“Oliver Letwin, latest white man to be forced to apologize for crimethink.”

He wasn’t forced to….he chose to.

Apologies for speaking the truth are commonplace in British society – particularly when an accusation of ‘racism’ has been made. The media outcry against Letwin is just a case in point.

Apathy is the highest common factor among the ‘lower orders’ in Britain, while the best lack all conviction.

“Poor, poor old Britain. Why did you do this to yourselves? Why? Why?”

About says it all, really. Treason.

Poor, poor old Britain. Why did you do this to yourselves? Why? Why?

The treason of the elites – business, political, media. Socialist and progressivist subversion. The pernicious influence of identity lobby groups. All enabled and empowered by the cynical manipulation of the backlash against WW2 German Nazism.

Not really all that different from the US, surely?

The evidence seems to be accumulating that this kind of failure of moral fibre is somehow inherent to liberal mass democracy.

It is truly amazing how White people everywhere have been successfully brainwashed when it comes to the race issue. Facts of high Black crime, of anti-White aggression and low Black morals don’t matter. Their eyes glaze over and they talk about the Black guy at work who’s a nice guy. I don’t know where this ends but it appears the White race has signed some kind of a suicide pact and won’t wake up.

The people suppressing this type of honesty know it is all true, but will penalize the one saying it out of cowardice. It’s how they survive politically.

Please answer the closing question. Why are Britain and America doing this to themselves?

Please answer the closing question. Why are Britain and America doing this to themselves?

It’s a war of the young against the old. The SJWs are Gen-X/millennials who target old baby boomers. Baby boomers are incapable of thinking things through. They think this will all blow over and things will go on as they always have because, after all, the baby boomers made everything awesome and why would anyone want to change it? Baby boomers also think they’re superior to the younger generation, even their own kin, and so are reluctant to turn over the keys out of fear that the young will wreck their progress.

When enough of the boomers have died to no longer be relevant, watch out.

The evidence seems to be accumulating that this kind of failure of moral fibre is somehow inherent to liberal mass democracy.

This gets to the heart of the matter. I would qualify your observation a bit by stressing the culpability of the so-called ‘intelligentsia’ in Western societies.

A lot of it has to do with trying to live out our myths.

It has been said that neurotics build castles in the air while psychotics try to live in them (as they cannot identify reality). Much of the West has crossed that line, but not because of psychosis, because it is not possible for them to abandon the myths.

We (collectively) “can’t handle the truth.”

“disgusting and appalling … positively Victorian,”

Ironically, PC is neo-victorian in its hysteria about race as the Victs were about race.

“Seventy-five years ago the Brits stood alone against Hitler’s bomber fleets and Panzer divisions. Nowadays they won’t even take a stand against alien troublemakers, criminals, and race hustlers.”

In some ways, nothing has changed.
True, Hitler was a vile war-monger, but the gullible UK public was sold the lie that Germans meant them harm. Hitler admired the Brits and wanted cooperation. But Churchill’s lies were swallowed by the sucker masses(as Brits fell for anti-German propaganda in WWI).

Brit masses have always been duped suckers.

Also, while Brits were successful in militarily fending off the Germans, they’ve been intellectually, culturally, financially, and personalitistically defenseless against the Jews who are the real masters of the UK.

UK wasn’t conquered by the Germans, but it was conquered by the Jews.
And the Brits take orders from their superiors. It’s just ‘good form’.

“quote “disgusting and appalling … positively Victorian,”

Is anything that is victorian now to be shunned? In England, of all places?

Sherlock Holmes? The novels of Charles Dickens? Gilbert and Sullivan? Should it all be consigned to the ash-heap of history? Should a nation condemn and regret its entire past? Evidently, some people will not be happy until and unless that is the case.

The price of diversity is not having a past.

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2016/01/notes-on-victim-culture.html

Submission to Islam sucks, but submission to globalism is worse.

Resist Glubmission.

Globalism sounds harmless, as if all the world is sharing and influencing each other equally,i.e, we all part of the global community with no single part of the world lording it over others. But globalism is really about the neo-imperialist domination of the entire globe by the Wall-Street-Hollywood-Las-Vegas-Silicon-Valley-Ivy-League-Pentagon-Tel-Aviv industrial-information-idolatry complex.

It financially rewards the comprador elites of nations that comply, it economically targets nations with political sovereignty(esp if Jews hate them)such as Russia and Iran, it militarily destroys the Middle East(at the behest of Jews) all the while hugging clockboy to demonstrate that globalism loves Muslims, it promotes the homo-agenda and the worship of the ‘gay’ anus, it promotes thug-and-ho culture of the masses(thus making young girls the world over like Saigon hookers), it undermines the national identity and interests of native majorities, and it forces PC on everyone around the world. PC ostensibly blames whites, but it actually targets ALL normal values(like marriage) and undermines majority rule everywhere.

If the French are ‘submitting’ to Islamism, it could be as a resistance against Glubmission.
Bowing down to Glubmission is to bow down to the US that is ruled by Jews.

What glubmission seeks to do to your daughter in all five continents.

Video Link

“Seventy-five years ago the Brits stood alone against Hitler’s bomber fleets and Panzer divisions.”

1)Britain declared war on Germany. Hitler didn’t want war with Britain.
2)Britain started the practice of bombing cities.

As to why there is such dishonesty about race, it isn’t due to “post-imperial guilt”. It’s because WWII has been retro-fitted as a war against “racism”. Obviously this is false as Britain at the time had, and intended to keep, an empire where she ruled over many millions of “blacks and coloureds”.

But now WWII has become the central negative myth of our era. Which is why every moral argument sooner or later ends up with some reference to “Nazis”. Accordingly “racism” has become our era’s cardinal sin.

“Poor, poor old Britain. Why did you do this to yourselves? Why? Why?”

John, are you familiar with work of professor Kevin Macdonald?

No other rich country is doing to itself what the western European countries (and their ethnic descendants) are doing. Not Japan, nor Korea nor Singapore or Israel (all are democracies). Nor are non-democratic rich countries, such as Qatar and Kuwait doing anything similar.

What Macdonald is saying is that north-west European peoples have particular ethnic characteristics (evolved cultural traits) that are unique, and that among them are the concept of universal justice (instead of relative justice – “that which is good for me is just”), low degree of differentiation between in-group and out-group, and enforcement of moral norms through altruistic punishment.

So, such a society could be destroyed if its members are persuaded that their own civilization is blameworthy. The members of the society would then exercise altruistic punishment and direct it towards its own society, damaging it, perhaps fatally.

This is what happened with north-west European societies: they lost confidence in their own civilization following two horrible world wars, and were then persuaded by various schools of thought (Marxism, Psychoanalysis, Postmodernism, etc.) that their own societies are to blame for various domestic and world problems.

And there you have it… That’s why there is no mass migration to Japan, no one in Saudi Arabia is denouncing its own people for racism, there is no talk in Israel about Islam being a “religion of peace”.

What will happen eventually, unfortunately, is that north-west European societies will become more like the others: nationalistic, adopting a more relative concept of justice, etc. That may not be “who we are”, but that’s who they are, and we’ll have to adjust.

This hysteria against Letwin is ridiculous, but in a way, it makes good sense.

Just like there is Regression to the Mean, there is Return to the Norm.

It is just the natural way of things.

For instance, having powerful work ethic is not natural. People are naturally lazy. So, for a nation to achieve more, it must drum up work ethic, discipline, and order from an early age and promote such virtues all through life. If people are not reminded and pushed, they eventually Return to the Norm of taking it easy.

The problem with PC is that much of it is so unnatural.
In some ways, promoting the unnatural can be good, as in promoting the work ethic and discipline. If we all followed our natures, we would be lazy slobs.

