|
|
News! White nationalists scorn fair skinI feel quite proud of myself. Through my recent posts on this blog, I have caused the white nationalists who gather here to pour scorn on the idea that white skin (or pink skin, as I call it) means anything. I am beginning to think that if Karl Marx were still alive, I could convert him to conservatism! I have achieved this momentous feat by pointing to the long-established pink-skinned elite of Latin America as proof that living in a multi-ethnic society does not cause racial distinctiveness or elite status to vanish. That the now irreversible multi-ethnic nature of American society will lead to a loss of Ango-Saxon distinctiveness and advantage is of course the main contention of the WNs. The only answer that the WNs have been able to give to my counter-example is to say that the skin colour of the Latin American elites means nothing. They are still wogs underneath the skin. I am of course delighted to have caused a turn towards deeper thinking among the WNs concerned and would like to highlight another point I have made to which the WNs so far seem to have NO reply whatever. They say that the Latin-American elite is nothing to be emulated because the Latins have within their gene pool some admixture from the elite end of the “native” population. They are not PURELY Spanish so represent failure in some unexplained way. But the white population of the USA is not PURELY anything either. They are a huge jumble of genes from all over the world and even include a substantial admixture of African genes. Yet that is the population that the WNs seem to want to preserve—a “mongrel” race. Racial purity is not only a myth but there is also no evidence that it is desirable. Or is the population of the world’s most influential nation a miserable failure in some mystical way? The WNs say that I have no vision of the future. They think I am happily driving along a road that ends in a cliff. But populations don’t end in cliffs. They change gradually. And the increasing ethnic diversity of the USA has coincided with a supercharged forward march for the USA in almost every desideratum. And even the ways in which the USA has not done well lack only the will to control them. Crime is the obvious example and Giuliani showed in NYC that a bit of old-fashioned policing can substantially fix that and do so in short order. The real enemy of crime-control is the political Left who oppose crime control out of their own destructive urges. And as for historical vision, I guess I should point out that the greatest and most lasting empires of the ancient world—Persia, Rome and Byzantium—were all totally multi-ethnic. I am enjoying this post so much that I am going to put it up straight away but there is a fair chance that I will have some updates later. Posted by jonjayray on Wednesday, July 27, 2005 at 08:59 PM in Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic Interests Comments:2
Posted by Geoff Beck on July 27, 2005, 09:10 PM | # I was wrong, it is time to get rid of JJR for good. This will be the very last time I ever post a comment on a thread of his. I hope others do the same, though I know it is tempting to take his bait. 3
Posted by Lurker on July 27, 2005, 09:21 PM | # Excuse me if Im not excited with the prospect of my descendants living in a Brazilian set up. Sitting on the verandah while the peons toil in the fields. Or perhaps in gated “communities” to keep the dangerous people (who are not “us” out). The shanty towns, the gangs, the death squads killing poor little brown kids - all the blessings of a multiethnic society. Sounds like a fucking disaster to me. I think we can do better than that. Lets do the humane thing for everyone and stop the immigration now. 4
Posted by Svigor on July 27, 2005, 09:33 PM | # Lol, John, you’re turning into a troll! I can’t take this seriously enough to respond. To those who don’t know, white (not pink; Mediterraneans are whites too) skin is significant - as a racial marker. 5
Posted by Svigor on July 27, 2005, 09:42 PM | # They say that the Latin-American elite is nothing to be emulated because the Latins have within their gene pool some admixture from the elite end of the “native” population. They are not PURELY Spanish so represent failure in some unexplained way. But the white population of the USA is not PURELY anything either. They are a huge jumble of genes from all over the world and even include a substantial admixture of African genes. Yet that is the population that the WNs seem to want to preserve—a “mongrel” race. Racial purity is not only a myth but there is also no evidence that it is desirable. Or is the population of the world’s most influential nation a miserable failure in some mystical way? Ah, now this I’ll respond to. It’s a strawman. I don’t think I’ve ever used the term “mongrel” here; I don’t use the term. I have 5000 posts at Stormfront, I may have used the term once or twice (literally) in reference to humans. You’ve had EGI explained to you many times so you know perfectly well the desirability of “purity” (your tendentious proxy-word for genetic homogeneity). 6
Posted by Svigor on July 27, 2005, 09:44 PM | # Lol, John is wrestling mightily with the ancient leftist strawman of “skin color!” That’s a real laff! :D Thanks John, I’m still chuckling. 7
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 27, 2005, 09:51 PM | # Geoff, I’m also not going to respond to this one, because with John “Sadistic Streak” Ray it’s always endless “déjà-vu all over again,” as Yogi Berra once complained (I think it was Yogi) ... I just don’t feel like taking the bait yet again and getting stuck one more time in that never-ending cycle, sorry ... Incidentally, having clicked on “DaveJ’s” name (first commenter in the thread, who wrote “Good post”) and read/skimmed some of the log entries he has up there at his own blog, I’d say his endorsement is ... how to put it? ... his endorsement is ... not exactly something any self-respecting blogger should covet. (Sorry if that deflates you any, John ... hey just trying to be helpful—help you separate the wheat from the chaff ...) Anyway, our friend John is bound to get his share of accolades for this entry from Silverhand, Quirky01, Birch “Extended Phenotype” Barlow, David “There Are No Such Things As Races” B., and the others—hell, it’ll draw them like honey draws flies—so, no harm done to John’s self-esteem if we sit this one out ... 8
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 27, 2005, 09:55 PM | # Lurker, that comment of yours above was like a welcome breath of fresh air in the midst of choking on toxic fumes—thanks for it ... 9
Posted by Stuka on July 28, 2005, 12:36 AM | # ...the now irreversible multi-ethnic nature of American society… “Irreversible”?! Yeah, right. Don’t bet on it. Anyway, thanks for the laughs. 10
Posted by Andrew L on July 28, 2005, 12:50 AM | # John has a small point about the Spanish, think about it ,Moors, Islam Arabs, yes that explains it, it is the Arab Gene,after all those years of anglo Women being raped, the obvious mutation and intellectual decline in the Spanish, Thats why they are so dopy NOW, bit far fetched , but the puzzle Certainly comes to gether. Bloody Arabs hay,fingers in everthing, Oops that sounded terrible, Hands on everything, You know what I mean,Ha 11
Posted by Tournament of Champions on July 28, 2005, 01:49 AM | # Probably JW, Fred, and others have taken apart these arguments before, but I as a somewhat new reader have not read all of them. Let me try my hand at it: have caused the white nationalists who gather here to pour scorn on the idea that white skin (or pink skin, as I call it) means anything. In the past thread several WNs argued white skin is necessary but not sufficient. At no point did they “pour scorn” on whiteness. pink-skinned elite of Latin America as proof that living in a multi-ethnic society does not cause racial distinctiveness or elite status to vanish. 1. Only because in Latin America they lord over racially inferior groups. In the United States letting in intellectually superior Jews have led to the replacement of the “pink skinned” Anglos by Jews at the controls of the US government. So, no, pink skinned people have lost their elite status in the US, and if Nick Griffin is to be believed, England also. does not cause racial distinctiveness… to vanish. The point is a) societal relatedness is decreased, and this is costly, and, b) different ethnic groups means conflicting within-nation interests, subject to exploitation by hostile groups. For instance, KMD has documented how the presence of a black population was skillfully exploited by Jews to drive a stake into the Anglo-Saxon semi-ethnostate. Furthermore, there is no dispute with regard to immigration- it is tremendously costly to the receipient nation ethny. They think I am happily driving along a road that ends in a cliff. But populations don’t end in cliffs. The WN position is correct. Neglecting EGI guarantees eventual extinction at the subgroup level. JJR’s argument is that the species will continue no matter if certain ethnys splat themselves at the base of the cliff, but this is irrelevant. But the white population of the USA is not PURELY anything either. They are a huge jumble of genes from all over the world and even include a substantial admixture of African genes. Again, a population does not seek to decrease relatedness and voluntarily introduce ethnic faultlines into its society. greatest and most lasting empires of the ancient world—Persia, Rome and Byzantium—were all totally multi-ethnic. Firstly it is irrelevant whether multiethny societies can be successful, the point is single ethny nations possess many additional advantages. Secondly they were not multi-racial. Multiracial societies experience far more ethnic conflict than a society of genetically-near ethnys cobbled together. Thirdly Rome (and by extension Byzantium) rose due to the efforts of a single ethny, And, I firmly believe the UNited States would be even stronger had they not passed the 1965 law, and instead simply outlawed condoms, for instance. The white baby boom would have continued and there would still be 300 million Americans today, 280m white. Blacks would not have pushed whties out of the jewels of America, its cities, and no welfare would mean at least 10m fewer blacks. 12
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 02:23 AM | # Ah! The Beckster has been struck dumb! A constructive approach might have been a definition of what population he and his ilk wished to “save” but a thoughtful response was obviously too difficult I notice that the holiday man is absent from the lists too. He does not like it when I point out that BOTH the Latin American elites and the U.S. whites are genetically mixed BTW 13
