by brothas?"
10 minutes later:
"Ladies and Gentlemen, is there a Reverend on board?"
"Yes, Doctor Reverend Martin ..."
BTW, to A.M., I don't think Delta will discontinue the policy, as these airlines require a medical professional to be available before the Flight Attendants are supposed to open up that emergency medical kit.
Why anyone would want to be an airplane steward(ess) is beyond me. What are the attractions?
Free travel to all kinds of vacation spots on your off time.
See different places and people all the time.
It's very attractive to young novelty-seekers.
Russian explorers going East had instructions to attempt to trade fairly and establish good relations where possible with Siberians.
But these are Russians; they were also told to “beat them up a little” if necessary.
Britain managed to come to Jesus on slavery right around the time she lost her colonies and slavery stopped being (or being tied to) a serious source of revenue.
The Caribbean colonies were a significant revenue source; are there studies on how hard they were hit by emancipation?
Sure, walk me through it; who’s owned the Sulzbergers all this time?
Seems bereft of all reason (emphasis added to peak lunacy).
You seem to have substituted Whites for Jews, somehow.
Live practically anywhere you want (that is on your employer’s routes).
Free travel to all kinds of vacation spots on your off time.
See different places and people all the time.
It’s very attractive to young novelty-seekers.
Now in credit to the Dutch and the British, they thought that they were doing the right thing by "buying" the land instead of just taking it by force the way that the Spanish did. Some white guy would give you a bunch of beads or something - the Indians must have thought that they were getting a good deal, as if someone told you that they wanted to pay you for the air in your backyard. The white guys thought that they had a good deal because they had just bought Manhattan Island for $26. But in retrospect, there was no real "meeting of the minds" at all.
I don’t think the Indians were that clueless, particularly after they saw what previous purchases looked like. I think it’s more that they understood there was plenty of land nearby (remember, there weren’t all that many Indians around here. Estimates are something like 3,000 of them in the Northeast corner of NJ where about 2,000,000 people live today), so why not sell some for valuable goods like muskets and axes and such (you can buy replicas of the bill of sale for Manhattan at the federal building downtown — at least you used to be able to do, and it includes a bunch of axes and muskets, as I recall).
Don’t forget the US banned the importation of slaves in 1808.
The Caribbean colonies were a significant revenue source; are there studies on how hard they were hit by emancipation?
Immigration proponents act like there are a finite amount of people to move, and then everything will be all right. They don't seem to grok the ability of the womb to raise up any number of people to overwhelm whatever level of resources one can muster.
The Chinese “one child policy” was a colossal mistake. Without it, Australia, Canada and much of the western U.S. would now be majority Chinese. It never crossed the minds of the Chinese communists that the West would throw open its borders to the surplus population of the world.
A much more serious case against Sweden for invasive colonization and imperialism could be made vis-a-vis Finland, where Sweden took land on which Swedes still live today, and Germany, which Gustavus Adolphus invaded and ravaged during the Thirty Years War. Of course, whites can never be victims of colonization nor recipients of reparatory benefits, so these facts don't exist.
Also, Finns and Germans aren't crying to be let into Sweden, so they don't need to fabricate ex post facto rationalizations. Or if you prefer Judeo-centric theories, moving Finns and Germans into Sweden wouldn't harm it, so there is no (((call))) for such immigration to take place.
You’re forgetting the Danes, who used to make up most of the population of southern Sweden before they were massacred and driven out. Swedes used to be really unpleasant people to have as neighbors.
This is correct. I remember on another forum seeing a conservative/libertarian type praising the Latino illegals because they worked harder for less money than citizens, and calling for them to be legalised.
He didn’t realise the contradiction: the moment they no longer fear deportation they will stop working harder and charging less than their native-born competitors. (It’s not just greed either–as new citizens they will now have taxes to pay.)
Rather like Americans in 1965, the Indians had no idea how many people would eventually come, and how rapidly the immigrants would multiply.
I do not advocate for relocating the locals in Central America. Latin Americans are problematic people, but with tough enough government they would be civil. We are not talking about Africa here, which is a massive place with large populations that never lived in a modern setting, or had a modern gov’t. Central America is a lot more manageable than that, from the perspective of would-be settlers/conquerors.
I agree with you that it is a tragedy such large amounts of land and natural resources in Latin America and Africa go under-utilized, supporting nothing but rural villages and gigantic urban slums. The problem with colonization is that it wasn’t done hard enough. I don’t advocate for genocide, which is evil, but if people cannot effectively govern themselves then they are not entitled to try. Relatively it is more unethical to let them try.
This attitude will see a resurgence in my lifetime (probably late in it). The resurgence will come because advances in genomic science will 100% validate human biodiversity, and most common preconceptions about race,. Most people will stop listening to authorities who say otherwise. It remains to be seen whether Western nations will still be intact, practically speaking, at that point. Renewed attempts at colonization will be impossible if there is no longer any shared political capital in the West.