And in a mild form, PC-lite has its uses. After all, we want to be sensitive to one another. We don’t want people to act like Howard Stern and Sarah Silverman or Sam Kinision in public. We want people to mind their manners and etc.
So, people need to be reminded and encouraged to watch themselves. (The problem of modern society is Pop Culture and the ideology of self-esteem encourage individuals to be brash, pushy, self-centered, egotistical, infantile, narcissistic, and brazen. Just listen to Rap music, watch vulgar comedy, and violent movies. Society says ‘act like a barbarian or slut to feel empowered’. So, kids drop their inhibitions, but then, when people act naturally, they are bound to feel ‘racist’ and ‘misogynist’ passions because tribalism and sexualism come naturally to them. But then, PC vilifies them for not minding their thoughts and manners. Our society says, “Be crazy, lewd, out-of-control, wild, aggressive, instinctive, impulsive, and barbaric BUT be ever-so-mindful not to say anything that might be micro-aggressive or triggering in a ‘racist’, ‘homophobic’, or ‘antisemitic’ manner.” It’s like telling someone that it’s great to run around drunkenly in wild abandon but he should watch the land mines.)

“Less than three percent of Britons today are black, but blacks are ten percent of inmates in British prisons.”

LOL – Does John Derbyshire know that less than a half percent of Britons to day are Jews, but they’re the king makers, owner of Bank of England, and owns 80% of British media? And let us not forget Jewish pedophile Lord Janner and Catholic pedophile Sir James Wilson Vincent Savile. I bet no British Black or Muslim can beat their “civilized White” records.

http://rehmat1.com/2012/10/30/pope-knighted-the-most-jewish-catholic-paedophile/

He’d have been sacked from the Cabinet if he hadn’t. Of course he’ll still be sacked at the next reshuffle anyway.

Dear Mr. Derbyshire,

““Poor, poor old Britain. Why did you do this to yourselves? Why? Why?”

One of the reasons is British vaingloriousness. The British had been told that they fought “for freedom”, that their elites fought “for freedom”, that they were “the country of freedom”. So they have taken freedom in Britain for natural and for granted, without lookin at the facts.

Orwell was the one and only intellectual who tried to warn them against the dangers from within. (Orwell had observed the British intellectual elites in wartime BBC and MoI and simply had extrapolated what would happen with Britain if these BBC/MoI guys came to power.)
But Orwell was misunderstood as a warner against Soviet Russia, not against the British elites.

So the British after 1945 were trustful instead of watchful and didn’t develop strong institutional protections against illiberty – not even under Ms. Thatcher -, nor the consciousness connected with such institutions.

Take as a counterexample Germany. In West Germany after 1945 people distrusted the state and political parties distrusted each other. So they were watchful, they installed a lot of institutions against illiberty and they had, at least till 1968, a consciousness about the luring danger of illiberty. This consciousness is mostly lost now, but some institutional protections remain. In Germany, police can’t arrest someone because of incorrect speech without due process (e.g. a court order), nor can state erect a cangaroo court like the Human Rights Commissions. Freedom of assembly is rather well procured (freedom of association, alas, much less.) So the level of intimidation is lower.

Black Caribbeans are fairly well integrated. So much so that they are on course to disappearing as an ethnic group in Britain.

“[M]ixed-race children under the age of ten with black Caribbean and white parents outnumber black Caribbean children by two-to-one.”

It’s not cricket to present something as a quote with no indication of its source.

White people are trained from youth to atone for white race crimes of history.

We are taught in school that being white is evil and that we must atone and apologize for that.

The question is who put these ideas in our educational curriculum and why?

Occam’s razor tells us that the rich and powerful people and institutions put these anti-white ideas into our textbooks and curriculum. The rich and powerful people and institutions of the West control most of what goes on in our society. Obvious much?

Why did the rich and powerful people and institutions put anti-white multiculturalism into educational curriculum?

Because white race guilt puts money into rich pockets and into corporate coffers.

Follow the money.

How does anti-white multiculturalism put money into rich pockets and into corporate coffers?

Because anti-white multiculturalism helps generate workers and consumers.

More workers and consumers means more corporate profits.

The West is operated as a human livestock operation. As the number of workers and consumers increase, corporate profits increase.

White people stopped having kids, to a great degree.

The big corporations want more workers and consumers.

Where are the big corporations going to get more workers and consumers?

From whites?

No.

They are going to get more workers and consumers from nonwhites and immigration.

In order to manufacture consent for racial integration and mass immigration, you need to make whites feel guilty.

Hence the appearance of anti-white multiculturalism, which is enacted primarily via the educational curriculum.

One of side effects of anti-white multiculturalism being crammed into the minds of young and malleable whites in school is white race guilt. Hence the eternal apologies.

Obvious much?

To illustrate the radical shift in educational curriculum, watch the movie Hope and Glory, a movie of London suburbs during WW2. In it, it shows british youth being taught the glories of the british empire. Nowadays they are taught the horrors of the british empire. That radical shift did not happen by accident.

Sherlock Holmes has been repurposed (by the so-called BBC, natch!) as a propaganda tool:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/12073234/sherlock-special-new-years-day-benedict-cumberbatch-abominable-bride-TV.html

Holmes is played by Benedict Cumberbatch (sic), who recently, when his performance of Hamlet was over for the evening, harangued the audience about the plight of the refugees (again, sic) currently invading Europe.

Watson is played by the execrable Martin Freeman, erstwhile Hobbit, Labour luvvie and tax evader, also given to delivering stern lectures about equality and social justice.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3025156/Red-Ed-s-hypocrite-Hobbit-tax-avoider-know-double-standards-champagne-socialists-investigation-shows-Labour-s-new-celebrity-poster-boy-really-takes-biscuit.html

I know all this only from the web, since I cannily threw my TV set away over ten years ago.

here is the clip from the movie Hope and Glory that shows how kids were taught the glories of the British Empire during WW2:

Video Link
But of course today, 70 years laters, the british empire is seen as an abomination visited upon the Sacred Nonwhites of the Third World. Same thing goes in American schools.

This radical transformation did not happen by accident.

The corporations and their think tanks and foundations realized that in order to grow profits, they needed to grow the supply of workers and consumers in western societies. But whites stopped having so many kids. A problem!

How did the corporations and their coin-operated governments solve this problem? Though anti-white multiculturalism. You cram white guilt into malleable young minds, and as adults they will be guilt-ridden, too guilt-ridden to speak out against mass immigration.

But why am I the only person saying this?

They are quite culturally integrated, but on the street they don’t look to be disappearing. What is happening amongst the working class is that Afro-Caribbean women still have children mostly with Afro-Caribbean men, while Afro-Caribbean men have children both with them and with white women. So Afro-Caribbean children are still* being born, as are lots of half-black children who are culturally mostly white. White men are losing out and having few children.
At my son’s school I think there are more half-black kids with white mothers than there are white kids – and when you see white working class kids in London nowadays they tend to be east-European.

Edit: BTW this points out that TFR rates based on maternal fertility don’t fully capture the decline. White women in London might have TFR (say) 1.5, but that does not mean 3/4 as many white kids in each generation. Amongst the working class the number of white kids could easily be halving each generation.

*I do think the number of pure-blood Afro-Caribbean kids is declining, but not as fast as the number of white kids.

Beautifully put. Churchill didn’t oppose Hitler because of anything more than anger over Germany’s refusal to abide by the corrupt Versailles Treaty. German attitudes toward Jews had nothing to do with Britain’s entry into WWII. That is a tough pill for Brits to swallow these days. But pathological altruism always leads to ruin.

Hitler a war monger??? Surely thou jest!

Let’s see,

Poles murder tens of thousands of ex-patriate Germans in German lands handed illegally to the Poles post Versailles Diktat.

Germany moves into Poland to protect these threatened people.

France and Britain declare war on Germany.

USA is not neutral and confiscates German ships and property.

Soviet Union amasses millions of troops and weaponry along its western borders to overrun all of Europe, which is only “saved” by the preemptorial attack by Germany.

And the Germans are the bad guys???

HdC

Why?

Television.

Apathy is the highest common factor among the ‘lower orders’ in Britain, while the best lack all conviction.

Self-harming apathy among the lower orders is caused by the lack of conviction at the top – which is caused by the media’s ability to destroy anyone with a lot to lose.

