The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
What Northeastern Liberals Don't Get About Mexicans
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

For years, New York SWPL liberals have imagined illegal immigration to be their secret weapon for sticking it to their hated enemies in Texas, those horrible Texans with their cowboy hats and cowboy boots and horses and not wearing helmets and probably not even using child safety seats. You won’t be acting like that once you are inundated in a sea of The Other!

Eventually, however, even Park Slopers might notice that Mexicans are actually more like Extreme Texans in culture.

 
Hide 202 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I used to police an area that was about half illegal aliens from Guatemala and Mexico. At every dance, party, and seasonal celebration shots were fired into the air. Any time they served alcohol a big fraction of the girls were in the 13 to 16 year old range.

    Don’t worry they’re going to vote Democrat anyway legal or not. And they give the Dems more numbers to fudge with. So win-win for them.

    What I don’t understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters.

    • Replies: @Maximus
    @TWS

    "What I don’t understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters." When do people get it? No opposition exists to progressives, the red blue teams are just different wings on the bird of prey that is going to eat you, freedoms first serf..

    , @Realist
    @TWS

    It's cheap labor. And that's all that counts. Greed rules.

    , @thisisaknife
    @TWS

    Good question: "What I don’t understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters."

    Republicans want the cheap labor.

    Shopkeeper's logic. They'll sell matches used to burn the town. Sell you the rope to hang 'em with. Well not them in their gated communities. The Republican Party doesn't give a rat's ass about you. Also notice their support for war. Big business! Sure it usually isn't their sons being mutilated and killed. Sure part of the strategy isn't to spit in your face like the Dems do. Conservative rich guys and right-wing media blowhards tell us we're Real Americans, salt of the Earth. What the Dems and Republicans are is two wings of one party of business, run by multinational corporations.

  2. Unfortunately you can argue the other way-after all why shouldn’t Mexicans be forbidden entry to a place that’s full of their own culture.

  3. That video is kind of awesome, and if that was what we had to look forward to, I wouldn’t be so apprehensive. In any event, better to someday be living in a new country of Latin America del Norte than Eurabia.

  4. I don’t believe that SWPL liberals could ever have thought that Mexicans of all people were going to sivilize Texans.

  5. I admire much about Mexicans. My oldest son spends one evening a week immersed in Mexican culture which has been so good for his moral development.
    If they would quit littering, half of the animosity against them would disappear overnight.

    • Replies: @tformation
    @Dahlia

    Dahlia said: "If they would quit littering, half of the animosity against them would disappear overnight."

    HAHAHA! Thanks for the laugh! I used to live in a Mexican neighborhood in Chicago, and I would often witness Mexican mothers with children just throwing their trash onto the sidewalk and streets. The biggest complaint I would hear from my parents about our (old) neighborhood was about how there was so much trash on the streets.

    There are some rough edges to Mexican culture, but I share your admiration for Mexican culture. When driving on the south side of Chicago, you can immediately tell when you move from a black neighborhood to a Mexican one. The boarded up stores disappear. There are non-liquor store businesses that are open and thriving! People are walking around outside: Tamale guys, a legion of handcart ice cream men, etc. There really is an entrepreneurial spirit within the culture.

  6. Is that Rafalca?

    I had no idea they did dressage in Mexico!

    • Replies: @Lot
    @Raekwon

    I though of Mitt's dancing horse too. Is it easy to teach them to dance like that?

  7. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:

    “Eventually, however, even Park Slopers might notice that Mexicans are actually more like Extreme Texans in culture.”

    Esp as Anglos adopted and streamlined much of Mexican culture in the development of the ‘cowboy’.

    But it’s all who, whom. White Libs look down on religious whites, but they feel an admiration for black church folks. White religious folks are seen as rigid and reactionary. Black religious folks are seen as soulful and MLK-like.

    Same with Texans. When a white guy wears a cowboy hat, he’s like JR Ewwwwwwing, the cold-hearted son of a bitch. But when a Mexican wears a cowboy hat, he’s being ‘authentic’ and colorful.

    It’s like nationalism bad for whites, but nationalism great for Jews.

    PS. Mexican guy on horse in modern living room, and another Mexican guy shooting with smartphone. Priceless.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Priss Factor


    Same with Texans. When a white guy wears a cowboy hat, he’s like JR Ewwwwwwing, the cold-hearted son of a bitch. But when a Mexican wears a cowboy hat, he’s being ‘authentic’ and colorful.
     
    Notice also the sneering and sniping against Halloween, which is increasingly condemned by libs as a stupid/boring/racist festival, while they simultaneously hype and praise the 'Day of the Dead' celebration.
  8. In the comments to the Daily Beast story, “The Case for More Low-skilled Immigration,” a commenter named secular_atheist typifies these attitudes:

    I am as you say, “caucasian” , a lapsed Jew. I do not need lectures from bigoted, exclusionary idiots like you who think america belongs to “caucasians”.

    Besides, “caucasians” technically refers to people of the Caucasus mountains, ie, Chechens, Dagestanis, ingushetians, etc.

    You must be thinking of the old social Darwinistic term ” caucasoid” to describe people of European ancestry. That theory is dead in the water.There is no scientific basis for “caucasoids”.

    There is actually no such thing as “white race” or “whites”.

    All “whites” are actually Demelanized Africans , ie Africans after migrating out of Africa, 75, 000 years ago, who lost their melanin pigmentation in the middle-east and Europe to become “light-skinned” people to allow more sunlight to allow for the synthesis of Vitamin D or Calciferol.

    Besides, you act like there are “no” white people in the democratic party??? Check out the demographics of the democratic party and you’ll realize that most young people who self-identify as “whites” are democrats.

    The republican party is the party of old, bigoted white men and bigoted, fanatic, christian nuts”

    Another commenter named Crazylady, however, more than holds her own. She provides a fund of excellent links documenting every point she makes. Check her out.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/07/the-case-for-more-low-skill-immigration.html

    • Replies: @gu
    @Luke Lea

    This kind of stuff puts the holocaust in perspective.

  9. There is something to the Mexicans as Texans to the Extreme idea, but I wouldn’t go too far with that in my personal experience. They are absolutely transforming areas that they settle in and raise families in this state. There are parts of my home area that have simply turned into 1980s Matamoros in the last decade or two. Trust me, that’s not Extreme Texas, it’s just Mexico.

  10. Difference is that the Texans are actually competent enough to put up good resistance against the New Englanders. They even manage to elect a president every now and then. Mexicans may be every bit as culturally contemptible, but they’re not going to be poking holes in the Vox “crisis” of the week.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Doug


    Difference is that the Texans are actually competent enough to put up good resistance against the New Englanders. They even manage to elect a president every now and then.
     
    Like LBJ and George W Bush? If that's what Texas has to offer, I'm quite unimpressed.
  11. For Mexicans, climbing the social ladder has always meant looking, acting, and breeding more Euro. So the dems actively broadcasting themselves as the angry black party is going to be an electoral disaster for them if the republicans drop the fringes and become the European American party. Compare what happens when a pretty Mexican girl shows up at dinner with a white BF vs a black one. The dems bet the wrong horse in a major way on this one.

    • Replies: @Lugash
    @HairlessNeanderthal

    If Mexicans start showing even the slightest hint of going Republican we'll see Hollywood and the media shift from portraying whites as oppressors of blacks and start showing more whites as oppressors of brown to bring them back in line.

    Replies: @Gringo

    , @Robbie
    @HairlessNeanderthal

    The problem is, there simply aren't enough white people to go around.

    And also, that white boy at the mexican table is losing ALOT and so are all whites each time a white person appears at the dinner table of a non-white family.

    The democrats strategy is winning.

    , @athEIst
    @HairlessNeanderthal

    JOKE told to me by a Mexican:
    Why are there no rich Mexicans? Because when a Mexican becomes rich, he becomes SPANISH.

    This was pre Carlos Slim.

  12. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor
    "Eventually, however, even Park Slopers might notice that Mexicans are actually more like Extreme Texans in culture."

    Esp as Anglos adopted and streamlined much of Mexican culture in the development of the 'cowboy'.

    But it's all who, whom. White Libs look down on religious whites, but they feel an admiration for black church folks. White religious folks are seen as rigid and reactionary. Black religious folks are seen as soulful and MLK-like.

    Same with Texans. When a white guy wears a cowboy hat, he's like JR Ewwwwwwing, the cold-hearted son of a bitch. But when a Mexican wears a cowboy hat, he's being 'authentic' and colorful.

    It's like nationalism bad for whites, but nationalism great for Jews.

    PS. Mexican guy on horse in modern living room, and another Mexican guy shooting with smartphone. Priceless.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Same with Texans. When a white guy wears a cowboy hat, he’s like JR Ewwwwwwing, the cold-hearted son of a bitch. But when a Mexican wears a cowboy hat, he’s being ‘authentic’ and colorful.

    Notice also the sneering and sniping against Halloween, which is increasingly condemned by libs as a stupid/boring/racist festival, while they simultaneously hype and praise the ‘Day of the Dead’ celebration.

  13. @Raekwon
    Is that Rafalca?

    I had no idea they did dressage in Mexico!

    Replies: @Lot

    I though of Mitt’s dancing horse too. Is it easy to teach them to dance like that?

  14. They also don’t understand Mexicans hate black people. I’ve worked with Mexicans and for the most part got along great with them. That doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to import 20 million of them a year.

  15. A native Texan’s observations:

    All the things Steve’s pointed out over the years about Mexicans using public parks and green spaces are absolutely right-on. One thing I noticed in recent years is that the beautiful green belts in Austin, once populated by trustafarian SWPL hikers and townies drinking beer and smoking weed, are thickly crowded with Mexican families picnicking, building fire pits to roast meat, and insouciantly allowing toddlers and off-leash dogs to run about peeing in the sacred creek. These things are moral sins to honkies but of course criticism cannot be expressed aloud, so the good liberals simply drive further out into the Hill Country to get their Gaia on.

    There is a world of difference between illegal immigrants who haven’t been here long and second-generation Mexican Americans and Tejanos whose families have been here for six or more generations. The first group aren’t political at all and they’re possibly the least p.c. people on earth. They take sex roles Very Seriously. They grow up into men and women around 16. They follow the Mexican custom of nicknaming people according to their physical characteristics. If you’re fat or black, you’re gonna be referred to, to your face, as Gordo or Negro. If you’re even slightly weird or socially awkward you are Maricon. They are Not Supportive of eccentricity. If you demand to be referred to differently they will amiably say “OK, Negro!” At my workplace I deal daily with people from around the world and I believe Mexicans are the politest people around.

    The second and third groups have learned that resentment against white people brings cash and prizes. These are your Dem voters.

    If some Texans seem squishy on immigration, it’s because for as long as there have been Anglo settlers in Texas, there have been Mexican settlers right alongside us. Contrary to liberal myth, Mexicans haven’t been here forever–Texas was Commanche country for a long time and they were terrifying predators on farming people. Larry McMurtry’s books aren’t wild exaggerations. Next to the land where I grew up there was a cemetery containing gravestones of people killed by Indians in the mid-to-late 1800s. Until the Spanish and later the settlers who came with Stephen F. Austin established a military presence this wasn’t a safe place for families. But Texas has never been exclusively Anglo.

    I think the runaway immigration favored by our lords and rulers of the clerisy is a terrible idea, but my daily experience with working class illegal immigrants is not like what I read in the reactosphere. It’s a situation that is probably too complicated to resolve to anyone’s satisfaction. It’s definitely not as simple as just deporting the undocumented, the way park rangers move bears to some adjacent wild place when too many hikers get mauled. And my comments only apply to Mexicans who would like to come here and partake of our good life, including the health care that is free to them but not to me. It’s rational on their part. Probably immigrants from other more alien cultures should receive more scrutiny.

    I realize that the length and porosity of our Southern border permits Islamic terrorists and other non-Mexicans to sneak in but I haven’t heard of a serious proposal to seal it up as Israel has.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Miss Conduct

    Miss Conduct,

    You post over at city-data, don't you?

    Replies: @Miss Conduct

    , @IBC
    @Miss Conduct


    There is a world of difference between illegal immigrants who haven’t been here long and second-generation Mexican Americans and Tejanos whose families have been here for six or more generations.
     
    Yes, and there're probably some real cultural differences between the old Norteño Mexicans and the newer migrants from places like Guerrero and Chiapas, or even Guatemala. As you know, the Texas cowboy culture really does share a lot with that of northern Mexico. And in the old days, even some of the Anglos wore those pointy sombreros that are now considered stereotypical. For example, the hangin' judge, Roy Bean,"the law west of the Pecos."

    http://myrahmcilvain.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/judge-roy-bean.jpg

    These days, he would be the one swinging --for cultural appropriation!

    I'm not sure many of the Park Slopers will recognize anything Texan about Mexican migrants to the northeastern US, because I think that culturally they're still almost completely drowned out by the influence of the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. I've also read that many Mexicans in the northeast are from southern Mexico and perhaps that makes them blend in more with migrants from Guatemala and El Salvador who are also relatively more common there than out West. I heard on the radio, that these days NYC is actually a good place to study endangered indigenous languages and dialects, because of the huge diversity of immigrants from remote corners of the globe. No doubt there are quite a few non-Hispanic indigenous "Latinos" living in the NYC area, but I would guess that they act a lot less like stereotypical Texans than the old Norteños did.

    Replies: @JayMan

    , @Priss Factor
    @Miss Conduct

    "One thing I noticed in recent years is that the beautiful green belts in Austin, once populated by trustafarian SWPL hikers and townies drinking beer and smoking weed, are thickly crowded with Mexican families picnicking, building fire pits to roast meat, and insouciantly allowing toddlers and off-leash dogs to run about peeing in the sacred creek."

    Find some way to move them to the NE. Let Mexers act like that in Harvard. Make Harvard vibrant.
    Notice Libs are all for Mexers drowning Texas but wouldn't want it for Vermont. White Northern Libs are also happy that blacks are moving back down south.

    Best option. Bring more Chechens and let us Chechenize ourselves.
    We'll kick some serious butt then. Chechens take no shit from no one.

    Replies: @athEIst

  16. Incidentally, male Hispanics went Republican in the last TX gubernatorial election.

    I think Texas does a better job of civilizing recent mexican immigrants than many of the other states do, because Texas *was* part of Mexico and has always had a substantial Mexican population. So if you make it out of the Valley and into Houston or San Antonio or whatever, there’s an already-installed base of Spanish-speaking, Mexican-heritage individuals who have middle class habits and family structure for you to assimilate to.

    At least in the Houston area, I find the lower middle class latino neighborhoods to be more pleasant than the lower middle class white ones. The mexicans tend to decorate their front yards with a lot of gardening and lawn art, while the lower-middle whites just have the same green lawn that the house had when it was new in 1955. Likewise, streets in mexican districts are lively places, with ice cream trucks, chicharonne carts, and children’s pickup soccer games with minimal adult supervision. White neighborhoods are ghost towns as everyone’s inside on the computer or being shuttled off to extracurricular activity #3. Kids can’t play outside… there’s predators, don’tcha know. Someone might call CPS.

  17. @HairlessNeanderthal
    For Mexicans, climbing the social ladder has always meant looking, acting, and breeding more Euro. So the dems actively broadcasting themselves as the angry black party is going to be an electoral disaster for them if the republicans drop the fringes and become the European American party. Compare what happens when a pretty Mexican girl shows up at dinner with a white BF vs a black one. The dems bet the wrong horse in a major way on this one.

    Replies: @Lugash, @Robbie, @athEIst

    If Mexicans start showing even the slightest hint of going Republican we’ll see Hollywood and the media shift from portraying whites as oppressors of blacks and start showing more whites as oppressors of brown to bring them back in line.

    • Replies: @Gringo
    @Lugash

    If Mexicans start showing even the slightest hint of going Republican we’ll see Hollywood and the media shift from portraying whites as oppressors of blacks and start showing more whites as oppressors of brown to bring them back in line.

    Greg Abbott got 44% of the Hispanic vote in the TX governor's race. As another commenter pointed out, he also got a majority of the male Hispanic vote. Greg Abbott's inlaws are Hispanic.

    And yes, the trash producing proclivities of Mexicans in TX is duly noted. I have had some issues with them.

  18. What they really don’t get is how much Mexicans love donkey shows.

    • Replies: @E. Rekshun
    @Anonymous

    What they really don’t get is how much Mexicans love donkey shows.

    And don't forget cock fights!

    Replies: @Anonymous

  19. I forgot to add, the popping off of guns into the air for seemingly no reason, the filling of front yards with scores of people dressed to the nines for the purpose of drinking beer on Sunday afternoon, houses where garage sales are held every other weekend, and the loud (LOUD!) blasting of Tejano music are not wild exaggerations either.

    • Replies: @Dahlia
    @Miss Conduct

    Houses holding garage sales every other weekend... You say that like it's a bad thing! Actually, Mexican yard sales are terrible.

    My 15-year-old has discovered them to be a cash cow and heads straight for them, however, preferring them above all other. He has $90 worth of merchandise he just through up on eBay from an investment of $10.
    Not divulging, though, lol!

    , @Stealth
    @Miss Conduct

    You haven't lived until you've fired a gun into the air to ring in the new year. I remember doing that with acquaintances when y2k rolled around. I was too intoxicated to need hearing protection.

  20. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:

    Though Charles Murray is a punk for signing onto ‘gay marriage’, the theme of ‘coming apart’ may be the defining characteristic of our times.
    Indeed, white folks are coming apart in so many ways. There was a time when rich whites, middle class whites, working class whites, and poor whites might have shared something in common in being Christians, believing in family values, remembering ancestors of humbler lineage down on the farm, reading columnists like Breslin and Royko and listening to Sinatra and watching Walter Cronkite.
    Also, though there was always rich and poor, the standard family restaurant was a common thing among most white Americans. If you visited NY, Chicago, or some other big city in the 1970s, there were regular places where people of all stripes went to eat at.
    When GRAPES OF WRATH came out, even rich white folks could, on so many levels, identify with the Joads. Joads were poor simple folks, but their core values weren’t so far from the values of rich Anglos and the like. Today, the holiest moral cause among urban gentry is ‘gay marriage’. A super-Lib like Chris Hughes feels more kinship with billionaire Tim Cook than with a hardworking journalist digging dirt about Apple, the biggest company in the whole wide world. Meanwhile, such folks look down on working class and poor white folks as ‘trash’. They sneer as bakeries are sued and shut down by a government that forces ‘gay marriage’ favored by homo and Jewish billionaires.
    And Jewish and homo elites want to favor and promote the rise of homo elites in all other nations, so that there will be like a globo-homo-fringe-elite-rule all over the world. They want Russia and Japan to be ruled by homo elites who feel closer to the likes of Hughes and Cook than with their own peoples.

    White Americans have come apart economically, culturally, morally, consumer-preference-ly, and etc. Like Murray said, even preference of beer says much about different classes and the like.
    The truly odd thing is that there is one particular ethnic group that plays on and inflames these divisions, though to be sure, even that group, the Jews, is sort of coming apart as Lib Jews and Orthodox Jews(who have more kids) disagree on many things. Also, a crack is forming between total Zionist-supporting Jews and other kinds of Jews who, though supportive of Israel, are embarrassed that the increasing unity between Israel and the reviled GOP(mainly reviled by Jewish media) makes Jews look bad among the Democratic non-white coalition that isn’t too keen on Israel.
    Anyway, though Jews play on white divisions, if white folks of various stripes are united on one thing, it is in their unconditional and mindless devotion to Jews and Israel. White Lib will say to White Con, “I hate you!”, and white Con will say to White Lib, “I hate you too”, and Jews will clap with joy at such hate and manipulate them to fight even more. Sam Fuller made a film called ‘white dog’, but maybe someone should make a movie called ‘white dogfighting’ as an allegory of how Jews encourage whites to hate and fight other whites. But both White Libs and White Cons are crazily devoted to Jews. It’s like the sinister general in Paths of Glory plays on all sides, but each side is fooled into believing that the general is its best friend and ally. We saw this with Russia and Ukraine too. Russians to Jews: “We love you Jews and we are trying to save you from Nazi Ukrainians.” Ukrainians to Jews: “We love you Jews and we are trying to save you from Nazi Russians.” Jews are surely loving this. They act as wedge but pretend to be the bridge among peoples.

    Anyway, the Coming Apart scenario is true enough, and it’s happening on a global scale. Yet, the world is paradoxically ‘coming apart’ because it is ‘coming together’. The thing is the ‘coming together’ is highly selective than undiscriminating. If indeed the world were truly coming together, all groups, both sexes(or fifty sexes according to facebook), all nations, all ethnic groups, all religious groups, and etc. should be merging into one blobby mass of mankind.

    Instead, certain elements of a particular group come apart from rest of their own group and merge with certain elements of other groups(than with the entirety of that group). Consider Turkey. Under Ataturk, there arose a kind of collective modern nationalism based on secular western values. So, despite the ethnic and religious divisions, there was an emphasis on unity among all Turks. But in recent times, as Turkey became more free and democratic, Turkey has been coming apart along religious and secular lines. There are some religious folks in Turkey who now feel nothing in common with secular Turks and feel closer to devout Muslims outside Turkey. And there are secular Turks who are turned off by the rise of new religiosity and feel closer to secular whites in Europe.
    It’s been noted by Murray, an IQ expert, that the rise of meritocracy has led to the coming apart based on skills. As science and technology becomes ever more advanced, it’s not good enough to be smart. You gotta be very smart. And as globalism has made cheap labor available all over the world, the smart and rich can hire people in other nations. Also, as women have equality to pursue academics and careers, many very smart women go to top schools and marry very smart men.
    There is, of course, a coming together of high-IQ people. Smart Jews, smart whites, smart yellows, smart Hindus, smart blacks(or mulattos), and etc are marrying one another. But smart whites are coming apart from other whites. Smart yellows are coming apart from other yellows. Smart Hispanics are coming apart from other Hispanics. For every ‘coming together’, there is a ‘coming apart’. So, if successful black men come together with white women, they come apart from black women. When yellow women come together with white/Jewish men, they come apart from yellow men. When white women with limited brains but great looks go with rich men(of any stripe), they come apart from white men of their class origin. When Mexican chicks go with Anglo men, they come apart from Mexican men. And there are imbalances in these ‘coming together’ scenarios.

    Globally, there is much coming together but this also entails much coming apart. The elites of Britain come together with the elites of Israel, Qatar, Hong Kong, and Nairobi, but they are coming apart from non-elite white Britons. There was a time when even a rich powerful Briton would have felt a common national bond with his fellow countrymen. We don’t see that today. British elites promote ‘diversity’ and excoriate & even punish any lowly Briton who says anything about racial and national survival of Britain. When Lawrence(of Arabia) came together with Arabs, he came apart from Britons, and in the end, he couldn’t handle the contradictions and returned to being a Britain and went back home. Today, the Muslim world is spreading all over UK.
    As for the British underclasses they(like the French underclasses)seem to be coming apart from their own history, heritage, and tradition and ‘coming together’ with Hollywood fantasies and rap music/culture.

    In the 1970s, there were rich parts in any city, but if you walked around, you still felt the city-as-a-whole was a working class, middle class, and family place to be. Today, many urban areas are like glittering bejeweled paradises for lawyers in love. They are glass palaces. Eateries are fancy pantsy.
    The ‘high rise man’ of the 70s and early 80s are nothing compared to high-rise man of today.
    The class/cultural/economic differences back then were downright ‘communist’ compared to the brazen, shameless, narcissistic, and sky-is-the-limit look and feel of today’s rich urban areas. Back then, even if you lived well in a fancy place, you were reminded of REAL PEOPLE and REAL PLACES that were all around you. And even fancy places weren’t all that fancy. It’s like Taki keeps complaining about how yachts used to be made tastefully, but today the bigass palatial yachts of billionaire(such as the Oracle guy) has no limits.
    When Royko wrote a column about the high rise man, readers(even rich folks) could nod their head in agreement about the class pretensions of the hip and well-to-do: http://books.google.com/books?id=WUMjZaxfpwEC&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=mike+royko+bungalow+man+high+rise+man&source=bl&ots=_EZreFR6j9&sig=dNr9adsMWjm2pVA7uoK5RMFcLYU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gT6HVIavFYSrgwSP_YHABA&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=mike%20royko%20bungalow%20man%20high%20rise%20man&f=false

    The High-Rise Man described by Royko would be considered backward and crude by today’s standards of urban liberal gentry privilege. He would be like Gordon Gekko’s bigass portable phone.
    Today, when ‘gay pride parades’ in the richest hearts of the city is the main celebration of the year(bigger than St. Patrick’s Day and Christmas), no one will even get the joke.
    Despite all the conceit of ‘victory of the left’ in the culture war, it’s really victory of elite Jewish-homo privilege that hides behind ‘progressive’ symbol-puppets like Obama whose main priorities have been serving Jews, homos, and Wall Street.

    When I was a kid and walked or biked around rich areas, I thought Wow. But I didn’t see them as being separate from the rest of the city. Just much better off. Today, when I see some areas in NY and Chicago, by golly, I don’t know if I’m in the world of reality. If you live in such a place or esp was raised in such a place, why would you feel any cultural connection with people outside it? You will be filled with class privilege/snobbery. But since US values are still officially ‘egalitarian’, you will pretend that your disdain for other Americans is due to issues of politics, ethics, or agendas.
    YOU voted for Obama. You are friends or friends of a friend of the Rolling Stone writer who exposed ‘rape culture’. You attended a cocktail party about ‘climate change’. But it’s really snobbery draped in trendy causes. It’s like Hughes and Cook are united cuz both are homo and rich, but Hughes tries to turn his class-homo solidarity into an issue of social justice, what with Cook being so ‘heroic’ to come out. (Funny, but it took more courage for him to remain in the closet as the homo community was yelling at him to come out, dammit).
    Even the language is snobby, even downright contemptuous. If you not on the ‘gay marriage’ bandwagon, you are said to be ‘less evolved’. Ooh-ooh ah-ah, does that make me an ape?

    Given the way things are going, the dominant theme among whites must be COMING TOGETHER. This is why Jewish elites are especially after Richard Spencer. Though Spencer is powerless, he has the right idea, and if his idea takes hold, it can spread like wildfire. Spencer is saying whites should all unite in common interest, from US to Europe to Russia. He organized a meeting in Hungary—midpoint between western europe and eastern europe—where all whites would be welcome from US, Europe, Russia, etc. Even Dugin was planned to appear. Jews freaked out and exerted great pressure to have him arrested and humiliated. Jews, who have the power to drive a wedge between Russia and US/EU, treated Spencer like a little toy. But they were afraid of his ideas. And Jews are now going after him in his own homebase in Montana. As Montana is mostly white, if Spencer can win over whites in Montana, there is a possibility that white consciousness may spread to other places. A forest fire, after all, starts in one single area. It later spreads. So, Jews are trying to snuff even his little fire in Montana because they fear his idea of COMING TOGETHER of whites.

    White Right should also be mindful of cumming together as a race is only as good if the men and women of the race cum together and produce babies of the same race. After all, suppose Norway had been having kids with non-Norwegians on a huge scale for 1000 yrs. Norway as we know it today wouldn’t even exist. It would have genetically vanished long ago.
    To promote and encourage the cumming together, maybe we need to create a new kind of spiritual idea. Jews have the thing with the covenant with God where Jewish men gotta have their foreskins cut off.
    Suppose the covenant concept of white folks is that a white man and white woman is only truly blessed by the god of white power/race when they have sex. The covenant is fulfilled with white penis meets white vagina, especially to produce a white child.
    When white men and white women continue to cum apart, their race will unravel and die off.

    Imagine if Norway were drift off to Africa and became physically adjoined to Nigeria with a much bigger population. Suppose Norwegian women run off with Negro men and have mulatto kids. Suppose Norwegian men have fewer white women to have kids with and have kids with black women. What will happen to Norway in the long run? It will disappear as a people, race, and culture. It will disappear in a few generations. Who wants that?

    Of course, with massive migrations from Africa, Europe may indeed disappear. All those ships carrying blacks, esp black men, are like Afro-Shaft Carriers, in some ways more dangerous than Air Craft Carriers. Invasion forces are arriving.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Priss Factor

    This may be the craziest comment I've ever read.

    You clearly aren't old enough, or well educated enough, to remember that the English hate the French who hate the Germans who hate the Poles who hate the Russians who hate the Ukranians who hate the Czechs who hate the Austrians who hate the Swiss who hate the Italians who hate the Spanish ... and everyone hates me, the Ulsterman, whose ancestors left Norway for Scotland and Scotland for N. Ireland and N. Ireland (when we found out they hated the Protestants) for Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love, where we discovered that the Germans hate the Irish who hate the English who hate the ....

    Then we headed west, where we found out that the Norwegians hate the Finns who hate the Swedes who hate the French who hate the Germans who hate the ....

    And I haven't even gotten into the Irish Catholics hating the Irish Quakers, who left Ireland for Pennsylvania, where they discovered that .... (the other side of my family tree).

    There is no such thing as whites all being on the same side. "NO IRISH NEED APPLY" signs say it all.

    Do I even need to start on the weapons-grade stupid racism of the rest of your comment?