Posted by Steve Edwards on July 28, 2005, 02:49 AM | # “And the increasing ethnic diversity of the USA has coincided with a supercharged forward march for the USA in almost every desideratum.” This is an absurd statement that actually conceals far more than it reveals. Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilisations puts paid to the lie that the West in general, or the US in particular, is more powerful now than ever before. If you were to trace the share of land territory ruled directly by western countries and their allies from the 1900s through to the 2000s, you would have to conclude that there has been an enormous shift in the balance of power away from Western countries. Equally, the Western share of world population, GDP, manufacturing, military manpower etc has fallen lower than at any time in the last 100 or more years. And on the point of the US in particular, you may recall four Westerners (including Wilson) sat down after WWI and effectively redrew the boundaries of the entireity of Europe, Asia Minor and the Middle East. A similar thing happened at the end of WWII. To be able to do such a thing, without any credible challenge whatsoever, requires an awesome power that neither the United States nor her allies could achieve today. JJR seems to think that America’s contemporary occupation of a couple of pathetic little regimes in Central Asia and the Middle East in some way mitigates these undeniable facts. A much more accurate formulation of what has indeed happened over the 20th centuries is that: a) Western countries are (relatively) weaker than at any time in the last 100 years, or more. b) Western countries are more ethnically diverse than at any time in the last 100 years, or more. There may or may not be causation, but JJR’s post sheds absolutely no light on this issue (or any other issue), and therefore carries no meaningful information. 14
Posted by Andrew L on July 28, 2005, 03:28 AM | # Well said Steve, But the diversity bit, cultural marxist diversity .Deliberate supression. 15
Posted by The Pete on July 28, 2005, 06:00 AM | # No matter how many times I read that, it all comes back to me wanting to fight Fred Scrooby. Also, good post. 16
Posted by Mark Richardson on July 28, 2005, 06:06 AM | # The interesting thing to note is how much John has to clutch at straws in order to maintain his position. He wants to argue for a multi-ethnic society, but at the same time wishes to assert that this will not threaten the existence of the mainstream, established ethnic group. It’s an unlikely proposition and John has to make some unlikely arguments to support it. There is, for instance, his insistence that the survival of lighter skin in the Latin American elites shows that European racial types are not threatened. Straw-clutching. The idea that my distinctive Anglo community will be transformed on the Mexican model is not reassuring at all. Nor, I expect, would even the elite of the Latin countries retain any aspect of a European phenotype if Mexico were to experience, as we do, a constant stream of mass immigration from around the world. Then there is the claim that multiethnic states are the most successful, as evidenced by the empires of the world. More straw clutching. The British were not a “diverse” society in the modern sense when their empire was won. Nor were the Romans. The Romans, as we know, did become more ethnically diverse later in the empire. But then they were overrun by .... ethnically homogenous tribes of northerners. Nearly all the claims made by John are counter-intuitive. Are we really to believe that a multi-ethnic society will be more successful than a homogenous one in the long term? Why would I feel a sense of ownership of and obligation to a country if it is no longer my ethnic homeland? Why would I fight as hard to maintain its public standards, its moral integrity or its cultural achievements? 17
Posted by Rodney on July 28, 2005, 06:07 AM | # Racial purity is not only a myth but there is also no evidence that it is desirable Anyone else find this, in particular, puzzling? 18
Posted by DaveJ on July 28, 2005, 07:42 AM | # DaveJ doesn’t have any posts on any blogs. Just to clear that up. 19
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 07:46 AM | # “The British were not a “diverse” society in the modern sense when their empire was won. Nor were the Romans.” The Brit empire was very shortlived. I was talking about LONG-lived empires. Rome was homogeneous to a degree in the Republican period but it was also weak then. The Empire was the heterogeneous era and that was when it was most powerful. The empire reached its greatest extent under Trajan—who was a Spaniard 20
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 07:54 AM | # “Are we really to believe that a multi-ethnic society will be more successful than a homogenous one in the long term?” It depends on the respects in which it is homogeneous and heterogenous. Loyalty to America and Australia is often very pronounced among immigrants who have got there legally. A population that is the product of SELECTIVE immigration may not be racially homogeneous but it could still be desirable in othere ways—having a high level of amenity, for instance. I am not at all arguing for the American experiment with illegal immigration but at the same time I don’t think it will be the disaster that the WNs proclaim 21
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 07:57 AM | # And anyway the big social problems in America are not with immigrants but with blacks. 22
Posted by onetwothree on July 28, 2005, 07:58 AM | # The empire reached its greatest extent under Trajan—who was a Spaniard Trajan was a Spaniard? Really? Well…let the reconquista carry on! It’s easy to say to other people, “I think your backyard should be inundated with the third world.” That’s _so_ easy. In fact, I think that _YOUR_ backyard should be inundated with the third world. And if you don’t like it…if you don’t like it, just remember: Trajan was a Spaniard! That should help. 23
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 08:01 AM | # I get the impression that few readers of this blog are economically sophisticated so I have not so far mentioned the major way in which illegals keep the American economy dynamic, flexible and growing: They represent a de facto deregulation of the labour market—in that they often work for less than the legal minimum wage. But I don’t want to explain here why that is a good thing. Look it up in a textbook 24
Posted by Mark Richardson on July 28, 2005, 08:33 AM | # John, now I really don’t get it! You’ve said so often that Australia is superior because we don’t have as much illegal immigration as other countries. Now you’re telling us that illegal immigration is a boon. I throw my hands skyward. 25
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 28, 2005, 09:01 AM | # I don’t fight double-digiters, Pete—just a rule of mine ... 26
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 28, 2005, 09:08 AM | # John, no one invokes “racial purity.” We have a race and we want to keep it, that’s all. What’s hard to understand? We also don’t view other races or other colors as “inferior.” Do we have to change into them to prove that? Or can we just point it out without having to acquiesce in our own race-replacement “to show we’re telling the truth”? Why is race-replacement being pushed on whites? Why isn’t it being pushed on Chinamen, Bangladeshis, Mexicans, Negroes, and Moroccans? Why only us? 27
Posted by Steve Edwards on July 28, 2005, 09:12 AM | # “I get the impression that few readers of this blog are economically sophisticated so I have not so far mentioned the major way in which illegals keep the American economy dynamic, flexible and growing…” Dear. God. We now have incontrovertible evidence that John’s rhetoric about Australia’s “selective immigration programme” is simply duplicitous. “Look it up in a textbook”. That’s brilliant - if only they had put that on the Statue of Liberty! Why bother with high-minded rhetoric when you have a knock-down argument like “Look it up in a textbook”? 28
Posted by Stuka on July 28, 2005, 09:17 AM | # I get the impression that a certain contributor to this blog is not historically sophisticated, since every schoolboy knows that Trajan was a Roman. He was descended from an old, aristocratic Roman family. 29
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 28, 2005, 09:23 AM | # The illegals are being used to replace high-wage white workers with slave-wage Mexican peon ones, John—everyone knew that. And? ... Your point was? ... Yes, this massive substitution of slave labor for labor at a living wage is making every single CEO in this country a billionaire as the nation’s race gets changed irrevocably into something unrecognizable. We all knew that. And your point was? ... We’re all supposed to applaud that, you mean? ... A nation’s race counts for something, John. It’s not nothing. 30
Posted by Tournament of Champions on July 28, 2005, 10:23 AM | # I get the impression that few readers of this blog are economically sophisticated so I have not so far mentioned the major way in which illegals keep the American economy dynamic, flexible and growing: They represent a de facto deregulation of the labour market—in that they often work for less than the legal minimum wage. Actually, those free factor flow models do not hold for immigration. Why? Because immigration is not “free”, since the native population suffers displacement costs, costs that must be factored in. Furthermore, the National Academy of Sciences has found almost the entire increase in GDP is captured by the immigrants in the form of wages (National Research Council 1997). That means natives get virtually zippo in return for the inconvenience of being displaced out of existence. Borgas confirms these figures in Heaven’s door: immigration policy and the American economy. Princeton University Press. 31
Posted by Steve Edwards on July 28, 2005, 11:19 AM | # That point about the economics of immigration is made very well by Gerard Jackson from Brookesnews: http://www.brookesnews.com/052507immigration.html Basically, if labour is scarce relative to other factors of production, then yes, immigration will raise overall welfare. However, the USA is probably labour abundant by now - although GDP might increase with each illegal immigrant entering the workforce, it must be pointed out that per-capita incomes will fall (as capital per worker falls). Equally, it is naive to assume that the illegal workers will not be net fiscal beneficiaries - unless you abolish public education, welfare etc, it is difficult to conceive of a situation where illegal immigrants will NOT receive more than they pay in taxes. For this exact reason, I know one or two Australian libertarians who have unashamedly stated that they support open borders because it WILL lead to the destruction of social welfare. But don’t worry about any of that, just “read the textbooks”. 32
Posted by ben tillman on July 28, 2005, 12:38 PM | # ...the greatest and most lasting empires of the ancient world—Persia, Rome and Byzantium—were all totally multi-ethnic. Empires are multiethnic *by definition*, JR, which leads to an interesting hypothesis…. 33
Posted by ben tillman on July 28, 2005, 12:50 PM | # They say that the Latin-American elite is nothing to be emulated because the Latins have within their gene pool some admixture from the elite end of the “native” population. They are not PURELY Spanish so represent failure in some unexplained way. They don’t represent “failure” (because they never tried to accomplish anything different!), but the point is that they aren’t us, and we don’t want to be changed into them. If I recall correctly, JWH’s data showed that Latin American elites had 15-30% Amerindian or Negro admixture along with proportions of Iberian and Sephardic blood, which vary by country. (It may be that in Brasil, Panama, and Colombia, for instance, the Sephardic contribution outweighs the Iberian.) In the US, the white population has essentially no admixture with Negroes, and the Indian infusion is minor and not problematic. 34