Rotherham

Until the 1960s or so Canada, for all intents and purposes, didn’t have black people. Thanks to (L)liberal immigration policy now not only is there the crime and social dysfunction associated with them but also a racism/White guilt industry, including a nascent BLM movement. In fact, blacks have managed to surpass natives as the preferred victims for SJW hustlers but the smart money has both set to be surpassed by muslims. Totally not worth the few extra Olympic track and field medals we’ve gotten in return.

But Churchill’s lies were swallowed by the sucker masses(as Brits fell for anti-German propaganda in WWI).

You have to put what happened back then into its historical context. In time of war it is necessary that you hate the enemy with all your being – and to instill this hatred into the population you need to use propaganda to conjure some dire images – babies turned out of incubators comes to mind.

Churchill had his back to the wall, mate – I was there.

Where are the British football hooligans when you need them?

But why am I the only person saying this?

Because you are wrong. Plenty of corporations in Japan.

In America, our notion of ourselves as a “propositional nation” is very strongly embedded. What this means in practice is that things like race, gender, social class, creed, and national origin are not allowed to count for anything. Only the individual’s assent to “rational,” “universal” propositions determines his destiny; this is how the myth is maintained. We produce one successful middle-class black person out of a thousand, and we consider the myth validated. We don’t look at the 999 failed cases as evidence to the contrary. Obviously those cases just didn’t believe hard enough, or were held back by white racism.

This exclusive emphasis on the individual’s assent to rational propositions can be traced back to John Locke and Immanuel Kant, whose ideas passed into the very founding of America by way of Montesquieu and Voltaire. That vaunted “rugged individualism” that Americans pride themselves on is really just the old Enlightenment cult of reason with a Puritanical varnish. One is reminded of Kant’s maxim that “even a republic of devils could be moral as long as they kept their reason.”

Protestantism, Puritanism, Rationalism, and finally PC liberalism, are not different belief systems but successive stages on the path leading away from revealed Truth and perennial philosophy, and toward social disintegration.

To accept any part of this sequence means, eventually, to accept the remainder. To myth of American Exceptionalism necessarily entails PC liberalism. That is why it is so frustrating to see so-called “conservatives” like Rush Limbaugh (who really does have a lot of common sense on some subjects) continue to tout the US Constitution and the American tradition of “individual liberty” as the answer to the PC garbage when really they are the cause of it.

The Constitution is not our ally here. Propositional notions of liberty and human rights are not grounded in reality—they are fantastical and absurd. What’s needed is a real metaphysical faith, a pure and unabashed view of reality, and actions backed up by strength and honor.

It looks like both Black Caribbean men and women are both avoiding each other. “The Labour Force Survey reveals that 48% of black Caribbean men and 34% of black Caribbean women in couples are with partners of a different ethnic group—with higher proportions still among younger cohorts. Black Caribbean children under ten years old are outnumbered two-to-one by children who are a mixture of white and black Caribbean.” http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21595908-rapid-rise-mixed-race-britain-changing-neighbourhoodsand-perplexing

japan is quite homogeneous, thus ensuring that the people maintain the power.

Japan has a parliamentarian govt, with weak checks and balances and separation of powers, thus putting governmental power in the hands of politicians from small districts, thus ensuring that the people can better control their own govt.

Yes, grasshopper, japan has corporations. But in japan OTHER FACTORS (as noted above) ensure that the corporations have much less power over the gov’t.

You have learned today, grasshopper.

Poor, poor old Britain. Why did you do this to yourselves? Why? Why?

Why did Britain have the first working class organisations, and strikes? Because Britain was the first modern state and being furthest down the path of civil society, it has a head start in reaching senescence.

Except from An essay on the history of civil society by Adam Ferguson (1723-1816).

THE boasted refinements, then, of the polished age, are not divested of danger. They open a door, perhaps, to disaster, as wide and accessible as any of those they have shut. If they build walls and ramparts, they enervate the minds of those who are placed to defend them; if they form disciplined armies, they reduce the military spirit of entire nations; and by placing the sword where they have given a distaste to civil establishments, they prepare for mankind the government of force

“Seventy-five years ago the Brits stood alone against Hitler’s bomber fleets and Panzer divisions.”

And if Hitler had won none of this would be happening.

Letwin is an outlier cuz most Tribers are PC commissars.

The West failed when it failed to stand up to Jews.

Jews amassed supreme power and promoted black power, homo power, and even Muslim power.

Once whites said ‘we worship Jews and will never resist or object to Jewish power’, not only Jews but their vicious allies got a free pass as well.

It’s Power by Association.

If you come to worship someone and cave to all his demands, you will soon find yourself having to cave to the demands of his friends and associates as well no matter how degenerate they are. You must to do so to appease your super-master-friend cuz you must never offend him.

Whites thought that Jews would be satisfied and grateful with being loved by whites and even join with whites, but once Jews were thus favored, they insisted that homos be favored too. And whites must comply lest they offend the super-great Jews.

And even as Jews destroy the Middle East, Jews in the West say whites better accept Muslims as immigrants cuz, if not, Jews will feel very offended.

The end result:

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/baptist-churches-start-to-ordain-homosexuals-and-perform-same-sex-marriage-rituals/

Like I said, Gayria and Jewria are bigger problems than Sharia.

Btw, if they don’t discriminate, then they should allow Satan-worshipers and polytheists too.

Lord Janner!!

http://rehmat1.com/2014/07/15/british-paedophile-holocaust-hoaxer/

Again I wonder whether you’re really a Paki bashing troll attempting to make Muslims look thick as well as malign.

Julia Middleton has nailed you on one issue with “Rotherham”. To which could be added the depraved beheading of a British soldier in London.

But it is your sheer ignorance that is breathtaking. How can Jews own anything like 80 per cent of the British media without Rupert Murdoch being Jewish which he most definitely isn’t On his mother’s side Protestant Irish (Australian) and on his father’s Scots Presbyterian – indeed grandfather was a senior cleric.

As to “ownership” of the Bank of England: it has no private owners if indeed ownership is a relevant concept in relation to the Bank of England. Ah, but it does have the Court of Directors. Did you know that? They are in charge in much the same way as the board of any public company. Out of 11 members of the Court of the Bank of England just one, Bradley Fried, has a name in any way suggestive of Jewish ancestry or identity.

Aren’t you embarrassed to sound so stupid and pig ignorant, even as a troll?

“But why am I the only person saying this?”

Saying what? That corporations are not conservative? That they are agents and vessels of multi-culturalism? Lots of people say that. You are not the only one saying it, ‘radical-centrist’ aka ‘leftwing-conservative’, aka whatever other screen-name you’ve gone by.

You seem to think you are the only one so saying, because you are a self-absorbed, deluded nitwit, who simply won’t shut up about what a courageous truth-teller you are. You are a tiresome idiot.

I have noticed. Even a casual perusal of modern british TV leads one to the conclusion that it is complete crap. British television used to be pretty good at producing historical dramas like “Elizabeth R”, “Shadow of the Tower”, “Fall of Eagles”, and “I, Claudius”. What one sees on offer now is invariably shrill PC harping by champagne socialists like Martin Freeman and Benedict Cucumberbun (or whatever his ridiculous name is).

“You have learned today, grasshopper.”

Are you “Truth” now? Leave it to an idiot like you to mimic an idiot like him.

I shed no tears for Letwin, just as I do not cry for Larry Summers or James Watson. Damn them, all three, for a pack of cowards – guys who knew the truth, who could have made a difference, but preferred to cringe.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/mar/27/why-left-wrong-mass-immigration

In busy offices up and down the land some of Britain’s most idealistic young men and women – working in human rights NGOs and immigration law firms – struggle every day to usher into this society as many people as possible from poor countries.

They are motivated by the admirable belief that all human lives are equally valuable. And like some of the older 1960s liberal baby boomers, who were reacting against the extreme nationalism of the first half of the 20th century, they seem to feel few national attachments. Indeed, they feel no less a commitment to the welfare of someone in Burundi than they do to a fellow citizen in Birmingham. Perhaps they even feel a greater commitment.

Charity used to begin at home. But the best fast-stream civil servants now want to work in DfID, the international development department. Their idealism is focused more on raising up the global poor or worrying about global warming than on sorting out Britain’s social care system.[…]

Intellectual sophistication is, more generally, associated with transcending the local, the everyday, the parochial, and even the national. Replacing the nation with other allegiances seems an attractive, even morally superior, alternative – chiming with globalisation’s market freedoms. […]

That was one of the pithiest and best comments of all time.

This story perfectly illustrates the nut job world we live in. Letwin’s dilemma is just another instance of this madness.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/28/new-york-can-fine-you-250k-for-misgendering-somebody/

Let’s be serious here.
Didn’t Bruce Jenner ‘misgender’ himself by pretending to be a woman?

I mean the guy has a penis and a pair of nuts. His ass should be sued for misgendering and insulting womenfolk.

We live in strange times. In truth, trans-gendering IS mis-gendering, but in our crazy Jewish-controlled world, you or I noticing that a guy has penis and balls than a vagina is a criminal offense while a guy with penis and balls pretending to be a woman with vagina is a paragon of truth and justice.

Trannies who mis-gender themselves are said to speak the truth whereas we who see and speak the truth — Bruce Jenner is no lady — are accused of mis-gendering.

I’m sure defenders of Rachel Dolezal will accuse us of mis-racing.

Jews are messing up everything. They mess up Ukraine but accuse Russia of aggression.
They mess up the Middle East with Zionist hatred and aggression but then defame Europeans as haters for resisting the mass invasion(while Israel takes in no refugees while giving medical attention to ISIS fighters.) They mess up Wall Street but preempt any criticism by screaming about ‘antisemitism’.

In our world, if a guy pulls down his pants, exposes his penis, and says “I’m a woman”, he is telling the truth that you better accept or else be sued and ruined.
And if you disagree, YOU are ‘misgendering’ and telling a lie.@_@

But in a world where ‘gay marriage’ is some kind of holy faith, whaddya expect?

One of the more interesting questions you leave unanswered JD is what is a large racial minority that a country should avoid.

Britain’s 3 per cent of Caribbeans is about the same as Australia’s Aborigines (who also engage in widespread miscegenation) and, except for a slight IQ loss over a few generations it’s no big deal despite similarly great overrepresentation in the prison system.

Australia would cope very well if the proportions of bright educated or entrepreneurial Indians and Chinese each rose to 5 or 6 per cent (and probably more) though I can imagine being wrong if competition for good jobs grew and the large numbers of enterprising Australians working outside Australia started to come home. Muslims, who still have a relatively high fertility rate, don’t look like becoming a serious problem because of their numbers as they are in France though their useless radicalised young men who shoot people will be an irritant for at least some years to come. So….

What’s the formula, with weighting of factors, for deciding what makes a minority too large? PS A clue? We, in Australia, got over the Catholic Irish minority problem completely despite their being an undoubtedly large minority (including some of my ancestry) and the hostilities of generations up to the 1960s. And surely the competence and pleasantness of Asian nurses in hospitals and Asian ubiquity as bank tellers and supermarket staff (usually students) must help. I’m reminded of your expressing understanding of people’s preference for a small smiling person raking the lawn over the usual US alternative.

I just watched that movie and really enjoyed it. Freeman Dyson commended it in an interview, saying it captured much of the mood of Wartime England that better than anything else.

“He’d have been sacked from the Cabinet if he hadn’t.”

It’s called principle. Something very few politicians have. Your defense of Letwin speaks to your lack of principle.

It is time for Britain to return to its Christian philosophical roots.

In Christian philosophy life is valued higher then justice. (So is forgiveness.)

No matter what – those (savages) poor Brits had no right to kill that cop. When you follow established time proven ideals – one plus one still adds up to two.

When you leave Christian principles – all manor of intellectual BS flourishes.

UK and US, the situations are similar.

If we were to use geographical metaphors, Jewish power is like the size of the Soviet Union. In contrast, gentile power in the Conservative Parties is that of Iron Curtain nations.

So, even though the GOP and Tory numerically have many more gentiles than Jews, in actual power in terms of of donations and media control, Jewish power is much stronger. Jews also have moral-spiritual aura of Holocaust Worship.

When we look at cucky politicians in the GOP, they remind us of the Communist Leaders of the Warsaw Pact nations. What did the Warsaw Pact lackeys fear most? Soviet Union. They knew that if they didn’t keep their people in line, the Soviets will come invading like they did in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. So, in Poland, the communist military cracked down in the 80s out of fear that if Solidarity grew stronger, the Soviet tanks would roll in.

In the US, GOP politicians know that they can be made or unmade by Jewish power. Jews got the money, the media, and probably the scandalous dirt on all of them.
The Warsaw Pact stooge-leaders claimed to represent international brotherhood of man and worldwide communist movement, but in effect, they were running dogs of the USSR. They had to go along with whatever the USSR commanded. Of course, in time the peoples of their nations began to notice how bogus it all was and began to grumble and even to rebel. When the people got unruly, the leaders of such nations felt they had to go hardline on the people cuz, if not, the Soviets Union would send in the tanks and replace their failed leadership with new leadership who can do the job.

GOP cucks see GOP voters the same way. The Jewish donors have the power of the USSR. Cuck candidates and operatives are like the rulers of the Warsaw Pact nations. They talk about principles and ideals, but they are really all about sucking up to Supreme Jewish Power and pushing the Tel-Aviv Line. And their main role is to pacify the masses and keep them duped and dumb enough to go along with the lie that the GOP platform represents their aspirations and interests(when in fact it serves Jewish globalists just like the Warsaw Pact was really devised to serve the interests of the USSR).

This is why cucks panic when they see the Trump campaign. Trump is acting like Tito and upsetting the Supreme Authority. If the cucks fail to control the conservative voters, they will lose their credibility in the eyes of their Jewish masters. The masters will look at them and say, ‘you guys are weak and worthless; you can’t keep the masses under lid’. And they will be replaced by new lackeys.

Because the cucks are INSIDERS, they know the full power of the Jews. They know that Jews have the awesome power of the gods. They tremble in fear just like Warsaw Pact leaders(who’d been invited inside the Kremlin to receive orders from Soviet leaders) understood the danger of losing control of the masses lest the Soviet gods punish them. They feared not only the rage of the masses but the iron fist of the Soviets that would punish and replace them for the failure of keeping their people under control.

Cucks have been appointed by Jewish Masters to control the conservative masses. They are not meant to represent the people or lead them. They were handpicked and groomed by Jewish Masters to control the conservative voters into useful idiots of sheeple. But Trump’s Tito Moment is showing that they have lost their control over the conservative masses, and this means that Jewish Masters will lose confidence in them and choose others to take their place.

That’s what this is all about.

Cucks fear the Jews like the generals in EMPIRE STRIKES BACK feared Darth. They know that unless they can do the job and deliver, they are dispensable and replaceable.

Video Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tSa3xLVYgM

Video Link

Video Link

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/upshot/donald-trumps-strongest-supporters-a-certain-kind-of-democrat.html

Support for Trump is 35% or less among boomers vs Millennials at 29%. Not much difference despite being the most brainwashed generation. It is quite possible that among white younger generations the support is higher than their elders due to larger numbers of younger non-whites. On the contrary it is the boomers in positions of power who have enabled the current PC dystopia.

I really don’t think the Jews are safe from the mob either

show me the evidence…and btw, I am rubber and you are glue….everything you say….

Chess games are not usually lost in the move right before checkmate. They are lost due to errors in the early or middle game, and the losing side gradually holds an increasingly untenable position. So it is with immigration and demographics.

Now now, don’t start confusing the peasants with the facts.

You are clearly wrong, I’ll give you two obvious instances.

1. A large majority of Japanese are opposed to Abe’s warmongering changes to the Constitution.

http://www.thenation.com/article/japan-is-scrapping-its-pacifist-constitution-despite-massive-public-opposition/

2. The US bases on Okinawa.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/01/20/japan-says-us-base-in-okinawa-will-move-ahead-despite-local-opposition.html

Again I wonder whether you’re really an Israeli bashing troll attempting to make Jews look thick as well as malign.

I has nailed you on many issues with “Holocaus”. To which could be added the depraved beheading of a British soldier in London by Israeli Mossad.

Chicago-based American-Jewish investigative writer and blogger Stephen Lendman, in his May 24 post, also suspected beheading being a”false flag operation” and not an act of Muslim terrorism.

“Manufactured pretexts make it easier (to attack Syria or Iran). False flags are longstanding pre-war tactics. They’re US/Israeli specialties. Britain’s an active co-conspirator. Muslim extremism was blamed for Wednesday’s London killing. We’ve seen this all before. Expect heightened Islamophobia ahead. UK, US, other key NATO allies, and Israel benefit most. They’ll take full advantage,” wrote Lendman.

“It takes five people to stage an event like this – two to be ‘parents’,- two to pose for the camera, one in ninja outfit and one to contact the media that doesn’t bother checking who ANY of these four other people are …,” American Jewish author Noam Wolf wrote on her Facebook page.

http://rehmat1.com/2013/05/26/london-beheading-an-israeli-false-flag-operation/

Beautifully put. Churchill didn’t oppose Hitler because of anything more than anger over Germany’s refusal to abide by the corrupt Versailles Treaty.

The impression I get is that Churchill wanted a war, and Hitler gave him his best chance at one. Churchill was like the British John McCain that way.

Blame the elites. Immigration had a twofold effect on profitability. First, the increase in the workforce lowered wages. And second, population increases increased the size of the domestic market. Business 101 thinking. The pursuit of profit and damn everything else. All the apologies and moral indignation are merely tactics to protect enhanced profit strategies. Add a third reason — the clash of cultures resulting from out of control immigration policies increases the need for government intervention. Throw in some out of touch intellectual do gooders, and you hit the trifecta — business, political, and intellectual elites unite against the people.

You gotta admit the Globs have a lot of PULL.

We of the patriotic ilk(who have no pull) discuss matters in terms of power and principles.
But those with the PULL have so much leverage, options, and influence. They don’t have to argue, debate, or persuade, at least not honestly or fairly. They can just use their firepower to threaten, defame, and destroy. They can just mutter loaded terminology, slogans, and cliches and maintain the official narrative cuz they have so much pull.

We are lone voices, but the Globs constitute a vast and deep network.

The PULL makes all the differences.
Consider the scene in THE GODFATHER when Michael says he’s gonna kill Sollozzo(the Turk) and the Irish-American Polish captain.
On the surface, it’s a blunt matter of one young man using a gun to kill two men. One happens to be a big time drug dealer who is protected by the other families. And the other is a NY police captain. He is an important man.

Video Link
The idea of Michael killing those two men seems nuts, reckless, impossible, self-destructive, and ruinous to the Family.
So, why does the Corleones decided to do it? Cuz they got the pull.
Michael is part of a network. There is the family, its allies, its agents, and institutions with covert connections with the family.

Your right about all of that. Blacks were virtually all but non-existent in Canada until well into the late 1960’s. Although the way our cultural Marxist media acts with its ludicrous embrace of “black heritage month” – used to be just called February – you would think Canada had always been a majority black nation. In my view whatever “gains” we acquired by importing Jamaicans etc. and now Somalis, etc. was many times over outweighed by the disadvantages of more crime, violence and social disharmony and dissolution.

good luck trying to get these alt-right drones to see reason….they are like the mirror image of liberals…

“75 years ago the Brits stood alone against Hitler’s panzers and bombers”.

Little bit of a selective memory going on here. Actually Great Britain was the one that declared war on Germany in 1939. And in 1914 too. Neither Hitler or the half-English Kaiser ever wanted any war with Britain. That is a historic fact! I can’t think of one single thing the British ever gained from fighting either of those wars with Germany at all. In fact I would argue the United Kingdom would have been far, far better off if it had avoided conflict with the ‘dreaded Hun’ altogether.

In any case, common sense should have told the British that once they began letting a few colored peoples into their country, this would eventually be followed by ever more and more of them, like a little snowball being rolled down a long hill and that their nation would be changed forever by it – and probably for the worse, not the better. Enoch Powell warned them.

Letwin is hardly a “grandee” – he’s just a clever Jew. Very much what MacMillan (an actual grandee) would call an “Old Estonian” :

http://leftfootforward.org/2014/08/the-antisemitic-traditions-of-the-tory-party/

(although, I suppose he is technically an Old Etonian too, but of the nouveau riche variety).

My gut impression is that Afro-Caribbean men are having more children than Afro-Caribbean women, while white men are having fewer children than white women, at least among the working class.

Well if your focus is on IQ, why not bring in a million Chinese and Indians per year, as for the native population, survival of the fittest? And pray tell once those 5 percent of Chinese come in what magical willpower will stop those 5 percent from bringing in the rest of their 10 blood relations each, after all they got excellent test scores. Or maybe you know this all along and are just pretending to play stupid?

Why John Derbyshire avoided to mention the following:

1. Oliver Letwin is a Zionist Jew and member of ‘Conservatives for Israel’.

2. In 2013 Wikipedia accused Letwin of deleting his being “Jewish” and replacing it with “Atheist”.

3. Nicky Jacob was cleared of charges of murdering Police Constable Keith Blakelock in April 2014.

4. Letwin is a close friend of two other Israel-First British Jewish traitors involved in Liam Fox Affair.

http://rehmat1.com/2016/01/04/uks-anti-black-jewish-scandal/

why are alt-right sites littered with these zombie-esque Jew-hater Fetishists?

Yes. Probably a fortiori in the case of immigration and demographics. That’s what makes it so important to choose the right immigrants and not to allow any lot to become too large with respect to the mainstream while unassimilated and to make sure that there is not just one alien group.

In Australia we should discourage all religious Muslim immigration while we have a population of no more than 2.5 per cent of Australia’s total (I don’t know how they split up in terms of Sunni, Shia, Turkish, Lebanese, Afghan, Pakistani, Indonesian etc and the number may be as low as 2.2 per cent).

It seems that Hinduism is growing much faster in Australia than Islam btw and, happily, Hinduism isn’t a proselytising religion. The proportion of Hindus is about 1.3 per cent. Those of Indian birth (400,000) and ancestry (500,000) amount to 2.13 per cent in 2015 so Hinduism doesn’t seem to be too strong.

I had forgotten that the 2011 census asked a question about ancestry and produced some confusing results. Thus English 36.1???%; Australian (mostly not the roughly 2 per cent of wholly or part Aboriginal ancestry) 35.4%; Iriah 10.4%; Scottish 8.9%; Italian 4.6%; German 4.5%; Chinese 4.3%; Indian 2.0%; Greek 1.9%; Dutch 1.7% etc etc.

I am surprised by the 4 per cent Chinese though it is mostly Hong Kong, Vietnamese and Malaysian Chinese I guess after the old leftovers from the 19th century gold rushes. Tiananmen Square refugees (i.e those in Australia as students who stayed in 1989) started a flow from China which has now been added to by those with money buying security of property and an English language education for their children – a very big element n our major cities residential property market.

The birth rates of all but, perhaps, some Muslims and hopeless alcoholic Aborigines are low. Australian born fertility is higher than that of immigrants.

This PC crap looks very very bad.

But…

Something is happening. In the 60s, the youth movement was mostly on the Left even though some like Ken Kesey and John Milius didn’t exactly fit the mold.

So, the Buffalo Springfield song ‘For What It’s Worth’ was about the counter-culture. Young people seemed to take on the establishment. (To be sure, the infusion of youth hedonism into leftism in the 60s fundamentally changed leftism’s character.)

Today, it could be said that the majority of millennials are ‘progressives’. And they act like they are carrying the ‘radical’ torch and ‘fighting the power’.

But here’s one problem. In the 60s, the leftist youth were really at odds with college administration, the church, the establishment, the government, and etc. They really were rebelling against established powers and norms.

Today, the millennial ‘progressives’ and ‘radicals’ have exactly the SAME IDEAS and OUTLOOKS as their professors, Hollywood, MTV, Wall Street(at least in terms of social values), globalists, and de-spiritualized churches.
Millennial ‘radicals’ and ‘progressives’ may flaunt the rebel style, but they are nothing but teachers’ pets or teapets from kindergarten to college. Also, even corporate culture is so PC, what with all the harangues about ‘diversity’ and ‘homo-worship’. And big cities impose fines and destroy bakers who won’t conform to gayria(make wedding cakes for homos). Starbucks and Apple promote PC values. Corporations, Big Government, Wall Street, Las Vegas, Hollywood, Music industry, and etc are all in on the same boat with Lena Dunham, Rachel Maddow, Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner, Anderson Pooper, Ellen Degenerate, and etc.

Maybe millennials are so shrill and obnoxious because, deep down inside, they realize that they are nothing but teachers’ pets and don’t have a single original idea in their head. So, they must throw tantrums to get any kind of attention. After all, they became what they are by soaking in all the PC taught to them by their schools, the media, and government. I mean when Wall Street, Walmart, Washington, and etc all celebrate the passage of ‘gay marriage’, what is so ‘radical’ or rebellious about being in tune with PC?
SJW make a lot of fuss as if they’re rebellious free spirits, but they are nothing but tiresome and predictable running dogs of the PC establishment controlled by Jews. They just bark according to their training.

The ONLY young people today with ideas and positions that challenge, oppose, critique, and counter the PC dogma of the Establishment are on the Alt Right. The cuck ‘right’ is, of course, just a lite version of PC dogma.
The ONLY young people who don’t obey the PC status quo are on the Alt Right.

The classic Marxist left died with the fall of communism, and the new synthesis that calls itself ‘progressive’ is nothing but corporate-backed worship of the homo anus and silly trannies. In a way, one could argue that neo-aristocratic capitalism destroyed the left by turning it homo and decadent. The true left is deader than the right. What goes by the name of ‘left’ today is Wall Street-backed illusion of the hip and cool. It is about drinking Starbucks Coffee.

As for anti-white politics of identity politics, that is actually the the politics of the non-white RIGHT. It is mistaken for ‘left’ because it is allied with white ‘progressives’. It’s like right-wing Muslims in Europe side with white ‘progressives’ who push homo agenda. In the US, blacks are into black identity, and browns are into brown identity. Jews are really really into Jewish identity. Thus, they are all really part of the right.
It’s now really all about right vs right vs right vs right. There is no true left anymore. There is globalist ‘left’ that is mostly focused on homo agenda(that defuses class conflict as issue). The rich folks love the homo agenda cuz it puts class issues in the back burner. Also, as homos are prominent in the vanity pop culture industry, the homo agenda is all about turning everyone into narcissistic hedonistic consumers. And multi-culturalism is just a cover for identity politics, and identity politics is really rightist in character.
As for open borders, it is the project of globalist elites to undermine native working class and use cheap immigrant labor.
We hear the same demand for cheap foreign workers not only in the US but in EU and now in East Asia too. 75% of Japanese corporations argue for open immigration into Japan.

So, the left is dead. Some groups may invoke leftism but only because they want MORE for their own kind. So, they are really motivated by rightism. Blacks just want more free stuff and advantages for blacks via more government programs. The main driving motive isn’t ‘my class’ but ‘my race’. MORE STUFF FOR MY PEOPLE. Identity politics. Rightist. Malcolm X was a black nationalist, thus a rightist, and he chose socialism because he thought it would serve his people better. Likewise, Hitler went for national socialism.

Anyway, it’s all about the right. It’s white right vs Jewish right vs black right vs brown right vs yellow right and etc.
Why should it be ‘right’ when whites take up identity politics but it’s ‘left’ when non-whites do so? No, all forms of identity politics is rightist.

And it is only the Alt Right that rejects the official paradigms and makes things clear.

You obviously know nothing of English society if you think an Old Etonian of Jewish background is ever going to be a Zionist first unless he has some psychiatric problem and inability to carve out a normal competitive career. And what makes you say Wikipedia “accused” Letwin of deleting “Jewish” and replacing it with “Atheist”? And if you can justify this infelicitous use of language what do you think of anyone to do with running Wikipedia exercising judgment on people in such a way? Are you, btw, saying that he was being deceitful in saying he was an atheist? If so, why?

Nor do you know anything about political life. The mere adhesion to “Conservative Friends of Israel” as any professional politician, staffer or party organiser could tell you, means b-all without a lot more information, He could even have been reluctant but signed up when someone said, “look mate we can’t afford to have f***ing Labor claiming its got all us Yids on side”. (You think only crude Australians might speak like that. Then, again, you don’t know the English upper classes).

What I know that you don’t is quite a bit about the Chinese and Indians who come to Australia. A typical young engineer of my acquaintance went back to China after his graduate studies in Australia and married a girl in Shanghai who is now employed 7 years later as a research scientist in Australia. Despite his telling me years ago that having been an only child was lonely he and his wife have just one child. My nieces Chinese tutor is a married Chinese woman who has been in Australia for 25 years and has no children nor any other relations in the country. She says we should take no refugees btw! So, empirically, they just don’t show any sign of bringing in lots of blood relations, partly because they don’t have many I suppose, and also because we don’t favour mere “family reunion” beyond spouses and children.

And of course I don’t focus entirely on IQ though it isn’t a bad proxy test for choosing people who will be future taxpayers.

As it happens the White Australia Policy which lasted till the late 1960s with no regular exceptions except e.g. Japanese brides of servicemen was one that probably set up Australia well for an immigration program which is now pretty successful by most standards, The policy was most strongly supported on the left by unions but had fairly general acceptance especially by those who would have benefited by furniture having to be stamped “Made by Chinese Labor” in the late 19th century! Its duration seems to have happily allowed both hosts and newcomers to grow up as modern people who can live together.

I don’t know what gives you the confidence to use the word “stupid” when you obviously don’t know much about our existing substantial number of Chinese ethnics from many different parts of Asia, or what they actually do about family.

Macmillan’s own great-grandfather was a crofter.

How do you know that I am not Chinese, so I may have a better view inside the submarine than someone outside the submarine? And how do you think the Chinese population of Vancouver boomed? And as for the TFR I am pretty sure it is not 7 per woman, and it can not be much less than 2 per woman on average. And maybe having Chinese relatives (though not blood relatives) makes you more welcoming of Chinese immigration? And given how family oriented the Chinese are they are very interested in bringing over their relatives if they can, I mean looking at the AQI of Peking and Melbourne it is self explanatory.

Do you have any official government statistics to prove that the TFR of Chinese Australians in less than 1 or somewhere near 1? I have Filipino acquaintances who have relatives who live in Canada and they talk about the importance of getting somebody there to act as your anchor and smooth your path to getting admitted to Canada.

To be honest with people like wizard of Oz around the giant panda has bigger odds of making it to the year 2200 than white people ROFLMAO. But then your own people wish for your own extinction (because it will raise the IQ score at least and because Chinese tutors are better in math than the people of Aristotle’s ethnic persuasion), so what can the rest of the curious onlookers do?

The classic Marxist left died with the fall of communism, and the new synthesis that calls itself ‘progressive’ is nothing but corporate-backed worship of the homo anus and silly trannies. In a way, one could argue that neo-aristocratic capitalism destroyed the left by turning it homo and decadent. The true left is deader than the right. What goes by the name of ‘left’ today is Wall Street-backed illusion of the hip and cool. It is about drinking Starbucks Coffee.

I know we on the alt-right bemoan our lack of influence but I think you are right – we probably do have more influence now, or at least exponentially growing momentum. Marx still had a lot of sway with academics maybe 15 years ago or so. Probably a decade ago. But as far as influence, when is the last time you have heard someone preach “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”? My guess is the USSR was funding a lot of outreach and the Marxist proselytizing died when the USSR died.

I don’t know that you are not Chinese. As I was replying to someone with a different pseudonym it didn’t occur to me to interest myself in the question?

Can you give me some reason why I should since you don’t seem to be dealing with what I wrote except for saying that Vancouver has had an experience of Chinese immigration which for some reason not spelled out should be a lesson and concern for all Australia?

“show me the evidence…”

For what? That you are a tiresome idiot? I would refer you to………….every single thing you’ve ever written here.

” I am rubber and you are glue….everything you say….”

Including that.

I’m surprised that you think that there would be any “official govrrnment statistics” on the TFR – by which I take you to mean total fertility ratio – of Chinese Australians or even unnaturalised Chinese residents. Is that the sort of inquiry governments in the Anglosphere that you are familiar with conduct? Not likely I would say. But it does appear that the fertility of the Australian born of all ethnicities – about 1.85 or more – is greater than that of the foreign born generally and I doubt that the Chinese are amongst those with higher rates though one Overseas Chinese friend married to an ex Scottish lawyer in Australia who has three children has 11 whole and half siblings; not one of whom however show any inclination to live in Australia.

If by chance you were of Chinese ancestry, as you hypothesised in your previous reply, why do you think that relevant? What claim does that give you to propound knowledgeable opinions on the likely course of (ethnic) Chinese immigration to Australia or that Chinese Australians are likely to outbreed earlier immigrant stock?

David Irving performs and excellent piece of Research in Hitler’s War and again in Churchill’s War. Unfortunately, the truths were too well documented and Irving’s works must now be found on used-books sites, as they have been banned from further publication in most of the West, where the truth of the “Holocaust” is protected by laws and imprisonment. The Jewish bankers of the UK bailed Churchill out of financial ruin on multiple occasions and he became their spokesman for unlimited war against the only country that had seen through the central banking exploitation system and replaced the same. The “holocaust” story merely served the purposes of the Soviet Bolsheviks (predominantly Jewish, BTW), who fabricated the “evidence” after the fact and fed it to their obsequious cousins in the US media. Now it is “history.”

You really haven’t the foggiest when it comes to the arrangements, preferences and politics of England, do you?

In that case what is the population of Chinese in 1970 in comparison to now? And maybe a chinese knows more about these things than you do?

The US govt publishes TFR by race, though not by ethnicity.

That is a historic fact! I can’t think of one single thing the British ever gained from fighting either of those wars with Germany at all.

I think WWI was Britain’s last best chance to cut the High Seas Fleet down to size. That may have been some of their motivation. A Germany with the most powerful army in Europe coupled with a bigger navy than Britain and a Kaiser a bit on the nutty side.

About low Chinese TFR, pray tell how did the Han Chinese go from 1% to 50% of the population of Sinkiang despite having likely lower TFR than the Uyghurs?

ITS A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And besides, if Hitler had not been dumb enough to get rid of the Jews and send them packing to the US, then Germany would have been the 1st country to have nukes, or at least civilian nuclear power, which is what would have happened under a von Pappen chancellorship, or a quasi military junta.

Churchill actually wanted to keep Britain white in the 1950s and tried to limit South Asian immigration but was outvoted by his ministers.

Newly discovered Hitler paintings show remarkable talent.

http://www.rense.com/general96/hitlerpaintings.html

p.s. Once again is Mufti Netanyahu wanting in talent or not?

p.s. Just as crazy – yes – talent NO. He is just not the man Hitler was.

The government has been shipping them in. That’s one of the things the Uyghurs are pissed about.

Where do people get the impression that overseas Chinese have pretty good rates of compliance when it comes to paying taxes without somebody checking the books? OTOH based on its agricultural output, Australia can accomodate up to 90 million people and over if you make people live in 60 storey commieblocks, so if you want to make Australia’s population resemble Kuala Lumpur with some white people added it can be easily done.

Chinese immigration to Vancouver has been a disaster for white Canadians who lived there.

“A Germany with the most powerful army in Europe coupled with a bigger navy than Britain”..

The German navy in 1914 was nowhere near close to being equal to Great Britain’s.

“and a Kaiser a bit on the nutty side.”

He kept his country at peace for 26 years, not a bad record for a European monarch in times gone by. If the Kaiser was a war monger why didn’t he attack Russia in 1905-06? Russia had just been defeated by Japan, its navy sunk and the country was being swept by revolution?

Whatever Britain’s motivation might have been the cost simply wasn’t worth it. I stand by my view that the U.K. would have been vastly better off if it had stayed out of the great war in 1914.

1. “In that case”….. In what case? What are you talking about?

2. Why 1970? And what do you mean by Chinese? There have only been Chinese from the PRC in substantial numbers since 1989. And why aren’t you equally interested in Indians (and which kinds of Indians)?

3. Some of the comments particularly in reply to me seem to be white people’s comments who are lump all people of Chinese together and regard them as the Yellow Peril. So perhaps I detect in the first sentence the question “since the lifting of the White Australia policy formally and fully how has the population of Chinese ethnicity or ancestry in Australia increased? I would look that up as you easily can so if you have a point to make please make it clear. Of course there were very small remnants of Australia’s 19th century Chinese immigrants/settlers – probably under 1 per cent of Australia’s then much smaller population. Then a few from SE Asia with little in common with their PRC Han cousins came and settled though the biggest intake was probably for a few years in the 70s and early 80s when ethnic Chinese came from Vietnam. The Lord Mayor of Melbourne of some 20+years ago John So was from Hong Kong and you could still hear it.

Quite a few come to Australia probably because they are Christians or Falun Gong, others to secure their money with real estate investments and reliable courts, others simply as students who find careers in Australia after graduating. Perhaps some came to be able to have two or three children though I see no sign of any of the splendidly old-fashioned families of 8 to 15 children that lasted longer in the Chinese diaspora than in most prosperous parts of the world.

You can see that I just don’t quite no where you are coming from – what your issues are? I would be very happy with the way ethnic Chinese run Hong Kong (as far as they are allowed to), Singapore or Taiwan. Even if they became powerful enough to change Australia I don’t see any reason to think they would be uncomfortable changes for any but perhaps a few under class no-hopers.

4. It could well be true that a Chinse person would know more about a lot of things I am interested in than I do. But…. what are “these things” so I can get a handle on what it takes to know something about them? Would a Chinese person for example have a better idea of what effect on Australian society another few per cent of Chinese immigrants would have? Or what someone not Chinese should care about? And again, what do you mean by “Chinese”? If you were Chinese and using your brain I would have thought you might specify which Chinese might know a lot of relevant stuff. A recent arrival from Shanghai in New York? A third generation Hakka just moved from Singapore to a US university? Not obvious, needs spelling out.

Interesting. Thanks. Can you give me a link? Is there any sign of high fertility amongst any particular Asian “racial” group? I can (just) see Chinese being treated as a single race but the Indian caste system alone, as well as the obvious differences between the southerners like Tamils and the northerners like Sikhs would throw out any racial classification system.

That would be the same way as in Tibet the Han were pushed or bribed by their government to dilute the outsider populations within China. Curiously the Chinese one child policy doesn’t seem to have been applied to the minorities. Does anyone know why? Maybe they calculated that the coercion needed would be too inflammatory and the numbers involved really didn’t make enough difference -as your figures prove, at least on the geo-political front.

What have you got to say about the libel action David Irving brought and lost against Deborah Lipstadt (I think I have the details correct)?

As to Churchill being bailed out numerous times by Jewish bankers I think you will find that it was one Jewish South African mining magnate’s money that was the critical bail out and then at a time when Churchill’s course was set anyway (unless he was bankrupted and excluded from Parliament). And it was Brendan Bracken, of Irish origins and ethnicity, who fixed it.

It is true that Churchill was a very bad Chancellor of the Exchequer (and admitted it I seem to remember, if not in the late 20s) but the place of doing things for Jews in that needs a bit of explaining. I doubt if any canny Jewish financier would have been happy at the restoration of the pound sterling exchange rate with the US dollar at the 1914 exchange rate which resulted from the price of gold that Churchill was responsible for.

Cumberbatch is his real name. But his father Tim was Timothy Carlton as an actor!

Which Christian philosophical roots are you thinking of? St Augustine, Tertullian, Orthodoxy, Hus, Albigensians, Cathars, Luther, Calvin, Erasmus, Bonhoeffer – or do you have a favourite learned Pope or two?

The image of William II as a mad warmonger was only a propaganda lie like the modern guff about Putin. And Britain was still well ahead in the naval arms race and had the capacity to remain so. But it is possible (not guaranteed) that had Germany not been running that race at all Britain would not have intervened in a European war. Building a serious, potentially anti-British fleet had been predicated on the hostility between Britain and France; Britain could not risk facing all three large fleets at once, so would hopefully make an alliance with Germany. When that policy proved insufficient with the Entente Cordiale, the response was to double down on it.

And by the way why set up an arbitrary 10% East Asian Maginot line, why not 25%, why is 25% logically worse than 10%, and if you follow the Ancestral North Eurasian Migration immigration into Europe hypothesis then a lot of Northwest European whites may already be as much as 1/8 East Asian, so putting another 5% or 8% East Asian DNA into the mixture would surely put their whiteness into doubt, unless you consider quadroons white? And again how much grizzly DNA can you put into a panda before the panda stops being a panda?

And to further the point, what if with a half-Korean daughther asks why can’t the rest of Australians look like her, after all she gets good grades in school right? Can you give any purely logical answers? And again once those 5% proportion of East Asians are absorbed into the population, what will stop another 5% of proportion of East Asians from being admitted, after all the average Australian now is 5% East Asian, so what is logically so bad about adding another 5% more into the mixture, and so on and so forth, what makes you people so confident that you can hold the line in the sand?

[Instead of cluttering up a thread with numerous, short comments, it’s much better to combine them together into a couple of longer and more substantial ones. Also, pick a single handle and stick to it rather than using several different ones. If you wish to remain “deeply anonymous” you may use “Anonymous” or “Anon.” Using numerous handles is a violation of the rules and can get your comments trashed.]

After all a lot of half Asians like Kristin Kreuk still retain mostly white features, so what would be so bad about a half east Asian Australia? And as for India, high caste Indians do not do a particularly good job of running their own place, unlike say the Japanese.

Based on pure logic, why would Australia be worse if it was settled by the Han Chinese, instead of the British, I mean it would probably be doing a lot better in test scores and math tests now if that were the case. And why would an Islamic Australia free of SJWs be a bad thing, especially if it is run from Cordoba and not from Raqqa. I mean the desire of white countries is stay white is not entirely logical but also based on emotion right?

How come people at Unz.com are so quick to defend the desire of the Japanese to stay as much 100% Japanese as possible but then lambast people for saying that maybe that amount of Asians within Australia in 1970 is high enough, so no need to take in more, or at least keep their percentage relative to overall population of Asutralia cosntant? I mean there was a thread at Isteve about Japan and Islam, and where are the people saying that maybe Japan should consider taking in 12 million Koreans since Koreans may have even higher IQ scores than the Japs? And genetically and culturally Koreans and Japs are closer to each other than Koreans and British Australians. I mean where is Wizard accusing the Japs of being irrationally afraid of Koreans and not allowing mass immigration from Korea? After all not all Koreans are alike right? Or how about taking in 12 million 110 IQ Hindu Indians?

After all the Japs do not know the personal life story of every single potential Korean immigrant right?

[Instead of cluttering up a thread with numerous, short comments, it’s much better to combine them together into a couple of longer and more substantial ones. Also, pick a single handle and stick to it rather than using several different ones. If you wish to remain “deeply anonymous” you may use “Anonymous” or “Anon.” Using numerous handles is a violation of the rules and can get your comments trashed.]

Hitler did white people an immense amount of harm by guilting them into things like the immigration act of 1965. I mean there never was any question of countries like Canada and Australia accepting large amounts of non-Europeans before WW2. I remember Louis Armstrong being compared to a monkey when he went to Sweden in the 1930s.

How come nobody questions or challenges the desire of non-white countries to remain the same?

The High Seas Fleet was closer to Britain’s than you think and ready to surpass it due to Germany’s industrial base.

The result was a naval arms race with Britain as the German navy grew to become one of the greatest maritime forces in the world, second only to the Royal Navy.

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

The Kaiser was dumb enough to back Austria in it’s squabble with Serbia over the murder of Ferdinand and that gave the Austrians the green light to attack.

I agree that Britain might have been better to stay out.

I recommend you read M. Stanton Evans’ “The Theme is Freedom.” Rebuts a lot of the causal links you are positing.

He argues that the American notions of liberty were not purely or even mostly propositional. Rather they were birthed from the practical lessons of England’s common law tradition and a skeptical, Christian-influenced view of man as a fallen being not to be trusted with absolute power or to be subjected to rationalist schemes of social engineering.

I do not know, everytime something relevant to white people is mentioned why do people like Sailer feel the need to compulsively mention Asians?

Are you quoting Yeats? “..the best lack all conviction” taken from the Second Coming.

Superior essay from you Derb. Thanks!

They would if the media wasn’t anti-white.

The European and world order Hitler envisioned would have been to the near, middle, and especially long-term detriment of Britain and Britons. Therefore he intended Britons harm. Even if he wanted to be friendly about it, and even if he thought their empire would provide excellent institutional top-cover for a German Europe. Given the economic and military potential of the continent, the latter would have been far more powerful than Britain and would have dominated much of the world through its residual empire. The inevitable result would have been the MUCH faster drift away of the independent dominions, and the eventual replacement of British power in the rest by German power.

And in Europe, it’s a toss up. Even looking at the present and future, Britain was British and governed by Britons for the long stretch of time after the war and into the 90s, and tied to a much looser and less German Europe than the one Hitler imagined. Even now it’s tied to a much looser and less German Europe than the one Hitler imagined, despite all the blather about how Germany finally won the wars. GErmany today is not Hitler’s Germany, and the EU is not Hitler’s Europe.

Even with the racial future that’s coming, I doubt you’ll find many Britons who actually would have enjoyed living in pro-Nazi Britain from 1940 on.

On one level, I suppose, one might say Britain bargained its 21st century to buy itself the prosperous years [and still culturally British ones] from the mid 1950s to the mid-1990s. That might seem a poor tradeoff in the longer view, but it gave my parents a decent youth before they both left, and gave my more distant relatives better lives than they would have had. And there was no intrinsic reason it had to end the way it will now, so saying that 1940 was the decisive turning point and German rule the only option is a bit overdone.

I might want a greater commitment to common defence of Euro-American civilization within and without, but I don’t now and would not then have wanted it to be directed at my ancestors’ expense by a gang of homosexual/wannabe street toughs, comic opera buffoons, hard-core psychopaths [stare a minute at a photo of Heydrich or Goebbels], and Cliff Clavin beer hall philosophers.

The Kaiser himself had thrown in the towel in defeat in the naval arms race in the years leading up to 1914 and actually signed a naval pact with Britain. The German fleet was never a threat to the U.K., although there was a false perception it was. I suggest you read some of Major-General J.F.C. Fuller’s writings on this.

Why shouldn’t the Kaiser have backed Austria? The Ferdinand’s were his personal friends, the slaying of a heir apparent was a major blow to a Europe of kingdoms and empires. It should also be remembered that Austria was Germany’s only major ally left on the continent in 1914 and Germany was desperate to hang on to her. Please see the book 1914, the war that ended peace. The author shows how the German elites felt they had to support Vienna or be left alone and vulnerable on the continent. To me the real dumb leader was Tsar Nicholas. Had he told the troublesome Serbs that they were strictly on their own and could absolutely not rely on Russia for support the Serbs would probably have backed down. Even if they had still been obtuse enough to fight, “world war one” would have just been a minor brawl between Austria and Serbia. The Tsar saw what happened in 1904-05 with the war with Japan. That caused a revolution that nearly cost him his throne. He should have learned his lesson and realized he needed to avoid war at all costs to preserve his ramshackle empire. Instead he lost his throne, dynasty, family and his own life too. Nicholas was 100 times stupider then the Kaiser ever was.

We agree at least that Britain should have stayed out. This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Somme offensive. I’m sure the BBC etc, will air all manners of programs on it. I think it was the dumbest battle ever. 1914 marked the beginning of Great Britain’s permanent decline.