  21. Donkey shows are to Mexicans what rodeos are to Texans.

  22. Truly prophetic scene.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Priss Factor


    Truly prophetic scene.
     
    Hey! I just realized! That's the Einstein Brothers! Bob Einstein plays the clerk and Al Einstein plays the customer!
  23. I wonder if these northeastern liberal foodies get that authentic Tex-Mex is where they barbecue the donkey Texas-style after the donkey show.

  24. @Doug
    Difference is that the Texans are actually competent enough to put up good resistance against the New Englanders. They even manage to elect a president every now and then. Mexicans may be every bit as culturally contemptible, but they're not going to be poking holes in the Vox "crisis" of the week.

    Replies: @syonredux

    Difference is that the Texans are actually competent enough to put up good resistance against the New Englanders. They even manage to elect a president every now and then.

    Like LBJ and George W Bush? If that’s what Texas has to offer, I’m quite unimpressed.

  25. I want to go to that party!

  26. Mexicans are imported by Northeast WASPs and Jews to outnumber the Southern WASPs and the Irish/Italian-Catholics who are slowly uniting against the Northeast WASPs + Jews.

    Mexicans also serve the useful purpose of thumping blacks back into place as the Irish/Italian thugs used to before they moved out to the suburbs and became more genteel.

    The problem is that, unlike the Irish and Italians, Mexicans haven’t yet united themselves politically as the Irish/Italian/other did in the late 19th Century. Union activity and soldiers camaraderie in wars of conquest (Mexican war, Civil War, Indian Wars, Spanish-American war) caused a lot of disparate American Irish to suddenly stop seeing themselves as Cork or Donegal boys and start proclaiming “Irishness” and get politically active (had they seen themselves as “Irish” back in Ireland instead of disparate clans, they could have kicked the British out by the 1840s instead of being forced to flee in the Great Hunger). Ditto later Italians. But today, NAFTA—which brings a lot of Mexicans in—is killing unions, and ethnic unions are verboten under “anti-discrimination” laws; plus we’re always “the bad guys” in wars these days and have too many diversity units to allow ethnic uniting in the units.

    This problem hurts Dems, as Steve points out, because the Great Latino Wave in politics we keep getting promised isn’t happening. But Dems are in the pocket of corporate America, too, as well as knee deep in their own-created diversity quagmire, so all they can really hope is that the Mexicans quietly beat the crap out of the Bloods (no videos, please) and get somewhat organized on their own.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @whorefinder


    Union activity and soldiers camaraderie in wars of conquest (Mexican war, Civil War, Indian Wars, Spanish-American war) caused a lot of disparate American Irish to suddenly stop seeing themselves as Cork or Donegal boys and start proclaiming “Irishness” and get politically active
     
    Not quite. The Irish started organizing themselves against the WASPs in the USA back in the 1830s. Indeed, Dickens commented that Irish control was so pervasive in the cities that he was hesitant to call them American.

    (had they seen themselves as “Irish” back in Ireland instead of disparate clans, they could have kicked the British out by the 1840s instead of being forced to flee in the Great Hunger).
     
    Hardly.The English were far too powerful.They had nearly exterminated the Irish in the 1640s* and handily crushed Wolf Tone's revolt in 1798.

    *Ireland
    Charles Carlton, Going to the Wars (1992)
    Petty's 1672 estimate of dead in Ireland, covering 10/1641-10/1653:
    Protestants d. by war, dis., malnu.: 112,000, incl. 37,000 massacred at outbreak. Carlton says that 37,000 is exaggeration by factor of 9 or 10.
    Catholic d.: 504,000
    Total: 618,000 [sic.]
    Fuller, A Military History of the Western World, v.2 (1955): 500,000
    R.F. Foster, Modern Ireland 1600-1972 (1988)
    Irish population decline from 2.0M (ca. 1640) to 1.7M (1672) [i.e.: 300,000]
    1641: 4,000 k. in Ulster
    Pitirim Sorokin:
    The Sociology of Revolution (1967): 100,000 to 200,000 Irish massacred, 1651
    Social and Cultural Dynamics, vol.3: 5,500 battle losses, 1649-52
    Hirst, Authority & Conflict: England, 1603-1658 (1986): Ulster rebellion, 1641: 4,000 Protestants k. immediately + 8,000 refugees died in winter.
    Morgan, Oxford History of Britain: Ulster rebellion, 1641: 3,000 Protestants k.
     
    , @n/a
    @whorefinder


    Mexicans are imported by Northeast WASPs and Jews to outnumber the Southern WASPs and the Irish/Italian-Catholics who are slowly uniting against the Northeast WASPs + Jews.
     
    "Northeast WASPs" like Ted Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson?

    But, seriously, list for us by name 30 or so of the people you would consider most responsible for mass hispanic immigration. No honest list of this kind will be dominated by "Northeast WASPs".

    For the record, the fantasies of E. Michael Jones aside, the actual coalition was Southerners, Irish/Italian Catholics, and Jews against Northeastern "WASPs". New England Catholics remain to the left of New England Protestants down to the present.
  27. One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.

    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos…….

    • Replies: @Miss Conduct
    @syonredux

    "Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos……."

    That's hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime. Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother's monogram? Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.

    Replies: @syonredux, @anonym

    , @anon
    @syonredux


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos…….
     
    That's rich. Hearing that out of a mischling, of all people!

    Replies: @syonredux

    , @Anonymous
    @syonredux

    Texans don't care what you think and don't need you or anybody else to "count" them as Anglos or anything else. They're not insecure about their identities like you are.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @syonredux


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos…….

     

    I have a hard time counting anybody as "Anglos", because it's a Mexican insult for me and my relations and my neighbors. The more honest "gringo" is preferable.
    , @ben tillman
    @syonredux


    One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.
     
    That is worse than your fantastical views on secession. If it were up to Texans, there would be no illegals here. Of course, the central government has made it clear that the States have no say on immigration -- or any other policy for that matter.
  28. I don’t think NE SWPLs really give a rat’s ass about trying to “civilize” Texans. If anything, it’s about trying to render them politically irrelevant by swamping them demographically.

    Underlying this, of course, is the fear that Texas offers a workable rival political-economic model. IMO, this fear is largely irrational because much of what makes Texas work is due to Texas’s specific circumstances and is not easily replicated elsewhere, especially in places like, say, NYC. But, I digress.

    TL;DR: imported Mexicans are a means to an end. As long as they fulfill that end, their behavior is irrelevant to SWPLs.

  29. Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse), which you can’t really say about any Anglo ethny, whether SWPL or Cowboy.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Simon in London


    Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse),
     
    As a disposable commodity.If you break one, no big deal.You can always have another.
    , @Desiderius
    @Simon in London


    Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse), which you can’t really say about any Anglo ethny, whether SWPL or Cowboy.
     
    We like them in the particular, but not the abstract. Many SWPLs are so stuck in the latter, they never make it to the former. Those who do like them a little too much - their own, at least.
  30. I hold generally favourable views on Mexicans, though not on the squat Mexican Indians.

    A completely different species, surely.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Laguna Beach Fogey

    The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species. And far more decent and nobler than the mestizo and European Mexicans.

    Replies: @syonredux

  31. @syonredux
    One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos.......

    Replies: @Miss Conduct, @anon, @Anonymous, @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    “Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos…….”

    That’s hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime. Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother’s monogram? Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Miss Conduct


    That’s hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime.
     
    Oh dear , a "country club" in Texas.One tends to imagine that it will be rather more "country" than club"

    Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother’s monogram?
     
    How materialistic.Dear lady, surely you realize that true culture involves things that are higher than tableware? Evidently Anglo culture in Texas functions on a strictly cargo cult basis

    Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.
     
    I see little difference between the two

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @ben tillman

    , @anonym
    @Miss Conduct

    I've heard Texans like their eccentrics, too. Another Anglo trait.

    Also, possibly, an interest in genealogy and lineages.

  32. Dahlia says:
    @Miss Conduct
    I forgot to add, the popping off of guns into the air for seemingly no reason, the filling of front yards with scores of people dressed to the nines for the purpose of drinking beer on Sunday afternoon, houses where garage sales are held every other weekend, and the loud (LOUD!) blasting of Tejano music are not wild exaggerations either.

    Replies: @Dahlia, @Stealth

    Houses holding garage sales every other weekend… You say that like it’s a bad thing! Actually, Mexican yard sales are terrible.

    My 15-year-old has discovered them to be a cash cow and heads straight for them, however, preferring them above all other. He has $90 worth of merchandise he just through up on eBay from an investment of $10.
    Not divulging, though, lol!

  33. Park Slope already has experience with Mexican groping ‘culture,’ courtesy of nearby Sunset Park.

  34. @Simon in London
    Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse), which you can't really say about any Anglo ethny, whether SWPL or Cowboy.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Desiderius

    Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse),

    As a disposable commodity.If you break one, no big deal.You can always have another.

  35. @TWS
    I used to police an area that was about half illegal aliens from Guatemala and Mexico. At every dance, party, and seasonal celebration shots were fired into the air. Any time they served alcohol a big fraction of the girls were in the 13 to 16 year old range.

    Don't worry they're going to vote Democrat anyway legal or not. And they give the Dems more numbers to fudge with. So win-win for them.

    What I don't understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters.

    Replies: @Maximus, @Realist, @thisisaknife

    “What I don’t understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters.” When do people get it? No opposition exists to progressives, the red blue teams are just different wings on the bird of prey that is going to eat you, freedoms first serf..

  36. @TWS
    I used to police an area that was about half illegal aliens from Guatemala and Mexico. At every dance, party, and seasonal celebration shots were fired into the air. Any time they served alcohol a big fraction of the girls were in the 13 to 16 year old range.

    Don't worry they're going to vote Democrat anyway legal or not. And they give the Dems more numbers to fudge with. So win-win for them.

    What I don't understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters.

    Replies: @Maximus, @Realist, @thisisaknife

    It’s cheap labor. And that’s all that counts. Greed rules.

  37. @What I don’t understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters.

    the gop’s job is to shore up and protect gains made by the dems. they’ve been doing that for over 100 years. it’s a one party state, the state of one party. to the left singularity!

  38. Keith Vaz [AKA "Sir Charles Pipkins"] says:

    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Keith Vaz


    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.
     
    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.

    One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans.

    Borges actually comments on this in a review that he wrote of Faulkner's work. He notes that Faulkner's world will seem warmly familiar to the Latin American reader, as Faulkner's USA (in contrast to, say, Hawthorne's) is "creole" in character.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @History Reader

    , @Cagey Beast
    @Keith Vaz

    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    Oh FFS just call them Jews if you mean Jews; this "Scots Irish" thing is about as stale as Tutankhamun's sandwich. In any case, your claim is just not true. This incredibly annoying preference for "the Other" is widespread in people who like to think of themselves as progressive. There's no question that every Jewish community I know of in Christendom is especially prone to this attitude but it exists independently in others.

    , @Southfarthing
    @Keith Vaz


    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.
     

    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. That's why Atheists and Jews cluster together in politics: they're both mostly found in coastal cities. Or are atheists really a different race from Whites?

    Jews wish to destroy Christians... by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron? Definitely not Whites.

    *(Not counting the Amish-like Orthodox, who aren't highly represented in academia or business.)

    Replies: @ben tillman, @Anonymous, @n/a

  39. In Texas we have an easy way to tell if someone was raised in Mexico or here… just watch them finish a beer.

    If they go over to the waste basket and put the beer can in it, they were raised in Texas.

    If they drop the can straight to the ground and walk off… Mexico.

    Not a joke.

    • Replies: @IBC
    @Johanus de Morgateroyde


    In Texas we have an easy way to tell if someone was raised in Mexico or here… just watch them finish a beer.

    If they go over to the waste basket and put the beer can in it, they were raised in Texas.

    If they drop the can straight to the ground and walk off… Mexico.
     
    What about glass bottles? When I was in Mexico, I saw lots and lots of plastic bottles lying on the ground but not a lot of glass. It seemed like people were pretty good about picking up glass bottles because of the deposit on them. Not just beer but soft drinks too. I think the Coke bottles are not just recycled, but actually refilled and reused like they used to be here in the USA.
    , @IBC
    @Johanus de Morgateroyde

    When I was in Mexico, I was impressed that there were separate public garbage bins for organic waste. I don't know how long they've been doing that or how common such containers really are (I was in Mexico City and the Yucatan and I didn't visit any really poor areas), but I noticed them in several public areas, including in places where there appeared to be few, if any foreign tourists. Maybe Mexicans are slowly turning into neat freaks.

  40. @syonredux
    One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos.......

    Replies: @Miss Conduct, @anon, @Anonymous, @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos…….

    That’s rich. Hearing that out of a mischling, of all people!

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @anon


    That’s rich. Hearing that out of a mischling, of all people!
     
    Dear fellow, there's nothing "mischling" about me. Unlike Texas, I am Anglo to the core.
  41. @syonredux
    One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos.......

    Replies: @Miss Conduct, @anon, @Anonymous, @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    Texans don’t care what you think and don’t need you or anybody else to “count” them as Anglos or anything else. They’re not insecure about their identities like you are.

  42. @syonredux
    One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos.......

    Replies: @Miss Conduct, @anon, @Anonymous, @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos…….

    I have a hard time counting anybody as “Anglos”, because it’s a Mexican insult for me and my relations and my neighbors. The more honest “gringo” is preferable.

  43. @Laguna Beach Fogey
    I hold generally favourable views on Mexicans, though not on the squat Mexican Indians.

    A completely different species, surely.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species. And far more decent and nobler than the mestizo and European Mexicans.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Anonymous


    The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species. And far more decent and nobler than the mestizo and European Mexicans.
     
    Those would be the ones whose immediate ancestors specialized in tobacco enemas and child sacrifice, yes?

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Karl

  44. @Miss Conduct
    A native Texan's observations:

    All the things Steve's pointed out over the years about Mexicans using public parks and green spaces are absolutely right-on. One thing I noticed in recent years is that the beautiful green belts in Austin, once populated by trustafarian SWPL hikers and townies drinking beer and smoking weed, are thickly crowded with Mexican families picnicking, building fire pits to roast meat, and insouciantly allowing toddlers and off-leash dogs to run about peeing in the sacred creek. These things are moral sins to honkies but of course criticism cannot be expressed aloud, so the good liberals simply drive further out into the Hill Country to get their Gaia on.

    There is a world of difference between illegal immigrants who haven't been here long and second-generation Mexican Americans and Tejanos whose families have been here for six or more generations. The first group aren't political at all and they're possibly the least p.c. people on earth. They take sex roles Very Seriously. They grow up into men and women around 16. They follow the Mexican custom of nicknaming people according to their physical characteristics. If you're fat or black, you're gonna be referred to, to your face, as Gordo or Negro. If you're even slightly weird or socially awkward you are Maricon. They are Not Supportive of eccentricity. If you demand to be referred to differently they will amiably say "OK, Negro!" At my workplace I deal daily with people from around the world and I believe Mexicans are the politest people around.

    The second and third groups have learned that resentment against white people brings cash and prizes. These are your Dem voters.

    If some Texans seem squishy on immigration, it's because for as long as there have been Anglo settlers in Texas, there have been Mexican settlers right alongside us. Contrary to liberal myth, Mexicans haven't been here forever--Texas was Commanche country for a long time and they were terrifying predators on farming people. Larry McMurtry's books aren't wild exaggerations. Next to the land where I grew up there was a cemetery containing gravestones of people killed by Indians in the mid-to-late 1800s. Until the Spanish and later the settlers who came with Stephen F. Austin established a military presence this wasn't a safe place for families. But Texas has never been exclusively Anglo.

    I think the runaway immigration favored by our lords and rulers of the clerisy is a terrible idea, but my daily experience with working class illegal immigrants is not like what I read in the reactosphere. It's a situation that is probably too complicated to resolve to anyone's satisfaction. It's definitely not as simple as just deporting the undocumented, the way park rangers move bears to some adjacent wild place when too many hikers get mauled. And my comments only apply to Mexicans who would like to come here and partake of our good life, including the health care that is free to them but not to me. It's rational on their part. Probably immigrants from other more alien cultures should receive more scrutiny.

    I realize that the length and porosity of our Southern border permits Islamic terrorists and other non-Mexicans to sneak in but I haven't heard of a serious proposal to seal it up as Israel has.

    Replies: @anon, @IBC, @Priss Factor

    Miss Conduct,

    You post over at city-data, don’t you?

    • Replies: @Miss Conduct
    @anon

    No, must be someone else.

  45. Dahlia says:

    Uh, oh. The Observer has an article saying that Rolling Stone is assembling a rereport project of the UVa rape story. This is within an article about how the editor, Sean Woods, tendered his resignation, but founder and publisher Jann Wenner wouldn’t accept it.
    This is all according to an anonymous source.
    Says, “UVa does have a problem. That is legit.”
    Blames Erdely for finding a story that was embellished.

    No mention of other wild stories like the altar boy ritual sex abuse whose victim’s story has since unraveled.

  46. I have a hard time counting anybody as “Anglos”, because it’s a Mexican insult for me and my relations and my neighbors. The more honest “gringo” is preferable.

    Would you prefer Anglo-Saxon? Perhaps just Saxon?

    “Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglo-Saxons”

    “Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Saxons”

    A rose by any other name, dear fellow.

    Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.They are just too…..Hispanic in their attitudes and manners

    • Replies: @Miss Conduct
    @syonredux

    "Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.They are just too…..Hispanic in their attitudes and manners"

    This dude (a) has never been to Texas or Mexico; (b) has never met a Texan or a Mexican; (c) is not only unclear on which fork to use but also probably doesn't understand why it matters; and (d) is trolling.

    Due to (a) and (b) he doesn't realize that "Anglo" is what Mexican Americans dismissively call honkies in Texas. It's not exactly the most stinging of insults.

    , @John Grady
    @syonredux

    "Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc."

    Tell that to Cormac McCarthy who spent his productive years in the anglo side of El Paso.

    Replies: @syonredux

  47. @Priss Factor
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntxyw834MA4

    Truly prophetic scene.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Truly prophetic scene.

    Hey! I just realized! That’s the Einstein Brothers! Bob Einstein plays the clerk and Al Einstein plays the customer!

  48. @anon
    @Miss Conduct

    Miss Conduct,

    You post over at city-data, don't you?

    Replies: @Miss Conduct

    No, must be someone else.

  49. @Miss Conduct
    @syonredux

    "Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos……."

    That's hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime. Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother's monogram? Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.

    Replies: @syonredux, @anonym

    That’s hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime.

    Oh dear , a “country club” in Texas.One tends to imagine that it will be rather more “country” than club”

    Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother’s monogram?

    How materialistic.Dear lady, surely you realize that true culture involves things that are higher than tableware? Evidently Anglo culture in Texas functions on a strictly cargo cult basis

    Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.

    I see little difference between the two

    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    @syonredux

    Guys let syon go. You'd have a lot of resentment to work off too if you were a northeastern conservative. Sure it's weird when a midget calls a tall person shorty but it shouldn't bother him.

    , @ben tillman
    @syonredux


    Oh dear , a “country club” in Texas.One tends to imagine that it will be rather more “country” than club”
     
    You have quite an imagination. Perhaps Rolling Stone is hiring.
  50. @syonredux

    I have a hard time counting anybody as “Anglos”, because it’s a Mexican insult for me and my relations and my neighbors. The more honest “gringo” is preferable.
     
    Would you prefer Anglo-Saxon? Perhaps just Saxon?

    "Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglo-Saxons"

    "Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Saxons"

    A rose by any other name, dear fellow.

    Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.They are just too.....Hispanic in their attitudes and manners

    Replies: @Miss Conduct, @John Grady

    “Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.They are just too…..Hispanic in their attitudes and manners”

    This dude (a) has never been to Texas or Mexico; (b) has never met a Texan or a Mexican; (c) is not only unclear on which fork to use but also probably doesn’t understand why it matters; and (d) is trolling.

    Due to (a) and (b) he doesn’t realize that “Anglo” is what Mexican Americans dismissively call honkies in Texas. It’s not exactly the most stinging of insults.

  51. @anon
    @syonredux


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos…….
     
    That's rich. Hearing that out of a mischling, of all people!

    Replies: @syonredux

    That’s rich. Hearing that out of a mischling, of all people!

    Dear fellow, there’s nothing “mischling” about me. Unlike Texas, I am Anglo to the core.

  52. @Anonymous
    @Laguna Beach Fogey

    The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species. And far more decent and nobler than the mestizo and European Mexicans.

    Replies: @syonredux

    The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species. And far more decent and nobler than the mestizo and European Mexicans.

    Those would be the ones whose immediate ancestors specialized in tobacco enemas and child sacrifice, yes?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @syonredux

    Yes, that's how decadent and degenerate the mestizo and European Mexicans and Latin Americans more generally are.

    , @Karl
    @syonredux

    >> Those would be the ones whose immediate ancestors specialized in tobacco enemas and child sacrifice, yes?


    True. But also please don't forget that also, they are the ones whose civilization collapsed in no time flat in the face of...... what? 3 boatloads of Spanish Marines?

  53. @Miss Conduct
    A native Texan's observations:

    All the things Steve's pointed out over the years about Mexicans using public parks and green spaces are absolutely right-on. One thing I noticed in recent years is that the beautiful green belts in Austin, once populated by trustafarian SWPL hikers and townies drinking beer and smoking weed, are thickly crowded with Mexican families picnicking, building fire pits to roast meat, and insouciantly allowing toddlers and off-leash dogs to run about peeing in the sacred creek. These things are moral sins to honkies but of course criticism cannot be expressed aloud, so the good liberals simply drive further out into the Hill Country to get their Gaia on.

    There is a world of difference between illegal immigrants who haven't been here long and second-generation Mexican Americans and Tejanos whose families have been here for six or more generations. The first group aren't political at all and they're possibly the least p.c. people on earth. They take sex roles Very Seriously. They grow up into men and women around 16. They follow the Mexican custom of nicknaming people according to their physical characteristics. If you're fat or black, you're gonna be referred to, to your face, as Gordo or Negro. If you're even slightly weird or socially awkward you are Maricon. They are Not Supportive of eccentricity. If you demand to be referred to differently they will amiably say "OK, Negro!" At my workplace I deal daily with people from around the world and I believe Mexicans are the politest people around.

    The second and third groups have learned that resentment against white people brings cash and prizes. These are your Dem voters.

    If some Texans seem squishy on immigration, it's because for as long as there have been Anglo settlers in Texas, there have been Mexican settlers right alongside us. Contrary to liberal myth, Mexicans haven't been here forever--Texas was Commanche country for a long time and they were terrifying predators on farming people. Larry McMurtry's books aren't wild exaggerations. Next to the land where I grew up there was a cemetery containing gravestones of people killed by Indians in the mid-to-late 1800s. Until the Spanish and later the settlers who came with Stephen F. Austin established a military presence this wasn't a safe place for families. But Texas has never been exclusively Anglo.

    I think the runaway immigration favored by our lords and rulers of the clerisy is a terrible idea, but my daily experience with working class illegal immigrants is not like what I read in the reactosphere. It's a situation that is probably too complicated to resolve to anyone's satisfaction. It's definitely not as simple as just deporting the undocumented, the way park rangers move bears to some adjacent wild place when too many hikers get mauled. And my comments only apply to Mexicans who would like to come here and partake of our good life, including the health care that is free to them but not to me. It's rational on their part. Probably immigrants from other more alien cultures should receive more scrutiny.

    I realize that the length and porosity of our Southern border permits Islamic terrorists and other non-Mexicans to sneak in but I haven't heard of a serious proposal to seal it up as Israel has.

    Replies: @anon, @IBC, @Priss Factor

    There is a world of difference between illegal immigrants who haven’t been here long and second-generation Mexican Americans and Tejanos whose families have been here for six or more generations.

    Yes, and there’re probably some real cultural differences between the old Norteño Mexicans and the newer migrants from places like Guerrero and Chiapas, or even Guatemala. As you know, the Texas cowboy culture really does share a lot with that of northern Mexico. And in the old days, even some of the Anglos wore those pointy sombreros that are now considered stereotypical. For example, the hangin’ judge, Roy Bean,”the law west of the Pecos.”

    These days, he would be the one swinging –for cultural appropriation!

    I’m not sure many of the Park Slopers will recognize anything Texan about Mexican migrants to the northeastern US, because I think that culturally they’re still almost completely drowned out by the influence of the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. I’ve also read that many Mexicans in the northeast are from southern Mexico and perhaps that makes them blend in more with migrants from Guatemala and El Salvador who are also relatively more common there than out West. I heard on the radio, that these days NYC is actually a good place to study endangered indigenous languages and dialects, because of the huge diversity of immigrants from remote corners of the globe. No doubt there are quite a few non-Hispanic indigenous “Latinos” living in the NYC area, but I would guess that they act a lot less like stereotypical Texans than the old Norteños did.

    • Replies: @JayMan
    @IBC


    Yes, and there’re probably some real cultural differences between the old Norteño Mexicans and the newer migrants from places like Guerrero and Chiapas, or even Guatemala.
     
    Yup.
  54. I’ve noticed Obama and his Civil Rights warriors have been trying to lasso the ‘browns’ into their corral when they speak of ‘blacks and browns’ being the victims of police ‘violence’. This seems to show the extreme influence of gangs and prison culture in the black population or at least it is their only point of contact with Spanish speakers. That is perhaps understandable because they won’t have much contact with normal Latinos, hispanics or ‘browns’ who are up early to go to their jobs at construction sites, do the agricultural, landscape and other hard work ‘blacks won’t do’ so they seem to think that the ‘browns’ are just like them except higher up on the narcotics food chain. Dealing wholesale instead of retail. That MS13 is as respected in the ‘brown’ community as the Bloods and Crips are in the black.

    That said there is another side of Latinos that is very different. Call it the Roberto D’Aubisson type. Virulently right wing. Some are small businessmen or professionals others just working guys who get robbed by black thugs and don’t like brown ones either. Even calling them ‘browns’ is an insult. They aren’t sawed off mestizos whose physique was shaped by generations of stoop labor. In fact, the Spanish speaking or descended community in America is so diverse its impossible to characterize them as a political or ethnic community. Puerto Ricans come in all colors and Latin Americans in Miami no more resemble illegal alien mestizos in LA than do the residents of Malibu.

  55. Priss Factor [AKA "dna turtles"] says:
    @Miss Conduct
    A native Texan's observations:

    All the things Steve's pointed out over the years about Mexicans using public parks and green spaces are absolutely right-on. One thing I noticed in recent years is that the beautiful green belts in Austin, once populated by trustafarian SWPL hikers and townies drinking beer and smoking weed, are thickly crowded with Mexican families picnicking, building fire pits to roast meat, and insouciantly allowing toddlers and off-leash dogs to run about peeing in the sacred creek. These things are moral sins to honkies but of course criticism cannot be expressed aloud, so the good liberals simply drive further out into the Hill Country to get their Gaia on.

    There is a world of difference between illegal immigrants who haven't been here long and second-generation Mexican Americans and Tejanos whose families have been here for six or more generations. The first group aren't political at all and they're possibly the least p.c. people on earth. They take sex roles Very Seriously. They grow up into men and women around 16. They follow the Mexican custom of nicknaming people according to their physical characteristics. If you're fat or black, you're gonna be referred to, to your face, as Gordo or Negro. If you're even slightly weird or socially awkward you are Maricon. They are Not Supportive of eccentricity. If you demand to be referred to differently they will amiably say "OK, Negro!" At my workplace I deal daily with people from around the world and I believe Mexicans are the politest people around.

    The second and third groups have learned that resentment against white people brings cash and prizes. These are your Dem voters.

    If some Texans seem squishy on immigration, it's because for as long as there have been Anglo settlers in Texas, there have been Mexican settlers right alongside us. Contrary to liberal myth, Mexicans haven't been here forever--Texas was Commanche country for a long time and they were terrifying predators on farming people. Larry McMurtry's books aren't wild exaggerations. Next to the land where I grew up there was a cemetery containing gravestones of people killed by Indians in the mid-to-late 1800s. Until the Spanish and later the settlers who came with Stephen F. Austin established a military presence this wasn't a safe place for families. But Texas has never been exclusively Anglo.

    I think the runaway immigration favored by our lords and rulers of the clerisy is a terrible idea, but my daily experience with working class illegal immigrants is not like what I read in the reactosphere. It's a situation that is probably too complicated to resolve to anyone's satisfaction. It's definitely not as simple as just deporting the undocumented, the way park rangers move bears to some adjacent wild place when too many hikers get mauled. And my comments only apply to Mexicans who would like to come here and partake of our good life, including the health care that is free to them but not to me. It's rational on their part. Probably immigrants from other more alien cultures should receive more scrutiny.

    I realize that the length and porosity of our Southern border permits Islamic terrorists and other non-Mexicans to sneak in but I haven't heard of a serious proposal to seal it up as Israel has.

    Replies: @anon, @IBC, @Priss Factor

    “One thing I noticed in recent years is that the beautiful green belts in Austin, once populated by trustafarian SWPL hikers and townies drinking beer and smoking weed, are thickly crowded with Mexican families picnicking, building fire pits to roast meat, and insouciantly allowing toddlers and off-leash dogs to run about peeing in the sacred creek.”