Posted by AD on July 28, 2005, 01:24 PM | # JJR grew up in a different world and i think he is stuck in that reality.I honestly dont think he knows the full extent of what has happened to Australia. His world of theories,enlightenment ideals and sense of detached superiority mean nothing in the real world.He would be eaten alive if he had to live his life in the ‘multiethnic heartland’.His Australia,where immigrants just want to work and love the free market doesn’t exist. I grew up in multiethnic Australia from day one.It doesn’t work,it is hell.Cheap labour isnt a fair trade off for arabs yelling epithets at elderly Aussies who dare still live in a neighbourhood the muslims have now claimed.Diverse cuisine isn’t a fair trade off for hundreds of racially motivated gang rapes.Population growth isn’t a fair trade off for the thousands of white kids who are too scared to go to school because the non-white majority don’t believe in ‘tolerance’ quite as much as genteel anglos like JJR. All of JJR’s arguments come down to pacifying us.All of our real life experiences are ‘paranoia’.Any attempt by us to resist or fight back is rooted in fascism,marxism,the left,the far right,non-conservatism,the esoteric hitlerite green movement blah blah blah. He is embaressed by the paranoid ‘White Nationalists’.They go against his enlightenment ideals.“There is no ‘pure’ white in Australia/USA/etc so there is no point resisting the ethnocentric non-whites who target you as white and see you as something that needs to be overcome.Just let them know there is no ‘pure’ white,problem solved.” JJR is like a fat degenerate Roman,so proud and idealistic,living in a society where men marry boys and women marry horses,so enlightened,so ‘inclusive’ and ‘diverse’ with no sense of loyalty beyond the ‘ideal’,scoffing at suggestions that something might be wrong,that their tolerance of everything might actually be a weakness.There was no getting through to them as there is no getting through to him,they didnt believe the stronger,more tribalistic invaders were at the door,even as the city was burning.They couldnt believe it,it was against the Roman ideal.Just as ‘White Nationalist’ theories are against JJR’s conceited Anglo ideals. Ofcourse,the conquering northerners felt that beheading these decadent Romans was a great act of sympathy. 35
Posted by Desmond Jones on July 28, 2005, 01:40 PM | # Mr. Tillman, Please excuse my ignorance, but if 15-30% genetic admixture excludes a person from being white, then how would whiteness be defined in a national context? A Florida company, DNAPrint Genomics, does profiling for US, Cdn, and UK police forces and the following statement by their representative was interesting… “...Mr. Gaskin said, once a DNA sample suggests that at least 30 per cent of a person’s heritage belongs to a particular racial group, a person starts “to exhibit features consistent with that population.” It’s not clear from the article what he means by ‘consistent with that population’, however it appears to suggest s/he looks white, black, Indo/Aryan etc. Such a notion appears inconsistent with empirical observation. A son descended from black/white grandparents and black/white parents, (the males are black)looks decidedly black however feels, apparently, more affinity with whites. His brother, however, definitely considers himself black. How is the decision made? 36
Posted by JW Holliday on July 28, 2005, 02:17 PM | # A few points:- 1. As Salter makes very clear in his book, EGI does not depend on “racial purity”, which I agree is a dubious concept that should be replaced with relative genetic (racial) homogeneity. What are important are the relative, comparative genetic differences. Every generation of every population has their own set of genetic interests. So that, for example, Puerto Ricans are a triracial people of European (Spanish), Negro, and Amerindian origins. That is clear from genetic testing. Do Puerto Ricans have group genetic interests? Certainly yes, the fact that they are an admixed ethny does not change the fact that they have such interests, that would be harmed, for example, by the immigration of Koreans (or even of unmixed members of the parental racial stocks). However, from the standpoint of the original Spanish colonists of Puerto Rico, the present day Puerto Rican populations represents a drastic diminishment of genetic interests, compared to what would have been obtained if Spaniards had settled the island, and filled its capacity, without mixing with the Amerind natives or importing (and mixing with) Negro slaves. I trust the relative nature of EGI, and its independence - from the perspective of any current population - from “racial purity” is apparent to all with triple-digit IQs. 2. The question of the racial distinctiveness of white Latin Americans also does not depend on any mythical absolute racial purity either. Instead, the question of whether whites have maintained racial distinctiveness in Latin America depends on a comparison between the putative “whites” of Latin America and the ancestral Old World Spanish and Portuguese European stocks. Whether or not Old World Iberians are “racially pure” or not is irrelevant; the question is whether the Iberian genetic structure has been essentially maintained in the New World. Genetic data - which I have voluminously provided in previous threads - so far indicates that it has not been maintained. Certainly, there are individuals and families in Latin America of unmixed Iberian (not “racially pure”, whatever that means) parentage. But, the question is, have the “white” elites of Latin America, as a group, maintained their Iberian genetic identity? The answer is no. 3. White Americans: The non-Caucasian influx in Euro-Americans in the USA is considerably less than that found in “white” Latin Americans. It is also doubtful whether the later waves of immigrants - starting with the Irish and Germans in the early-mid 1800s - mixed with Amerinds or Negroes at all. And certainly, earlier admixture, mostly with Amerinds, was limited, and cannot be compared to that observed in Latin America. Of course, that any influx took place - despite segregation and anti-miscegenation laws - is just further support for strictly homogenous ethnostates. After all, even laws against mixing cannot stop mixing; only preventing different races from being present in the same nation can do so. In any case, given what was said above about every generation of every population having their own EGI, the low levels of admixture that may be present in white Americans does not preclude, of course, them having EGI. Thus, we wish to preserve the white American population we have, with the proviso that those who are significantly admixed are not really “white” Americans. Furthermore, modern autosomal gene assays can determine these issues, so one needs not depend on facile comments by aracial bloggers to determine the precise genetic interests of any group. 4. Skin color is one important phenotypic racial character. My objection was, and remains, using skin color as the sole, or even predominant, determinant of race, which is absurd. Are dark-skinned South Asians equivalent to West African Negroes? Are ruddy Koreans the same as Irishmen? Is it necessary to even get into this, particularly given the wealth of genetic population studies, and genetic testing, which can determine racial affilations independent of a “pink skin” obsession? 5. As regards the political and social question of the health of America, many *Americans*, and certainly not only WNs, look at the future of the USA with extreme skepticism. A strong sign are all the politicians here who seem obligated to say “America’s best days are ahead of her”, a sure sign that that is not the case. A ravaged educational system, an outsourced economy, a dumbed down population, racial tensions, open borders, a treasonous political class ... how many Americans on this blog think the USA has a rosy future? How many think that the influence the USA currently still possesses is due to “diversity?” 6. As regards the promotion of illegal immigration by some here, I let that speak for itself. 37
Posted by JW Holliday on July 28, 2005, 02:20 PM | # For now, I’m being restained:- John: They say that the Latin-American elite is nothing to be emulated because the Latins have within their gene pool some admixture from the elite end of the “native” population. They are not PURELY Spanish so represent failure in some unexplained way. If the whole point is whether the white Spaniards of Latin America have maintained their racial distinctiveness - defined in a manner of interest to Once again, “racial distinctiveness” from my perspective has meaning only if the group’s genetic structure (and resultant overall phenotype) is In point of fact, since there really isn’t any more significant European migration to Latin America that I 38
Posted by JW Holliday on July 28, 2005, 02:27 PM | # Desmond Jones, Gaskin has access to the DNAPrint photodatabase, in which genetic assay results are correlated to phenotype. It is possible that it has been observed that, for forensic identification purposes, a minority affiliation of ~30% is the point at which the minority ancestry is readily observable and obvious - although lower amounts of admixture may well be observable as well to the trained eye. Obvious phenotypic differences that help police in forensic investigations are one thing; what we are talking about here is whether a person or group is within the genetic range of Old World European populations (which we may call “white.”). And 15-30% Afro-Amerind is beyond that range; in fact, a person with such a degree of admixture would not be eligible for the Euro 1.0 subracial test - from the DNAP website:- To qualify for the EURO-DNA 1.0 test, a person must have AncestryByDNA 2.5 scores that fall with in following ranges 1. greater than 50% European AND So…what a particular person self-identifies with is their problem. If they cannot even be assayed by Euro 1.0 they can hardly be considered Caucasian, much less “European white.” By the way, the company is in the process of developing a more detailed race test, more precisely examining minority affilations. It will be, however, more expensive, as it will use more, and different, markers. 39
Posted by AD on July 28, 2005, 02:32 PM | # That the now irreversible multi-ethnic nature of American society will lead to a loss of Ango-Saxon distinctiveness and advantage is of course the main contention of the WNs. No,that isn’t the ‘main contention’ of White Nationalism,thats the ‘main contention’ of White Supremacism,which doesnt really exist except in Hollywood movies. We don’t want to rule over anybody else,we don’t want ‘advantage’.We believe that any advantages of a multiethnic society are outweighed by the costs.We believe that intentionally creating multiethnic societies was a mistake.We dont like it,we find it disgusting,ridiculous,illogical,traitorous and against the will of the people.The owners of the slave ships were wrong for bringing the africans to america,the missionaries were wrong for bringing the aborigines into the cities and everyone who has since lobbied for unassimilable aliens to enter our societies for whatever reason since was/is wrong. You seem to be arguing that it is worth intentionally creating a multiethnic society,just so some white elite can rule over the brown masses.As creators of a culture,we have the right to lock whoever the hell we want out.Screw the White Man’s Burden. You sound like a caricature of some pompous dope in colonial India trying to convert the masses,then invite them back to the west.How about you stick it up your arse,old son. You are enabling another holocaust,another Yugoslavia,another Lebanon et al.You,and those like you,already have enabled the Witchita Massacre,the LA riots,the horrific murder of Kriss Donald,September 11,the Sydney gang rapes,the London bombings,the zebra killings and thousands of similar incidents.All of these things could never have happened in a homogenous white society.When will you learn?You have been proven wrong time and again. 40