    Find some way to move them to the NE. Let Mexers act like that in Harvard. Make Harvard vibrant.
    Notice Libs are all for Mexers drowning Texas but wouldn’t want it for Vermont. White Northern Libs are also happy that blacks are moving back down south.

    Best option. Bring more Chechens and let us Chechenize ourselves.
    We’ll kick some serious butt then. Chechens take no shit from no one.

    • Replies: @athEIst
    @Priss Factor

    Except the many Putin killed.

    Replies: @Priss Factor

  56. Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse), which you can’t really say about any Anglo ethny, whether SWPL or Cowboy.

    Mormons?

  57. @syonredux
    @Miss Conduct


    That’s hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime.
     
    Oh dear , a "country club" in Texas.One tends to imagine that it will be rather more "country" than club"

    Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother’s monogram?
     
    How materialistic.Dear lady, surely you realize that true culture involves things that are higher than tableware? Evidently Anglo culture in Texas functions on a strictly cargo cult basis

    Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.
     
    I see little difference between the two

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @ben tillman

    Guys let syon go. You’d have a lot of resentment to work off too if you were a northeastern conservative. Sure it’s weird when a midget calls a tall person shorty but it shouldn’t bother him.

  58. “I hold generally favourable views on Mexicans, though not on the squat Mexican Indians.

    A completely different species, surely.”

    The vast majority of Mexicans have Indian blood pumping through their hearts, so how are Mexican Indians a different species from most Mexicans ?

    More like White Mexicans are a completely different species from most Mexicans because the percentage of Mexicans who would test 100 percent Caucasian if they took a DNA test is a very small minority.

  59. @Johanus de Morgateroyde
    In Texas we have an easy way to tell if someone was raised in Mexico or here... just watch them finish a beer.

    If they go over to the waste basket and put the beer can in it, they were raised in Texas.

    If they drop the can straight to the ground and walk off... Mexico.

    Not a joke.

    Replies: @IBC, @IBC

    In Texas we have an easy way to tell if someone was raised in Mexico or here… just watch them finish a beer.

    If they go over to the waste basket and put the beer can in it, they were raised in Texas.

    If they drop the can straight to the ground and walk off… Mexico.

    What about glass bottles? When I was in Mexico, I saw lots and lots of plastic bottles lying on the ground but not a lot of glass. It seemed like people were pretty good about picking up glass bottles because of the deposit on them. Not just beer but soft drinks too. I think the Coke bottles are not just recycled, but actually refilled and reused like they used to be here in the USA.

  60. Texans aren’t really Anglos — they’re a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called “Yankee,” and it means essentially the same thing.

    Arguably, a higher proportion of Americans with Jewish ancestry than white gentiles are Anglo. Does it sound right, for example, to call some good old boy from Kentucky an “Anglo?” Or a guy named Olafson from North Dakota?

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:

    He attended the Buckley School, Philips Exeter Academy and graduated from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude in economics and political science and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He was captain of the Yale soccer team. Steyer received his MBA from Stanford Business School, where he was an Arjay Miller Scholar.

    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain “American” are merely proles, so why apply it to us?

    If it’s purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans “Anglo?” If it’s racial, why not say “whites?” If religious, why not “white Protestants?” If it really means “non-Jewish American whites,” it’s a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a “Yankee.” And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as “Anglo,” nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as “American,” and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us “Anglo,” he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it’s hardly a point of pride.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
    @Bill P

    "As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me"

    I use Anglo non-pejoratively, along with Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Celtic, Anglo-Norman, occasionally Anglo-Germanic. It's usually a shorthand for persons of British descent. I guess being British I am a foreigner, but we don't use terms like Anglosphere pejoratively (unless we're cultural Marxists I guess). We're interested in the 'English-Speaking Peoples', our relatives, and Anglo- seems like an ok way to describe them. I guess a different term could be used but I can't think of an equally handy alternative.

    Replies: @Southfarthing, @n/a

    , @syonredux
    @Bill P

    RE: Terms for us,

    American: Too inclusive.Our Hispanic enemies can claim that after the stroke of a pen.

    White: Meaningless.The Whites in Mexico (cf Vicente Fox and the Mexican elite) are our enemies.The Whites in Russia don't care what happens to us.

    Anglo: Defines us in terms of culture and place.So what if the Mexicans use it as a pejorative. Most terms of group pride begin in acts of re-appropriation (cf Black)

    , @FUBAR007
    @Bill P

    "Anglo", properly employed, denotes someone of predominantly English ancestry. That's it. All else is a misappropriation of the term.

    There's no such thing as an ethnic "American". It's too broad a term. Even when referring to Old Stock people whose ancestors have been here since before the Revolution as that includes English, Scottish, Germans, Dutch, etc. "White American" is similarly over-broad--it covers everyone from Southern Anglos to Ashkenazi Jews to midwestern Germans to northeastern Irish Catholics. Trying to use either term in an ethnic sense implies a level of cultural homogeneity that's never really existed.

    Replies: @n/a

    , @SFG
    @Bill P

    I always assumed 'Anglo' meant English in descent. Nothing wrong with it--hardcore lefties don't like it because it implies conservatism, but nothing shameful about English ancestry in my view--the Brits have accomplished quite a bit over the years.

    I have to say nobody outside of the alt-right and Jews themselves is quite as obsessed with separating out Jews as a separate category. Your average American Ashkenazi is apparently about half Italian due to the genetic studies, and a lot of them have interbred with the locals here in the USA. It is true that the lines between old-money WASPs and old-money Ashekenazim don't seem all that clear in the Northeast anymore.

    Replies: @silviosilver

    , @Uptown Resident
    @Bill P

    I think "Anglo" just refers to a native English speaker. Anglophone.

    , @n/a
    @Bill P

    Your comment is extremely confused.


    Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called “Yankee,” and it means essentially the same thing.
     
    This is incorrect. "Anglo" as a noun is ungrammatical mestizo slang for "English-speaking white person". You're confusing this with "WASP", which is often falsely claimed to denote only elite, Northeastern Protestants (but even then, never limited to "Yankees").

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:

    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.
     
    How would a half-Jew be a good example of a "Yankee" -- even if his mother were a "Yankee"?

    In fact, Steyer's mother, Margaret Fahr (notice the not-quite-New England Puritan surname) was born in Minnesota. Her parents were born in Pennsylvania. Of her great-grandparents, two were born in Germany, one was born in Scotland, one was born in New York, two were born in Pennsylvania (with substantial Scottish ancestry and minimal if any New England ancestry), one was born in New Brunswick with a Scottish name and a father from northern Ireland, and one was born in Maine, but with one parent again having been born in New Brunswick, of partially Scotch-Irish origin.

    In other words, she shares much more of her ancestry with groups you identify with than with New England Puritans. Yet, bizarrely, you somehow come up with her being a New England Yankee. You are far from alone, of course. It's pretty much universal that other-identified types who spout off about Yankees/Puritans in internet comment sections have no idea what an actual Yankee or Puritan-descended person looks like. The vast majority of those casually assumed by these types to be Yankees/Puritans are not.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain “American” are merely proles, so why apply it to us? [. . .]

    Instead, I view myself and my people as “American,” and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood.
     
    It's "WASP" that is a pejorative for (unhyphenated) "American", and confusion of the sort you're talking about was exactly the point behind the popularization of this term -- the idea that "elite WASPs" represent a separate ethnic group from members of the American majority, which must be dispossessed in the name of fairness -- when in fact there was never an "elite WASP" ethnic group, as distinct from simply elite segments of the Northwestern European-derived American ethnic core, subject to continual turnover in the form of social mobility.

    200 years ago, if someone called one of us “Anglo,” he would have been punched in the face.
     
    The largest component in the ancestry of colonial Americans was English. America did in fact have an Anglo-Saxon identity. This is not controversial. If your origins are anything like you claim, you probably have more English ancestry than you believe.

    Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it’s hardly a point of pride.
     
    No, we don't.

    Replies: @silviosilver

  61. @Keith Vaz
    'New York SWPL liberals... Hated enemy.' Hardly. What you're describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Cagey Beast, @Southfarthing

    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.

    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.

    One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans.

    Borges actually comments on this in a review that he wrote of Faulkner’s work. He notes that Faulkner’s world will seem warmly familiar to the Latin American reader, as Faulkner’s USA (in contrast to, say, Hawthorne’s) is “creole” in character.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @syonredux


    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.
     
    But that's not got nothing to do with this issue. Those Yankees never sought to flood the country with non-Whites. Instead, they went to war against the people harboring non-Whites.
    , @History Reader
    @syonredux

    Syon:


    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.
     
    Uh... what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time. Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it's history.

    Google "Mordecai Cohen," the richest man in the state at that time, and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader. According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade, that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.

    Now, I want you to go out and clean these erasers for trying to teach without doing your homework. There's a lad!

    Replies: @syonredux, @Art Deco

  62. “For Mexicans, climbing the social ladder has always meant looking, acting, and breeding more Euro.”

    In America the very top of the social ladder is becoming POTUS. Julian Castro will likely become the first Mexican president of The United States. He doesn’t look very Euro and neither does his wife and daughter.

    And he doesn’t act very Euro either as Julian Castro supports immigration laws that speeds up the process of making European Americans a racial Minority in the U.S.

  63. @Johanus de Morgateroyde
    In Texas we have an easy way to tell if someone was raised in Mexico or here... just watch them finish a beer.

    If they go over to the waste basket and put the beer can in it, they were raised in Texas.

    If they drop the can straight to the ground and walk off... Mexico.

    Not a joke.

    Replies: @IBC, @IBC

    When I was in Mexico, I was impressed that there were separate public garbage bins for organic waste. I don’t know how long they’ve been doing that or how common such containers really are (I was in Mexico City and the Yucatan and I didn’t visit any really poor areas), but I noticed them in several public areas, including in places where there appeared to be few, if any foreign tourists. Maybe Mexicans are slowly turning into neat freaks.

  64. @whorefinder
    Mexicans are imported by Northeast WASPs and Jews to outnumber the Southern WASPs and the Irish/Italian-Catholics who are slowly uniting against the Northeast WASPs + Jews.

    Mexicans also serve the useful purpose of thumping blacks back into place as the Irish/Italian thugs used to before they moved out to the suburbs and became more genteel.

    The problem is that, unlike the Irish and Italians, Mexicans haven't yet united themselves politically as the Irish/Italian/other did in the late 19th Century. Union activity and soldiers camaraderie in wars of conquest (Mexican war, Civil War, Indian Wars, Spanish-American war) caused a lot of disparate American Irish to suddenly stop seeing themselves as Cork or Donegal boys and start proclaiming "Irishness" and get politically active (had they seen themselves as "Irish" back in Ireland instead of disparate clans, they could have kicked the British out by the 1840s instead of being forced to flee in the Great Hunger). Ditto later Italians. But today, NAFTA---which brings a lot of Mexicans in---is killing unions, and ethnic unions are verboten under "anti-discrimination" laws; plus we're always "the bad guys" in wars these days and have too many diversity units to allow ethnic uniting in the units.

    This problem hurts Dems, as Steve points out, because the Great Latino Wave in politics we keep getting promised isn't happening. But Dems are in the pocket of corporate America, too, as well as knee deep in their own-created diversity quagmire, so all they can really hope is that the Mexicans quietly beat the crap out of the Bloods (no videos, please) and get somewhat organized on their own.

    Replies: @syonredux, @n/a

    Union activity and soldiers camaraderie in wars of conquest (Mexican war, Civil War, Indian Wars, Spanish-American war) caused a lot of disparate American Irish to suddenly stop seeing themselves as Cork or Donegal boys and start proclaiming “Irishness” and get politically active

    Not quite. The Irish started organizing themselves against the WASPs in the USA back in the 1830s. Indeed, Dickens commented that Irish control was so pervasive in the cities that he was hesitant to call them American.

    (had they seen themselves as “Irish” back in Ireland instead of disparate clans, they could have kicked the British out by the 1840s instead of being forced to flee in the Great Hunger).

    Hardly.The English were far too powerful.They had nearly exterminated the Irish in the 1640s* and handily crushed Wolf Tone’s revolt in 1798.

    *Ireland
    Charles Carlton, Going to the Wars (1992)
    Petty’s 1672 estimate of dead in Ireland, covering 10/1641-10/1653:
    Protestants d. by war, dis., malnu.: 112,000, incl. 37,000 massacred at outbreak. Carlton says that 37,000 is exaggeration by factor of 9 or 10.
    Catholic d.: 504,000
    Total: 618,000 [sic.]
    Fuller, A Military History of the Western World, v.2 (1955): 500,000
    R.F. Foster, Modern Ireland 1600-1972 (1988)
    Irish population decline from 2.0M (ca. 1640) to 1.7M (1672) [i.e.: 300,000]
    1641: 4,000 k. in Ulster
    Pitirim Sorokin:
    The Sociology of Revolution (1967): 100,000 to 200,000 Irish massacred, 1651
    Social and Cultural Dynamics, vol.3: 5,500 battle losses, 1649-52
    Hirst, Authority & Conflict: England, 1603-1658 (1986): Ulster rebellion, 1641: 4,000 Protestants k. immediately + 8,000 refugees died in winter.
    Morgan, Oxford History of Britain: Ulster rebellion, 1641: 3,000 Protestants k.

  65. Notice Libs are all for Mexers drowning Texas but wouldn’t want it for Vermont. White Northern Libs are also happy that blacks are moving back down south.

    Don’t fool yourself. I live in Vermont. They’re old and tired, and almost none of them are having kids. They bemoan the lack of diversity and support the importation of Somalis into Burlington. The only thing saving white Vermonters from extinction is the steady trickle of people fleeing Mass./CT/NJ/NY, and these people are coming up with with their .5 kids and their same political attitudes.

    My daughter comes home from school using words like cis-gendered, and my youngest son was suspended from the bus for a week in first grade because his friend told a girl he could see her underwear and my son “laughed nervously.”

    We’re doomed up here.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    @sansfoy

    "We’re doomed up here."

    Chechens are so cool and tough compared to wussies that white Americans have become.

    Silver lining about white libs not having kids. White cons should have lots of kids and become the dominant voice of white folks.

    After all, white folks still rule much of Latin America... even though they are minorities.

  66. On “Sons Of Anarchy” the SAMCRO club does not allow Blacks to join their motorcycle club yet they let in Juice who is a Puerto Rican who looks like he is at least Quadroon phenotype wise. Talk about hypocrisy.

    Unless they don’t use the one drop rule and when the say no Blacks allowed, they only mean those who look like they are predominantly of Sub Saharan African descent and not those who look like they have a little bit of Black in them.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @Jefferson

    Makes sense to me. Read about Castas paintings in colonial Spain--they would subdivide in quite a detailed fashion by percentage of indigenous, Spanish, and African ancestry.

    , @HairlessNeanderthal
    @Jefferson

    You mean the same Juice that kills a prospect who discovers that his father is black?

  67. @Bill P
    Texans aren't really Anglos -- they're a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called "Yankee," and it means essentially the same thing.

    Arguably, a higher proportion of Americans with Jewish ancestry than white gentiles are Anglo. Does it sound right, for example, to call some good old boy from Kentucky an "Anglo?" Or a guy named Olafson from North Dakota?

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:


    He attended the Buckley School, Philips Exeter Academy and graduated from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude in economics and political science and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He was captain of the Yale soccer team. Steyer received his MBA from Stanford Business School, where he was an Arjay Miller Scholar.
     
    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain "American" are merely proles, so why apply it to us?

    If it's purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans "Anglo?" If it's racial, why not say "whites?" If religious, why not "white Protestants?" If it really means "non-Jewish American whites," it's a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx - people who were subsequently lumped into the category of "Scots Irish" - and, yes, some English (not "Anglo") with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a "Yankee." And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as "Anglo," nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as "American," and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us "Anglo," he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it's hardly a point of pride.

    Replies: @Simon in London, @syonredux, @FUBAR007, @SFG, @Uptown Resident, @n/a

    “As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me”

    I use Anglo non-pejoratively, along with Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Celtic, Anglo-Norman, occasionally Anglo-Germanic. It’s usually a shorthand for persons of British descent. I guess being British I am a foreigner, but we don’t use terms like Anglosphere pejoratively (unless we’re cultural Marxists I guess). We’re interested in the ‘English-Speaking Peoples’, our relatives, and Anglo- seems like an ok way to describe them. I guess a different term could be used but I can’t think of an equally handy alternative.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @Simon in London

    Right. Even Americans who don't have English ancestry are within the Anglosphere tradition. They adopted an English-founded country as their homeland.

    , @n/a
    @Simon in London

    Anglosphere, Anglophone, and Anglo-Saxon are fine. It's "Anglo" as a noun which is grating.

    Replies: @FUBAR007, @Simon in London

  68. @Bill P
    Texans aren't really Anglos -- they're a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called "Yankee," and it means essentially the same thing.

    Arguably, a higher proportion of Americans with Jewish ancestry than white gentiles are Anglo. Does it sound right, for example, to call some good old boy from Kentucky an "Anglo?" Or a guy named Olafson from North Dakota?

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:


    He attended the Buckley School, Philips Exeter Academy and graduated from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude in economics and political science and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He was captain of the Yale soccer team. Steyer received his MBA from Stanford Business School, where he was an Arjay Miller Scholar.
     
    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain "American" are merely proles, so why apply it to us?

    If it's purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans "Anglo?" If it's racial, why not say "whites?" If religious, why not "white Protestants?" If it really means "non-Jewish American whites," it's a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx - people who were subsequently lumped into the category of "Scots Irish" - and, yes, some English (not "Anglo") with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a "Yankee." And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as "Anglo," nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as "American," and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us "Anglo," he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it's hardly a point of pride.

    Replies: @Simon in London, @syonredux, @FUBAR007, @SFG, @Uptown Resident, @n/a

    RE: Terms for us,

    American: Too inclusive.Our Hispanic enemies can claim that after the stroke of a pen.

    White: Meaningless.The Whites in Mexico (cf Vicente Fox and the Mexican elite) are our enemies.The Whites in Russia don’t care what happens to us.

    Anglo: Defines us in terms of culture and place.So what if the Mexicans use it as a pejorative. Most terms of group pride begin in acts of re-appropriation (cf Black)

  69. You won’t be acting like that once you are inundated in a sea of The Other!

    Heh. Sailer hears what I hear. Another pitch perfect line.

    Social Justice Church Ladies

  70. Marty [AKA "tiny blades"] says:

    McDonald’s in Santa Rosa. I’m looking at a young Mexican family, baby girl, mother-in-law, respectable looking 24-year old husband (no tattoos or criminal paraphernalia), drop-dead gorgeous young mom. Mom is sullen, pouting, uncommunicative with husband. Glad to see Mexican men have the same problems that bedevil white husbands.

  71. @Keith Vaz
    'New York SWPL liberals... Hated enemy.' Hardly. What you're describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Cagey Beast, @Southfarthing

    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    Oh FFS just call them Jews if you mean Jews; this “Scots Irish” thing is about as stale as Tutankhamun’s sandwich. In any case, your claim is just not true. This incredibly annoying preference for “the Other” is widespread in people who like to think of themselves as progressive. There’s no question that every Jewish community I know of in Christendom is especially prone to this attitude but it exists independently in others.

  72. @Simon in London
    Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse), which you can't really say about any Anglo ethny, whether SWPL or Cowboy.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Desiderius

    Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse), which you can’t really say about any Anglo ethny, whether SWPL or Cowboy.

    We like them in the particular, but not the abstract. Many SWPLs are so stuck in the latter, they never make it to the former. Those who do like them a little too much – their own, at least.

  73. Texans aren’t really Anglos — they’re a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called “Yankee,” and it means essentially the same thing.

    Anglo refers to someone who is ethnically english. Australians, kiwis, canadians and many white americans are ANGLOS.

    “Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain “American” are merely proles, so why apply it to us?”

    The founding fathers described themselves as proud Anglo Saxons. Anglo is an ethnic term, are german, italian, Frenchman, spainard all pejorative terms?

    “If it’s purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans “Anglo?” If it’s racial, why not say “whites?” If religious, why not “white Protestants?” If it really means “non-Jewish American whites,” it’s a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.”

    It’s an ethnic term. The fact that the native anglo language has been adopted by the entire world doesn’t change that.

    “As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a “Yankee.” And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as “Anglo,” nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.”

    You are not an anglo. You are not ethnically anglo Saxon. Nobody would refer to you as an anglo because you aren’t one.

    “Instead, I view myself and my people as “American,” and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us “Anglo,” he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it’s hardly a point of pride.”

    canadians, kiwis, australians etc are refer to themselves as by nationality but they are still ethnically anglo Saxon. Americans two hundred years ago were extremely proud of their Anglo Saxon blood/race/heritage. To refer to someone as not being anglo would have made you the recipient of a punch to the face.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Anglo tango


    Anglo refers to someone who is ethnically english [sic-- but not orthographically English?]. Australians, kiwis, canadians and many white americans are ANGLOS.

     

    No, we are not. The English-language term is "Anglo-Saxon". In our language, "Anglo-" is a prefix, not a complete word.

    canadians, kiwis, australians [sic] etc are refer to themselves as by nationality but they are still ethnically anglo Saxon. Americans two hundred years ago were extremely proud of their Anglo Saxon blood/race/heritage.
     
    You make my point yourself.

    To refer to someone as not being anglo [sic] would have made you the recipient of a punch to the face.
     
    You mean the recipient of a challenge to a duel. But never mind 1814. Show me any example of an American calling himself "Anglo" before 1965. Or even 1985.

    (By the way, in English we capitalize proper adjectives. Leave that lower-casing stuff to ¡los mexicanos!)

  74. “White: Meaningless.The Whites in Mexico (cf Vicente Fox and the Mexican elite) are our enemies.The Whites in Russia don’t care what happens to us.”

    The Russians were calling us White Americans racists for what happened to Michael Brown. So much for the stereotype that Russians are similar to Southern Rednecks in how they view Blacks. Russians on average are culturally closer to SWPL types than they are to Southern Rednecks.

    • Replies: @dcite
    @Jefferson

    What "Russians" (who speaks for them?) call Americans (or vice versa) in the mass media is political noise, the usual SWPL PC game when it is called for. There's no substance in it.

  75. And don’t forget how overtly racist Mexican TV is:

  76. @Lugash
    @HairlessNeanderthal

    If Mexicans start showing even the slightest hint of going Republican we'll see Hollywood and the media shift from portraying whites as oppressors of blacks and start showing more whites as oppressors of brown to bring them back in line.

    Replies: @Gringo

    If Mexicans start showing even the slightest hint of going Republican we’ll see Hollywood and the media shift from portraying whites as oppressors of blacks and start showing more whites as oppressors of brown to bring them back in line.

    Greg Abbott got 44% of the Hispanic vote in the TX governor’s race. As another commenter pointed out, he also got a majority of the male Hispanic vote. Greg Abbott’s inlaws are Hispanic.

    And yes, the trash producing proclivities of Mexicans in TX is duly noted. I have had some issues with them.

  77. The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species.

    Judging by the looks of the baby that this Indio had on a lawn in front of a clinic you may be right:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2451618/Mexican-woman-gives-birth-clinic-LAWN-treatment-denied.html

  78. One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans.

    -syon

    Good point. There’s something about New England that has always resisted fully committing to an “American” identity.

    However, a lot of Southern customs show a clear English character, such as the love of gardening, a lively tradition of debate, taking tea, and the “hanging judge.” Not to mention coon hunting, which is clearly derived from hunting foxes with hounds. And by ancestry, the most English states in the Union (going by white population) may well be Mississippi and Alabama.

    The West is culturally the farthest from the old country, and probably most purely American in identity.

    • Replies: @JayMan
    @Bill P


    Good point. There’s something about New England that has always resisted fully committing to an “American” identity.

    However, a lot of Southern customs show a clear English character, such as the love of gardening, a lively tradition of debate, taking tea, and the “hanging judge.” Not to mention coon hunting, which is clearly derived from hunting foxes with hounds. And by ancestry, the most English states in the Union (going by white population) may well be Mississippi and Alabama.

    The West is culturally the farthest from the old country, and probably most purely American in identity.
     

    Guys:

    http://twitter.com/JayMan471/status/536345610405031936

    Flags of the American Nations | JayMan's Blog

    Maps of the American Nations | JayMan's Blog

    Rural White Liberals – a Key to Understanding the Political Divide | JayMan's Blog

    More Maps of the American Nations | JayMan's Blog

    Replies: @EriK

  79. In my corner of North America “Anglo” means someone whose first language is English rather than French. I’m fine with being called one in that context but I wouldn’t want people to think I’m agreeing to being a WASP, which is a particular thing in itself. Not all Anglos are WASPs but all WASPs are Anglos.

  80. @Anonymous
    What they really don't get is how much Mexicans love donkey shows.

    Replies: @E. Rekshun

    What they really don’t get is how much Mexicans love donkey shows.

    And don’t forget cock fights!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @E. Rekshun

    Cock fighting is also still popular among white Southerners:

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

  81. @Dahlia
    I admire much about Mexicans. My oldest son spends one evening a week immersed in Mexican culture which has been so good for his moral development.
    If they would quit littering, half of the animosity against them would disappear overnight.

    Replies: @tformation

    Dahlia said: “If they would quit littering, half of the animosity against them would disappear overnight.”

    HAHAHA! Thanks for the laugh! I used to live in a Mexican neighborhood in Chicago, and I would often witness Mexican mothers with children just throwing their trash onto the sidewalk and streets. The biggest complaint I would hear from my parents about our (old) neighborhood was about how there was so much trash on the streets.

    There are some rough edges to Mexican culture, but I share your admiration for Mexican culture. When driving on the south side of Chicago, you can immediately tell when you move from a black neighborhood to a Mexican one. The boarded up stores disappear. There are non-liquor store businesses that are open and thriving! People are walking around outside: Tamale guys, a legion of handcart ice cream men, etc. There really is an entrepreneurial spirit within the culture.

  82. @sansfoy

    Notice Libs are all for Mexers drowning Texas but wouldn’t want it for Vermont. White Northern Libs are also happy that blacks are moving back down south.
     
    Don't fool yourself. I live in Vermont. They're old and tired, and almost none of them are having kids. They bemoan the lack of diversity and support the importation of Somalis into Burlington. The only thing saving white Vermonters from extinction is the steady trickle of people fleeing Mass./CT/NJ/NY, and these people are coming up with with their .5 kids and their same political attitudes.

    My daughter comes home from school using words like cis-gendered, and my youngest son was suspended from the bus for a week in first grade because his friend told a girl he could see her underwear and my son "laughed nervously."

    We're doomed up here.

    Replies: @Priss Factor

    “We’re doomed up here.”

    Chechens are so cool and tough compared to wussies that white Americans have become.

    Silver lining about white libs not having kids. White cons should have lots of kids and become the dominant voice of white folks.

    After all, white folks still rule much of Latin America… even though they are minorities.

  83. I grew up outside of Boston, but moved to the South in 1990. Back then, I never encountered any Mexicans, but MA and CT has had a large (& growing) concentration of Puerto Ricans. In fact, when I was 12 y/o I got jumped and beat up by two older Puerto Ricans. And all the members of my high school Spanish Club were Puerto Ricans.

  84. @syonredux
    @Anonymous


    The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species. And far more decent and nobler than the mestizo and European Mexicans.
     
    Those would be the ones whose immediate ancestors specialized in tobacco enemas and child sacrifice, yes?

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Karl

    Yes, that’s how decadent and degenerate the mestizo and European Mexicans and Latin Americans more generally are.

  85. @Bill P
    Texans aren't really Anglos -- they're a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called "Yankee," and it means essentially the same thing.

    Arguably, a higher proportion of Americans with Jewish ancestry than white gentiles are Anglo. Does it sound right, for example, to call some good old boy from Kentucky an "Anglo?" Or a guy named Olafson from North Dakota?

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:


    He attended the Buckley School, Philips Exeter Academy and graduated from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude in economics and political science and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He was captain of the Yale soccer team. Steyer received his MBA from Stanford Business School, where he was an Arjay Miller Scholar.
     
    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain "American" are merely proles, so why apply it to us?

    If it's purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans "Anglo?" If it's racial, why not say "whites?" If religious, why not "white Protestants?" If it really means "non-Jewish American whites," it's a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx - people who were subsequently lumped into the category of "Scots Irish" - and, yes, some English (not "Anglo") with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a "Yankee." And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as "Anglo," nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as "American," and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us "Anglo," he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it's hardly a point of pride.

    Replies: @Simon in London, @syonredux, @FUBAR007, @SFG, @Uptown Resident, @n/a

    “Anglo”, properly employed, denotes someone of predominantly English ancestry. That’s it. All else is a misappropriation of the term.

    There’s no such thing as an ethnic “American”. It’s too broad a term. Even when referring to Old Stock people whose ancestors have been here since before the Revolution as that includes English, Scottish, Germans, Dutch, etc. “White American” is similarly over-broad–it covers everyone from Southern Anglos to Ashkenazi Jews to midwestern Germans to northeastern Irish Catholics. Trying to use either term in an ethnic sense implies a level of cultural homogeneity that’s never really existed.

    • Replies: @n/a
    @FUBAR007


    There’s no such thing as an ethnic “American”. It’s too broad a term. Even when referring to Old Stock people whose ancestors have been here since before the Revolution as that includes English, Scottish, Germans, Dutch, etc.
     
    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-is-american.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/hrdlicka-on-american-type.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/coon-on-american-race.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2010/03/hrdlicka-new-uncle-sam-is-in-making.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/national-origins-of-americas-founders.html

    Trying to use either term in an ethnic sense implies a level of cultural homogeneity that’s never really existed.
     
    I guess regional differences within Germany mean there's no such thing as a German.

    Replies: @FUBAR007, @Suburban_elk

  86. @HairlessNeanderthal
    For Mexicans, climbing the social ladder has always meant looking, acting, and breeding more Euro. So the dems actively broadcasting themselves as the angry black party is going to be an electoral disaster for them if the republicans drop the fringes and become the European American party. Compare what happens when a pretty Mexican girl shows up at dinner with a white BF vs a black one. The dems bet the wrong horse in a major way on this one.

    Replies: @Lugash, @Robbie, @athEIst

    The problem is, there simply aren’t enough white people to go around.

    And also, that white boy at the mexican table is losing ALOT and so are all whites each time a white person appears at the dinner table of a non-white family.

    The democrats strategy is winning.

  87. @Simon in London
    @Bill P

    "As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me"

    I use Anglo non-pejoratively, along with Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Celtic, Anglo-Norman, occasionally Anglo-Germanic. It's usually a shorthand for persons of British descent. I guess being British I am a foreigner, but we don't use terms like Anglosphere pejoratively (unless we're cultural Marxists I guess). We're interested in the 'English-Speaking Peoples', our relatives, and Anglo- seems like an ok way to describe them. I guess a different term could be used but I can't think of an equally handy alternative.

    Replies: @Southfarthing, @n/a

    Right. Even Americans who don’t have English ancestry are within the Anglosphere tradition. They adopted an English-founded country as their homeland.

  88. Well, Mexicans seem to like their children (hence the one on the horse), which you can’t really say about any Anglo ethny, whether SWPL or Cowboy.

    And why can’t you say that? White Texans love to have kids.

  89. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a “Yankee.” And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as “Anglo,” nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as “American,” and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us “Anglo,” he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it’s hardly a point of pride.

    When it was that Welsh, Ulster, Scottish, and English mix with some French Huguenots, that was great. I wish this country would have absorbed the whole Huguenot sect.

  90. @syonredux
    One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.


    Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos.......

    Replies: @Miss Conduct, @anon, @Anonymous, @Reg Cæsar, @ben tillman

    One of the problems with Texans: they are unreliable on the national question.They are completely willing to lie there and take it from Mexico.

    That is worse than your fantastical views on secession. If it were up to Texans, there would be no illegals here. Of course, the central government has made it clear that the States have no say on immigration — or any other policy for that matter.

  91. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/minnesota-schools-allow-male-athletes-who-say-they-are-female-to-shower-wit?utm

    I think we are gonna see a rise in transgenderism, esp among boys and men.

    This sounds like a Beavis and Butthead episode.
    The fellers pretend to be girls to shower with girls.

  92. Actually the stuff white people like is Mexicans raising real estate values while reducing wages. It is really pocket book issues.

  93. @syonredux
    @Keith Vaz


    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.
     
    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.

    One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans.

    Borges actually comments on this in a review that he wrote of Faulkner's work. He notes that Faulkner's world will seem warmly familiar to the Latin American reader, as Faulkner's USA (in contrast to, say, Hawthorne's) is "creole" in character.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @History Reader

    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.

    But that’s not got nothing to do with this issue. Those Yankees never sought to flood the country with non-Whites. Instead, they went to war against the people harboring non-Whites.

  94. @syonredux
    @Miss Conduct


    That’s hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime.
     
    Oh dear , a "country club" in Texas.One tends to imagine that it will be rather more "country" than club"

    Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother’s monogram?
     
    How materialistic.Dear lady, surely you realize that true culture involves things that are higher than tableware? Evidently Anglo culture in Texas functions on a strictly cargo cult basis

    Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.
     
    I see little difference between the two

    Replies: @Sam Haysom, @ben tillman

    Oh dear , a “country club” in Texas.One tends to imagine that it will be rather more “country” than club”

    You have quite an imagination. Perhaps Rolling Stone is hiring.

  95. @Keith Vaz
    'New York SWPL liberals... Hated enemy.' Hardly. What you're describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.

    Replies: @syonredux, @Cagey Beast, @Southfarthing

    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.

    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. That’s why Atheists and Jews cluster together in politics: they’re both mostly found in coastal cities. Or are atheists really a different race from Whites?

    Jews wish to destroy Christians… by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron? Definitely not Whites.

    *(Not counting the Amish-like Orthodox, who aren’t highly represented in academia or business.)

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Southfarthing


    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region.
     
    Which is another way of saying that the difference between regions disappears when you control for the number of Jews.

    Brilliant.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    , @Anonymous
    @Southfarthing

    Lena Dunham doesn't identify as Christian, and her attitude is common:

    http://www.jewishjournal.com/the_ticket/item/girls_writer_lays_bare_womens_insecurities_20120425


    Dunham said that Hannah shares her Jewish sensibility. “I went to Hebrew school for, like, two weeks, and then didn’t get the part I wanted in the play and quit,” she said. “But I’ve always had a great love of all the holidays that we celebrate together as a family: Passover, Chanukah. I’ve spent a good amount of time in temple, and I definitely feel very culturally Jewish, although that’s the biggest cliché for a Jewish woman to say.”
     

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    , @n/a
    @Southfarthing

    "Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. "

    No, it doesn't.


    "Jews wish to destroy Christians… by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron?"

    Are you trolling, are you Jewish, or are you really this delusional?


    Her father was born to a Jewish family, while her mother converted to Judaism.[6] Agron attended Hebrew school and had a bat mitzvah.[6][7]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianna_Agron

    [Chris Pine, 1/4 Jewish] has stated, "I definitely have a spiritual outlook... I am not a religious guy, I am probably agnostic".[9]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Pine

     

    Replies: @Southfarthing

  96. @Jefferson
    On "Sons Of Anarchy" the SAMCRO club does not allow Blacks to join their motorcycle club yet they let in Juice who is a Puerto Rican who looks like he is at least Quadroon phenotype wise. Talk about hypocrisy.

    Unless they don't use the one drop rule and when the say no Blacks allowed, they only mean those who look like they are predominantly of Sub Saharan African descent and not those who look like they have a little bit of Black in them.

    Replies: @SFG, @HairlessNeanderthal

    Makes sense to me. Read about Castas paintings in colonial Spain–they would subdivide in quite a detailed fashion by percentage of indigenous, Spanish, and African ancestry.

  97. @TWS
    I used to police an area that was about half illegal aliens from Guatemala and Mexico. At every dance, party, and seasonal celebration shots were fired into the air. Any time they served alcohol a big fraction of the girls were in the 13 to 16 year old range.

    Don't worry they're going to vote Democrat anyway legal or not. And they give the Dems more numbers to fudge with. So win-win for them.

    What I don't understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters.

    Replies: @Maximus, @Realist, @thisisaknife

    Good question: “What I don’t understand is why the Republican leadership keeps welcoming more Dem voters.”

    Republicans want the cheap labor.

    Shopkeeper’s logic. They’ll sell matches used to burn the town. Sell you the rope to hang ’em with. Well not them in their gated communities. The Republican Party doesn’t give a rat’s ass about you. Also notice their support for war. Big business! Sure it usually isn’t their sons being mutilated and killed. Sure part of the strategy isn’t to spit in your face like the Dems do. Conservative rich guys and right-wing media blowhards tell us we’re Real Americans, salt of the Earth. What the Dems and Republicans are is two wings of one party of business, run by multinational corporations.

  98. @Bill P
    Texans aren't really Anglos -- they're a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called "Yankee," and it means essentially the same thing.

    Arguably, a higher proportion of Americans with Jewish ancestry than white gentiles are Anglo. Does it sound right, for example, to call some good old boy from Kentucky an "Anglo?" Or a guy named Olafson from North Dakota?

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:


    He attended the Buckley School, Philips Exeter Academy and graduated from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude in economics and political science and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He was captain of the Yale soccer team. Steyer received his MBA from Stanford Business School, where he was an Arjay Miller Scholar.
     
    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain "American" are merely proles, so why apply it to us?

    If it's purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans "Anglo?" If it's racial, why not say "whites?" If religious, why not "white Protestants?" If it really means "non-Jewish American whites," it's a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx - people who were subsequently lumped into the category of "Scots Irish" - and, yes, some English (not "Anglo") with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a "Yankee." And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as "Anglo," nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as "American," and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us "Anglo," he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it's hardly a point of pride.

    Replies: @Simon in London, @syonredux, @FUBAR007, @SFG, @Uptown Resident, @n/a

    I always assumed ‘Anglo’ meant English in descent. Nothing wrong with it–hardcore lefties don’t like it because it implies conservatism, but nothing shameful about English ancestry in my view–the Brits have accomplished quite a bit over the years.

    I have to say nobody outside of the alt-right and Jews themselves is quite as obsessed with separating out Jews as a separate category. Your average American Ashkenazi is apparently about half Italian due to the genetic studies, and a lot of them have interbred with the locals here in the USA. It is true that the lines between old-money WASPs and old-money Ashekenazim don’t seem all that clear in the Northeast anymore.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    @SFG


    I have to say nobody outside of the alt-right and Jews themselves is quite as obsessed with separating out Jews as a separate category.
     
    I won't argue with that. But you have to admit there is a tandem bizarre tendency among some alt-righters to insist that no distinction worthy of the name can possibly be drawn. It's not so much that you're an 'anti-semite' if you draw a distinction; it's a kind of madness, an obsession, they like to claim. The whole future of the dissident right hinges on making it 'safe for Jews' this thinking goes. The exasperation when you contradict them has to be seen to be believed.
  99. “One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans.”

    MMMM dear girl, you wrote “purely European” when you meant “English”. One must not comment authoritatively on things one does not understand, mmmmkay dear girl? There is no need for you cut-and-paste another 10,000 word Wikipedia article for us. It is enough for you to know that reading non-fiction on a particular topic may serve you better than Borges’ opinion on what Latin Americans (you do know that Spain & Portugal are in Europe don’t you?) would find “warmly familiar”.

    Texas was settled primarily by people whose ancestors came from the British Isles, with lots and lots of Germans mixed in (Germany is also in Europe, MMMMkay?)

    MMMM, anyway dear girl, you should focus on reclaiming your beloved New England from the corrupt Irish, low stewardship Ashkenazi, and incompetent blacks that have been calling the shots the past 100 years or so and spend less time pretending to be…whatever prancing fairy you are pretending to be. Or maybe you’re not pretending?

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @William Badwhite


    MMMM dear girl, you wrote “purely European” when you meant “English”.
     
    MMM,just trying trying to be polite to a few stray Protestant Frenchmen and sundry other continentals dear boy

    One must not comment authoritatively on things one does not understand,
     
    MMMM, that must be why I shy away from Steve's rather boring digressions into the arcana surrounding baseball

    mmmmkay dear girl?
     
    Flirting with me, dear boy? I'm always up (so to speak) for a good bout

    There is no need for you cut-and-paste another 10,000 word Wikipedia article for us.
     
    Are you sure, dear boy? I do so enjoy spreading sweetness and light

    It is enough for you to know that reading non-fiction on a particular topic may serve you better than Borges’ opinion on what Latin Americans would find “warmly familiar”.
     
    I don't know, dear boy.It seems to me that Borges is a rather good authority on that particular subject.

    (you do know that Spain & Portugal are in Europe don’t you?)
     
    MMMM, the French would possibly argue otherwise ("Africa begins at the Pyrenees," etc).Of course, that's a quarrel for our Latin friends

    Texas was settled primarily by people whose ancestors came from the British Isles,
     
    MMMM, degeneration of blood and culture, dear boy.What Cotton Mather called "Criolian Degeneracy." Quite sad, really.

    with lots and lots of Germans mixed in
     
    Mixing with the Germans scarcely helps their Anglo status, dear boy.

    (Germany is also in Europe, MMMMkay?)
     
    Yes, dear boy, but, sadly, the Germans are not Anglos.

    MMMM, anyway dear girl,
     
    You're such a minx, dear boy.....

    you should focus on reclaiming your beloved New England from the corrupt Irish,
     
    Sad cases, yes, but they are preferable to Mexicans....

    low stewardship Ashkenazi,
     
    Again, dear boy, quite preferable to Mexicans

    and incompetent blacks
     
    MMMM, aren't there an inordinate number of Blacks in Texas? I seem to recall my mother mentioning seeing a few when she was forced to reside for a few years in Texas. Poor woman.She had no idea that Anglos could fall so far.

    that have been calling the shots the past 100 years or so and spend less time pretending to be…whatever prancing fairy you are pretending to be. Or maybe you’re not pretending?
     
    I'm the genuine article, dear boy.
  100. I use Anglo non-pejoratively, along with Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Celtic, Anglo-Norman, occasionally Anglo-Germanic.

    -Simon in London

    Well, take the term Anglo-Irish, which has a specific ethno-cultural meaning. When I hear the term, I know exactly what it means, because I have Anglo-Irish in my family (I like to say that my most Irish grandparent is also the most English — her father was of Anglo-Irish descent).

    It refers specifically to ethnic English people who settled in Ireland, mainly attended the Church of Ireland, and who were, incidentally, among the most active in the cause of Irish independence. An example of an Anglo-Irishman would be Robert Parnell, the handsome parliamentarian who got in trouble over his affair with Kitty O’Shea.

    Lots of Anglo-Irish came to the US along with others from the area.

    So when one hears “Anglo,” the meaning is quite specific, and is above all associated with the Anglican Church. This is probably where the term gained currency, since it is Latin after all.

    However, to an American, given the historical connotation, it kind of suggests that we’re interlopers or strangers in our own country. For example, would anyone call English people “Anglos” in England? Would one call Irish in Ireland “Hiberno-Irish?” Or, better yet, would one call Chinese “Sino-Chinese?” By the way, “Han Chinese” is a redundant term, because non-Han ethnic groups in China are not Chinese (which means “people of the Qin dynasty”), and will tell you so.

    Some may disagree, but to me it just seems like one more example of our dispossession. I won’t accept being hyphenated in the country my ancestors founded.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
    @Bill P

    "Some may disagree, but to me it just seems like one more example of our dispossession. I won’t accept being hyphenated in the country my ancestors founded"

    I take your point, but realistically you have been dispossessed already.

  101. “New York SWPL liberals” should also include the Wall Street/GOP monied crowd as well who are equally big on importing Hispanics into the country for their own purposes.

    Look we wouldn’t be having this discussion without Wall Street and the monied set who have been the biggest supporters behind open borders since Clinton.

    Yes the New York SWPL crowd hates whites with a passion and want them banished to the corn field if possible. But they don’t have the mojo that Wall Street has – unlimited funds to sway congressional porch monkeys.

    The take away for me, given the post election behavior of the GOP in D.C. is that there is no difference between the GOP and Democrats on domestic issues at all. Boehner is just a uglier and weaker version of Pelosi. McConnell hasn’t met a bribe he doesn’t like and may as be well be buddies with Reid.

    And now with GOP insiders promoting three consumate statist clowns/oligarchs for president, is probably the best reason yet to not vote in 2016.

  102. Yeah, the people of the Tribe are not really good at understanding culture. Its not just cuisine and accents like they mistakenly believe. The Cowboy was a more gentlemanly version of the Frito Banditos that ran Tejas before a few thousand Texans showed them the way home.
    The Mestizo is a HYBRID. Mexicans think they’re a race, but actually they’re the result of The Conquistadors not bringing their wives to The New World. In Mexico, there are two nations: The Aztlans/Mestizos and the Aztec Indians. Indians aren’t Mexican.
    A few thousand peons from San Pedro makes a Great Hacienda, but a lousy army. The last time Mexico won a war was when Napoleon III decided he didn’t care about it and The French went home. The Aztlan Nation or La Raza celebrates this Amazing Victory over The French Army on Cinco de Mayo, also known as the day Latinos drink German Beer.
    I imagine that soon they will be a Great Political Force. About 15 minutes after a Mexican runs for office against The Gringos…

  103. @Miss Conduct
    I forgot to add, the popping off of guns into the air for seemingly no reason, the filling of front yards with scores of people dressed to the nines for the purpose of drinking beer on Sunday afternoon, houses where garage sales are held every other weekend, and the loud (LOUD!) blasting of Tejano music are not wild exaggerations either.

    Replies: @Dahlia, @Stealth

    You haven’t lived until you’ve fired a gun into the air to ring in the new year. I remember doing that with acquaintances when y2k rolled around. I was too intoxicated to need hearing protection.

  104. Was this a rainy day? Why not have the horse and band in the backyard?

  105. Compliment: That horse is awesome.

    Complaint: At the end, when youtube shows thumbnails of “related” videos, one of these shows a blond bikini babe on the beach. I watched the video. There was no blond bikini babe on the beach.

  106. Gimme Mexicans over haute degeneracy.

  107. Sansfoy, what’s the deal up there? Beautiful state, but wow, you guys are making Massachusetts look right wing. Can’t imagine living there, or at least raising kids there.

  108. Unfortunately you can argue the other way-after all why shouldn’t Mexicans be forbidden entry to a place that’s full of their own culture.

    Hey, I agree. Israel’s white (right?) and western (right?), Europe and America are white and western, let’s fill Israel with white, western heathens (“gentiles”) from Europe and America. Why should whites be forbidden entry to a place that’s full of their own culture?

    But until that happens, no Mexicans in America.

    • Replies: @Karl
    @Svigor

    >> let’s fill Israel with white, western heathens (“gentiles”) from Europe and America. Why should whites be forbidden entry to a place that’s full of their own culture?


    If an individual has ONE Irish grandparent, that individual is AUTOMATICALLY allowed to "make aliya" to Ireland

    Everyone else has to stand in line to become an Irish citizen.

    Israel follows the EXACT SAME rule.

    Russian is an un-official third language here; Yad ha-Shmona is the "Finnish" communal farm; in Florentine in South TelAviv, there's TWO Tagalog newspapers; etc, etc etc.

    By the way, why should I imagine that bringing Svigor in would be a better deal for us, than bringing in another Thai or another Chinese?

    Or for that matter, some muslim-Circassian refugees from Syria. The Circassians here, practically ==own== the Border Police (our "carabinieri")


    There's a muslim-Arab woman in Akko ("Acre") who is running for a seat in Knesset under the flag of Jewish Home, a hard-right nationalist party.

    She has 3 sons in the infantry here.

  109. Good gosh, some of you guys are as bad as any sort of prog blog talking about what you “know” when it comes to Texas.

    “Tejanos” are one of those odd cultural mixings that you could describe nowadays as “antebellum South with salsa” if you wanted to sound like a dork. The guys masturbating furiously over the image of the cavalier over in the Jefferson thread would totally recognize the kind of attitude that makes up a lot of Tejano masculinity. Tejano females are right there with Ol Miss sorority girls, and I remember one grandmother dismissing me when I couldn’t recite my lineage to know when I came into the country by telling me “My grandmother told me when Sam Houston rode his horse into town..”

    A different world, not easily encapsulated.

    • Replies: @Gringo
    @As If


    Good gosh, some of you guys are as bad as any sort of prog blog talking about what you “know” when it comes to Texas.“Tejanos” are one of those odd cultural mixings that you could describe nowadays as “antebellum South with salsa” if you wanted to sound like a dork...A different world, not easily encapsulated.
     
    A Tejano neighbor of mine researched his family's genealogy, and found out that he had Converso ancestors who had come to Monterey, then an outpost of the Spanish Empire that was about as far from the influence of Madrid and the Inquisition as possible. In the 18th century his ancestors came to Texas/Tejas. My Tejano neighbor went to Ivy League Columbia for his undergrad years, and found that the assumed atheism of the place was not a comfortable fit for his Roman Catholic faith.
  110. OT: After seeing this furphobic hate crime and the media’s stunning lack of empathy for the victims, I’m predicting the next great civil rights struggle: World War F

  111. @syonredux

    I have a hard time counting anybody as “Anglos”, because it’s a Mexican insult for me and my relations and my neighbors. The more honest “gringo” is preferable.
     
    Would you prefer Anglo-Saxon? Perhaps just Saxon?

    "Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglo-Saxons"

    "Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Saxons"

    A rose by any other name, dear fellow.

    Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.They are just too.....Hispanic in their attitudes and manners

    Replies: @Miss Conduct, @John Grady

    “Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.”

    Tell that to Cormac McCarthy who spent his productive years in the anglo side of El Paso.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @John Grady


    “Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.”

    Tell that to Cormac McCarthy who spent his productive years in the anglo side of El Paso.
     
    I enjoyed your careful choice of language ("productive").Needless to say, McCarthy is not a product of Texas:

    McCarthy was born in Providence, Rhode Island, one of six children of Charles Joseph McCarthy and Gladys Christina McGrail McCarthy.[19] In 1937, his family relocated to Knoxville, where his father worked as a lawyer for the Tennessee Valley Authority.[20] The family first lived on Noelton Drive in the upscale Sequoyah Hills subdivision, but by 1941 had settled in a house on Martin Mill Pike in South Knoxville (this latter house burned in 2009).[21] Among his childhood friends was Jim Long (1930–12), who would later be depicted as J-Bone in his novel Suttree.[22] McCarthy attended St. Mary's Parochial School and Knoxville Catholic High School,[23] and was an altar boy at the Church of the Immaculate Conception.[22] He attended the University of Tennessee from 1951–52 and 1957–59 but never graduated. While at UT he published two stories in The Phoenix and was awarded the Ingram Merrill Award for creative writing in 1959 and 1960.
     
  112. @Jefferson
    On "Sons Of Anarchy" the SAMCRO club does not allow Blacks to join their motorcycle club yet they let in Juice who is a Puerto Rican who looks like he is at least Quadroon phenotype wise. Talk about hypocrisy.

    Unless they don't use the one drop rule and when the say no Blacks allowed, they only mean those who look like they are predominantly of Sub Saharan African descent and not those who look like they have a little bit of Black in them.

    Replies: @SFG, @HairlessNeanderthal

    You mean the same Juice that kills a prospect who discovers that his father is black?

  113. Syon: American-American.

    On “Sons Of Anarchy” the SAMCRO club does not allow Blacks to join their motorcycle club yet they let in Juice who is a Puerto Rican who looks like he is at least Quadroon phenotype wise. Talk about hypocrisy.

    Unless they don’t use the one drop rule and when the say no Blacks allowed, they only mean those who look like they are predominantly of Sub Saharan African descent and not those who look like they have a little bit of Black in them.

    That show is absurdity squared. A Jewish biker gang, basically. A Jewish PC biker gang, but for their ban on blacks, which they’re quickly “overcoming.” BTW, the Puerto Rican isn’t a Puerto Rican, he’s a mulatto who pretends to be a Puerto Rican. I stopped watching that stupid show after the tranny episode.

  114. There’s very little about U.S. immigration policy that I like. But I wouldn’t trade our problems for Europe’s.

  115. @IBC
    @Miss Conduct


    There is a world of difference between illegal immigrants who haven’t been here long and second-generation Mexican Americans and Tejanos whose families have been here for six or more generations.
     
    Yes, and there're probably some real cultural differences between the old Norteño Mexicans and the newer migrants from places like Guerrero and Chiapas, or even Guatemala. As you know, the Texas cowboy culture really does share a lot with that of northern Mexico. And in the old days, even some of the Anglos wore those pointy sombreros that are now considered stereotypical. For example, the hangin' judge, Roy Bean,"the law west of the Pecos."

    http://myrahmcilvain.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/judge-roy-bean.jpg

    These days, he would be the one swinging --for cultural appropriation!

    I'm not sure many of the Park Slopers will recognize anything Texan about Mexican migrants to the northeastern US, because I think that culturally they're still almost completely drowned out by the influence of the Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. I've also read that many Mexicans in the northeast are from southern Mexico and perhaps that makes them blend in more with migrants from Guatemala and El Salvador who are also relatively more common there than out West. I heard on the radio, that these days NYC is actually a good place to study endangered indigenous languages and dialects, because of the huge diversity of immigrants from remote corners of the globe. No doubt there are quite a few non-Hispanic indigenous "Latinos" living in the NYC area, but I would guess that they act a lot less like stereotypical Texans than the old Norteños did.

    Replies: @JayMan

    Yes, and there’re probably some real cultural differences between the old Norteño Mexicans and the newer migrants from places like Guerrero and Chiapas, or even Guatemala.

    Yup.

  116. @Bill P

    One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans.

    -syon
     

    Good point. There's something about New England that has always resisted fully committing to an "American" identity.

    However, a lot of Southern customs show a clear English character, such as the love of gardening, a lively tradition of debate, taking tea, and the "hanging judge." Not to mention coon hunting, which is clearly derived from hunting foxes with hounds. And by ancestry, the most English states in the Union (going by white population) may well be Mississippi and Alabama.

    The West is culturally the farthest from the old country, and probably most purely American in identity.

    Replies: @JayMan

    Good point. There’s something about New England that has always resisted fully committing to an “American” identity.

    However, a lot of Southern customs show a clear English character, such as the love of gardening, a lively tradition of debate, taking tea, and the “hanging judge.” Not to mention coon hunting, which is clearly derived from hunting foxes with hounds. And by ancestry, the most English states in the Union (going by white population) may well be Mississippi and Alabama.

    The West is culturally the farthest from the old country, and probably most purely American in identity.

    Guys:

    Flags of the American Nations | JayMan’s Blog

    Maps of the American Nations | JayMan’s Blog

    Rural White Liberals – a Key to Understanding the Political Divide | JayMan’s Blog

    More Maps of the American Nations | JayMan’s Blog

    • Replies: @EriK
    @JayMan

    Great stuff.

    Replies: @JayMan

  117. @Miss Conduct
    @syonredux

    "Frankly, I have a hard time counting Texans as Anglos……."

    That's hilarious. You should come to a debutante ball at one of the country clubs in Fort Worth sometime. Do you know the difference between a pickle fork and an oyster fork, or between an ice cream fork and a fish fork, and have service for 16 of all of them in sterling with your great-mother's monogram? Yeah, no Anglos here. Totally indistinguishable from Mexicans. Yeah.

    Replies: @syonredux, @anonym

    I’ve heard Texans like their eccentrics, too. Another Anglo trait.

    Also, possibly, an interest in genealogy and lineages.

  118. @John Grady
    @syonredux

    "Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc."

    Tell that to Cormac McCarthy who spent his productive years in the anglo side of El Paso.

    Replies: @syonredux

    “Texans just do not seem to be part of the same culture as Shakespeare, Burke, Benjamin Franklin, etc.”

    Tell that to Cormac McCarthy who spent his productive years in the anglo side of El Paso.

    I enjoyed your careful choice of language (“productive”).Needless to say, McCarthy is not a product of Texas:

    McCarthy was born in Providence, Rhode Island, one of six children of Charles Joseph McCarthy and Gladys Christina McGrail McCarthy.[19] In 1937, his family relocated to Knoxville, where his father worked as a lawyer for the Tennessee Valley Authority.[20] The family first lived on Noelton Drive in the upscale Sequoyah Hills subdivision, but by 1941 had settled in a house on Martin Mill Pike in South Knoxville (this latter house burned in 2009).[21] Among his childhood friends was Jim Long (1930–12), who would later be depicted as J-Bone in his novel Suttree.[22] McCarthy attended St. Mary’s Parochial School and Knoxville Catholic High School,[23] and was an altar boy at the Church of the Immaculate Conception.[22] He attended the University of Tennessee from 1951–52 and 1957–59 but never graduated. While at UT he published two stories in The Phoenix and was awarded the Ingram Merrill Award for creative writing in 1959 and 1960.

  119. @Southfarthing
    @Keith Vaz


    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.
     

    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. That's why Atheists and Jews cluster together in politics: they're both mostly found in coastal cities. Or are atheists really a different race from Whites?

    Jews wish to destroy Christians... by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron? Definitely not Whites.

    *(Not counting the Amish-like Orthodox, who aren't highly represented in academia or business.)

    Replies: @ben tillman, @Anonymous, @n/a

    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region.

    Which is another way of saying that the difference between regions disappears when you control for the number of Jews.

    Brilliant.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @ben tillman


    Which is another way of saying that the difference between regions disappears when you control for the number of Jews.
     
    It means Jews mostly have the same attitudes as their neighbors.

    For example, only 16% of the supporters of FWD.us are Jewish.

    So if there were no Jews in the tech industry, FWD.us would be 100% their coastal urbanite neighbors like Bill Gates, who have the same views.

    As a lifelong coastal urbanite, the enforcers of political correctness upon me have always been kumbayah liberals and Christians.

    Replies: @ben tillman

  120. @syonredux
    @Keith Vaz


    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.
     
    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.

    One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans.

    Borges actually comments on this in a review that he wrote of Faulkner's work. He notes that Faulkner's world will seem warmly familiar to the Latin American reader, as Faulkner's USA (in contrast to, say, Hawthorne's) is "creole" in character.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @History Reader

    Syon:

    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.

    Uh… what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time. Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it’s history.

    Google “Mordecai Cohen,” the richest man in the state at that time, and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader. According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade, that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.