Posted by ben tillman on July 28, 2005, 03:00 PM | # Please excuse my ignorance, but if 15-30% genetic admixture excludes a person from being white…. You’re putting words in my mouth. 41
Posted by ben tillman on July 28, 2005, 03:13 PM | # So that, for example, Puerto Ricans are a triracial people of European (Spanish), Negro, and Amerindian origins. ...and Sephardic. 42
Posted by Desmond Jones on July 28, 2005, 03:29 PM | # My apolgies Mr. Tillman, the intent was not to misrepresent your position. However, Mr. Holliday’s kind explanation does in fact affirm the position that “15-30% Amerindian or Negro admixture” excludes a classification as Eurocaucasian. The confusion arose from the article asserting that at ~30% admixture a person begins“to exhibit features consistent with that population.” However, the statement made no sense in light of the empirical observation that a young man of 75% white origin and 25% black origin still looked decidely black. 43
Posted by ben tillman on July 28, 2005, 03:50 PM | # Screw the White Man’s Burden. AD, you may enjoy a couple of my eponym’s speeches on the U.S. Senate floor: http://www.boondocksnet.com/ai/kipling/tillman.html
44
Posted by Svigor on July 28, 2005, 04:02 PM | # Oh, thanks to AD for catching JJR’s conflation of Anglo-Saxon supremacy with WNism. Must’ve missed that while I was laughing at his antics. 45
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 28, 2005, 04:28 PM | # AD’s posts of 5:24 PM and 6:32 PM are some of the best reader’s posts I’ve ever seen in blog forums anywhere. Just wanted to mention that. Once again, AD gets it right and gets to the inner core of the matter. The guy’s got the picture. Completely. Thanks for those, AD. 46
Posted by Mark Richardson on July 28, 2005, 05:45 PM | # I have wondered, like AD, whether John’s residence in a relatively intact Anglo-Australian Brisbane has made him more complacent on the race replacement issue than would be possible for someone living in Sydney or Melbourne. In Melbourne, the signs of loss are inescapable. Whole suburbs have changed hands since I was a boy. And in Sydney, as I understand it, suburbs like Cabramatta have changed within a lifetime from Anglo to Italian to Vietnamese. To experience such a thing shocks you into a recognition that you just can’t take for granted the existence of your own ethny. 47
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 07:15 PM | # “You’ve said so often that Australia is superior because we don’t have as much illegal immigration as other countries. Now you’re telling us that illegal immigration is a boon.” Perhaps I should have made that clearer. I have repeatedly said that, like most Australians, I DEPLORE illegal immigration. But that does not mean that it cannot have some advantages economically and I was pointing one out. An infinitely better solution than immigration, of course, would be to deregulate the labour market by abolishing minimum wages etc 48
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 07:28 PM | # I appear to have created the impression that I approve of the racial chaos that prevails in much of the Anglosphere today. I of course do not. Having a population include groups that are antagonistic to other groups in the society is disastrous—as we know from Ulster. So while I approve in general of Australia’s selective immigration policy, I certainly do not approve of it in every detail. In particular, I think too little caution was exercised in admitting “refugees” from the Middle East. There appear to be such large hostile elements in that group that extreme selectivity should have been exercised but it was not. And Lakemba and similar areas are the unpleasant price we pay for that. 49
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 07:37 PM | # The case of the UK: I think the situation in the UK is a terrible disaster. In a single lifetime it has gone from a very civil society to a crime-plagued one and one that harbours in its midst a very hostile minority. But the only way to improve things now is to either lock up or expel the problem individuals and the political will to do that is faint. But any hope of improving that will NOT be helped by such nonsense as blaming everything on “The Jews” The UK situation is the fruit of English tolerance, nothing else. That tolerance must find its limits. 50
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 07:45 PM | # The U.S. situation: Again the problem is lack of political will. The Hispanics are not to blame for any problems they cause. The U.S. government is. But the political process will NOT be pushed in the right direction by calling for a white homeland. That will simply get you dismissed as kooks. And the big problem is not the immigrants but the blacks and their huge crime-rate etc. What are you going to do with them? Expel them? Set up an Apartheid system? Don’t be ridiculous. Again the only feasible solution is strict policing of the problem individuals. Visit the real world some time! 51
Posted by Svigor on July 28, 2005, 07:50 PM | # John, since your assessment of what is practical is based on something ephemeral (public ignorance), I’ll politely decline your suggestion. If everybody knew what we knew, the problems would be dealt with, right smartly. 52
Posted by jonjayray on July 28, 2005, 08:06 PM | # I am pleased that Mr Holliday has moved toward less abusive posts and ones that deal with the issue more comprehensively. I think he and I agree that NO modern population is likely to remain genetically stable. The only question is which way it will drift. So I think the Latino elite is still an interesting case in point. It is undoubtedly divergent from its Spanish parent population. But what has it lost by that? It has retained its elite position. That shouldn’t be too hard to bear! So while it is undoubtedly true that the US population of NW European origin will steadily diverge from NW Europe will that have to be bad in any way? I cannot see it. I think the American offshoot is not only maintaining its enviable position but is in fact moving ahead of it’s NW European progenitor—if current economic and political trends are anything to go by. 53
Posted by Steve Edwards on July 28, 2005, 11:21 PM | # I think there must be something amiss when a blogger at Majority Rights is so fond of minority rule. 54
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 12:29 AM | # There is a problem here of the white nationalists’ own making. Is it normal for people to question a policy of genocide toward their race? Do they have to have some political position or other to question that, or can they be totally apolitical and still question it? If not wanting your race to be the target of genocide is just plain normal, something everybody does, and nothing special, why do those questioning it need to be called by the special name, “white nationalists”? Aren’t they just normal folk acting normally? This additional qualfication, “white nationalists,” is not just unnecessary, but it makes you vulnerable to attack by people like John Ray who turn it into a term of derision like “white supremacist” or “Ku Klux Klanner”—a pity since the term isn’t necessary in the first place. To not want your race or ethnic group exterminated is nothing special, and needs no particular political orientation or any special name. I’d drop the white nationalist tag, I really would. If someone asked me if I was a white nationalist I’d answer, ” ‘White nationalist’? What’s that? I don’t dabble in political theory. I’m just against genocide—especially my own.” “An infinitely better solution than immigration, of course, would be to deregulate the labour market by abolishing minimum wages etc” (—John Ray, 11:15 PM) How low do we drive wages, John? If Tranzis like Bush get their way and are allowed to import anyone in the world as a worker, wages can go as close to zero as you like. Doesn’t a society have an obligation to defend the wages of its own workers, its own flesh-and-blood workingmen? “You Shall Not Crucify Them on a Cross of Gold!” was what late-1800s “prairie populist” presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan cried to the Wall Streeters who’d hit upon a way to make themselves filthy rich through supporting policies that impoverished and ruined midwestern farmers, driving them off the land. How many white workingmen and their families must be crucified on Wall Street’s cross of gold, John, before enough of them will have become billionaires on the backs of Mexican slave labor to finally be willing to call the outrage off? “But any hope of improving that will NOT be helped by such nonsense as blaming everything on ‘The Jews’ “ (—John Ray) The enemy has to be named. I agree completely with Mark Richardson that the principle enemy by far where race-replacement is concerned is liberalism among white Christians, and my own pick for second most important culprit is the franchise having been extended to women, something that never should have been done without simultaneously putting certain protections in place. Those aren’t the only sources of the problem, though. After them, unfortunately, come a long array of culprits in I don’t know what order, among which are the Jews, sorry to say: organized Jewish pressure groups and more diffuse Jewish societal influence which is powerful and shows an excessive tendency to influence things in the direction of the weakening of white Christian society. To “blame everything on Jews” is, needless to say, wacko and so is not taking Jews to task where they are blameworthy, blameworthy as Jews, not just as liberals (which they also are, way too often—liberals, that is, and let them be criticized for that too: it’s a huge blemish on them). They are culprits in what’s going on, after all—and often highly organized and influential ones, as witness their almost singlehandedly bringing about the replacement of the 1924-1965 national-origins immigration policy with the 1965 Kennedy-Celler Immigration Holocaust Act. For that treacherous act of intended genocide alone, they deserve to be loudly denounced day and night without let-up by every single right-thinking person on the planet. 55
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 12:30 AM | # “calling for a white homeland [...] will simply get you dismissed as kooks.” (—John Ray, 11:45 PM) Not by thinking people, John. They know every other race has a homeland so what’s wrong with whites having one? John, I fear that without knowing it you’ve internalised some of the left-wing bullsh*t according to which it’s normal and commendable for every race except whites to have a homeland. For once, get your head screwed on frontwards on this, John. Time’s running out. “Again the only feasible solution is strict policing of the problem individuals.” But polities where there are majorities of Negroes will refuse to “police Negro communities strictly,” John (especially where the crime victims are whites—ever heard of a place called Southern Africa? ...). So, that whole solution you keep trotting out ain’t gonna come to pass politically where Negroes have a majority or plurality over whites in a population: they’re not going to put their brethren in jail for violent crimes against whites any more in Detroit than in Johannesburg. Stop kidding yourself. “I think the American offshoot is not only maintaining its enviable position but is in fact moving ahead of it’s NW European progenitor—if current economic and political trends are anything to go by.” This is irrelevant if the white populations involved didn’t want to be changed into another race (replaced with another race, actually) but had it forced on them by corrupt politicians bought and paid for by the Tranzis and so on acting in concert with all the other usual suspects. Furthermore, as for the U.S. “moving ahead of its European progenitor,” that progenitor is also more and more hobbled by precisely the very thing we’re fighting against in the States so maybe that explains its own loss of competitive edge vis-à-vis us in our newly-debilitated condition, and finally, to the extent we look a healthy economy that’s just pure momentum from the years when we actually were healthy. Come back in thirty years from now, John, and we’ll talk. 56