    Now, I want you to go out and clean these erasers for trying to teach without doing your homework. There’s a lad!

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @History Reader


    Uh… what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.
     
    Why would I be amazed, dear boy? Charleston's Jewish community is quite well known

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time.
     
    I'm sorry, dear boy; that part of your post was a bit too scrambled.Is this what you were referring to:

    The percentage of Jewish Charlestonians who held slaves in 1830 (83%) was roughly the same as that of the general white population of the city (87%).
     

    Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it’s history.
     
    Not quite, dear boy.Southern History, after all, begins in 1607 at Jamestown.Jewish life in the colonial South was largely limited to South Carolina and Georgia.

    Google “Mordecai Cohen,” the richest man in the state at that time,
     
    MMMM, this article pegs him at second richest:

    Thus the ruling class of Charleston looked to Mordecai Cohen, by some estimates the second wealthiest man in South Carolina
     
    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Plus, note the weasel-words ("by some estimates").

    and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader.
     
    Isn't that a hotly contested honor?

    According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.
     
    Well, his son David sounds rather unpleasant:

    Jim worked as a hostler or a groom for David Cohen but also did field work. He described David Cohen as a man of relentless vigilance: “He was in the habit of walking about at all hours of the night to find out who stole wood, or turnips, or hogs, or any thing else.” When he suspected anyone of thieving, the punishments were dire. One old man, Peter, was found stealing a few sticks of wood from David Cohen. Jim testified that Peter was whipped for hours until he was unconscious and then doused with brine before being chained in the stocks kept on the plantation for just such occasions.
    After being on the receiving end of one especially cruel whipping by David Cohen’s overseer, Jim fled Soldier’s Retreat and hid with a community of black fugitives in the dense swamps. Recaptured after only few brief weeks of freedom, Jim was brutally punished with another whipping. When sympathetic interviewers later transcribed his story, they added a footnote testifying that the fugitive’s scars all over his body “appear as if pieces of flesh had been gouged out, and some are ridges or elevations of the flesh and skin. They could easily be felt through his clothing.”
     
    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade,
     
    Actually, dear boy, the Slave Trade was not much of a factor after 1808:

    The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 (2 Stat. 426, enacted March 2, 1807) is a United States federal law that stated that no new slaves were permitted to be imported into the United States. It took effect in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.
     

    that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.
     
    Not really, dear boy.As the above passage should indicate, the Slave Trade was not much of an issue in 1860.

    Replies: @History Reader, @Jack D

    , @Art Deco
    @History Reader

    At the time the slave trade was outlawed by federal statute (1808), there were about 2,500 Jews in the United States out of a total population of over 7 million. There were 200,000 in 1860, out of a total population of 31 million. The presence of the overwhelming majority of the latter was attributable to immigration from the German states which had taken place in the previous twenty years.

  121. iSteveFan says:

    There’s very little about U.S. immigration policy that I like. But I wouldn’t trade our problems for Europe’s.

    I wouldn’t be so sure of that. First, the nonwhite population of the USA is substantially higher than that of Europe. Second, Europeans haven’t had the “propositional nation” notion dumped onto them, which might make it easier for the locals to eventually rally to end and even reverse immigration. Third, the European nation-states still have ethnic-linguistic ties among the natives.

    Both Europe and the USA are heading towards the cliff, but Europe probably has more of a chance to save itself. In the USA, even if we stopped all immigration tomorrow, nonwhite births already now exceed white births. The future is already baked in the cake. Europe still has time. But so long as the current EU elite run things, they won’t be able to right the ship.

  122. @Bill P
    Texans aren't really Anglos -- they're a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called "Yankee," and it means essentially the same thing.

    Arguably, a higher proportion of Americans with Jewish ancestry than white gentiles are Anglo. Does it sound right, for example, to call some good old boy from Kentucky an "Anglo?" Or a guy named Olafson from North Dakota?

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:


    He attended the Buckley School, Philips Exeter Academy and graduated from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude in economics and political science and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He was captain of the Yale soccer team. Steyer received his MBA from Stanford Business School, where he was an Arjay Miller Scholar.
     
    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain "American" are merely proles, so why apply it to us?

    If it's purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans "Anglo?" If it's racial, why not say "whites?" If religious, why not "white Protestants?" If it really means "non-Jewish American whites," it's a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx - people who were subsequently lumped into the category of "Scots Irish" - and, yes, some English (not "Anglo") with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a "Yankee." And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as "Anglo," nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as "American," and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us "Anglo," he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it's hardly a point of pride.

    Replies: @Simon in London, @syonredux, @FUBAR007, @SFG, @Uptown Resident, @n/a

    I think “Anglo” just refers to a native English speaker. Anglophone.

  123. @William Badwhite
    "One suspects that the basis for the dislike stems from the fact that the North (and New England in particular) is much more European in character than the South.New England, for example, was basically Old England transported bodily to the New World. A purely European transplant.The South, in contrast, was shaped by the fact that it was filled with non-Europeans."

    MMMM dear girl, you wrote "purely European" when you meant "English". One must not comment authoritatively on things one does not understand, mmmmkay dear girl? There is no need for you cut-and-paste another 10,000 word Wikipedia article for us. It is enough for you to know that reading non-fiction on a particular topic may serve you better than Borges' opinion on what Latin Americans (you do know that Spain & Portugal are in Europe don't you?) would find "warmly familiar".

    Texas was settled primarily by people whose ancestors came from the British Isles, with lots and lots of Germans mixed in (Germany is also in Europe, MMMMkay?)

    MMMM, anyway dear girl, you should focus on reclaiming your beloved New England from the corrupt Irish, low stewardship Ashkenazi, and incompetent blacks that have been calling the shots the past 100 years or so and spend less time pretending to be...whatever prancing fairy you are pretending to be. Or maybe you're not pretending?

    Replies: @syonredux

    MMMM dear girl, you wrote “purely European” when you meant “English”.

    MMM,just trying trying to be polite to a few stray Protestant Frenchmen and sundry other continentals dear boy

    One must not comment authoritatively on things one does not understand,

    MMMM, that must be why I shy away from Steve’s rather boring digressions into the arcana surrounding baseball

    mmmmkay dear girl?

    Flirting with me, dear boy? I’m always up (so to speak) for a good bout

    There is no need for you cut-and-paste another 10,000 word Wikipedia article for us.

    Are you sure, dear boy? I do so enjoy spreading sweetness and light

    It is enough for you to know that reading non-fiction on a particular topic may serve you better than Borges’ opinion on what Latin Americans would find “warmly familiar”.

    I don’t know, dear boy.It seems to me that Borges is a rather good authority on that particular subject.

    (you do know that Spain & Portugal are in Europe don’t you?)

    MMMM, the French would possibly argue otherwise (“Africa begins at the Pyrenees,” etc).Of course, that’s a quarrel for our Latin friends

    Texas was settled primarily by people whose ancestors came from the British Isles,

    MMMM, degeneration of blood and culture, dear boy.What Cotton Mather called “Criolian Degeneracy.” Quite sad, really.

    with lots and lots of Germans mixed in

    Mixing with the Germans scarcely helps their Anglo status, dear boy.

    (Germany is also in Europe, MMMMkay?)

    Yes, dear boy, but, sadly, the Germans are not Anglos.

    MMMM, anyway dear girl,

    You’re such a minx, dear boy…..

    you should focus on reclaiming your beloved New England from the corrupt Irish,

    Sad cases, yes, but they are preferable to Mexicans….

    low stewardship Ashkenazi,

    Again, dear boy, quite preferable to Mexicans

    and incompetent blacks

    MMMM, aren’t there an inordinate number of Blacks in Texas? I seem to recall my mother mentioning seeing a few when she was forced to reside for a few years in Texas. Poor woman.She had no idea that Anglos could fall so far.

    that have been calling the shots the past 100 years or so and spend less time pretending to be…whatever prancing fairy you are pretending to be. Or maybe you’re not pretending?

    I’m the genuine article, dear boy.

  124. ” BTW, the Puerto Rican isn’t a Puerto Rican, he’s a mulatto who pretends to be a Puerto Rican.”

    Actually his mother is Puerto Rican, but the father is African American. If his mother was like the average Puerto Rican woman, than he would have Black blood on his mother’s side as well since most Puerto Ricans have the blood of Africa pumping through hearts. Here is the genetic study on the DNA of Puerto Rico.
    http://www.livescience.com/37624-mapping-puerto-rican-heritage.html

    That would explain why Puerto Ricans get along so well with Black Americans, they have a shared ancestry.

  125. “MMMM, aren’t there an inordinate number of Blacks in Texas? I seem to recall my mother mentioning seeing a few when she was forced to reside for a few years in Texas. Poor woman.She had no idea that Anglos could fall so far.”

    Eastern Texas has a high percentage of Blacks. The closer you get to the Louisiana border, the Blacker it gets. The closer you get to the border with New Mexico, the fewer Blacks you see because you are entering Walter White Breaking Bad territory.

    Western Texas is Breaking Bad and Eastern Texas is the Deep South with a large slave descendent population.

  126. @History Reader
    @syonredux

    Syon:


    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.
     
    Uh... what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time. Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it's history.

    Google "Mordecai Cohen," the richest man in the state at that time, and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader. According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade, that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.

    Now, I want you to go out and clean these erasers for trying to teach without doing your homework. There's a lad!

    Replies: @syonredux, @Art Deco

    Uh… what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.

    Why would I be amazed, dear boy? Charleston’s Jewish community is quite well known

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time.

    I’m sorry, dear boy; that part of your post was a bit too scrambled.Is this what you were referring to:

    The percentage of Jewish Charlestonians who held slaves in 1830 (83%) was roughly the same as that of the general white population of the city (87%).

    Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it’s history.

    Not quite, dear boy.Southern History, after all, begins in 1607 at Jamestown.Jewish life in the colonial South was largely limited to South Carolina and Georgia.

    Google “Mordecai Cohen,” the richest man in the state at that time,

    MMMM, this article pegs him at second richest:

    Thus the ruling class of Charleston looked to Mordecai Cohen, by some estimates the second wealthiest man in South Carolina

    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Plus, note the weasel-words (“by some estimates”).

    and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader.

    Isn’t that a hotly contested honor?

    According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.

    Well, his son David sounds rather unpleasant:

    Jim worked as a hostler or a groom for David Cohen but also did field work. He described David Cohen as a man of relentless vigilance: “He was in the habit of walking about at all hours of the night to find out who stole wood, or turnips, or hogs, or any thing else.” When he suspected anyone of thieving, the punishments were dire. One old man, Peter, was found stealing a few sticks of wood from David Cohen. Jim testified that Peter was whipped for hours until he was unconscious and then doused with brine before being chained in the stocks kept on the plantation for just such occasions.
    After being on the receiving end of one especially cruel whipping by David Cohen’s overseer, Jim fled Soldier’s Retreat and hid with a community of black fugitives in the dense swamps. Recaptured after only few brief weeks of freedom, Jim was brutally punished with another whipping. When sympathetic interviewers later transcribed his story, they added a footnote testifying that the fugitive’s scars all over his body “appear as if pieces of flesh had been gouged out, and some are ridges or elevations of the flesh and skin. They could easily be felt through his clothing.”

    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade,

    Actually, dear boy, the Slave Trade was not much of a factor after 1808:

    The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 (2 Stat. 426, enacted March 2, 1807) is a United States federal law that stated that no new slaves were permitted to be imported into the United States. It took effect in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.

    that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.

    Not really, dear boy.As the above passage should indicate, the Slave Trade was not much of an issue in 1860.

    • Replies: @History Reader
    @syonredux

    Synon:


    Not really, dear boy.As the above passage should indicate, the Slave Trade was not much of an issue in 1860.
     
    Are you still trying to "win"? I think that's the saddest thing I've seen today.

    I think, since you've been corralled into a corner, you're trying to find a way out via playing games with semantics. I'm afraid it won't work, in this case, as I mentioned the Slave Trade, while you're attempting to respond as if I said "The Atlantic Slave Trade."

    The Slave Trade in America went right on until the Civil War was over, don't you know. There were also minor enterprises of transporting American born slaves to Haiti, with some unpleasant results, as well as other places. But sans that fact, the act of selling one human being to another is of course, "slave trading."

    In any case, you've gone from being terribly misinformed to making an ass out of yourself, which I'm fairly sure is your primary intent by now. Of course you're not stupid. You're just having fun, right?

    I might suggest you try reading the personal diaries of people who were around during that era. It might inform you of the import of Jews, not only in the slave trade, but many other aspects of American life. While you may have honestly given up on yourself long ago, I want you to know you can deliver yourself from the label of "idiot" by simply doing some research and reading some books on the subject of which you attempt to hold court, to avoid the repetitive comedic results always at your expense, that you have inevitably experienced on this website.

    I'd like to see you participate here without the usual cascade of unintended laughter by Steve's readers, followed by your half-hearted claims of "I meant to do that."

    You owe it to yourself to be relevant–if only in the comments section of somebody else's website.

    Replies: @syonredux

    , @Jack D
    @syonredux

    Blacks/servants stealing things is not a new problem. It must have been a constant struggle on the plantation to keep the slaves from robbing you blind - this was before security cameras and theft tags. If you look at old colonial furniture, there are locks all over the place - they would lock up things like linens (not to mention liquor and silver).

    It was not really in slave owner's interest to damage their own property, but sometimes the overseers might have gotten overenthusiastic with the whip out of frustration with recidivism (Eric Garner arrested 30 times) - at least they didn't choke them to death or shoot him. Note that they chose an old man, who was probably not worth much anymore, pour encourager les autres, just the way that today you might choose some random blond frat boy to expel from university for "rape".

    There were certainly a few Jews in the coastal ports of the Old South (all the main coastal ports of the 13 colonies, actually) and some of them did quite well, but the idea that they somehow dominated the slave trade is a complete myth. They were not absent from that trade, but they were not especially prominent in it either, if only because there really weren't that many Jews in the US before the German wave of the 1840s and then the great E. European wave of the late 19th century. Prior to the 1840s, Jews never exceeded .05% of the population of the US - less than 3,000 Jews spread out over the entire US.

  127. @Anglo tango

    Texans aren’t really Anglos — they’re a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called “Yankee,” and it means essentially the same thing.
     
    Anglo refers to someone who is ethnically english. Australians, kiwis, canadians and many white americans are ANGLOS.

    "Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain “American” are merely proles, so why apply it to us?"

    The founding fathers described themselves as proud Anglo Saxons. Anglo is an ethnic term, are german, italian, Frenchman, spainard all pejorative terms?

    "If it’s purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans “Anglo?” If it’s racial, why not say “whites?” If religious, why not “white Protestants?” If it really means “non-Jewish American whites,” it’s a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return."

    It's an ethnic term. The fact that the native anglo language has been adopted by the entire world doesn't change that.

    "As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a “Yankee.” And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as “Anglo,” nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so."

    You are not an anglo. You are not ethnically anglo Saxon. Nobody would refer to you as an anglo because you aren't one.

    "Instead, I view myself and my people as “American,” and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us “Anglo,” he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it’s hardly a point of pride."

    canadians, kiwis, australians etc are refer to themselves as by nationality but they are still ethnically anglo Saxon. Americans two hundred years ago were extremely proud of their Anglo Saxon blood/race/heritage. To refer to someone as not being anglo would have made you the recipient of a punch to the face.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Anglo refers to someone who is ethnically english [sic– but not orthographically English?]. Australians, kiwis, canadians and many white americans are ANGLOS.

    No, we are not. The English-language term is “Anglo-Saxon“. In our language, “Anglo-” is a prefix, not a complete word.

    canadians, kiwis, australians [sic] etc are refer to themselves as by nationality but they are still ethnically anglo Saxon. Americans two hundred years ago were extremely proud of their Anglo Saxon blood/race/heritage.

    You make my point yourself.

    To refer to someone as not being anglo [sic] would have made you the recipient of a punch to the face.

    You mean the recipient of a challenge to a duel. But never mind 1814. Show me any example of an American calling himself “Anglo” before 1965. Or even 1985.

    (By the way, in English we capitalize proper adjectives. Leave that lower-casing stuff to ¡los mexicanos!)

  128. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Southfarthing
    @Keith Vaz


    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.
     

    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. That's why Atheists and Jews cluster together in politics: they're both mostly found in coastal cities. Or are atheists really a different race from Whites?

    Jews wish to destroy Christians... by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron? Definitely not Whites.

    *(Not counting the Amish-like Orthodox, who aren't highly represented in academia or business.)

    Replies: @ben tillman, @Anonymous, @n/a

    Lena Dunham doesn’t identify as Christian, and her attitude is common:

    http://www.jewishjournal.com/the_ticket/item/girls_writer_lays_bare_womens_insecurities_20120425

    Dunham said that Hannah shares her Jewish sensibility. “I went to Hebrew school for, like, two weeks, and then didn’t get the part I wanted in the play and quit,” she said. “But I’ve always had a great love of all the holidays that we celebrate together as a family: Passover, Chanukah. I’ve spent a good amount of time in temple, and I definitely feel very culturally Jewish, although that’s the biggest cliché for a Jewish woman to say.”

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @Anonymous


    Lena Dunham doesn’t identify as Christian, and her attitude is common
     
    The Pew survey found that of intermarried Jews (most Jews), only 20% are raising their children as fully Jewish by religion:

    “Among Jews with a non-Jewish spouse... 20% say they are raising their children Jewish by religion, and 25% are raising their children partly Jewish by religion. Roughly one-third (37%) of intermarried Jews who are raising children say they are not raising those children Jewish at all.”
     
    And that 20% who are raised Jewish by religion will still tend have less strong ties to Jewish heritage since they’re not really ethnically Jewish. (75% of their ancestry is Christian, if we include the 50% historical Italian admixture.)

    Replies: @Anonymous

  129. Anglo Saxon sounds more like a jazz instrument than an ethnic group.

  130. @E. Rekshun
    @Anonymous

    What they really don’t get is how much Mexicans love donkey shows.

    And don't forget cock fights!

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Cock fighting is also still popular among white Southerners:

  131. @HairlessNeanderthal
    For Mexicans, climbing the social ladder has always meant looking, acting, and breeding more Euro. So the dems actively broadcasting themselves as the angry black party is going to be an electoral disaster for them if the republicans drop the fringes and become the European American party. Compare what happens when a pretty Mexican girl shows up at dinner with a white BF vs a black one. The dems bet the wrong horse in a major way on this one.

    Replies: @Lugash, @Robbie, @athEIst

    JOKE told to me by a Mexican:
    Why are there no rich Mexicans? Because when a Mexican becomes rich, he becomes SPANISH.

    This was pre Carlos Slim.

  132. @Priss Factor
    @Miss Conduct

    "One thing I noticed in recent years is that the beautiful green belts in Austin, once populated by trustafarian SWPL hikers and townies drinking beer and smoking weed, are thickly crowded with Mexican families picnicking, building fire pits to roast meat, and insouciantly allowing toddlers and off-leash dogs to run about peeing in the sacred creek."

    Find some way to move them to the NE. Let Mexers act like that in Harvard. Make Harvard vibrant.
    Notice Libs are all for Mexers drowning Texas but wouldn't want it for Vermont. White Northern Libs are also happy that blacks are moving back down south.

    Best option. Bring more Chechens and let us Chechenize ourselves.
    We'll kick some serious butt then. Chechens take no shit from no one.

    Replies: @athEIst

    Except the many Putin killed.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    @athEIst

    'Except the many Putin killed.'

    They died fighting.

  133. Another thing about FOB Mexicans when they come to the USA – they drive veeeeeeeery, veeeeeeeeery slow.

  134. Come on, Steve. Ride that horse!

  135. @ben tillman
    @Southfarthing


    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region.
     
    Which is another way of saying that the difference between regions disappears when you control for the number of Jews.

    Brilliant.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    Which is another way of saying that the difference between regions disappears when you control for the number of Jews.

    It means Jews mostly have the same attitudes as their neighbors.

    For example, only 16% of the supporters of FWD.us are Jewish.

    So if there were no Jews in the tech industry, FWD.us would be 100% their coastal urbanite neighbors like Bill Gates, who have the same views.

    As a lifelong coastal urbanite, the enforcers of political correctness upon me have always been kumbayah liberals and Christians.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Southfarthing


    It means Jews mostly have the same attitudes as their neighbors.
     
    I would have sworn I just said that!

    For example, only 16% of the supporters of FWD.us are Jewish.

    So if there were no Jews in the tech industry, FWD.us would be 100% their coastal urbanite neighbors like Bill Gates, who have the same views.
     
    No, you're begging the question. The arrow of causation could go either way, and it should be obvious that it is not Whites persuading Jews to adopt an anti-White ideology but that it is rather the other way around.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

  136. @athEIst
    @Priss Factor

    Except the many Putin killed.

    Replies: @Priss Factor

    ‘Except the many Putin killed.’

    They died fighting.

  137. @Anonymous
    @Southfarthing

    Lena Dunham doesn't identify as Christian, and her attitude is common:

    http://www.jewishjournal.com/the_ticket/item/girls_writer_lays_bare_womens_insecurities_20120425


    Dunham said that Hannah shares her Jewish sensibility. “I went to Hebrew school for, like, two weeks, and then didn’t get the part I wanted in the play and quit,” she said. “But I’ve always had a great love of all the holidays that we celebrate together as a family: Passover, Chanukah. I’ve spent a good amount of time in temple, and I definitely feel very culturally Jewish, although that’s the biggest cliché for a Jewish woman to say.”
     

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    Lena Dunham doesn’t identify as Christian, and her attitude is common

    The Pew survey found that of intermarried Jews (most Jews), only 20% are raising their children as fully Jewish by religion:

    “Among Jews with a non-Jewish spouse… 20% say they are raising their children Jewish by religion, and 25% are raising their children partly Jewish by religion. Roughly one-third (37%) of intermarried Jews who are raising children say they are not raising those children Jewish at all.”

    And that 20% who are raised Jewish by religion will still tend have less strong ties to Jewish heritage since they’re not really ethnically Jewish. (75% of their ancestry is Christian, if we include the 50% historical Italian admixture.)

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Southfarthing

    Lena Dunham is probably atheist or agnostic, hence not really "Jewish by religion". But she identifies as "culturally Jewish", which is what's relevant, and her attitude is common.

  138. @syonredux
    @History Reader


    Uh… what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.
     
    Why would I be amazed, dear boy? Charleston's Jewish community is quite well known

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time.
     
    I'm sorry, dear boy; that part of your post was a bit too scrambled.Is this what you were referring to:

    The percentage of Jewish Charlestonians who held slaves in 1830 (83%) was roughly the same as that of the general white population of the city (87%).
     

    Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it’s history.
     
    Not quite, dear boy.Southern History, after all, begins in 1607 at Jamestown.Jewish life in the colonial South was largely limited to South Carolina and Georgia.

    Google “Mordecai Cohen,” the richest man in the state at that time,
     
    MMMM, this article pegs him at second richest:

    Thus the ruling class of Charleston looked to Mordecai Cohen, by some estimates the second wealthiest man in South Carolina
     
    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Plus, note the weasel-words ("by some estimates").

    and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader.
     
    Isn't that a hotly contested honor?

    According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.
     
    Well, his son David sounds rather unpleasant:

    Jim worked as a hostler or a groom for David Cohen but also did field work. He described David Cohen as a man of relentless vigilance: “He was in the habit of walking about at all hours of the night to find out who stole wood, or turnips, or hogs, or any thing else.” When he suspected anyone of thieving, the punishments were dire. One old man, Peter, was found stealing a few sticks of wood from David Cohen. Jim testified that Peter was whipped for hours until he was unconscious and then doused with brine before being chained in the stocks kept on the plantation for just such occasions.
    After being on the receiving end of one especially cruel whipping by David Cohen’s overseer, Jim fled Soldier’s Retreat and hid with a community of black fugitives in the dense swamps. Recaptured after only few brief weeks of freedom, Jim was brutally punished with another whipping. When sympathetic interviewers later transcribed his story, they added a footnote testifying that the fugitive’s scars all over his body “appear as if pieces of flesh had been gouged out, and some are ridges or elevations of the flesh and skin. They could easily be felt through his clothing.”
     
    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade,
     
    Actually, dear boy, the Slave Trade was not much of a factor after 1808:

    The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 (2 Stat. 426, enacted March 2, 1807) is a United States federal law that stated that no new slaves were permitted to be imported into the United States. It took effect in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.
     

    that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.
     
    Not really, dear boy.As the above passage should indicate, the Slave Trade was not much of an issue in 1860.

    Replies: @History Reader, @Jack D

    Synon:

    Not really, dear boy.As the above passage should indicate, the Slave Trade was not much of an issue in 1860.

    Are you still trying to “win”? I think that’s the saddest thing I’ve seen today.

    I think, since you’ve been corralled into a corner, you’re trying to find a way out via playing games with semantics. I’m afraid it won’t work, in this case, as I mentioned the Slave Trade, while you’re attempting to respond as if I said “The Atlantic Slave Trade.”

    The Slave Trade in America went right on until the Civil War was over, don’t you know. There were also minor enterprises of transporting American born slaves to Haiti, with some unpleasant results, as well as other places. But sans that fact, the act of selling one human being to another is of course, “slave trading.”

    In any case, you’ve gone from being terribly misinformed to making an ass out of yourself, which I’m fairly sure is your primary intent by now. Of course you’re not stupid. You’re just having fun, right?

    I might suggest you try reading the personal diaries of people who were around during that era. It might inform you of the import of Jews, not only in the slave trade, but many other aspects of American life. While you may have honestly given up on yourself long ago, I want you to know you can deliver yourself from the label of “idiot” by simply doing some research and reading some books on the subject of which you attempt to hold court, to avoid the repetitive comedic results always at your expense, that you have inevitably experienced on this website.

    I’d like to see you participate here without the usual cascade of unintended laughter by Steve’s readers, followed by your half-hearted claims of “I meant to do that.”

    You owe it to yourself to be relevant–if only in the comments section of somebody else’s website.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @History Reader


    Are you still trying to “win”? I think that’s the saddest thing I’ve seen today.
     
    Is it? You must lead a singularly charmed existence, dear boy.

    I think, since you’ve been corralled into a corner, you’re trying to find a way out via playing games with semantics. I’m afraid it won’t work, in this case, as I mentioned the Slave Trade, while you’re attempting to respond as if I said “The Atlantic Slave Trade.”
     
    Dear boy, you referred to the Slave Trade in a Jewish context.That tends to imply salt water transport.

    The Slave Trade in America went right on until the Civil War was over, don’t you know.
     
    The interstate transportation of slaves, yes. Jewish involvement in that was pretty marginal in comparison to their role in the importation from Africa and the Caribbean.

    There were also minor enterprises of transporting American born slaves to Haiti,
     
    Key word being "minor."

    with some unpleasant results, as well as other places. But sans that fact, the act of selling one human being to another is of course, “slave trading.”
     
    Of course, dear boy, but one also needs to bear in mind context......In your case, the relevant context involved Jews and South Carolina.....

    In any case, you’ve gone from being terribly misinformed
     
    Misinformed about what, dear boy?

    to making an ass out of yourself, which I’m fairly sure is your primary intent by now.
     
    MMMM, there are moments when Plato's allegory of the cave seems positively spot on....

    Of course you’re not stupid. You’re just having fun, right?
     
    As was the case with Byron, I laugh only so that I may not cry....

    I might suggest you try reading the personal diaries of people who were around during that era.
     
    Which era, dear boy? the pre-Revolutionary South? the early Republic? I've read the diaries of several leading figures from the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.John Quincy Adams diary is one that I can heartily recommend. His descriptions of John C Calhoun are quite illuminating.

    It might inform you of the import of Jews, not only in the slave trade, but many other aspects of American life.
     
    MMMM, I'm afraid that all of the pre-Civil War diaries that I have read have painted a rather marginal portrait of Jews.Take, for example, Mary Chesnut. Reading her accounts, it's rather hard to picture Jews as being terribly important.

    While you may have honestly given up on yourself long ago,
     
    Dear boy, I gave up hope on my fellow man long ago.As a wise man once said, I fight for myself alone.

    I want you to know you can deliver yourself from the label of “idiot” by simply doing some research and reading some books on the subject of which you attempt to hold court, to avoid the repetitive comedic results always at your expense, that you have inevitably experienced on this website.
     
    Dear boy, aren't you overdoing it just a tad? To assume the professor's role, one must first demonstrate a certain level of professorial acumen....

    I’d like to see you participate here without the usual cascade of unintended laughter
     
    Do you mean to say that I bring the divine gift of laughter to my fellow man? Dear boy, there can be no higher compliment.

    by Steve’s readers, followed by your half-hearted claims of “I meant to do that."
     
    Dear boy, nearly all that I do is half-hearted. We live, after all, in a vile and decadent age, one which will soon see America degenerate into Mexico North.

    You owe it to yourself to be relevant–if only in the comments section of somebody else’s website.
     
    Dear boy, I am always irrelevant.
  139. @whorefinder
    Mexicans are imported by Northeast WASPs and Jews to outnumber the Southern WASPs and the Irish/Italian-Catholics who are slowly uniting against the Northeast WASPs + Jews.

    Mexicans also serve the useful purpose of thumping blacks back into place as the Irish/Italian thugs used to before they moved out to the suburbs and became more genteel.

    The problem is that, unlike the Irish and Italians, Mexicans haven't yet united themselves politically as the Irish/Italian/other did in the late 19th Century. Union activity and soldiers camaraderie in wars of conquest (Mexican war, Civil War, Indian Wars, Spanish-American war) caused a lot of disparate American Irish to suddenly stop seeing themselves as Cork or Donegal boys and start proclaiming "Irishness" and get politically active (had they seen themselves as "Irish" back in Ireland instead of disparate clans, they could have kicked the British out by the 1840s instead of being forced to flee in the Great Hunger). Ditto later Italians. But today, NAFTA---which brings a lot of Mexicans in---is killing unions, and ethnic unions are verboten under "anti-discrimination" laws; plus we're always "the bad guys" in wars these days and have too many diversity units to allow ethnic uniting in the units.

    This problem hurts Dems, as Steve points out, because the Great Latino Wave in politics we keep getting promised isn't happening. But Dems are in the pocket of corporate America, too, as well as knee deep in their own-created diversity quagmire, so all they can really hope is that the Mexicans quietly beat the crap out of the Bloods (no videos, please) and get somewhat organized on their own.

    Replies: @syonredux, @n/a

    Mexicans are imported by Northeast WASPs and Jews to outnumber the Southern WASPs and the Irish/Italian-Catholics who are slowly uniting against the Northeast WASPs + Jews.

    “Northeast WASPs” like Ted Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson?

    But, seriously, list for us by name 30 or so of the people you would consider most responsible for mass hispanic immigration. No honest list of this kind will be dominated by “Northeast WASPs”.

    For the record, the fantasies of E. Michael Jones aside, the actual coalition was Southerners, Irish/Italian Catholics, and Jews against Northeastern “WASPs”. New England Catholics remain to the left of New England Protestants down to the present.

  140. @Bill P
    Texans aren't really Anglos -- they're a peculiar sort of southern American. Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called "Yankee," and it means essentially the same thing.

    Arguably, a higher proportion of Americans with Jewish ancestry than white gentiles are Anglo. Does it sound right, for example, to call some good old boy from Kentucky an "Anglo?" Or a guy named Olafson from North Dakota?

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:


    He attended the Buckley School, Philips Exeter Academy and graduated from Yale University, Summa Cum Laude in economics and political science and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. He was captain of the Yale soccer team. Steyer received his MBA from Stanford Business School, where he was an Arjay Miller Scholar.
     
    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain "American" are merely proles, so why apply it to us?

    If it's purely a linguistic term, why not call American-born Mexicans "Anglo?" If it's racial, why not say "whites?" If religious, why not "white Protestants?" If it really means "non-Jewish American whites," it's a misleading and spurious term, because many of the most Anglo-ey of Anglos are guys like Tom Steyer, who qualifies for Israeli citizenship under the right of return.

    As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx - people who were subsequently lumped into the category of "Scots Irish" - and, yes, some English (not "Anglo") with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me, sort of like how a Russian might ignorantly call a Texan a "Yankee." And indeed, in my personal experience it has only been racial minorities and Jews who view me as such, because nobody in my family ever referred to themselves as "Anglo," nor have I met other white Americans of similar background who do so.

    Instead, I view myself and my people as "American," and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood. 200 years ago, if someone called one of us "Anglo," he would have been punched in the face. Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it's hardly a point of pride.

    Replies: @Simon in London, @syonredux, @FUBAR007, @SFG, @Uptown Resident, @n/a

    Your comment is extremely confused.

    Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called “Yankee,” and it means essentially the same thing.

    This is incorrect. “Anglo” as a noun is ungrammatical mestizo slang for “English-speaking white person”. You’re confusing this with “WASP”, which is often falsely claimed to denote only elite, Northeastern Protestants (but even then, never limited to “Yankees”).

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:

    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.

    How would a half-Jew be a good example of a “Yankee” — even if his mother were a “Yankee”?

    In fact, Steyer’s mother, Margaret Fahr (notice the not-quite-New England Puritan surname) was born in Minnesota. Her parents were born in Pennsylvania. Of her great-grandparents, two were born in Germany, one was born in Scotland, one was born in New York, two were born in Pennsylvania (with substantial Scottish ancestry and minimal if any New England ancestry), one was born in New Brunswick with a Scottish name and a father from northern Ireland, and one was born in Maine, but with one parent again having been born in New Brunswick, of partially Scotch-Irish origin.

    In other words, she shares much more of her ancestry with groups you identify with than with New England Puritans. Yet, bizarrely, you somehow come up with her being a New England Yankee. You are far from alone, of course. It’s pretty much universal that other-identified types who spout off about Yankees/Puritans in internet comment sections have no idea what an actual Yankee or Puritan-descended person looks like. The vast majority of those casually assumed by these types to be Yankees/Puritans are not.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain “American” are merely proles, so why apply it to us? [. . .]

    Instead, I view myself and my people as “American,” and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood.

    It’s “WASP” that is a pejorative for (unhyphenated) “American”, and confusion of the sort you’re talking about was exactly the point behind the popularization of this term — the idea that “elite WASPs” represent a separate ethnic group from members of the American majority, which must be dispossessed in the name of fairness — when in fact there was never an “elite WASP” ethnic group, as distinct from simply elite segments of the Northwestern European-derived American ethnic core, subject to continual turnover in the form of social mobility.

    200 years ago, if someone called one of us “Anglo,” he would have been punched in the face.

    The largest component in the ancestry of colonial Americans was English. America did in fact have an Anglo-Saxon identity. This is not controversial. If your origins are anything like you claim, you probably have more English ancestry than you believe.

    Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it’s hardly a point of pride.

    No, we don’t.

    • Replies: @silviosilver
    @n/a


    No, we don’t.
     
    I don't think you should have to sit there and take it, but you'd best learn to endure it without it driving you bonkers because I expect you're going to get a lot more of it before all is said and done because anti-'WASP'ism is the racial butthurt that never dies.

    How many 'WASPs ' are there in America according to your learned estimate?

    Replies: @n/a

  141. @Southfarthing
    @Keith Vaz


    ‘New York SWPL liberals… Hated enemy.’ Hardly. What you’re describing are Scots-Irish and their wish to destroy White Europeans.

    We really must stop using social and / or political terms in discourse about racial / tribal phenomena.
     

    Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. That's why Atheists and Jews cluster together in politics: they're both mostly found in coastal cities. Or are atheists really a different race from Whites?

    Jews wish to destroy Christians... by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron? Definitely not Whites.

    *(Not counting the Amish-like Orthodox, who aren't highly represented in academia or business.)

    Replies: @ben tillman, @Anonymous, @n/a

    “Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. ”

    No, it doesn’t.

    “Jews wish to destroy Christians… by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron?”

    Are you trolling, are you Jewish, or are you really this delusional?

    Her father was born to a Jewish family, while her mother converted to Judaism.[6] Agron attended Hebrew school and had a bat mitzvah.[6][7]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianna_Agron

    [Chris Pine, 1/4 Jewish] has stated, “I definitely have a spiritual outlook… I am not a religious guy, I am probably agnostic”.[9]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Pine

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @n/a

    Non-Orthodox Jews' 71% intermarriage rate is creating ethnically Gentile babies instead of ethnically Jewish babies. (A half-Jew/half-Gentile is ethnically 75% Gentile.) That's true even if 20% of the children of those intermarriages are fully religiously Jewish, like Dianna Agron.

    Creating ethnically Gentile babies is hard to reconcile with the original claim of "wishing to destroy White Europeans."
    ---------------


    “Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region." >> "No, it doesn’t."
     
    Some data in that direction:

    Obama job approval ratings in 2014
    Approve; Disapprove
    ------------------------------------
    Massachusetts: 48.5%; 45.3%
    Jews nationwide: 55; 41
    No religion/Atheists nationwide (ibid.): 54; 38

    Likewise, most Jews opposing immigration would suggest they're not to the left of coastal liberal populations on that issue:


    Jews: 50 percent said it is too high; 5 percent said is too low; 22 percent just right.
     
  142. @FUBAR007
    @Bill P

    "Anglo", properly employed, denotes someone of predominantly English ancestry. That's it. All else is a misappropriation of the term.

    There's no such thing as an ethnic "American". It's too broad a term. Even when referring to Old Stock people whose ancestors have been here since before the Revolution as that includes English, Scottish, Germans, Dutch, etc. "White American" is similarly over-broad--it covers everyone from Southern Anglos to Ashkenazi Jews to midwestern Germans to northeastern Irish Catholics. Trying to use either term in an ethnic sense implies a level of cultural homogeneity that's never really existed.

    Replies: @n/a

    There’s no such thing as an ethnic “American”. It’s too broad a term. Even when referring to Old Stock people whose ancestors have been here since before the Revolution as that includes English, Scottish, Germans, Dutch, etc.

    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-is-american.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/hrdlicka-on-american-type.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/coon-on-american-race.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2010/03/hrdlicka-new-uncle-sam-is-in-making.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/national-origins-of-americas-founders.html

    Trying to use either term in an ethnic sense implies a level of cultural homogeneity that’s never really existed.

    I guess regional differences within Germany mean there’s no such thing as a German.

    • Replies: @FUBAR007
    @n/a


    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.
     
    No, there isn't. Just as there's no such thing as someone who's ethnically British. Or Australian. Or Canadian. Just as there was no such thing as an ethnic Soviet. The terms refer to nationality, not ethnicity.

    When people speak of being American in an ethnic sense or talk about "core American" culture, what they're really talking about is the form of English culture that has dominated the U.S. since its beginning. See David Hackett Fischer's book Albion's Seed and Kevin Phillips's book The Cousins Wars. "Ethnic Americans" are English-Americans and those they've completely assimilated. (And, to be clear, being truly assimilated means much, much more than just speaking English as a first language and embracing the U.S. political and economic traditions.)

    I guess regional differences within Germany mean there’s no such thing as a German.
     
    In an ethnic sense, that's true. Germany didn't exist until 1871. "German" as a term encompasses multiple ethnicities of varying degrees of relation--Bavarians, Austrians, Germanophone Swiss, Prussians, and so on.

    Replies: @n/a

    , @Suburban_elk
    @n/a


    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.
     
    Damn straight.

    As the links in that post attest, serious people back then were confident an "American type" did exist: a new breed, as it were.

    These days, do white Americans even have a name for themselves, do they even exist?

    My opinion is that "white American" works best, in the here and now, to meet the challenges of discourse. It is accurate and everyone knows what it means. It also is inclusive.

    For example, As a white American, I am full of resentment and hatred for what has been done, to me and my country.

  143. @Simon in London
    @Bill P

    "As someone of ancient American lineage, comprised mainly of people from the shores of the Irish Sea, such as Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, Manx – people who were subsequently lumped into the category of “Scots Irish” – and, yes, some English (not “Anglo”) with a little Dutch and Norman in the mix, Anglo sounds like something a foreigner would call me"

    I use Anglo non-pejoratively, along with Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Celtic, Anglo-Norman, occasionally Anglo-Germanic. It's usually a shorthand for persons of British descent. I guess being British I am a foreigner, but we don't use terms like Anglosphere pejoratively (unless we're cultural Marxists I guess). We're interested in the 'English-Speaking Peoples', our relatives, and Anglo- seems like an ok way to describe them. I guess a different term could be used but I can't think of an equally handy alternative.

    Replies: @Southfarthing, @n/a

    Anglosphere, Anglophone, and Anglo-Saxon are fine. It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating.

    • Replies: @FUBAR007
    @n/a


    It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating.
     
    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation. And, I say this as someone who is of predominantly English extraction whose people have been in America since the 1620s.

    Are you the same guy who was upset a while back about someone using the term WASP?

    Replies: @ben tillman, @n/a

    , @Simon in London
    @n/a

    "Anglosphere, Anglophone, and Anglo-Saxon are fine. It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating

    Is "Anglo-Celt" ok? I like it better anyway. It was the Australians who came up with 'Anglo-Celtic' to describe themselves; it was later adopted by some US Southerners (so I believe the SPLC considers it a hate term) and it seems quite accurate in describing mainstream American culture, which is arguably more (real) Scots-Irish than English in descent. A lot more English than Scots-Irish went to America, but the Scots-Irish tended to go to the frontier, which meant (a) they had more children - because the frontier was expanding and the Red Indian resistance was only occasionally effective and (b) they set down the cultural folkways for later arrivals, a point Jim Webb makes in Born Fighting.

    Of course the remaining New England Yankees are mostly Anglo-Saxon not Anglo-Celt, as are the Tidewater Southerners, and to a lesser extent the Dirty South Southerners of southern Mississippi and Alabama below the Tennessee River are mostly English by ancestry, though I think they are fairly mixed these days and culturally didn't seem all that different to me from the Scots-Irish further north.

    Replies: @n/a

  144. @Luke Lea
    In the comments to the Daily Beast story, "The Case for More Low-skilled Immigration," a commenter named secular_atheist typifies these attitudes:

    I am as you say, "caucasian" , a lapsed Jew. I do not need lectures from bigoted, exclusionary idiots like you who think america belongs to "caucasians".

    Besides, "caucasians" technically refers to people of the Caucasus mountains, ie, Chechens, Dagestanis, ingushetians, etc.

    You must be thinking of the old social Darwinistic term " caucasoid" to describe people of European ancestry. That theory is dead in the water.There is no scientific basis for "caucasoids".

    There is actually no such thing as "white race" or "whites".

    All "whites" are actually Demelanized Africans , ie Africans after migrating out of Africa, 75, 000 years ago, who lost their melanin pigmentation in the middle-east and Europe to become "light-skinned" people to allow more sunlight to allow for the synthesis of Vitamin D or Calciferol.

    Besides, you act like there are "no" white people in the democratic party??? Check out the demographics of the democratic party and you'll realize that most young people who self-identify as "whites" are democrats.

    The republican party is the party of old, bigoted white men and bigoted, fanatic, christian nuts"



    Another commenter named Crazylady, however, more than holds her own. She provides a fund of excellent links documenting every point she makes. Check her out.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/07/the-case-for-more-low-skill-immigration.html

    Replies: @gu

    This kind of stuff puts the holocaust in perspective.

  145. @History Reader
    @syonredux

    Synon:


    Not really, dear boy.As the above passage should indicate, the Slave Trade was not much of an issue in 1860.
     
    Are you still trying to "win"? I think that's the saddest thing I've seen today.

    I think, since you've been corralled into a corner, you're trying to find a way out via playing games with semantics. I'm afraid it won't work, in this case, as I mentioned the Slave Trade, while you're attempting to respond as if I said "The Atlantic Slave Trade."

    The Slave Trade in America went right on until the Civil War was over, don't you know. There were also minor enterprises of transporting American born slaves to Haiti, with some unpleasant results, as well as other places. But sans that fact, the act of selling one human being to another is of course, "slave trading."

    In any case, you've gone from being terribly misinformed to making an ass out of yourself, which I'm fairly sure is your primary intent by now. Of course you're not stupid. You're just having fun, right?

    I might suggest you try reading the personal diaries of people who were around during that era. It might inform you of the import of Jews, not only in the slave trade, but many other aspects of American life. While you may have honestly given up on yourself long ago, I want you to know you can deliver yourself from the label of "idiot" by simply doing some research and reading some books on the subject of which you attempt to hold court, to avoid the repetitive comedic results always at your expense, that you have inevitably experienced on this website.

    I'd like to see you participate here without the usual cascade of unintended laughter by Steve's readers, followed by your half-hearted claims of "I meant to do that."

    You owe it to yourself to be relevant–if only in the comments section of somebody else's website.

    Replies: @syonredux

    Are you still trying to “win”? I think that’s the saddest thing I’ve seen today.

    Is it? You must lead a singularly charmed existence, dear boy.

    I think, since you’ve been corralled into a corner, you’re trying to find a way out via playing games with semantics. I’m afraid it won’t work, in this case, as I mentioned the Slave Trade, while you’re attempting to respond as if I said “The Atlantic Slave Trade.”

    Dear boy, you referred to the Slave Trade in a Jewish context.That tends to imply salt water transport.

    The Slave Trade in America went right on until the Civil War was over, don’t you know.

    The interstate transportation of slaves, yes. Jewish involvement in that was pretty marginal in comparison to their role in the importation from Africa and the Caribbean.

    There were also minor enterprises of transporting American born slaves to Haiti,

    Key word being “minor.”

    with some unpleasant results, as well as other places. But sans that fact, the act of selling one human being to another is of course, “slave trading.”

    Of course, dear boy, but one also needs to bear in mind context……In your case, the relevant context involved Jews and South Carolina…..

    In any case, you’ve gone from being terribly misinformed

    Misinformed about what, dear boy?

    to making an ass out of yourself, which I’m fairly sure is your primary intent by now.

    MMMM, there are moments when Plato’s allegory of the cave seems positively spot on….

    Of course you’re not stupid. You’re just having fun, right?

    As was the case with Byron, I laugh only so that I may not cry….

    I might suggest you try reading the personal diaries of people who were around during that era.

    Which era, dear boy? the pre-Revolutionary South? the early Republic? I’ve read the diaries of several leading figures from the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.John Quincy Adams diary is one that I can heartily recommend. His descriptions of John C Calhoun are quite illuminating.

    It might inform you of the import of Jews, not only in the slave trade, but many other aspects of American life.

    MMMM, I’m afraid that all of the pre-Civil War diaries that I have read have painted a rather marginal portrait of Jews.Take, for example, Mary Chesnut. Reading her accounts, it’s rather hard to picture Jews as being terribly important.

    While you may have honestly given up on yourself long ago,

    Dear boy, I gave up hope on my fellow man long ago.As a wise man once said, I fight for myself alone.

    I want you to know you can deliver yourself from the label of “idiot” by simply doing some research and reading some books on the subject of which you attempt to hold court, to avoid the repetitive comedic results always at your expense, that you have inevitably experienced on this website.

    Dear boy, aren’t you overdoing it just a tad? To assume the professor’s role, one must first demonstrate a certain level of professorial acumen….

    I’d like to see you participate here without the usual cascade of unintended laughter

    Do you mean to say that I bring the divine gift of laughter to my fellow man? Dear boy, there can be no higher compliment.

    by Steve’s readers, followed by your half-hearted claims of “I meant to do that.”

    Dear boy, nearly all that I do is half-hearted. We live, after all, in a vile and decadent age, one which will soon see America degenerate into Mexico North.

    You owe it to yourself to be relevant–if only in the comments section of somebody else’s website.

    Dear boy, I am always irrelevant.

  146. @n/a
    @FUBAR007


    There’s no such thing as an ethnic “American”. It’s too broad a term. Even when referring to Old Stock people whose ancestors have been here since before the Revolution as that includes English, Scottish, Germans, Dutch, etc.
     
    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-is-american.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/hrdlicka-on-american-type.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/coon-on-american-race.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2010/03/hrdlicka-new-uncle-sam-is-in-making.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/national-origins-of-americas-founders.html

    Trying to use either term in an ethnic sense implies a level of cultural homogeneity that’s never really existed.
     
    I guess regional differences within Germany mean there's no such thing as a German.

    Replies: @FUBAR007, @Suburban_elk

    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.

    No, there isn’t. Just as there’s no such thing as someone who’s ethnically British. Or Australian. Or Canadian. Just as there was no such thing as an ethnic Soviet. The terms refer to nationality, not ethnicity.

    When people speak of being American in an ethnic sense or talk about “core American” culture, what they’re really talking about is the form of English culture that has dominated the U.S. since its beginning. See David Hackett Fischer’s book Albion’s Seed and Kevin Phillips’s book The Cousins Wars. “Ethnic Americans” are English-Americans and those they’ve completely assimilated. (And, to be clear, being truly assimilated means much, much more than just speaking English as a first language and embracing the U.S. political and economic traditions.)

    I guess regional differences within Germany mean there’s no such thing as a German.

    In an ethnic sense, that’s true. Germany didn’t exist until 1871. “German” as a term encompasses multiple ethnicities of varying degrees of relation–Bavarians, Austrians, Germanophone Swiss, Prussians, and so on.

    • Replies: @n/a
    @FUBAR007

    Dictionary definitions of "ethnicity":


    an ethnic group; a social group that shares a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like:
     

    Identity with or membership in a particular racial, national, or cultural group and observance of that group's customs, beliefs, and language.
     
    Germans are an ethnicity, and have been since the medieval period, regardless of how many sub-German ethnicities can be defined.

    Core Americans are an ethnicty, regardless of regional variation. And, yes, core Americans are exactly the descendants of colonial Americans and those who have assimilated into this group.

    There does not exist in America today a separate "English American" ethnic group of colonial origin. The various colonial elements (British/Dutch/German) have been mixing freely for a couple hundred years, and also have mixed with later Northwestern European immigrants.

    Albion's Seed is an interesting but imperfect book, which is often taken too seriously by people who have little sense of history and minimal knowledge of their own ancestry.
  147. Planet of the Mexicans

  148. @n/a
    @Simon in London

    Anglosphere, Anglophone, and Anglo-Saxon are fine. It's "Anglo" as a noun which is grating.

    Replies: @FUBAR007, @Simon in London

    It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating.

    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation. And, I say this as someone who is of predominantly English extraction whose people have been in America since the 1620s.

    Are you the same guy who was upset a while back about someone using the term WASP?

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @FUBAR007


    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation.
     
    It doesn't have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It's just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.

    Replies: @syonredux, @n/a

    , @n/a
    @FUBAR007

    I am speaking for myself, as well as for others who find it irritating.

    I don't know if you're intentionally misrepresenting your ancestry, or just don't know anything about it (besides having been told you descend from a Mayflower passenger, if that much is even true), but I can be pretty sure it's not what you've claimed (says his family has been in New Jersey for hundreds of years but he still IS a "Puritan", despite the improbaility of anything like unmixed New England ancestry being preserved over that time period in the mid-Atlantic; thinks Lena Dunham is a Yankee/Puritan; says he identifies as a "Cavalier").

    No American prior to the last third of the 20th century ever said "I am an Anglo".

    "I am an Anglo-Saxon", yes. "I am an Anglo", no.

  149. “Needless to say, McCarthy is not a product of Texas”

    Then I guess, neither were Sam Houston, Steven F. Austin, etc.

    And as an aside, as Waylon Jennings once said, “you just can’t live in Texas, unless you’ve got a lot of soul.”

  150. @SFG
    @Bill P

    I always assumed 'Anglo' meant English in descent. Nothing wrong with it--hardcore lefties don't like it because it implies conservatism, but nothing shameful about English ancestry in my view--the Brits have accomplished quite a bit over the years.

    I have to say nobody outside of the alt-right and Jews themselves is quite as obsessed with separating out Jews as a separate category. Your average American Ashkenazi is apparently about half Italian due to the genetic studies, and a lot of them have interbred with the locals here in the USA. It is true that the lines between old-money WASPs and old-money Ashekenazim don't seem all that clear in the Northeast anymore.

    Replies: @silviosilver

    I have to say nobody outside of the alt-right and Jews themselves is quite as obsessed with separating out Jews as a separate category.

    I won’t argue with that. But you have to admit there is a tandem bizarre tendency among some alt-righters to insist that no distinction worthy of the name can possibly be drawn. It’s not so much that you’re an ‘anti-semite’ if you draw a distinction; it’s a kind of madness, an obsession, they like to claim. The whole future of the dissident right hinges on making it ‘safe for Jews’ this thinking goes. The exasperation when you contradict them has to be seen to be believed.

  151. @n/a
    @Bill P

    Your comment is extremely confused.


    Anglo is really a new term for what used to be called “Yankee,” and it means essentially the same thing.
     
    This is incorrect. "Anglo" as a noun is ungrammatical mestizo slang for "English-speaking white person". You're confusing this with "WASP", which is often falsely claimed to denote only elite, Northeastern Protestants (but even then, never limited to "Yankees").

    On the other hand, billionaire banker Tom Steyer is a good example of a contemporary Anglo:

    Jewish father, New England Episcopalian mother.
     
    How would a half-Jew be a good example of a "Yankee" -- even if his mother were a "Yankee"?

    In fact, Steyer's mother, Margaret Fahr (notice the not-quite-New England Puritan surname) was born in Minnesota. Her parents were born in Pennsylvania. Of her great-grandparents, two were born in Germany, one was born in Scotland, one was born in New York, two were born in Pennsylvania (with substantial Scottish ancestry and minimal if any New England ancestry), one was born in New Brunswick with a Scottish name and a father from northern Ireland, and one was born in Maine, but with one parent again having been born in New Brunswick, of partially Scotch-Irish origin.

    In other words, she shares much more of her ancestry with groups you identify with than with New England Puritans. Yet, bizarrely, you somehow come up with her being a New England Yankee. You are far from alone, of course. It's pretty much universal that other-identified types who spout off about Yankees/Puritans in internet comment sections have no idea what an actual Yankee or Puritan-descended person looks like. The vast majority of those casually assumed by these types to be Yankees/Puritans are not.

    Anglo is pejorative because it refers to people who supposedly have unearned privilege, which is true to some extent of the real ones. In contrast, those of us who are just plain “American” are merely proles, so why apply it to us? [. . .]

    Instead, I view myself and my people as “American,” and yes, more American than those hyphenated types and the kind of people who have the right to dual citizenship by blood.
     
    It's "WASP" that is a pejorative for (unhyphenated) "American", and confusion of the sort you're talking about was exactly the point behind the popularization of this term -- the idea that "elite WASPs" represent a separate ethnic group from members of the American majority, which must be dispossessed in the name of fairness -- when in fact there was never an "elite WASP" ethnic group, as distinct from simply elite segments of the Northwestern European-derived American ethnic core, subject to continual turnover in the form of social mobility.

    200 years ago, if someone called one of us “Anglo,” he would have been punched in the face.
     
    The largest component in the ancestry of colonial Americans was English. America did in fact have an Anglo-Saxon identity. This is not controversial. If your origins are anything like you claim, you probably have more English ancestry than you believe.

    Today, however, in our degraded state, we must endure such daily humiliations, but it’s hardly a point of pride.
     
    No, we don't.

    Replies: @silviosilver

    No, we don’t.

    I don’t think you should have to sit there and take it, but you’d best learn to endure it without it driving you bonkers because I expect you’re going to get a lot more of it before all is said and done because anti-‘WASP’ism is the racial butthurt that never dies.

    How many ‘WASPs ‘ are there in America according to your learned estimate?

    • Replies: @n/a
    @silviosilver


    How many ‘WASPs ‘ are there in America according to your learned estimate?
     
    Obviously, it depends on which definition of "WASP" you're using. Again, there was never any separate "elite WASP" ethnic group, and there were no barriers to non-English NW Europeans (Scots, Germans, Dutch, etc.) joining the social or economic elite in America.

    So, if we count all Northwestern European-descended Americans, we still come up with quite a large number today.

    On the other hand, to those who have been successfully confused by the term "WASP", and believe it refers only to Northeastern Protestants of unmixed colonial stock who despite every appearance otherwise still secretly run the country, or those who read Albion's Seed or promoters of Celto-Southronism and suddently discover they're Scotch-Irish and at war with pure Anglo-Saxon New England Puritan Yankees, the number of "WASPs" or "Yankees" fitting either of those definitions is tiny and continually shrinking.
  152. @n/a
    @FUBAR007


    There’s no such thing as an ethnic “American”. It’s too broad a term. Even when referring to Old Stock people whose ancestors have been here since before the Revolution as that includes English, Scottish, Germans, Dutch, etc.
     
    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.

    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/what-is-american.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/hrdlicka-on-american-type.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/coon-on-american-race.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2010/03/hrdlicka-new-uncle-sam-is-in-making.html
    http://racehist.blogspot.com/2008/04/national-origins-of-americas-founders.html

    Trying to use either term in an ethnic sense implies a level of cultural homogeneity that’s never really existed.
     
    I guess regional differences within Germany mean there's no such thing as a German.

    Replies: @FUBAR007, @Suburban_elk

    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.

    Damn straight.

    As the links in that post attest, serious people back then were confident an “American type” did exist: a new breed, as it were.

    These days, do white Americans even have a name for themselves, do they even exist?

    My opinion is that “white American” works best, in the here and now, to meet the challenges of discourse. It is accurate and everyone knows what it means. It also is inclusive.

    For example, As a white American, I am full of resentment and hatred for what has been done, to me and my country.

  153. @FUBAR007
    @n/a


    It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating.
     
    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation. And, I say this as someone who is of predominantly English extraction whose people have been in America since the 1620s.

    Are you the same guy who was upset a while back about someone using the term WASP?

    Replies: @ben tillman, @n/a

    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation.

    It doesn’t have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It’s just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @ben tillman


    It doesn’t have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It’s just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.
     
    That's their problem.I'm half Ashkenazi, and I'm proud to call myself Anglo.If Germans, Italians, Jews, etc, living in the USA don't like living in an Anglo country, why don't they leave.Hyphenates disgust me.If you don't feel a connection to what happened at Runnymede, just go. Find a country where you feel at home.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Hare Krishna, @anon

    , @n/a
    @ben tillman

    It's offensive to me for entirely different reasons: this is a term that was introduced from Spanglish by analogy to "hispanic". We don't need a separate word to describe white, English-speaking Americans in America. It's understood that Americans speak English.