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 01:45 AM | # “I think the American offshoot is not only maintaining its enviable position but is in fact moving ahead of it’s NW European progenitor—if current economic and political trends are anything to go by.” (—John Ray) “Not only maintaining its position but moving ahead”? You sure you want to stand by that, John? Look at this Steve’s : “Lots of liberals who favored the Iraq Attaq later said they didn’t realize how incompetent the US government would be in carrying it out. Yet, incompetence seems to be the defining note of most projects attempted by the government these days. I’m not sure why, but one problem is the tendency for any non-competitive institution to become less effective over time due to all those Parkinsonian processes at work whenever the attention is not concentrated by, say, having the Japanese fleet headed your way. The second is that rejection of reality—made up of marketing spin, postmodernism, political correctness, and old-fashioned American boosterism—that is so characteristic of our country nowadays, especially of the Bush Administration. Third, a multicultural country tends to devote more effort to the politics of distributing pork than of putting the very best people on the job.” (End of excerpt) (Scroob note) I’ll add a fourth one: could it be partly because the race of this country, the particular traditional mix of certain white-race subgroups that has characterized this country since the generation that crafted the Constitution, has been gradually changing? ... 57
Posted by Andrew L on July 29, 2005, 02:33 AM | # There is the answer Fred, Who Foots the bill for all the Ideological garbage with Immigration, Legal or Illegal, the Tax payer pays for everything, and of course when budgets are out, Increase taxation, so You realy have reached the full on Fascist state, verging on Stalinism Communism, ether way The government is going to get you, so Get it First. 58
Posted by Tournament of Champions on July 29, 2005, 03:41 AM | # I think he and I agree that NO modern population is likely to remain genetically stable. The only question is which way it will drift. Change due to selection is beneficial and some drift is unavoidable, but this is not a way of justifying immigration. Immigration is not beneficial and it is avoidable. But that does not mean that it cannot have some advantages economically and I was pointing one out. The U.S. situation: Again the problem is lack of political will. The Hispanics are not to blame for any problems they cause. The U.S. government is. Even today the (Jewish) neoconservatives call for a guest worker program that will flood the U.S. with millions, if not tens of millions of 3rd worlders. THAT IS THE VERY FIRST POLICY THEY ANNOUNCED THEY WOULD PURSUE AFTER BUSH’s REELECTION. THE VERY FIRST, AND THEY HAVE PURSUED IT RELENTLESSLY. (I apologize for anyone offended by all-caps, I believe the emphasis is necessary.) THere was no economic or political justification or popular support, none at all, they pursue it with one goal only: white dilution and genocide. We can also blame the gentile victims, after all, how could they be so stupid to get raped politically, repeatedly and unendingly? That’s an important question, but still they were betrayed by their govt. 59
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 04:11 AM | # Yes. I think the die is cast for the USA. I can see no way that the Hispanic flood will be stopped. To try would cause the party that tried to lose office. So neither major party favours real border control. You had better get used to it The USA will become Brazilianized but the elite will remain broadly NW European (including the Askenazim) 60
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 05:26 AM | # Why does nobody on this blog mention the U.S. blacks? Are they not the biggest problem with their huge crime rate?
I suspect that a lot of Americans tolerate the Hispanic influx because they think that after the blacks the Hispanics are a snack to live with They may be right 61
Posted by Steve Edwards on July 29, 2005, 05:44 AM | # “I can see no way that the Hispanic flood will be stopped. To try would cause the party that tried to lose office. So neither major party favours real border control. You had better get used to it.” So presumably you will retract your enthusiastic endorsement of Geoff’s Minuteman membership application on the other thread. Why would you praise something that you now claim is futile? 62
Posted by Kubilai on July 29, 2005, 06:12 AM | # Why does nobody on this blog mention the U.S. blacks? Because they are inconsequential. Their role in the future will be relegated to extinction and not the type of extinction of Whites which is interbreeding, the true kind. The Negro is already backpeddling against the swarm of the Hispanic who is the new underclass, though harding working. The new slave. The Negro has overstayed his welcome and will either flee “somewhere” or be systematically eliminated due to beneath the surface, race warfare. The fate is sealed for the US and Canada, though Canada still has large, predominately White areas in the Maritimes, Quebec, and the Prairie provinces. The huge non-White influx is concentrated in Ontario and British Columbia. Though the problem with Canada is the lack of a spine of its PEOPLE to change things. It would be easier to make political changes in Canada than the US, where the government is super-hostile and super-aggressive towards its citizenry, and needs to be decapitated if there is any chance to save the country. I do not see either of these two countries surviving intact. The only hope is for Europe to expel all the invaders and keep our heritage and race alive. 63
Posted by JW Holliday on July 29, 2005, 07:15 AM | # John: “I am pleased that Mr Holliday has moved toward less abusive posts and ones that deal with the issue more comprehensively.” John: “I think he and I agree that NO modern population is likely to remain genetically stable. The only question is which way it will drift.” JW: You think wrong. Please point to where I said that. What I *did* say is that populations in admixed societies will drift and change genetically. If the populations are in homogenous societies, the only drift will be random genetic drift, in which the population’s genetic structure would be maintained. Please do not misrepresent my position. To clarify: genetic stability IS possible, but only in homogeneous nations - you know, like the successful Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans. Another example of why people here get annoyed at John is his placement of the Ashkenazim as NW Europeans. Now, a short while ago, I had a detailed post discussing Jewish Ashkenazi genetics - based on gene assays (and history). Not only are the Ashkenazim *not* NW European, they are predominantly NON-European in a general sense. So, we have to go over the same things over and over again, because John simply cannot understand what continuity means in a blog. He just blithely ignores what has gone on before, and states whatever ideas flit through his mind. That’s not being abusive, John. Unless, you can point us to genetic studies demonstrating the NW European genetic character of the Ashkenazim? Now, he changes his tune and admits that “white” Latinos have changed from their Spanish forebears, but that is OK, because they are an “elite.” John- logic. The whole point of your posts on this subject was to prove WN concerns about ethnic continuity wrong. The nationalists here have *already* stated that they are not interested in being mongrel “elites” in some sort of neo-fascist multiracial police state that you envision. They wish to preserve their European biological and cultural character in a white nation. Thus, the “elite” status of mixed-race Latinos (soon to be swept away by Indian nationalism) is irrelevant. If we are concerned about EGI, then you have tacitly admitted we are correct. As regards saying that our goals are a pipe-dream, you know, if we give up, then it will be impossible. I’d rather folow a long-shot solution, then accept multiracial hell. 64
Posted by JW Holliday on July 29, 2005, 08:42 AM | # John, While a white ethnostate is certainly a long-range goal of American WNs (in my opinion, an admirable goal, not “kooky”), there is far more to WN that setting up a “white state.” I have already discussed some of these issues in a previous post in which I commented on GC’s apocalyptic fantasies concerning WN. That may summarize current thought on these issues. Another point, and I say this sincerely, and without animus: John, I do not think you know anything about the “on the ground” reality in the USA. I do believe that guys like me, Geoff, and Svigor have a better handle on the situation. Or, alternatively, you may check out the daily news items at Amren to get an idea of America as a “house on fire”, and of course VDARE articles are useful as well. The last paragraphs of Sailer’s piece are of particular interest. If you think Hispanics are somehow significantly “better” than blacks, then again, you have no experience with, or understanding of, the racial realities of America. That Hispanics are less crime-prone than blacks does not quite make them ideal denizens of America, by analogy, bone cancer is not something one would wish to ‘accept’, even though the short-term prognosis may be a bit better than pancreatic cancer. My analogy of the USA is of a stately mansion that looks good from the outside, but, once you enter and look closer, you see that is being eaten out by termites, has a flooded basement, a backed up toilet, and the walls are covered with filth and fungi. And here, I’m only talking about proximate issues. Even IF America was “sound”, which it is not, the blow to white EGI from multiculturalism would still necessitate us being against the system. The fact that they system itself is rotting - albeit slowly - inside out is just another symbol of what is happening. 65
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 08:46 AM | # “Yes. I think the die is cast for the USA. I can see no way that the Hispanic flood will be stopped. To try would cause the party that tried to lose office, [for the reason that there are so many clueless, extended-phenotype voters out there resembling myself. I myself, were I an American, would never vote for a politician who tried to staunch the flow of Mexicans into the United States]. So, [thanks to voters exactly like me,] neither major party favours real border control. You had better get used to it “ (—John Ray, 8:11 AM) “The USA will become Brazilianized but the elite will remain broadly NW European (including the Askenazim)” (—op. cit.) John’s a snob. He dislikes the white “non-élites” so much he just can’t wait to see them all get permanently replaced by Third-Worlders. He’s like columnist Mark Steyn in that regard—every time he contemplates the current race-replacement program being deliberately inflicted on traditional white-Euro societies he waxes downright gleeful—he smiles, rubs his hands together, salivates, stamps his feet and jumps up and down, can’t contain his joy at the prospect of the thing going to completion. Just like Steyn. One listens in vain for a single note of regret in his voice; in vain does one search through his comments looking for a bitter word. It’s all rejoicing, as if some long-needed correction is finally coming to pass, according to his view of things: “Yes, the white yobbos are finally getting what they’ve had coming to them for ages: permanent replacement by polite subcon grad students and high-IQ hard-working studious yellows! Hurrayyyyyy! We’ll soon see the last of them, the last of the socio-economic lower two-thirds or lower three-fourths layer of the previous white-Euro populations all over the West! The white yobbos who’ve never done anything but torment me are finally on the way out!” 66
Posted by Svigor on July 29, 2005, 09:15 AM | # Yeah, WNism is as much about whites reforming themselves into a nation able to survive multiracialism and multiculturalism as it is about forming white ethnostates. What’s funny is, multiracialism and multiculturalism will inevitably lead to WNism. Whites have resisted the racial nationalism that characterizes every other people on Earth, and in so doing have created conditions that will force WNism to the fore. Eventually the only remaining white people will be WNs, because no one else will have the stones to remain white people. Hopefully this culling of the herd (removing such as JJR) will enable whites to enact WN structures and ideologies that will immunize them from future repetition of the vicious cycle that has been plaguing them. Guess who’s going to be holding all the cards in 2050? 67
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 12:23 PM | # I have no doubt that the Ashkenazim have different gene frequencies to NW Europeans in general. But “Ashkenazim” means “Westerners” and they have long been part of the NW European scene. Basques are genetically different too. Are they not Europeans? 68
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 12:25 PM | # “The Negro has overstayed his welcome and will either flee “somewhere” or be systematically eliminated due to beneath the surface, race warfare.” Wow! A genocide advocate. That should be popular! 69
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 12:30 PM | # “So presumably you will retract your enthusiastic endorsement of Geoff’s Minuteman membership application” Not at all. I doubt that it will do any good but it is the right thing to do. As I often say, like most Australians, I deplore illegal immigration. I would not be blogging here otherwise. But I also say that all Americans had better get used to it as it will not change in the foreseeable future 70
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 12:33 PM | # “If the populations are in homogenous societies, the only drift will be random genetic drift” True but irrelevant. All Anglo societies are now heavily multiracial and show not the slightest sign of stopping the continuing inflow from all around the world 71
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 12:40 PM | # “Now, he changes his tune and admits that “white” Latinos have changed from their Spanish forebears, but that is OK, because they are an “elite.” John- logic. The whole point of your posts on this subject was to prove WN concerns about ethnic continuity wrong. The nationalists here have *already* stated that they are not interested in being mongrel “elites” in some sort of neo-fascist multiracial police state that you envision. They wish to preserve their European biological and cultural character in a white nation” I suppose where we differ is that I keep looking at the real world and concluding that it is not so bad. Never has humanity done better in fact. The fact is that the population of the USA of NW European origin WILL change its genetic makeup somewhat over time (as all European poulations always have to my knowledge) and my point is simply that that may not be a bad thing. The English themselves are after all the product of a genetic mix. 72
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 12:43 PM | # “I do not think you know anything about the “on the ground” reality in the USA.” I lived just down the road from Watts in L.A. not so long ago. Beat that! 73
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 12:46 PM | # Fred 74
Posted by JW Holliday on July 29, 2005, 01:00 PM | # John: I have no doubt that the Ashkenazim have different gene frequencies to NW Europeans in general. But “Ashkenazim” means “Westerners” and they have long been part of the NW European scene. Basques are genetically different too. Are they not Europeans? I could care less what “Ashkenazim” means; the fact that they have been long part of the “NW European scene” is also irrelevant. Gypsies have not magically become European despite being “part of the European scene” for an unfortunately long period of time. Basques are indigenous Europeans (perhaps more indigenous than any others!), and they are not, as are the Ashekanzim, heavily Middle Eastern/Central Asian. The genetic distinctiveness of Basques (which may prove to be not as great as previously thought) would be due to their particular ancestry in the European family of nations coupled with some degree of isolation. Question: if the Ashkenazim are “European”, then, pray tell, what European nation are they from, or, to be more precise, to what specific European territory are they indigenous to? What specific European territory is their homeland? That is no idle question. English-England. The Basques - their territory that spans southern France and northern Spain. Irish-Ireland. Russians-Russia. Italians-Italy. Germans-Germany. Is there a nation of Ashkenazia in Europe? Is there a nation of Gypsia as well? There we are talking about diaspora people who originated elsewhere and are scattered throughout Europe; they have no specific historical homeland in Europe because they are not European. They may have some admixture, but that’s it. I am confident that further genetic testing of the Ashkenazim will confirm the very preliminary results that show a marked non-European genetic pattern. 75
Posted by JW Holliday on July 29, 2005, 01:54 PM | # From American J. Phys. Anthrop. 122, pp. 73-84: “The results of our study in terms of intrapopulation heterogeneity and the relationship between the Basque populations described and the rest of the populations of Europe enable us to tackle the matter of the origin of the current European gene pool. For much of the Upper Paleolithic, the populations of Europe must have been small and, in many cases, isolated from one another, due to their form of subsistence or their being forced to fall back to glacial refuges during the coldest periods (Otte,[1990]). During that period there must have been widespread genetic population diversification in Europe as a result of processes such as genetic drift and bottlenecks. As indicated previously, the genetic diversification detected in the Basque population could be an example of this. The clear differentiation between Basque populations and those of nearby areas such as Aragon (and probably also other known genetic outliers such as Lapps, Sardinians, or Icelanders, which have not been considered in our analysis) from the genetically more homogenous rest of Europe is not congruent with the process of widespread genetic diversification in the Paleolithic described above, unless there was some subsequent process which resulted in the homogenization of the allele frequencies of most European populations. This process would have had to be caused by populations with a mainly European genetic origin, as indicated by Richards et al. ([1996]) and Semino et al. ([2000]), among others. Moreover, it would have had to be able to form the European continental clines which are observed for numerous alleles (Sokal et al.,[1989]; Semino et al.,[1996]; Chikhi et al.,[1998]), and to maintain the genetic idiosyncrasy of the current Basque population. The microevolutionary process required to meet the above conditions is one of Neolithization by populations carrying mtDNA and Y-chromosome haplotypes of European Upper Paleolithic origin.” Thus, Basques are indigenous Europeans of ancient origin and diversification, perhaps less influenced by “neolithization” compared to other Europeans, and, hence, preserving more of their orginal genetic differences. Regardless though of these details, no one has ever doubted that the Basques are indigenous Europeans. 76
Posted by JW Holliday on July 29, 2005, 02:03 PM | # John: I suppose where we differ is that I keep looking at the real world and concluding that it is not so bad. Never has humanity done better in fact. The fact is that the population of the USA of NW European origin WILL change its genetic makeup somewhat over time (as all European poulations always have to my knowledge) and my point is simply that that may not be a bad thing. The English themselves are after all the product of a genetic mix. Some mixes are better than the old mix. I’m looking at the real world as well; the difference is that I care about my people (Europeans), not “humanity”. Yes, I’m sure, the coloreds are having a grand old time at the expense of my people’s EGI, but that’s not the point. If we are WNs, we care about what happens to our people, not “humanity”. Do the Chinese care about “humanity”? Sure, they do….LOL! You refuse to make the slightest attempt to understand the WN viewpoint. From our perspective, things have never been worse. Virtually every European/European-diaspora nation on Earth is suffering from the same ominous demographic trends, and “our” (sic) leaders are traitors who are aiding and abetting these destructive trends. The English are a mix? OK, but of what? Anglo-Saxon and Celt and Norman, and maybe some other European types mixed in, but mostly the first two. That’s a big difference between trans-racial mixture, is it not? Are you using such absurd comparisons? And, John, in your usual form you completely disregard the point I made recently that every generation of every group, regardless of their admixture, has its own EGI. It does not matter if the English are “admixed”, the current English population has its genetic interests to defend. As regards your opinion that new mixes may be better than the old:- 1) Every people, regardless of what you or anyone else thinks of their “quality” has a right, or should I say an interest, in self-preservation. 2) Or maybe the new mix will be worse, no? 3) When are the Chinese going to mix it up? Your comments about the “inevitabilty” of these processes do not impress. If we take your advice and just give up, then, of course, you will be proven 100% right, which is convenient. Some of us though will continue to struggle to strategize for our EGI no matter what. It is always a clever strategy to tell your opponent that their cause is “hopeless” and that they should give up. What easier way to win than by the premature surrender of the enemy (and, unfortunately, it does seem that John joins with the enemies of racial preservation). No, John, Frank Salter is right and you gainsayers are not, because you cannot come up with any effective riposte to Salter other than to say “who cares?” or “give up, it’s inevitable.” It seems the only thing John learned from his time in the USA was that “blacks are bad.” I think you need a fresh dose of American reality, John. 77
Posted by Kubilai on July 29, 2005, 04:24 PM | # Wow! A genocide advocate. That should be popular! - John Ray John, if you cannot understand plain English, please let us know. If you do not have the interest and desire to delve deeply and thoroughly into the topics you discuss, please let us know again. If you write about things you know extremely little about and simply put on your own anecdotal twist, and from this point forward will be known as “Rayisms”, then please let us know. If you cannot understand detailed explanations from other commenters that use scientific jargon, instead of glossing things over and repeating already explained and debunked points of argument, then AGAIN please let us know. This wastes everybody’s time and energy. I have no problem explaining myself, even more than once, however to be smeared simply because you latch onto a word or a phrase is what I would not even tolerate from my two teens, let alone a university trained psychologist for God’s sake. Stating a more than likely reality of the future of the US has nothing to do with being an “advocate” my dear man. It is a highly likely scenario because it is happening NOW. The tensions between Mexicans and Blacks is high and when they are in close proximity to each, the tensions spill over into violence. You must be aware of such things, are you not? If not, then what the hell are you doing commenting on such things without a clarifier indicating you know nothing of what you speak? Here are some links for you to peruse and get brought up to speed on this matter. Mexicans love Black racist caricature stamps because they view Blacks with contempt. Vicente Fox slaps Blacks across the face with his Mexicans will do jobs even Blacks won’t do which caused quite the ruckus in the Black community. Mexicans use Blacks as target practice in California. Blacks are doing dismally despite over the last 40 years and are expected to do worse thanks to Mexican displacement. Multiculturalism is a thing for Whites to love and not Blacks or Hispanics, especially when they are together. The Black and Latino Divide is huge now and will only get bigger. Racial tensions between Blacks and Hispanics in school a powder keg. The powder keg explodes. Now, I find it quite hypocritical of YOU, a White genocide advocate with your love of Asians of all colors, to accuse me of genocide advocation. I do not wish that on any race, ESPECIALLY my own. However, with that said, if the choice came down to Whites versus any other race, well you would not have to look to hard to find where I fall on that issue. So stop being so goddamn obtuse. 78
Posted by Andrew L on July 29, 2005, 05:02 PM | # Spain gets a good kick here, so can anyone remember many years ago, how a single Moslem Refugee changed and destroyed a society, the refugee was an ex Sirrian, so that simple question ought to shut some people up,and a hint is Moor’s.hmmmm, and Ben mentioned multi ethnic in the greater, that destroyed , the Romanan empire, simply put,Barbarian, they did not assimulate to, education , language, or culture of any of that time, so it departed off the earth as we will.History has answered the questions before, relearning what was known has shifted the goal posts, and we are running out of time. 79
Posted by amon on July 29, 2005, 05:29 PM | # White Nationalism is a utopian dream. Even if WNs were able to take over a state/province and have it seceed (doubtful), the UN would make every country embargo the White Nation. Your efforts are better spent trying to restrict immigration, and put in place selective immigration policies. 80
Posted by Andrew L on July 29, 2005, 06:23 PM | # amon, white countries should put an embargo on the UN, and let the Islamic countries as well as the African countries maintain the Elitist ranks of the UN, “Useless Nurological- disordered”. 81
Posted by amon on July 29, 2005, 06:49 PM | # Andrew: You want the WN to be industrial, don’t you? If so, how do you expect it to survive, if few/no countries will trade with it? 82
Posted by Andrew L on July 29, 2005, 07:13 PM | # International trade existed well before Leftism’s take over of the world, so UN is just a vehicle of leftism, as well as some Governments that trade in deseption, in the short term it appears ok, but in the economic cycle, “NOT YET MENTIONED”, where there is no diversity or commonality, then Civil war and human instinct kick’s in. Survival, and when the commonality has be removed by the Aparthite and segregation of ethnic communities, “TRIBALISM” then Historys lesson return. Modern Civilizations have departed the planet, Bigger suprise, China may well be the Futuristic power broker and Imperial ruler, Communism’s sponsored Weapone, “Leftism”, that weapone from Soviet errea is working on behalf of communist China, as well as the UN, I view these as vehicles of Destruction. 83
Posted by JB on July 29, 2005, 07:21 PM | # JJRAY: we got facts, that’s better than textbook theories http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/importing_poverty.htm http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/illegals.htm JJRAY: Dismissed as kooks by whom ? By the jews who run the media and their lackeys and by those who are afraid of them, which is nearly all politicians. They’re the same people who cover up all the crimes committed against whites and make huge stories of the occasional white on black crime http://www.natall.com/free-speech/fs9810a.html They’re not some neutral observers or ordinary americans, they are the most important part of the problem. Whites are being kept in the dark and it is deliberate. A white country is being destroyed and those opposed to this course of events are demonized because the demonizers not only agree with the agenda, they came up with it and pushed it through the institutions http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/books-immigration.html Whites usually move out of an area when there are too much blacks. Many act like racists on an individual basis but today they’re afraid to express their racism or to extend the policies they apply to them and their families to the country. JJRAY: Apatheid and deportation, both would be good. Whites used to be free not to have blacks among them. Now the blacks are forced upon them and the consequences of this are concealed from them and they’re being taught every day that segregation era was bad, so bad that it is the cause that explains everything that is wrong with blacks today and that they have to sacrifice themselves and their children to make up for their past racist “crimes”. 84
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 07:31 PM | # “White Nationalism is a utopian dream. [...] Your efforts are better spent trying to restrict immigration, and put in place selective immigration policies.” (—Amon) What’s the difference between the two? White nationalism, if I understand it, comes down largely to “restricting immigration and putting in place selective immigration policies” (that and, where needed, the implementation of humane, financially-compensated repatriation measures). Of course John Ray will start trumpeting how impossible all that is—just as impossible as it was for the Jews to found the modern state of Israel, John. Naysayers aren’t necessarily right (and their motivations aren’t necessarily pure, by the way—are often bound up with lots and lots of envy and/or pure malice). “The UN would make every country embargo the White Nation.” Wow, good thing you warned everybody, Amon—we’re all scared-stiff of the U.N. around here ... Right! ... We’re quaking! ... In our Boots! ... All of us! ... Better stop that white nationalism stuff, guys—Kofi Anan might get mad! ... 85
Posted by Kubilai on July 29, 2005, 07:31 PM | # amon, that is probably the dumbest thing I have heard in a long time and there has not been a dearth of stupidity regarding racial issues. The old adage of money talks and bullshit walks holds true and when there is money to be made from anything, people will adopt it and trade for it. For example, Microsoft founder Bill Gates was a WN, do you honestly think people would forgo using Windows based PCs because he’s an evil Whitey? LOL Or how about a WN finding a cure for all cancer or heart disease? Or how about finding a viable alternative to the Peak Oil problem? Do you think anyone would give a rat’s you know what that these things came from a WN ethnostate? I think not and neither should you. Secondly, the UN is the most corrupt, Marxist driven organization on this planet. Not only are its days numbered, but if the day ever comes where we need the UNs “approval” is the day we should all lay down and die. It is a sham and wealth transferring entity. Sorry, but your “concerns” are completely unfounded. 86
Posted by Kubilai on July 29, 2005, 07:35 PM | # Better stop that white nationalism stuff, guys—Kofi Anan might get mad! ROTFLOL Thanks for that, Fred. That was too funny. 87
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 07:59 PM | # Amon, when you’re fighting for your heart’s desire, for what you love the most and can’t live without, for your oxygen, your nourishment, your life’s blood, you don’t go about it by first seeking the U.N.‘s permission. You aim for what you love no matter who approves or disapproves, and you work out the details later. 88
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 08:07 PM | # ”[...B]lacks are forced [on whites] and the consequences of this are concealed from [whites] and they’re being taught every day that the segregation era was [...] the cause that explains everything that is wrong with blacks today and that [whites] have to sacrifice themselves and their children to make up for their past racist ‘crimes.’ “ (—JB, 11:21 PM; emphasis added) This is exactly what whites and, especially and more ominously, their school-age children, are being brainwashed to believe. Excellent statement of one facet of the situation we’re up against, JB. 89
Posted by Andrew L on July 29, 2005, 08:18 PM | # Not Just Kofe Fred, what about his son Pluto or , what was the movie with the rabied dog, Fugo or something, what ever , thats his son’s name, fingers in the till and all. 90
Posted by Andrew L on July 29, 2005, 08:42 PM | # That is an Exellent point Fred and Kabilai, When the West has gone, and Japan , China, India, the Nationalist countries, who would be left for them to trade with, simple, they move in where the vacume is, China as I suggest is the, or more becoming powerful, so it will take what it wants, stuff the trading. Our societies have become to Fractured and Tribal,“FORCED”, so occupation would be easy. 91
Posted by amon on July 29, 2005, 08:53 PM | #
Policies which select people on the basis of their race would be ignored. So, as much as you hate the idea of it, we should work on putting into place immigration policies which limit immigration, as well as policies which favor more skilled immigrants—we should work on making the USA, UK, or wherever else adopt an immigration policy similar to Australia’s, albeit more selective. You may not like having people of different races around, but bringing in people who are not prone to criminality, drug use, incivility, etc is a HUGE improvement on what we have now.
Regardless, the UN is still powerful. If you did succeed in setting up a White Homeland (doubtful), don’t you think the UN would urge all major nations to embargo it? Even if they didn’t, don’t you think that the USA and wherever else would do so? As for Japan, China (?!), and Israel—they can have “ethnic homelands” because their inhabitants aren’t White Gentiles. There’s a double standard, as everyone knows.
It has nothing to do with being a WN—it has to do with living in a WN. If most/all nations embargo the WN, then the WN is left to itself to produce everything it needs, which is very close to impossible. Even if the WN did come up with a great business/product/whatever, and nations defied the embargo to buy it, that would only make for one successful enterprise. How would you expect the people in the country to make their livelihood? You might be thinking, Well, other countries wouldn’t embargo the WN. But if the USA embargoed Cuba for being Communist, and is more hostile toward racism than Communism, why wouldn’t they? And why wouldn’t they get other countries to do the same? Additionally, economics is only one of the practical issues that WNs ignore. WNs say they could set up a homeland in Vermont, or another such lily-White state. The thing is, a huge portion of these states are owned by private land owners. The UN even owns some of the USA’s land. 90% of the Dakota’s land area is in farms, which are owned by private landowners. Aside from uninhabitable Alaska or parts of the desert Southwest which have no water, there really is no place to set up a WN of a reasonable size. What way is there to deal with problems like this? I can’t think of any. Saying “Black people commit more crimes than White people” in public gets people offended, and yet you all expect to come along, take a chunk of a country’s land, say that only Whites are welcome in, and get away with it? Peoples’ attitudes toward racism have to change before you work toward starting a WN, and thus you should be working for that. One step at a time! 92
Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2005, 09:21 PM | # With friends like Amon advising us on immigration policy, who needs enemies like George Bush and Abe Foxman? 93
Posted by Kubilai on July 29, 2005, 09:32 PM | # Peoples’ attitudes toward racism have to change before you work toward starting a WN, and thus you should be working for that. One step at a time! - Amon This is about the only thing I agree with. People’s attitude toward racism is a tricky concept and not a foregone “truism”. I tend to think most people are innately “racist”, and if not completely racist, then racially aware. I think the relentless, anti-racist indoctrination from birth makes people non-racist or at the very least suppress it to the subconscious. Therefore, I do not think it will take a huge impetus to have people change from non-racist to overtly racially aware. The diehard anti-racists are hopeless and they do not factor into this equation. They can yell and scream all they want and once things change, “one step at a time”, then it will be too late for their vitriol to have any effect. A recent paper by Philip Rushton… http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2005/07/our_genes_make.php The one step at a time approach is valid though the steps will come fast and furious the further along we travel down this road. It will only take a certain critical mass of White “awakenings” before events start to accelerate towards our final goal. And once this final goal is attainable and it certainly will be, then there will be no need for a compromise. 94
Posted by Andrew L on July 29, 2005, 09:40 PM | # aman, What you say is partially true, but what the problem is is the Ideological State control, some call it intellectual Jews, I rather call them Nurological disordered. 95
Posted by jonjayray on July 29, 2005, 10:21 PM | # “White Nationalism is a utopian dream. Even if WNs were able to take over a state/province and have it seceed (doubtful), the UN would make every country embargo the White Nation. Your efforts are better spent trying to restrict immigration, and put in place selective immigration policies. “ Hear here! I wish you WNs would stop dreaming and do something useful —like oppose the Leftists who are the main source of what you deplore 96
Posted by Svigor on July 29, 2005, 10:51 PM | # White Nationalism is a utopian dream. Even if WNs were able to take over a state/province and have it seceed (doubtful), the UN would make every country embargo the White Nation. Your efforts are better spent trying to restrict immigration, and put in place selective immigration policies. Go to sleep! Go to sleep. Go to sleep… No thanks. The white racial awakening has already begun. As the situation worsens, the awakening will snowball. Eventually the only white people left will be WNs. 97
Posted by Svigor on July 29, 2005, 10:58 PM | # You may not like having people of different races around, but bringing in people who are not prone to criminality, drug use, incivility, etc is a HUGE improvement on what we have now. Sure, but why stop there? I don’t know of anyone here rejecting selective immigration in favor of open borders. 98
Posted by jonjayray on July 30, 2005, 12:23 AM | # “Apatheid and deportation, both would be good. Whites used to be free not to have blacks among them. Now the blacks are forced upon them” I will put aside the moral questions in that and point out 2 things: 1) Blacks have a vote and there are a lot of them so it won’t happen 2) Up to the 60s blacks were very little trouble to whites. They were scared shitless. I am NOT advocating a return to Jim Crow but merely pointing out that you do not have to deport blacks to reduce the problems they create by their propensity to crime etc. A return to discipline in the schools and tough law enforcement would fix most of it. 99
Posted by jonjayray on July 30, 2005, 12:31 AM | # “I’m sure, the coloreds are having a grand old time at the expense of my people’s EGI” Rubbish! EVERYONE is doing better than ever these days. It’s not a zero-sum game. The only exception is the crime-rate and all that needs is Giuliani policies to fix it 100
Posted by jonjayray on July 30, 2005, 12:32 AM | # Sheesh! If you can radically reduce crime in NYC, you can do it anywhere 101
Posted by Rational Islamophobe on July 30, 2005, 07:08 PM | # JJR, doing better has nothing to do with it. White countries, by Whites, for Whites. 102
Posted by John Raciti on March 24, 2007, 09:32 AM | # Biologically I am a Native Scandinavian (U5a1a) and Native Celtic-Iberian (R1b1c). Why am a referred to as a WOG in Australian culture? I am not from the east, or of middle eastern or of Africa background. I am a white Italian/Australian with Blue/Green eyes. My DNA is of the oldest European halotypes. Is the term ‘WOG’ a mis-used word by Australians to discribe one’s cultural group in society? I share many dna matches with my French/English/Germanic genetic cousins. If I am a ‘WOG’ then 70% to 90% of Europeans are WOG’s too… Next entry: Sweden: Fascism in slow motion Previous entry: CAFTA |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. Rizireepreode commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 10:06 AM. (go) (view) Bill commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 10:05 AM. (go) (view) webyLibeNeerb commented in entry 'Hart Attack' on 02/09/12, 09:29 AM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 09:00 AM. (go) (view) Dan Dare commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 08:37 AM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 08:10 AM. (go) (view) Leon Haller commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 08:05 AM. (go) (view) Helvena commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 08:04 AM. (go) (view) The Socal group scam commented in entry 'Yo! Cop = Scum Cow!' on 02/09/12, 07:16 AM. (go) (view) The Socal group scam commented in entry 'The Moral high ground?' on 02/09/12, 06:50 AM. (go) (view) Hyman commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/09/12, 05:47 AM. (go) (view) RES commented in entry 'Who caused the 2008 housing bubble to burst in the U.S.?' on 02/09/12, 05:44 AM. (go) (view) Robert Reis commented in entry 'Free speech and open discussion issues' on 02/09/12, 04:07 AM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/09/12, 12:27 AM. (go) (view) anon commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 11:18 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 10:51 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 10:28 PM. (go) (view) Silver commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 09:48 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 09:48 PM. (go) (view) Mary commented in entry 'Anti-white ideology is like anti-biotic overuse' on 02/08/12, 09:24 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 09:04 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 08:15 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 08:09 PM. (go) (view) Guessedworker commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 07:52 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 07:48 PM. (go) (view) jamesUK commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 07:36 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 07:10 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 06:49 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:45 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 06:27 PM. (go) (view) marloe commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 06:21 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:17 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 06:08 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:07 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 06:03 PM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by DaveJ on July 27, 2005, 09:06 PM | #
Good post.