    Also, while I don't really care about any offense someone who identifies as "Irish-American", for example, might feel at being called "Anglo", it certainly sows confusion and degrades the language when you have Italians or Jews being described as "Anglos".

  154. @Southfarthing
    @ben tillman


    Which is another way of saying that the difference between regions disappears when you control for the number of Jews.
     
    It means Jews mostly have the same attitudes as their neighbors.

    For example, only 16% of the supporters of FWD.us are Jewish.

    So if there were no Jews in the tech industry, FWD.us would be 100% their coastal urbanite neighbors like Bill Gates, who have the same views.

    As a lifelong coastal urbanite, the enforcers of political correctness upon me have always been kumbayah liberals and Christians.

    Replies: @ben tillman

    It means Jews mostly have the same attitudes as their neighbors.

    I would have sworn I just said that!

    For example, only 16% of the supporters of FWD.us are Jewish.

    So if there were no Jews in the tech industry, FWD.us would be 100% their coastal urbanite neighbors like Bill Gates, who have the same views.

    No, you’re begging the question. The arrow of causation could go either way, and it should be obvious that it is not Whites persuading Jews to adopt an anti-White ideology but that it is rather the other way around.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @ben tillman

    84% of the masters-of-the-universe behind FWD.us are not Jews.

    Are you saying billionaires are helpless victims?

    Replies: @ben tillman

  155. @Bill P

    I use Anglo non-pejoratively, along with Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Celtic, Anglo-Norman, occasionally Anglo-Germanic.

    -Simon in London
     
    Well, take the term Anglo-Irish, which has a specific ethno-cultural meaning. When I hear the term, I know exactly what it means, because I have Anglo-Irish in my family (I like to say that my most Irish grandparent is also the most English -- her father was of Anglo-Irish descent).

    It refers specifically to ethnic English people who settled in Ireland, mainly attended the Church of Ireland, and who were, incidentally, among the most active in the cause of Irish independence. An example of an Anglo-Irishman would be Robert Parnell, the handsome parliamentarian who got in trouble over his affair with Kitty O'Shea.

    Lots of Anglo-Irish came to the US along with others from the area.

    So when one hears "Anglo," the meaning is quite specific, and is above all associated with the Anglican Church. This is probably where the term gained currency, since it is Latin after all.

    However, to an American, given the historical connotation, it kind of suggests that we're interlopers or strangers in our own country. For example, would anyone call English people "Anglos" in England? Would one call Irish in Ireland "Hiberno-Irish?" Or, better yet, would one call Chinese "Sino-Chinese?" By the way, "Han Chinese" is a redundant term, because non-Han ethnic groups in China are not Chinese (which means "people of the Qin dynasty"), and will tell you so.

    Some may disagree, but to me it just seems like one more example of our dispossession. I won't accept being hyphenated in the country my ancestors founded.

    Replies: @Simon in London

    “Some may disagree, but to me it just seems like one more example of our dispossession. I won’t accept being hyphenated in the country my ancestors founded”

    I take your point, but realistically you have been dispossessed already.

  156. @n/a
    @Simon in London

    Anglosphere, Anglophone, and Anglo-Saxon are fine. It's "Anglo" as a noun which is grating.

    Replies: @FUBAR007, @Simon in London

    “Anglosphere, Anglophone, and Anglo-Saxon are fine. It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating

    Is “Anglo-Celt” ok? I like it better anyway. It was the Australians who came up with ‘Anglo-Celtic’ to describe themselves; it was later adopted by some US Southerners (so I believe the SPLC considers it a hate term) and it seems quite accurate in describing mainstream American culture, which is arguably more (real) Scots-Irish than English in descent. A lot more English than Scots-Irish went to America, but the Scots-Irish tended to go to the frontier, which meant (a) they had more children – because the frontier was expanding and the Red Indian resistance was only occasionally effective and (b) they set down the cultural folkways for later arrivals, a point Jim Webb makes in Born Fighting.

    Of course the remaining New England Yankees are mostly Anglo-Saxon not Anglo-Celt, as are the Tidewater Southerners, and to a lesser extent the Dirty South Southerners of southern Mississippi and Alabama below the Tennessee River are mostly English by ancestry, though I think they are fairly mixed these days and culturally didn’t seem all that different to me from the Scots-Irish further north.

    • Replies: @n/a
    @Simon in London


    Is “Anglo-Celt” ok? I like it better anyway.
     
    Of course. The point is, "Anglo-" is a combining form. The noun is "English". Or "Anglo-Saxon". Or "Anglo-Celt", etc.

    A lot more English than Scots-Irish went to America, but the Scots-Irish tended to go to the frontier, which meant (a) they had more children – because the frontier was expanding and the Red Indian resistance was only occasionally effective and (b) they set down the cultural folkways for later arrivals, a point Jim Webb makes in Born Fighting.
     
    The role of the "Scotch-Irish", as a distinct group, in shaping American culture has been greatly exaggerated. Even in Appalachia, there were usually more English than Scotch-Irish.
  157. @Southfarthing
    @Anonymous


    Lena Dunham doesn’t identify as Christian, and her attitude is common
     
    The Pew survey found that of intermarried Jews (most Jews), only 20% are raising their children as fully Jewish by religion:

    “Among Jews with a non-Jewish spouse... 20% say they are raising their children Jewish by religion, and 25% are raising their children partly Jewish by religion. Roughly one-third (37%) of intermarried Jews who are raising children say they are not raising those children Jewish at all.”
     
    And that 20% who are raised Jewish by religion will still tend have less strong ties to Jewish heritage since they’re not really ethnically Jewish. (75% of their ancestry is Christian, if we include the 50% historical Italian admixture.)

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Lena Dunham is probably atheist or agnostic, hence not really “Jewish by religion”. But she identifies as “culturally Jewish”, which is what’s relevant, and her attitude is common.

  158. @ben tillman
    @FUBAR007


    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation.
     
    It doesn't have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It's just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.

    Replies: @syonredux, @n/a

    It doesn’t have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It’s just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.

    That’s their problem.I’m half Ashkenazi, and I’m proud to call myself Anglo.If Germans, Italians, Jews, etc, living in the USA don’t like living in an Anglo country, why don’t they leave.Hyphenates disgust me.If you don’t feel a connection to what happened at Runnymede, just go. Find a country where you feel at home.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @syonredux

    I think you're thinking of the term "American", not "Anglo". "Anglo" has never really been used like that. So it sounds awkward, inauthentic, and forced. And most Americans, including those of English stock, probably have never heard of Runnymede and couldn't tell you what happened there

    Replies: @syonredux

    , @Hare Krishna
    @syonredux

    "Anglo" is a fighting word to Irish Americans. Including in California.

    Replies: @syonredux

    , @anon
    @syonredux


    That’s their problem.I’m half Ashkenazi, and I’m proud to call myself Anglo.
     
    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren't mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.


    In the spirit of reciprocal exposure (not that it matters, as I generally eschew screen names), I'm 1/4 Ashkenazi.

    Replies: @Southfarthing, @syonredux

  159. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Most Jewish-gentile intermarriages occur in an upper-middle class, professional, major metro area cultural milieu in which secular Jewish identity and culture are quite prominent or even predominant. These areas are much more the “home turf” of secular Jewish culture, while the gentiles are often transplants from more gentile suburban and rural areas who move there for college and professional work.

    It’s much more uncommon for Jews to settle and marry into very gentile, rural farming communities, for example.

  160. @syonredux
    @ben tillman


    It doesn’t have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It’s just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.
     
    That's their problem.I'm half Ashkenazi, and I'm proud to call myself Anglo.If Germans, Italians, Jews, etc, living in the USA don't like living in an Anglo country, why don't they leave.Hyphenates disgust me.If you don't feel a connection to what happened at Runnymede, just go. Find a country where you feel at home.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Hare Krishna, @anon

    I think you’re thinking of the term “American”, not “Anglo”. “Anglo” has never really been used like that. So it sounds awkward, inauthentic, and forced. And most Americans, including those of English stock, probably have never heard of Runnymede and couldn’t tell you what happened there

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Anonymous


    I think you’re thinking of the term “American”, not “Anglo”. “
     
    Sadly, American is a title that can be granted by a mere stroke of a pen. Salma Hayek is an American, but she proudly proclaims that her loyalty lies with Mexico.And, of course, David Brooks' son is serving with the IDF, yet he is an American.

    Anglo” has never really been used like that. So it sounds awkward, inauthentic, and forced.
     
    American sounded "awkward, inauthentic, and forced" at one time, too

    And most Americans, including those of English stock, probably have never heard of Runnymede and couldn’t tell you what happened there
     
    O tempora! O mores!
  161. @History Reader
    @syonredux

    Syon:


    Yankee dislike for the South has a long history, dear fellow, one that stretches back long before Jews played a significant role in American life.
     
    Uh... what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time. Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it's history.

    Google "Mordecai Cohen," the richest man in the state at that time, and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader. According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade, that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.

    Now, I want you to go out and clean these erasers for trying to teach without doing your homework. There's a lad!

    Replies: @syonredux, @Art Deco

    At the time the slave trade was outlawed by federal statute (1808), there were about 2,500 Jews in the United States out of a total population of over 7 million. There were 200,000 in 1860, out of a total population of 31 million. The presence of the overwhelming majority of the latter was attributable to immigration from the German states which had taken place in the previous twenty years.

  162. @syonredux
    @History Reader


    Uh… what are you talking about, dear boy? If you took a walk in downtown Charlestown in 1835, you would be amazed at the number of Jewish slave traders/owners.
     
    Why would I be amazed, dear boy? Charleston's Jewish community is quite well known

    They owned about 83% the of the 87% of slaveholders there around that time.
     
    I'm sorry, dear boy; that part of your post was a bit too scrambled.Is this what you were referring to:

    The percentage of Jewish Charlestonians who held slaves in 1830 (83%) was roughly the same as that of the general white population of the city (87%).
     

    Jews had a hell of a role in American southern life for most of it’s history.
     
    Not quite, dear boy.Southern History, after all, begins in 1607 at Jamestown.Jewish life in the colonial South was largely limited to South Carolina and Georgia.

    Google “Mordecai Cohen,” the richest man in the state at that time,
     
    MMMM, this article pegs him at second richest:

    Thus the ruling class of Charleston looked to Mordecai Cohen, by some estimates the second wealthiest man in South Carolina
     
    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Plus, note the weasel-words ("by some estimates").

    and the poster boy for the stereotypical ruthless slave trader.
     
    Isn't that a hotly contested honor?

    According to some of his escaped slaves, he was quite a piece of work.
     
    Well, his son David sounds rather unpleasant:

    Jim worked as a hostler or a groom for David Cohen but also did field work. He described David Cohen as a man of relentless vigilance: “He was in the habit of walking about at all hours of the night to find out who stole wood, or turnips, or hogs, or any thing else.” When he suspected anyone of thieving, the punishments were dire. One old man, Peter, was found stealing a few sticks of wood from David Cohen. Jim testified that Peter was whipped for hours until he was unconscious and then doused with brine before being chained in the stocks kept on the plantation for just such occasions.
    After being on the receiving end of one especially cruel whipping by David Cohen’s overseer, Jim fled Soldier’s Retreat and hid with a community of black fugitives in the dense swamps. Recaptured after only few brief weeks of freedom, Jim was brutally punished with another whipping. When sympathetic interviewers later transcribed his story, they added a footnote testifying that the fugitive’s scars all over his body “appear as if pieces of flesh had been gouged out, and some are ridges or elevations of the flesh and skin. They could easily be felt through his clothing.”
     
    http://forward.com/articles/205455/slaves-of-charleston/?p=all

    Part of the Yankee hatred of the south was BECAUSE of the hearty Jewish participation in the slave trade,
     
    Actually, dear boy, the Slave Trade was not much of a factor after 1808:

    The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves of 1807 (2 Stat. 426, enacted March 2, 1807) is a United States federal law that stated that no new slaves were permitted to be imported into the United States. It took effect in 1808, the earliest date permitted by the United States Constitution.
     

    that finally brought things to a head, dear boy.
     
    Not really, dear boy.As the above passage should indicate, the Slave Trade was not much of an issue in 1860.

    Replies: @History Reader, @Jack D

    Blacks/servants stealing things is not a new problem. It must have been a constant struggle on the plantation to keep the slaves from robbing you blind – this was before security cameras and theft tags. If you look at old colonial furniture, there are locks all over the place – they would lock up things like linens (not to mention liquor and silver).

    It was not really in slave owner’s interest to damage their own property, but sometimes the overseers might have gotten overenthusiastic with the whip out of frustration with recidivism (Eric Garner arrested 30 times) – at least they didn’t choke them to death or shoot him. Note that they chose an old man, who was probably not worth much anymore, pour encourager les autres, just the way that today you might choose some random blond frat boy to expel from university for “rape”.

    There were certainly a few Jews in the coastal ports of the Old South (all the main coastal ports of the 13 colonies, actually) and some of them did quite well, but the idea that they somehow dominated the slave trade is a complete myth. They were not absent from that trade, but they were not especially prominent in it either, if only because there really weren’t that many Jews in the US before the German wave of the 1840s and then the great E. European wave of the late 19th century. Prior to the 1840s, Jews never exceeded .05% of the population of the US – less than 3,000 Jews spread out over the entire US.

  163. @As If
    Good gosh, some of you guys are as bad as any sort of prog blog talking about what you "know" when it comes to Texas.

    "Tejanos" are one of those odd cultural mixings that you could describe nowadays as "antebellum South with salsa" if you wanted to sound like a dork. The guys masturbating furiously over the image of the cavalier over in the Jefferson thread would totally recognize the kind of attitude that makes up a lot of Tejano masculinity. Tejano females are right there with Ol Miss sorority girls, and I remember one grandmother dismissing me when I couldn't recite my lineage to know when I came into the country by telling me "My grandmother told me when Sam Houston rode his horse into town.."

    A different world, not easily encapsulated.

    Replies: @Gringo

    Good gosh, some of you guys are as bad as any sort of prog blog talking about what you “know” when it comes to Texas.“Tejanos” are one of those odd cultural mixings that you could describe nowadays as “antebellum South with salsa” if you wanted to sound like a dork…A different world, not easily encapsulated.

    A Tejano neighbor of mine researched his family’s genealogy, and found out that he had Converso ancestors who had come to Monterey, then an outpost of the Spanish Empire that was about as far from the influence of Madrid and the Inquisition as possible. In the 18th century his ancestors came to Texas/Tejas. My Tejano neighbor went to Ivy League Columbia for his undergrad years, and found that the assumed atheism of the place was not a comfortable fit for his Roman Catholic faith.

  164. @syonredux
    @ben tillman


    It doesn’t have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It’s just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.
     
    That's their problem.I'm half Ashkenazi, and I'm proud to call myself Anglo.If Germans, Italians, Jews, etc, living in the USA don't like living in an Anglo country, why don't they leave.Hyphenates disgust me.If you don't feel a connection to what happened at Runnymede, just go. Find a country where you feel at home.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Hare Krishna, @anon

    “Anglo” is a fighting word to Irish Americans. Including in California.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    @Hare Krishna


    “Anglo” is a fighting word to Irish Americans. Including in California.
     
    So much the worse for them.I feel nothing but disgust for "Hyphenated" Americans, and the Catholic Irish were the first Hyphenates.Hence, it is in no small measure due to them that we are forced to live in a "multicultural" cesspool today.

    If you want to be Irish, stay in Ireland, but please spare us something as monstrous as the "Irish-American."

    Replies: @dcite

  165. “That’s their problem.I’m half Ashkenazi, and I’m proud to call myself Anglo.”

    In the film “Spanglish”, Paz Vega who plays a Mexican maid refers to Adam Sandler as an Anglo. I have been called an Anglo as well by a Mexican, even though my ancestors come from a place that is geographically closer to Macedonia than it is to Manchester, England.

  166. @JayMan
    @Bill P


    Good point. There’s something about New England that has always resisted fully committing to an “American” identity.

    However, a lot of Southern customs show a clear English character, such as the love of gardening, a lively tradition of debate, taking tea, and the “hanging judge.” Not to mention coon hunting, which is clearly derived from hunting foxes with hounds. And by ancestry, the most English states in the Union (going by white population) may well be Mississippi and Alabama.

    The West is culturally the farthest from the old country, and probably most purely American in identity.
     

    Guys:

    http://twitter.com/JayMan471/status/536345610405031936

    Flags of the American Nations | JayMan's Blog

    Maps of the American Nations | JayMan's Blog

    Rural White Liberals – a Key to Understanding the Political Divide | JayMan's Blog

    More Maps of the American Nations | JayMan's Blog

    Replies: @EriK

    Great stuff.

    • Replies: @JayMan
    @EriK

    Thank you. :)

  167. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @syonredux
    @ben tillman


    It doesn’t have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It’s just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.
     
    That's their problem.I'm half Ashkenazi, and I'm proud to call myself Anglo.If Germans, Italians, Jews, etc, living in the USA don't like living in an Anglo country, why don't they leave.Hyphenates disgust me.If you don't feel a connection to what happened at Runnymede, just go. Find a country where you feel at home.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Hare Krishna, @anon

    That’s their problem.I’m half Ashkenazi, and I’m proud to call myself Anglo.

    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren’t mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.

    In the spirit of reciprocal exposure (not that it matters, as I generally eschew screen names), I’m 1/4 Ashkenazi.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @anon

    Most WNs just want Jews to identify as Whites and to be on their team.

    If you're using Nazi terms like "mischling" or "Jewish physics," your mind has been corrupted without you realizing it.

    Replies: @anon

    , @syonredux
    @anon


    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren’t mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.
     
    Dear fellow,as I said before, there is nothing "mischling" about me.Culturally, I am all Anglo.Possessing Ashkenazi DNA does not alter that fact.

    Replies: @anon, @Anonymous

  168. @anon
    @syonredux


    That’s their problem.I’m half Ashkenazi, and I’m proud to call myself Anglo.
     
    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren't mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.


    In the spirit of reciprocal exposure (not that it matters, as I generally eschew screen names), I'm 1/4 Ashkenazi.

    Replies: @Southfarthing, @syonredux

    Most WNs just want Jews to identify as Whites and to be on their team.

    If you’re using Nazi terms like “mischling” or “Jewish physics,” your mind has been corrupted without you realizing it.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Southfarthing

    Then what's the appropriate and benign equivalent of "mulatto" or "mestizo" for mixed-Ashkenazi?
    Online I've seen half-Ashkenzi refer to themselves as "mischling" in seemingly neutral and non-disparaging tones.

    If anything, it's ignorance or apathy to the connotations on my part.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

  169. @Southfarthing
    @anon

    Most WNs just want Jews to identify as Whites and to be on their team.

    If you're using Nazi terms like "mischling" or "Jewish physics," your mind has been corrupted without you realizing it.

    Replies: @anon

    Then what’s the appropriate and benign equivalent of “mulatto” or “mestizo” for mixed-Ashkenazi?
    Online I’ve seen half-Ashkenzi refer to themselves as “mischling” in seemingly neutral and non-disparaging tones.

    If anything, it’s ignorance or apathy to the connotations on my part.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @anon


    Then what’s the appropriate and benign equivalent of “mulatto” or “mestizo” for mixed-Ashkenazi?
     
    What's the equivalent of "mulatto" for a half Italian / half German? (Maybe commenter Jefferson can help?)

    Normal society doesn't care enough to create terms for these things.

    Replies: @dcite

  170. @n/a
    @Southfarthing

    "Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region. "

    No, it doesn't.


    "Jews wish to destroy Christians… by intermarrying with Christians at 71%* and having Christian babies instead of Jewish babies? Chris Pine and Dianna Agron?"

    Are you trolling, are you Jewish, or are you really this delusional?


    Her father was born to a Jewish family, while her mother converted to Judaism.[6] Agron attended Hebrew school and had a bat mitzvah.[6][7]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianna_Agron

    [Chris Pine, 1/4 Jewish] has stated, "I definitely have a spiritual outlook... I am not a religious guy, I am probably agnostic".[9]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Pine

     

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    Non-Orthodox Jews’ 71% intermarriage rate is creating ethnically Gentile babies instead of ethnically Jewish babies. (A half-Jew/half-Gentile is ethnically 75% Gentile.) That’s true even if 20% of the children of those intermarriages are fully religiously Jewish, like Dianna Agron.

    Creating ethnically Gentile babies is hard to reconcile with the original claim of “wishing to destroy White Europeans.”
    —————

    “Most of the difference between Jews and Christians gets removed when you control for region.” >> “No, it doesn’t.”

    Some data in that direction:

    Obama job approval ratings in 2014
    Approve; Disapprove
    ————————————
    Massachusetts: 48.5%; 45.3%
    Jews nationwide: 55; 41
    No religion/Atheists nationwide (ibid.): 54; 38

    Likewise, most Jews opposing immigration would suggest they’re not to the left of coastal liberal populations on that issue:

    Jews: 50 percent said it is too high; 5 percent said is too low; 22 percent just right.

  171. @anon
    @syonredux


    That’s their problem.I’m half Ashkenazi, and I’m proud to call myself Anglo.
     
    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren't mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.


    In the spirit of reciprocal exposure (not that it matters, as I generally eschew screen names), I'm 1/4 Ashkenazi.

    Replies: @Southfarthing, @syonredux

    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren’t mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.

    Dear fellow,as I said before, there is nothing “mischling” about me.Culturally, I am all Anglo.Possessing Ashkenazi DNA does not alter that fact.

    • Replies: @anon
    @syonredux

    Okay, I comprehend. I was never informed we had the second coming of Lawrence Auster in our midst.

    , @Anonymous
    @syonredux

    Culturally, nobody in America, even those of English stock, is "all Anglo". Unless maybe they've been completely confined to a remote community that hasn't had outside contact since the 19th century or something.

  172. @ben tillman
    @Southfarthing


    It means Jews mostly have the same attitudes as their neighbors.
     
    I would have sworn I just said that!

    For example, only 16% of the supporters of FWD.us are Jewish.

    So if there were no Jews in the tech industry, FWD.us would be 100% their coastal urbanite neighbors like Bill Gates, who have the same views.
     
    No, you're begging the question. The arrow of causation could go either way, and it should be obvious that it is not Whites persuading Jews to adopt an anti-White ideology but that it is rather the other way around.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    84% of the masters-of-the-universe behind FWD.us are not Jews.

    Are you saying billionaires are helpless victims?

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Southfarthing


    84% of the masters-of-the-universe behind FWD.us are not Jews.

    Are you saying billionaires are helpless victims?
     

    No, I said that your argument was ridiculous. Just like your new claim.

    I never said anything about any billionaires.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

  173. @Hare Krishna
    @syonredux

    "Anglo" is a fighting word to Irish Americans. Including in California.

    Replies: @syonredux

    “Anglo” is a fighting word to Irish Americans. Including in California.

    So much the worse for them.I feel nothing but disgust for “Hyphenated” Americans, and the Catholic Irish were the first Hyphenates.Hence, it is in no small measure due to them that we are forced to live in a “multicultural” cesspool today.

    If you want to be Irish, stay in Ireland, but please spare us something as monstrous as the “Irish-American.”

    • Replies: @dcite
    @syonredux

    None other than Joseph P. Kennedy hated the term "Irish American" and hated that he & his were still referred to that way when both sides of the family had born in America for several generations back.

  174. @syonredux
    @anon


    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren’t mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.
     
    Dear fellow,as I said before, there is nothing "mischling" about me.Culturally, I am all Anglo.Possessing Ashkenazi DNA does not alter that fact.

    Replies: @anon, @Anonymous

    Okay, I comprehend. I was never informed we had the second coming of Lawrence Auster in our midst.

  175. @syonredux
    @anon


    WTF, you bogus bastard. You replied to me up thread that you weren’t mischling. I knew I remembered correctly.
     
    Dear fellow,as I said before, there is nothing "mischling" about me.Culturally, I am all Anglo.Possessing Ashkenazi DNA does not alter that fact.

    Replies: @anon, @Anonymous

    Culturally, nobody in America, even those of English stock, is “all Anglo”. Unless maybe they’ve been completely confined to a remote community that hasn’t had outside contact since the 19th century or something.

  176. @anon
    @Southfarthing

    Then what's the appropriate and benign equivalent of "mulatto" or "mestizo" for mixed-Ashkenazi?
    Online I've seen half-Ashkenzi refer to themselves as "mischling" in seemingly neutral and non-disparaging tones.

    If anything, it's ignorance or apathy to the connotations on my part.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    Then what’s the appropriate and benign equivalent of “mulatto” or “mestizo” for mixed-Ashkenazi?

    What’s the equivalent of “mulatto” for a half Italian / half German? (Maybe commenter Jefferson can help?)

    Normal society doesn’t care enough to create terms for these things.

    • Replies: @dcite
    @Southfarthing

    Exactly. If there's a special term for something, it's because it is in some way of special importance or attention.

  177. @Anonymous
    @syonredux

    I think you're thinking of the term "American", not "Anglo". "Anglo" has never really been used like that. So it sounds awkward, inauthentic, and forced. And most Americans, including those of English stock, probably have never heard of Runnymede and couldn't tell you what happened there

    Replies: @syonredux

    I think you’re thinking of the term “American”, not “Anglo”. “

    Sadly, American is a title that can be granted by a mere stroke of a pen. Salma Hayek is an American, but she proudly proclaims that her loyalty lies with Mexico.And, of course, David Brooks’ son is serving with the IDF, yet he is an American.

    Anglo” has never really been used like that. So it sounds awkward, inauthentic, and forced.

    American sounded “awkward, inauthentic, and forced” at one time, too

    And most Americans, including those of English stock, probably have never heard of Runnymede and couldn’t tell you what happened there

    O tempora! O mores!

  178. @Southfarthing
    @ben tillman

    84% of the masters-of-the-universe behind FWD.us are not Jews.

    Are you saying billionaires are helpless victims?

    Replies: @ben tillman

    84% of the masters-of-the-universe behind FWD.us are not Jews.

    Are you saying billionaires are helpless victims?

    No, I said that your argument was ridiculous. Just like your new claim.

    I never said anything about any billionaires.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @ben tillman

    At some point, billionaires have to take responsibility for their own actions, right?

    There are far more Gentile billionaires than Jewish billionaires. If Gentile billionaires don't like immigration, they're free to stop supporting pro-immigration causes.

    If they wanted to, they could buy the NYT and turn it into a conservative paper, right? Why has nothing like that happened over the last 50 years?

    At some point, we have to look at the 84%, and not just the 16%.

  179. @ben tillman
    @Southfarthing


    84% of the masters-of-the-universe behind FWD.us are not Jews.

    Are you saying billionaires are helpless victims?
     

    No, I said that your argument was ridiculous. Just like your new claim.

    I never said anything about any billionaires.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    At some point, billionaires have to take responsibility for their own actions, right?

    There are far more Gentile billionaires than Jewish billionaires. If Gentile billionaires don’t like immigration, they’re free to stop supporting pro-immigration causes.

    If they wanted to, they could buy the NYT and turn it into a conservative paper, right? Why has nothing like that happened over the last 50 years?

    At some point, we have to look at the 84%, and not just the 16%.

  180. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor
    Though Charles Murray is a punk for signing onto 'gay marriage', the theme of 'coming apart' may be the defining characteristic of our times.
    Indeed, white folks are coming apart in so many ways. There was a time when rich whites, middle class whites, working class whites, and poor whites might have shared something in common in being Christians, believing in family values, remembering ancestors of humbler lineage down on the farm, reading columnists like Breslin and Royko and listening to Sinatra and watching Walter Cronkite.
    Also, though there was always rich and poor, the standard family restaurant was a common thing among most white Americans. If you visited NY, Chicago, or some other big city in the 1970s, there were regular places where people of all stripes went to eat at.
    When GRAPES OF WRATH came out, even rich white folks could, on so many levels, identify with the Joads. Joads were poor simple folks, but their core values weren't so far from the values of rich Anglos and the like. Today, the holiest moral cause among urban gentry is 'gay marriage'. A super-Lib like Chris Hughes feels more kinship with billionaire Tim Cook than with a hardworking journalist digging dirt about Apple, the biggest company in the whole wide world. Meanwhile, such folks look down on working class and poor white folks as 'trash'. They sneer as bakeries are sued and shut down by a government that forces 'gay marriage' favored by homo and Jewish billionaires.
    And Jewish and homo elites want to favor and promote the rise of homo elites in all other nations, so that there will be like a globo-homo-fringe-elite-rule all over the world. They want Russia and Japan to be ruled by homo elites who feel closer to the likes of Hughes and Cook than with their own peoples.

    White Americans have come apart economically, culturally, morally, consumer-preference-ly, and etc. Like Murray said, even preference of beer says much about different classes and the like.
    The truly odd thing is that there is one particular ethnic group that plays on and inflames these divisions, though to be sure, even that group, the Jews, is sort of coming apart as Lib Jews and Orthodox Jews(who have more kids) disagree on many things. Also, a crack is forming between total Zionist-supporting Jews and other kinds of Jews who, though supportive of Israel, are embarrassed that the increasing unity between Israel and the reviled GOP(mainly reviled by Jewish media) makes Jews look bad among the Democratic non-white coalition that isn't too keen on Israel.
    Anyway, though Jews play on white divisions, if white folks of various stripes are united on one thing, it is in their unconditional and mindless devotion to Jews and Israel. White Lib will say to White Con, "I hate you!", and white Con will say to White Lib, "I hate you too", and Jews will clap with joy at such hate and manipulate them to fight even more. Sam Fuller made a film called 'white dog', but maybe someone should make a movie called 'white dogfighting' as an allegory of how Jews encourage whites to hate and fight other whites. But both White Libs and White Cons are crazily devoted to Jews. It's like the sinister general in Paths of Glory plays on all sides, but each side is fooled into believing that the general is its best friend and ally. We saw this with Russia and Ukraine too. Russians to Jews: "We love you Jews and we are trying to save you from Nazi Ukrainians." Ukrainians to Jews: "We love you Jews and we are trying to save you from Nazi Russians." Jews are surely loving this. They act as wedge but pretend to be the bridge among peoples.

    Anyway, the Coming Apart scenario is true enough, and it's happening on a global scale. Yet, the world is paradoxically 'coming apart' because it is 'coming together'. The thing is the 'coming together' is highly selective than undiscriminating. If indeed the world were truly coming together, all groups, both sexes(or fifty sexes according to facebook), all nations, all ethnic groups, all religious groups, and etc. should be merging into one blobby mass of mankind.

    Instead, certain elements of a particular group come apart from rest of their own group and merge with certain elements of other groups(than with the entirety of that group). Consider Turkey. Under Ataturk, there arose a kind of collective modern nationalism based on secular western values. So, despite the ethnic and religious divisions, there was an emphasis on unity among all Turks. But in recent times, as Turkey became more free and democratic, Turkey has been coming apart along religious and secular lines. There are some religious folks in Turkey who now feel nothing in common with secular Turks and feel closer to devout Muslims outside Turkey. And there are secular Turks who are turned off by the rise of new religiosity and feel closer to secular whites in Europe.
    It's been noted by Murray, an IQ expert, that the rise of meritocracy has led to the coming apart based on skills. As science and technology becomes ever more advanced, it's not good enough to be smart. You gotta be very smart. And as globalism has made cheap labor available all over the world, the smart and rich can hire people in other nations. Also, as women have equality to pursue academics and careers, many very smart women go to top schools and marry very smart men.
    There is, of course, a coming together of high-IQ people. Smart Jews, smart whites, smart yellows, smart Hindus, smart blacks(or mulattos), and etc are marrying one another. But smart whites are coming apart from other whites. Smart yellows are coming apart from other yellows. Smart Hispanics are coming apart from other Hispanics. For every 'coming together', there is a 'coming apart'. So, if successful black men come together with white women, they come apart from black women. When yellow women come together with white/Jewish men, they come apart from yellow men. When white women with limited brains but great looks go with rich men(of any stripe), they come apart from white men of their class origin. When Mexican chicks go with Anglo men, they come apart from Mexican men. And there are imbalances in these 'coming together' scenarios.

    Globally, there is much coming together but this also entails much coming apart. The elites of Britain come together with the elites of Israel, Qatar, Hong Kong, and Nairobi, but they are coming apart from non-elite white Britons. There was a time when even a rich powerful Briton would have felt a common national bond with his fellow countrymen. We don't see that today. British elites promote 'diversity' and excoriate & even punish any lowly Briton who says anything about racial and national survival of Britain. When Lawrence(of Arabia) came together with Arabs, he came apart from Britons, and in the end, he couldn't handle the contradictions and returned to being a Britain and went back home. Today, the Muslim world is spreading all over UK.
    As for the British underclasses they(like the French underclasses)seem to be coming apart from their own history, heritage, and tradition and 'coming together' with Hollywood fantasies and rap music/culture.

    In the 1970s, there were rich parts in any city, but if you walked around, you still felt the city-as-a-whole was a working class, middle class, and family place to be. Today, many urban areas are like glittering bejeweled paradises for lawyers in love. They are glass palaces. Eateries are fancy pantsy.
    The 'high rise man' of the 70s and early 80s are nothing compared to high-rise man of today.
    The class/cultural/economic differences back then were downright 'communist' compared to the brazen, shameless, narcissistic, and sky-is-the-limit look and feel of today's rich urban areas. Back then, even if you lived well in a fancy place, you were reminded of REAL PEOPLE and REAL PLACES that were all around you. And even fancy places weren't all that fancy. It's like Taki keeps complaining about how yachts used to be made tastefully, but today the bigass palatial yachts of billionaire(such as the Oracle guy) has no limits.
    When Royko wrote a column about the high rise man, readers(even rich folks) could nod their head in agreement about the class pretensions of the hip and well-to-do: http://books.google.com/books?id=WUMjZaxfpwEC&pg=PA155&lpg=PA155&dq=mike+royko+bungalow+man+high+rise+man&source=bl&ots=_EZreFR6j9&sig=dNr9adsMWjm2pVA7uoK5RMFcLYU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gT6HVIavFYSrgwSP_YHABA&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=mike%20royko%20bungalow%20man%20high%20rise%20man&f=false

    The High-Rise Man described by Royko would be considered backward and crude by today's standards of urban liberal gentry privilege. He would be like Gordon Gekko's bigass portable phone.
    Today, when 'gay pride parades' in the richest hearts of the city is the main celebration of the year(bigger than St. Patrick's Day and Christmas), no one will even get the joke.
    Despite all the conceit of 'victory of the left' in the culture war, it's really victory of elite Jewish-homo privilege that hides behind 'progressive' symbol-puppets like Obama whose main priorities have been serving Jews, homos, and Wall Street.

    When I was a kid and walked or biked around rich areas, I thought Wow. But I didn't see them as being separate from the rest of the city. Just much better off. Today, when I see some areas in NY and Chicago, by golly, I don't know if I'm in the world of reality. If you live in such a place or esp was raised in such a place, why would you feel any cultural connection with people outside it? You will be filled with class privilege/snobbery. But since US values are still officially 'egalitarian', you will pretend that your disdain for other Americans is due to issues of politics, ethics, or agendas.
    YOU voted for Obama. You are friends or friends of a friend of the Rolling Stone writer who exposed 'rape culture'. You attended a cocktail party about 'climate change'. But it's really snobbery draped in trendy causes. It's like Hughes and Cook are united cuz both are homo and rich, but Hughes tries to turn his class-homo solidarity into an issue of social justice, what with Cook being so 'heroic' to come out. (Funny, but it took more courage for him to remain in the closet as the homo community was yelling at him to come out, dammit).
    Even the language is snobby, even downright contemptuous. If you not on the 'gay marriage' bandwagon, you are said to be 'less evolved'. Ooh-ooh ah-ah, does that make me an ape?

    Given the way things are going, the dominant theme among whites must be COMING TOGETHER. This is why Jewish elites are especially after Richard Spencer. Though Spencer is powerless, he has the right idea, and if his idea takes hold, it can spread like wildfire. Spencer is saying whites should all unite in common interest, from US to Europe to Russia. He organized a meeting in Hungary---midpoint between western europe and eastern europe---where all whites would be welcome from US, Europe, Russia, etc. Even Dugin was planned to appear. Jews freaked out and exerted great pressure to have him arrested and humiliated. Jews, who have the power to drive a wedge between Russia and US/EU, treated Spencer like a little toy. But they were afraid of his ideas. And Jews are now going after him in his own homebase in Montana. As Montana is mostly white, if Spencer can win over whites in Montana, there is a possibility that white consciousness may spread to other places. A forest fire, after all, starts in one single area. It later spreads. So, Jews are trying to snuff even his little fire in Montana because they fear his idea of COMING TOGETHER of whites.

    White Right should also be mindful of cumming together as a race is only as good if the men and women of the race cum together and produce babies of the same race. After all, suppose Norway had been having kids with non-Norwegians on a huge scale for 1000 yrs. Norway as we know it today wouldn't even exist. It would have genetically vanished long ago.
    To promote and encourage the cumming together, maybe we need to create a new kind of spiritual idea. Jews have the thing with the covenant with God where Jewish men gotta have their foreskins cut off.
    Suppose the covenant concept of white folks is that a white man and white woman is only truly blessed by the god of white power/race when they have sex. The covenant is fulfilled with white penis meets white vagina, especially to produce a white child.
    When white men and white women continue to cum apart, their race will unravel and die off.

    Imagine if Norway were drift off to Africa and became physically adjoined to Nigeria with a much bigger population. Suppose Norwegian women run off with Negro men and have mulatto kids. Suppose Norwegian men have fewer white women to have kids with and have kids with black women. What will happen to Norway in the long run? It will disappear as a people, race, and culture. It will disappear in a few generations. Who wants that?

    Of course, with massive migrations from Africa, Europe may indeed disappear. All those ships carrying blacks, esp black men, are like Afro-Shaft Carriers, in some ways more dangerous than Air Craft Carriers. Invasion forces are arriving.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    This may be the craziest comment I’ve ever read.

    You clearly aren’t old enough, or well educated enough, to remember that the English hate the French who hate the Germans who hate the Poles who hate the Russians who hate the Ukranians who hate the Czechs who hate the Austrians who hate the Swiss who hate the Italians who hate the Spanish … and everyone hates me, the Ulsterman, whose ancestors left Norway for Scotland and Scotland for N. Ireland and N. Ireland (when we found out they hated the Protestants) for Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love, where we discovered that the Germans hate the Irish who hate the English who hate the ….

    Then we headed west, where we found out that the Norwegians hate the Finns who hate the Swedes who hate the French who hate the Germans who hate the ….

    And I haven’t even gotten into the Irish Catholics hating the Irish Quakers, who left Ireland for Pennsylvania, where they discovered that …. (the other side of my family tree).

    There is no such thing as whites all being on the same side. “NO IRISH NEED APPLY” signs say it all.

    Do I even need to start on the weapons-grade stupid racism of the rest of your comment?

  181. @Jefferson
    "White: Meaningless.The Whites in Mexico (cf Vicente Fox and the Mexican elite) are our enemies.The Whites in Russia don’t care what happens to us."

    The Russians were calling us White Americans racists for what happened to Michael Brown. So much for the stereotype that Russians are similar to Southern Rednecks in how they view Blacks. Russians on average are culturally closer to SWPL types than they are to Southern Rednecks.

    Replies: @dcite

    What “Russians” (who speaks for them?) call Americans (or vice versa) in the mass media is political noise, the usual SWPL PC game when it is called for. There’s no substance in it.

  182. @Southfarthing
    @anon


    Then what’s the appropriate and benign equivalent of “mulatto” or “mestizo” for mixed-Ashkenazi?
     
    What's the equivalent of "mulatto" for a half Italian / half German? (Maybe commenter Jefferson can help?)

    Normal society doesn't care enough to create terms for these things.

    Replies: @dcite

    Exactly. If there’s a special term for something, it’s because it is in some way of special importance or attention.

  183. @syonredux
    @Hare Krishna


    “Anglo” is a fighting word to Irish Americans. Including in California.
     
    So much the worse for them.I feel nothing but disgust for "Hyphenated" Americans, and the Catholic Irish were the first Hyphenates.Hence, it is in no small measure due to them that we are forced to live in a "multicultural" cesspool today.

    If you want to be Irish, stay in Ireland, but please spare us something as monstrous as the "Irish-American."

    Replies: @dcite

    None other than Joseph P. Kennedy hated the term “Irish American” and hated that he & his were still referred to that way when both sides of the family had born in America for several generations back.

  184. JackD: it’s impossible to talk (relevantly) about who dominated the slave trade without mentioning places outside the U.S., particularly Brazil. Just as it’s impossible to make a relevant argument about who dominated the slave trade based on an ethnic group’s share of the population without addressing the slave-traders’ (probably infinitesimal) share of the population.

    What share of the population works at Goldman?

  185. Non-Orthodox Jews’ 71% intermarriage rate is

    A myth.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @Svigor


    "Non-Orthodox Jews’ 71% intermarriage rate is >> A myth."
     
    The Pew findings are robust in that they’re consistent with the steady rise of Jewish intermarriage rates across decades, the steady decline in Jewish religious identification, and the general relaxation of marriage attitudes starting in the 1960s.

    Jews managed to stay a unique culture for 2000 years because of religion, so once religion declined in the 60s, it was inevitable that (non-Orthodox) Jews' intermarriage rate would approach the intermarriage rate of other White ancestry groups.

    The Pew findings are also consistent with the world around us. Some of the most famous Jews:

    Jon Stewart: Married a Catholic.
    Kevin Rose:  Married a Christian.
    Mark Cuban: Married a Christian.
    Mark Zuckerberg: Married an Asian.
    Larry Page: Half-Jewish, married a Christian.
    Dustin Moskovitz: Married a Turk.
    Larry Ellison: Married a Christian.
    Steve Ballmer: Half-Jewish, married a Christian.
    Ben Horowitz: Married an African-American.
    Steven Spielberg: Married a Christian.
    Jared Kushner:  Married Ivanka Trump.
    Neil Gaiman: Married a Christian

    Jennifer Connelly: Half-Jewish, married Paul Bettany.
    Gwenyth Paltrow: Half-Jewish, married Chris Martin.
    Natalie Portman: Married Benjamin Millepied.
    Rachel Weisz: Married Daniel Craig.
    Scarlett Johansson: Half-Jewish, married Ryan Reynolds, then Romain Dauriac. http://www.amigosdoforum.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/scarlettmamae2.jpg
    Mila Kunis: Married Ashton Kutcher.
    Rachel Bilson: Half-Jewish, has a kid with Hayden Christensen.
    Dianna Agron: Half-Jewish.
    Allison Brie: Half-Jewish.

    Harrison Ford: Half-Jewish, married Calista Flockhart.
    Armie Hammer: Half-Jewish, married Elizabeth Chambers.
    Daniel Day-Lewis: Half-Jewish, married a half-Jew-raised-Christian, neither are religious.
    Paul Newman: Half-Jewish, married a Christian.
    Sacha Baron Cohen: Married Isla Fisher.
    Liev Schreiber: Half-Jewish, married Naomi Watts.
    Michael Douglas: Half-Jewish, married Catherine Zeta-Jones.
    Jake Gyllenhaal: Half-Jewish.
    Chris Pine: 1/4 Jewish.
    Adam Levine: 3/4 Jewish, married Behati Prinsloo
  186. What’s the equivalent of “mulatto” for a half Italian / half German? (Maybe commenter Jefferson can help?)

    Normal society doesn’t care enough to create terms for these things.

    Sort of like how normal whites don’t keep track of how often they marry other white people, under the rubric of “intermarriage” (yes, an atheistic Jew raised an atheistic Jew who marries an atheistic German raised an atheistic German has “intermarried” according to Jews), or rub elbows with people who think of it as a “silent holocaust.”

    At some point, billionaires have to take responsibility for their own actions, right?

    There are far more Gentile billionaires than Jewish billionaires. If Gentile billionaires don’t like immigration, they’re free to stop supporting pro-immigration causes.

    The Jewish billionaires and the non-white heathen (“gentile”) billionaires are on the same team.

    I don’t have the exact figures to hand, but if memory serves, Russia had a lot more men in uniform than the Germans did, going into Barbarossa. Didn’t stop the Germans from steamrolling them for quite some time. I think the Iraqi army probably substantially outnumbered the American going into Iraq Attaq I, as well. Israel’s army is pretty small, relatively speaking.

    • Replies: @Southfarthing
    @Svigor


    "Russia had a lot more men in uniform than the Germans did, going into Barbarossa. Didn’t stop the Germans from steamrolling them for quite some time."
     
    But the Russians were there, on the battlefield. In contrast, as Steve has noted, there are ZERO billionaires (other than Peter Thiel) who are against open borders.

    We can find out what happens when non-Jews own news companies by looking at open borders companies like the NYT, Fox News, and the Daily Mail.

    Replies: @Simon in London

  187. @EriK
    @JayMan

    Great stuff.

    Replies: @JayMan

    Thank you. 🙂

  188. @Svigor

    Non-Orthodox Jews’ 71% intermarriage rate is
     
    A myth.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    “Non-Orthodox Jews’ 71% intermarriage rate is >> A myth.”

    The Pew findings are robust in that they’re consistent with the steady rise of Jewish intermarriage rates across decades, the steady decline in Jewish religious identification, and the general relaxation of marriage attitudes starting in the 1960s.

    Jews managed to stay a unique culture for 2000 years because of religion, so once religion declined in the 60s, it was inevitable that (non-Orthodox) Jews’ intermarriage rate would approach the intermarriage rate of other White ancestry groups.

    The Pew findings are also consistent with the world around us. Some of the most famous Jews:

    Jon Stewart: Married a Catholic.
    Kevin Rose:  Married a Christian.
    Mark Cuban: Married a Christian.
    Mark Zuckerberg: Married an Asian.
    Larry Page: Half-Jewish, married a Christian.
    Dustin Moskovitz: Married a Turk.
    Larry Ellison: Married a Christian.
    Steve Ballmer: Half-Jewish, married a Christian.
    Ben Horowitz: Married an African-American.
    Steven Spielberg: Married a Christian.
    Jared Kushner:  Married Ivanka Trump.
    Neil Gaiman: Married a Christian

    Jennifer Connelly: Half-Jewish, married Paul Bettany.
    Gwenyth Paltrow: Half-Jewish, married Chris Martin.
    Natalie Portman: Married Benjamin Millepied.
    Rachel Weisz: Married Daniel Craig.
    Scarlett Johansson: Half-Jewish, married Ryan Reynolds, then Romain Dauriac.
    Mila Kunis: Married Ashton Kutcher.
    Rachel Bilson: Half-Jewish, has a kid with Hayden Christensen.
    Dianna Agron: Half-Jewish.
    Allison Brie: Half-Jewish.

    Harrison Ford: Half-Jewish, married Calista Flockhart.
    Armie Hammer: Half-Jewish, married Elizabeth Chambers.
    Daniel Day-Lewis: Half-Jewish, married a half-Jew-raised-Christian, neither are religious.
    Paul Newman: Half-Jewish, married a Christian.
    Sacha Baron Cohen: Married Isla Fisher.
    Liev Schreiber: Half-Jewish, married Naomi Watts.
    Michael Douglas: Half-Jewish, married Catherine Zeta-Jones.
    Jake Gyllenhaal: Half-Jewish.
    Chris Pine: 1/4 Jewish.
    Adam Levine: 3/4 Jewish, married Behati Prinsloo

  189. @Svigor

    What’s the equivalent of “mulatto” for a half Italian / half German? (Maybe commenter Jefferson can help?)

    Normal society doesn’t care enough to create terms for these things.
     

    Sort of like how normal whites don't keep track of how often they marry other white people, under the rubric of "intermarriage" (yes, an atheistic Jew raised an atheistic Jew who marries an atheistic German raised an atheistic German has "intermarried" according to Jews), or rub elbows with people who think of it as a "silent holocaust."

    At some point, billionaires have to take responsibility for their own actions, right?

    There are far more Gentile billionaires than Jewish billionaires. If Gentile billionaires don’t like immigration, they’re free to stop supporting pro-immigration causes.
     

    The Jewish billionaires and the non-white heathen ("gentile") billionaires are on the same team.

    I don't have the exact figures to hand, but if memory serves, Russia had a lot more men in uniform than the Germans did, going into Barbarossa. Didn't stop the Germans from steamrolling them for quite some time. I think the Iraqi army probably substantially outnumbered the American going into Iraq Attaq I, as well. Israel's army is pretty small, relatively speaking.

    Replies: @Southfarthing

    “Russia had a lot more men in uniform than the Germans did, going into Barbarossa. Didn’t stop the Germans from steamrolling them for quite some time.”

    But the Russians were there, on the battlefield. In contrast, as Steve has noted, there are ZERO billionaires (other than Peter Thiel) who are against open borders.

    We can find out what happens when non-Jews own news companies by looking at open borders companies like the NYT, Fox News, and the Daily Mail.

    • Replies: @Simon in London
    @Southfarthing

    "We can find out what happens when non-Jews own news companies by looking at open borders companies like the NYT, Fox News, and the Daily Mail."

    The UK Daily Mail pushes Open Borders?

  190. @Southfarthing
    @Svigor


    "Russia had a lot more men in uniform than the Germans did, going into Barbarossa. Didn’t stop the Germans from steamrolling them for quite some time."
     
    But the Russians were there, on the battlefield. In contrast, as Steve has noted, there are ZERO billionaires (other than Peter Thiel) who are against open borders.

    We can find out what happens when non-Jews own news companies by looking at open borders companies like the NYT, Fox News, and the Daily Mail.

    Replies: @Simon in London

    “We can find out what happens when non-Jews own news companies by looking at open borders companies like the NYT, Fox News, and the Daily Mail.”

    The UK Daily Mail pushes Open Borders?

  191. Look at the top ten most wanted fugitives in the state of Texas. 9/10 are listed as “white male”, yet photos show dark skinned mestizos.

    http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/Texas10MostWanted/fugitives.aspx

  192. @FUBAR007
    @n/a


    Of course there is such a thing as an ethnic American.
     
    No, there isn't. Just as there's no such thing as someone who's ethnically British. Or Australian. Or Canadian. Just as there was no such thing as an ethnic Soviet. The terms refer to nationality, not ethnicity.

    When people speak of being American in an ethnic sense or talk about "core American" culture, what they're really talking about is the form of English culture that has dominated the U.S. since its beginning. See David Hackett Fischer's book Albion's Seed and Kevin Phillips's book The Cousins Wars. "Ethnic Americans" are English-Americans and those they've completely assimilated. (And, to be clear, being truly assimilated means much, much more than just speaking English as a first language and embracing the U.S. political and economic traditions.)

    I guess regional differences within Germany mean there’s no such thing as a German.
     
    In an ethnic sense, that's true. Germany didn't exist until 1871. "German" as a term encompasses multiple ethnicities of varying degrees of relation--Bavarians, Austrians, Germanophone Swiss, Prussians, and so on.

    Replies: @n/a

    Dictionary definitions of “ethnicity”:

    an ethnic group; a social group that shares a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like:

    Identity with or membership in a particular racial, national, or cultural group and observance of that group’s customs, beliefs, and language.

    Germans are an ethnicity, and have been since the medieval period, regardless of how many sub-German ethnicities can be defined.

    Core Americans are an ethnicty, regardless of regional variation. And, yes, core Americans are exactly the descendants of colonial Americans and those who have assimilated into this group.

    There does not exist in America today a separate “English American” ethnic group of colonial origin. The various colonial elements (British/Dutch/German) have been mixing freely for a couple hundred years, and also have mixed with later Northwestern European immigrants.

    Albion’s Seed is an interesting but imperfect book, which is often taken too seriously by people who have little sense of history and minimal knowledge of their own ancestry.

  193. @FUBAR007
    @n/a


    It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating.
     
    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation. And, I say this as someone who is of predominantly English extraction whose people have been in America since the 1620s.

    Are you the same guy who was upset a while back about someone using the term WASP?

    Replies: @ben tillman, @n/a

    I am speaking for myself, as well as for others who find it irritating.

    I don’t know if you’re intentionally misrepresenting your ancestry, or just don’t know anything about it (besides having been told you descend from a Mayflower passenger, if that much is even true), but I can be pretty sure it’s not what you’ve claimed (says his family has been in New Jersey for hundreds of years but he still IS a “Puritan”, despite the improbaility of anything like unmixed New England ancestry being preserved over that time period in the mid-Atlantic; thinks Lena Dunham is a Yankee/Puritan; says he identifies as a “Cavalier”).

    No American prior to the last third of the 20th century ever said “I am an Anglo”.

    “I am an Anglo-Saxon”, yes. “I am an Anglo”, no.

  194. @syonredux
    @Anonymous


    The Indios in Mexico are a completely different species. And far more decent and nobler than the mestizo and European Mexicans.
     
    Those would be the ones whose immediate ancestors specialized in tobacco enemas and child sacrifice, yes?

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Karl

    >> Those would be the ones whose immediate ancestors specialized in tobacco enemas and child sacrifice, yes?

    True. But also please don’t forget that also, they are the ones whose civilization collapsed in no time flat in the face of…… what? 3 boatloads of Spanish Marines?

  195. @ben tillman
    @FUBAR007


    Speak for yourself.

    Except for perhaps in the Southwest, the term has no pejorative connotation.
     
    It doesn't have a pejorative connotation anywhere. It's just offensive to Whites whose ancestry is not predominantly English.

    Replies: @syonredux, @n/a

    It’s offensive to me for entirely different reasons: this is a term that was introduced from Spanglish by analogy to “hispanic”. We don’t need a separate word to describe white, English-speaking Americans in America. It’s understood that Americans speak English.

    Also, while I don’t really care about any offense someone who identifies as “Irish-American”, for example, might feel at being called “Anglo”, it certainly sows confusion and degrades the language when you have Italians or Jews being described as “Anglos”.

  196. @Simon in London
    @n/a

    "Anglosphere, Anglophone, and Anglo-Saxon are fine. It’s “Anglo” as a noun which is grating

    Is "Anglo-Celt" ok? I like it better anyway. It was the Australians who came up with 'Anglo-Celtic' to describe themselves; it was later adopted by some US Southerners (so I believe the SPLC considers it a hate term) and it seems quite accurate in describing mainstream American culture, which is arguably more (real) Scots-Irish than English in descent. A lot more English than Scots-Irish went to America, but the Scots-Irish tended to go to the frontier, which meant (a) they had more children - because the frontier was expanding and the Red Indian resistance was only occasionally effective and (b) they set down the cultural folkways for later arrivals, a point Jim Webb makes in Born Fighting.

    Of course the remaining New England Yankees are mostly Anglo-Saxon not Anglo-Celt, as are the Tidewater Southerners, and to a lesser extent the Dirty South Southerners of southern Mississippi and Alabama below the Tennessee River are mostly English by ancestry, though I think they are fairly mixed these days and culturally didn't seem all that different to me from the Scots-Irish further north.

    Replies: @n/a

    Is “Anglo-Celt” ok? I like it better anyway.

    Of course. The point is, “Anglo-” is a combining form. The noun is “English”. Or “Anglo-Saxon”. Or “Anglo-Celt”, etc.

    A lot more English than Scots-Irish went to America, but the Scots-Irish tended to go to the frontier, which meant (a) they had more children – because the frontier was expanding and the Red Indian resistance was only occasionally effective and (b) they set down the cultural folkways for later arrivals, a point Jim Webb makes in Born Fighting.

    The role of the “Scotch-Irish”, as a distinct group, in shaping American culture has been greatly exaggerated. Even in Appalachia, there were usually more English than Scotch-Irish.

  197. @Svigor
    Unfortunately you can argue the other way-after all why shouldn’t Mexicans be forbidden entry to a place that’s full of their own culture.
     Hey, I agree. Israel's white (right?) and western (right?), Europe and America are white and western, let's fill Israel with white, western heathens ("gentiles") from Europe and America. Why should whites be forbidden entry to a place that's full of their own culture?

    But until that happens, no Mexicans in America.

    Replies: @Karl

    >> let’s fill Israel with white, western heathens (“gentiles”) from Europe and America. Why should whites be forbidden entry to a place that’s full of their own culture?

    If an individual has ONE Irish grandparent, that individual is AUTOMATICALLY allowed to “make aliya” to Ireland

    Everyone else has to stand in line to become an Irish citizen.

    Israel follows the EXACT SAME rule.

    Russian is an un-official third language here; Yad ha-Shmona is the “Finnish” communal farm; in Florentine in South TelAviv, there’s TWO Tagalog newspapers; etc, etc etc.

    By the way, why should I imagine that bringing Svigor in would be a better deal for us, than bringing in another Thai or another Chinese?

    Or for that matter, some muslim-Circassian refugees from Syria. The Circassians here, practically ==own== the Border Police (our “carabinieri”)

    There’s a muslim-Arab woman in Akko (“Acre”) who is running for a seat in Knesset under the flag of Jewish Home, a hard-right nationalist party.

    She has 3 sons in the infantry here.

  198. @silviosilver
    @n/a


    No, we don’t.
     
    I don't think you should have to sit there and take it, but you'd best learn to endure it without it driving you bonkers because I expect you're going to get a lot more of it before all is said and done because anti-'WASP'ism is the racial butthurt that never dies.

    How many 'WASPs ' are there in America according to your learned estimate?

    Replies: @n/a

    How many ‘WASPs ‘ are there in America according to your learned estimate?

    Obviously, it depends on which definition of “WASP” you’re using. Again, there was never any separate “elite WASP” ethnic group, and there were no barriers to non-English NW Europeans (Scots, Germans, Dutch, etc.) joining the social or economic elite in America.

    So, if we count all Northwestern European-descended Americans, we still come up with quite a large number today.

    On the other hand, to those who have been successfully confused by the term “WASP”, and believe it refers only to Northeastern Protestants of unmixed colonial stock who despite every appearance otherwise still secretly run the country, or those who read Albion’s Seed or promoters of Celto-Southronism and suddently discover they’re Scotch-Irish and at war with pure Anglo-Saxon New England Puritan Yankees, the number of “WASPs” or “Yankees” fitting either of those definitions is tiny and continually shrinking.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS