|
|
Why I am a token niggerAs those who frequent this blog well know, I am a sort of “token nigger” here: I am the only one posting who does not think that an ethnically homogeneous society is a particularly good thing. I am a dreadful tease so not everything I say is totally serious but I am nonethless clearly less disturbed by non-Anglo immigration than anybody else here. Yet I am at the same time as pleased as Punch about my English, Scottish and Irish ancestry and am also proud of the country that my forebears have created here in Australia. And I also think it is incontestable that Protestantism has been an overwhelming influence in creating the modern world. And having been brought up as a Presbyterian, that is easy for me to say. And now that I have mentioned it, let me say that Presbyterianism is the most democratic form of Christianity. What originally made Presbyterianism distinctive was that each church was governed solely by elders (Presbyters) who were elected by the congregation itself. And I do understand very well David’s motivation in setting up this blog. He loves his English people and English traditions and I understand every bit of that. What disturbs him, as well it might, is the woes that the English now suffer as a result of past and present unselective immigration. I am in company with the vast majority of Australians in saying that only selective immigration makes sense. And we practice it too. But I also think that the egg is thoroughly scrambled now. I can see NO way in which the “internationalization” of the U.K. and U.S. populations is going to stop. Nor will it stop in Australia. Australia’s selection criteria do not include race and, as a result, we are said to have a greater percentage of our population foreign-born than any other country except Israel. There is however a huge difference in the COMPOSITION of the Australian population. Where the U.K. and U.S. have people of African ancestry, we have people of East Asian ancestry. The difference that makes is considerable, to put it mildly. I think Australia is very lucky indeed to have a large minority of hard-working, intelligent, enterprising, law-abiding family-oriented East Asians. And that is where we part company. The others bloggers here and I agree that the present flow of illegal immigration into the U.S. and U.K. should be stopped but they would like to stop most legal immigration too. They would like to restrict immigration to people of Anglo and NorthWestern European ancestry whereas I—like most Australians—think that only individual criteria are important. I think that you can have desirable immigrants of any race. What appears to bug the other bloggers here is loss of continuity and community. They feel that what they are is being lost or will be lost in the future. I do not see that at all. And South America shows why. After around 15 generations of living among a sea of blacks and Indians, there are still lots of pink-skinned people in South America. And they mostly run the place too. Although there is always a certain amount of interracial marriage, such marriages are very much the exception rather than the rule and it seems that a people who REALLY ARE genetically similar (such as people of broadly NorthWestern European ancestry) will intermarry readily among themselves while always remaining distinct from the other populations around them—be those other populations large or small. So the loss of continuity is a paper tiger. Whatever is good in Anglo genes will survive because distinctively Anglo people will survive too. They just have to get into bed with one-another to ensure it and they clearly have a considerable propensity for doing that. What about the loss of community? Wouldn’t it be nice to live in the sort of large village that I have described Iceland as being? Yes and No. I am hardly unaware of the attractions of that or I would not have described Iceland so sympathetically. And I must admit what a relief it is when I can go into an Australian shop or cafe and speak relaxed broad Australian with the staff there instead of having to struggle to communicate with people who know little English. But as someone who actually grew up in a large village (the Australian country town of Innisfail) I know there is a downside too. There are huge pressures towards conformity in a village and a lot of back-biting and gossip. Everyone knows everybody else’s business so privacy is very restricted. And I shudder to think of the inconvenient opening hours and limited range of services (such as restaurants) that we would have without the ethnics. So I don’t think much of mono-ethnic or village-style life at all. And in a modern society we create our own communities anyway. By and large we associate with whomever we choose and if we are comfortable only with people of a similar ethnic background, then people of that background will become our community. We are no longer restricted to the community that we live geographically next-door to. We create our own communities to suit ourselves. So we in fact get the best of both worlds these days: We live in a virtual community without the limitations of an old-fashioned geographical community. So regardless of whether the U.K. or the U.S. ever come to their senses about illegal immigration, loss of community and continuity will not occur. And as far as crime is concerned, Giuliani showed the solution to that. It just needs good policing to control crime—not a mono-ethnic society. Update Someone will of course want to mock my use of South America as an example of anything. They will point to what an economic mess the place is. They are right about the mess. But that is not an outcome of the non-European genes that predominate there. Argentina is almost wholly European and it is as big a mess as any. In my view, the South American mess is an outcome of ideology—Roman Catholicism and Bolivarism (which is a form of Fascism) in particular. Update 2 In what I said above I could be mistaken for an anti-Catholic Protestant bigot. So let me say that my comments on Catholicism were primarily a comment about what the church was when it formed Latin-American culture. At Vatican II the church reformed itself along largely Protestant lines and it is my personal view (atheist though I am) that committed Christians or Jews of any denomination—be it Catholic, Evangelical or Lubavitcher—are deserving of every respect. Posted by jonjayray on Thursday, June 9, 2005 at 08:33 PM in Immigration Comments:2
Posted by Kubilai on June 09, 2005, 09:03 PM | # Great! Now that you have rationalized your desire to flood your country with Asians, and flood is an appropriate term once the Asian numbers start increasing which they inevitably always do, care to state WHY there is this great need for immigration? What will immigrants do, that Australians cannot do? We know the reason for the low fertility numbers in the West. All that needs to be done there is to gently promote additional offspring per White couple, if necessary at all.* End of declining population growth. Also, your model immigrants are not of the clean the toilet variety, because as you state, they are high quality, high IQ types that are productive. SO the question still stands. WHY do you NEED them?? You never have given your reasons for that. * I said if at all because once immigration is halted and the people allowed to stabilize, the great burden of immigrants with their social service siphons will come to an abrupt halt. Hence lower pressure on the decent taxpayers, which will allow for more children to be conceived. 3
Posted by jonjayray on June 09, 2005, 09:32 PM | # Beckers Kubilai And if it comes to why, then why did America need immigration? Should we not have left it to the Indians? 4
Posted by Drew Fraser on June 09, 2005, 09:52 PM | # The claim that Oz has a selective immigration policy is easily refuted by taking a short stroll through any shopping mall in Western Sydney of a weekend. The population therein is a polyglot mass of every non-white ethny imaginable. There are indeed large numbers of East Asians, especially in the more upscale areas, but this “intelligent, hard-working, enterprising,law-abiding,family-oriented” The willingness of the Chinese ethnic lobby to throw its weight around (remember how it swung into action to help Tony Abbott engineer the destruction of One Nation?) is another manifestation of that family-oriented character. That being obvious, even to blind Freddy, is there any chance that the government here in Oz will ever dare to investigate the allegations about the Chinese spy ring aired by the recent would-be defector from the Chinese consulate, much less act if the allegations are true? Even if there is no such covert activity organized by the Communist regime in China, there is good reason to wonder where the loyalties of our “ideal citizens” from East Asia will lie should the economic house of cards supporting Western prosperity collapse, provoking deep-seated conflicts of interest between Oz and their homelands. Then, as mentioned above, there are all the others-including, in my suburb, growing numbers of black Africans. Watch out for the inevitable clashes between young black men and the weenies from East Asia who make no secret of their contempt for Africans. 5
Posted by Lurker on June 09, 2005, 10:14 PM | # It has to be asked: what is the “problem” to which large scale immigration is the “solution”? 6
Posted by Kubilai on June 09, 2005, 10:14 PM | # Breaking up a rather stifling monoculture and providing a greater range of services. - John John, the greater range of services is fallacious. What services are you speaking of? Ethnic restaurants? That is about the only thing that immigrants can probably do better than native Aussies or Brits or Canucks or Yanks. I do not know what other services you are implying. As for the monoculture, what is stifling about it? To you stifling, to many pleasant and a breath of fresh air. What evidence do you have that a monoculture is a negative, when it is clearly shown in history that a diverse one has been catastrophic? And if it comes to why, then why did America need immigration? Should we not have left it to the Indians? John, I’ve read you enough to realize that you know as well as I that these are mere words spit out and you are simply grasping. Reductio ad absurdum our predecessors shouldn’t have migrated out of Africa or Eurasia then. I’ll just touch upon the fact that the forefathers did NOT immigrate anywhere. They settled. 7
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 09, 2005, 10:29 PM | # “the benefits of immigration are as I have stated: Breaking up a rather stifling monoculture” (—John Ray, 1:32 AM) Was the London of, say, the 1930s—populated overwhelmingly by Englishmen—“a rather stifling monoculture,” John? Or even, how about Elizabethan London—was that? Was the Brussels of the 1970s and 80s “a rather stifling monoculture”? It was peopled almost entirely by white Belgians and I, who was born and raised in New York City, didn’t find it at all “stifling,” John. On the contrary, New York City, by the 80s already becoming too multi-racial, was stifling, and for that very reason—too multi-racial. Brussels, Antwerp, Cologne, Hamburg, and the other still-traditionally-populated European cities at that time were refreshing, a breath of fresh air, compared to multi-racial NYC, let me tell you, John. Nothing “stifling” about them when they were almost a hundred-percent white—not a thing. They were a delight. Don’t confuse the question of “village mentality vs. city mentality” with the question of “preservation of a place’s traditional racial majority vs. radically reducing or replacing a place’s traditional racial majority.” Two entirely different things, John. 8
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 09, 2005, 10:40 PM | # By the way, Lurker and Kub make excellent points: There is no need for any immigration whatsoever. None. As for white birth rates, let government get off the people’s back and stop driving white birth rates down and you’ll see those birth rates surge—through the roof even. As for individuals who crave contact with exotic peoples, foods, customs, etc., that is properly seen to not by importing them all here and changing the race of this country, but by the avenue people have always taken in pursuit of that: foreign travel. Besides, if everyone who wants contact with Hindus changes their country to India by immigration what will Hindus who want contact with whites do? There’ll be no white countries left for them to visit. 9
Posted by Stuka on June 09, 2005, 10:54 PM | # And South America shows why. After around 15 generations of living among a sea of blacks and Indians, there are still lots of pink-skinned people in South America. And they mostly run the place too. Are you seriously suggesting that Europe and North America emulate such success stories as Bolivia, Paraguay, and Brazil? Pull the other one, old chap. 10
Posted by John Ray on June 09, 2005, 10:57 PM | # The idea that white population growth will resume if taxes are lowered is absurd. Higher net incomes go with LOWER birthrates. We are seeing at the moment an adjustment to fertility control. Only maternal types are reproducing. Once the non-maternal types have selected themselves out of the human race, we should see resumption of population growth but from a much lower base. 11
Posted by John Ray on June 09, 2005, 10:59 PM | # Stuka Anglos and Latinos have different cultures 12
Posted by John Ray on June 09, 2005, 11:04 PM | # “stifling monoculture” It’s relative. But I remember the Australia of the Menzies years when Anglo dominance was absolute and it was very conformist and narrow compared to now. By greater range of services I refer to things like ethnic restaurants, ethnic grocers selling ehnic foods and lots more shops etc that stay open late 13
Posted by John Ray on June 09, 2005, 11:07 PM | # “The claim that Oz has a selective immigration policy is easily refuted by taking a short stroll through any shopping mall in Western Sydney of a weekend. The population therein is a polyglot mass of every non-white ethny imaginable” Yes. The much less selective refugee category has allowed in many more types than I would favour but even there the numbers are limited. I do not of course agree with every detail of Australian immigration policy but that it is selective is undoubted. 14
Posted by Guessedworker on June 10, 2005, 02:40 AM | # John, I have made the observation repeatedly that early snap-shots of a process like race replacement are productive only of complacency. Pretty much any demographer will tell you you what you are really dealing with. JW and, of course, Frank Salter himself will tell you what it means. An honourable reply to the regular MR refrain really requires you to project your position twenty to fifty years ahead and deal with the Salterian consequences - the products of competitive ethnic genetic interests - at that time. 15
Posted by Steve Edwards on June 10, 2005, 03:26 AM | # While John no doubt has a good point about the immigrant overclass aspect of Australian society (let us hold no grudges against those who have come here and done well), I think it is fallacious to say that “stifling conformity” was lifted from our shoulders by multiculturalism. Were it not for multiculturalism we would not have racial and religious vilification laws, no affirmative action of any kind, no Human Rights Commission, nor an Anti-Discrimination Act. We would certainly not be partaking in perpetual round-robins of historical self-flagellation. I believe you have your “conformity” regardless. There is a great deal of conformity produced by the multicultural industry to firewall itself from public criticism. 16
Posted by john fitzgerald on June 10, 2005, 04:15 AM | # Instead of thinking about ones own immediate needs, for example for curry, it might be better,long term that is, to think about what’s good for ones people. 17
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 06:15 AM | # “An honourable reply to the regular MR refrain really requires you to project your position twenty to fifty years ahead and deal with the Salterian consequences - the products of competitive ethnic genetic interests - at that time” I frankly think that we are ALL going to have to learn to live in a more multi-ethnic society. I cannot see much prospect of policy change anywhere in the Anglosphere. My position is that nothing drastic need happen as a result of current trends as long as we can get sane policing. That seems an achievable goal. I aim at the achievable. And don’t forget that super-multicultural Australia is also a very conservative country—arguably the most conservative country there is. So the political result can only be welcomed from my viewpoint. My last Hitler post suggests the mechanism for that result. 18
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 06:18 AM | # “ones own immediate needs, for example for curry” That would be a hard need to overlook but I cannot think of ANY downside to a large Indian presence. But a Bangladeshi presence could be worth avoiding. They appear to be the troublesome ones in Britain. 19
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 06:22 AM | # “Were it not for multiculturalism we would not have racial and religious vilification laws, no affirmative action of any kind, no Human Rights Commission, nor an Anti-Discrimination Act. We would certainly not be partaking in perpetual round-robins of historical self-flagellation” That’s all the doing of Leftists—not the ethnics themselves. Attack Leftism by all means. I do. But don’t blame the pawns in their game. 20
Posted by JW Holliday on June 10, 2005, 08:00 AM | # John, The others bloggers here and I agree that the present flow of illegal immigration into the U.S. and U.K. should be stopped but they would like to stop most legal immigration too. They would like to restrict immigration to people of Anglo and NorthWestern European ancestry whereas…” As usual with hardcore ultra-leftists (!), John likes to put words into other people’s mouths. Everyone on this blog can express their own policy recommendations, but mine boil down to: ethno-states - complete racial separation. Until such time that this can be achieved, whites should be encouraged to pursue “internal separation”, eschewing the multicultural state that oppresses them. I have commented on this already and will do so more in the future. As regards immigration policy in our current mess: no illegal, NO non-white legal, and any legal immigration to be restricted to Europeans. For the USA, I do not say “Anglo and North-Western European ancestry”, I would welcome Russians, Italians, Poles etc. John, as GW asserts, refuses to project in the future, with the ‘downside’ of an “indian presence’ being more guys like Zakaria and Godless Capitalist in positions to act against the interests of the white majority. 21
Posted by Mark Richardson on June 10, 2005, 08:27 AM | # John, you’re not exactly cut out to be a father of the tribe. This is a position that others are going to have to fill. Your arguments are too many to reply to in toto. So I’ll limit myself to one. It’s a delusion to believe that Anglos will survive as a distinctive ethny regardless of how many immigrants come to Australia. As you admitted once before, there will be intermixing, which over time will genetically change the way we are now. It’s unscientific and unrealistic to think otherwise. You say that Anglos can simply choose to breed with other Anglos. But choosing a mate isn’t like choosing bread at the supermarket. Individuals try to fulfil what they are looking for as best they can, but good matches don’t happen easily so people make compromises. The lines will inevitably blur around the edges, and the natural imprinting by which individuals recognise and identify with their own ethnic kin will weaken over time. You claim that the example of South America disproves this. But all South America shows is that the wealthiest men are more able to choose the fairer women, leading to an upper class which is more European in ancestry than the rest of the population. And what if these South American countries were to allow a continuing mass migration from Asia and Africa? And what if they combined this with a liberal disdain for identifying with their own ethny? What do you think the populations would look like then in 200 or 300 years time. A further shift would have taken place, in which the population would have intermixed further and a European phenotype would become more rare. 22
Posted by JW Holliday on June 10, 2005, 09:05 AM | # Australia a conservative country? Here we go again with subjective and proximate evaluations of ideologies. Not “conservative” in the sense of conserving a biological national ethnie, is it? Here is a fundamental break with John. Like the GNXPers, he promotes ideals while most of us are here to promote our people. People are more important than, and prior to, ideals. Genes are prior to everything. I don’t care about “conservatism.” I care about white racial interests. I aim at the right, not the “achievable”. The latter is a very convenient way of delegitimizing opposing views by saying how “ unrealistic” they are. To which, John and GC have the same problem - if ethnie-nationalists are so very unrealistic why bother with us? 23
Posted by Braveheart on June 10, 2005, 09:52 AM | # For those who are more suspicious: the South-African “hell-farms” to which Afrikaner beggars “disappear”. FULL TEXT (the direct link does not work, from censorbugbear/boergenocide) Are arrested Afrikaner beggars “disappearing to a hell farm” ? - “In my process of documentation I came upon very strange things, but the most disturbing however, was the story told by a unemployed young Afrikaner man in his early 30’s named “Dawid” standing at the corner of a street - a picture of Afrikaner destitution which has become commonplace in our country and is getting worse daily. ’ We are so scared of the police they come late in the late afternoon and when they pick you up it’s the last anybody sees of you… “They are taken away to the hell farm but I do not know where it is.’ “Yes I am and they collect our street beggars and I think they kill us on some farm in Vanderbijlpark I am very afraid…’ “Yes it is better here and the people are more compassionate’ that’s why the Afrikaner beggars are moving into the countryside and seek other safer towns, I was told. My equipment was confiscated, namely a video camera, laptop computer, and Pentax still camera with all photos and video tapes containing this evidence with photographs and video footage of the interviews etc. I was dropped off by the cops 15 km outside Rustenburg without interrogation or any questions and was warned that if they ever see me again ‘I would be sorry if I ever came to this town again.’ The officers who arrested me and confiscated my equipment were 2 black policemen in uniform and 3 others in civilian clothing. They wore no nametags and what was also exceedingly strange is that I was not taken to any official police station and officially charged, but instead was taken in a police vehicle outside Rustenburg and dumped. I was certain it was a police van as I heard and saw the police radio. I work alone so its quite difficult to do everything by myself and it has also become dangerous to work like this. (to produce a documentary on Afrikaner beggars) (name and contact info withheld to protect this filmmaker from any further harm). 24
Posted by JW Holliday on June 10, 2005, 11:06 AM | # Interesting that a libertarian supports policing as a cure for ethnic strife and violence. I guess we should have a nice conservative-libertarian police state in America, to safeguard our freedom and diversity? How about this analogy. A young white guy gets married and buys a big house - he wants a big family. But after the birth of their first child the government tells them they must have a Chinese family living in the house. With some misgivings they accept the situation and tell themselves it will be OK because Chinese people are always intelligent, polite and hardworking. Everything will be alright. So it proves at first. The Chinese are different, of course. But the white proprietors tell themselves they must be more flexible and understanding. Taking this for weakness the Chinese see nothing in these white people to respect. Actually, they never respected them anyway. They grow so confident they allow their real feelings towards the proprietors to start coming through. These are feelings, frankly, of contempt. More time passes. The Chinese have long discarded the proprietors house rules. Now they impose their own on them. They change the culture of the house completely, stink it up with their cooking, bring in more of their own family so the white guy cannot have the children he wants. Then they conspire with their co-ethnics to take over the house themselves and get rid of the “unwanted whites”. But, hey, these newcomers are very hard-working and conservative! It is all OK! 25
Posted by JW Holliday on June 10, 2005, 11:18 AM | # Is this the racial future of South America? Blacks in Brazil are starting to get politically aggressive as well. Stop looking to the past. The future will show that multi-ethnic states are unstable, and declining white populations in such states are particularly vulnerable. 26
Posted by Kubilai on June 10, 2005, 11:53 AM | # The idea that white population growth will resume if taxes are lowered is absurd. Higher net incomes go with LOWER birthrates. - John I don’t have much time right now to do this topic justice, however, your blanket statement above is false as you try and apply it across the entire spectrum of income. The situation facing Whites in White countries is oppressive taxation and cost of living due to the “diveristy is a strength” crowd. Whites are having fewer children because THEY have to support this social experiment gone awry. Most of the people having less children are the middle class who are hit the hardest by the muli-cult and if the oppressive financial boot is lifted from their collective necks, then they will have more children instead of the zero, one, or maybe two they are having now. What you’re implying is completely different and it is dishonest of you to simply spew garbage out like that simply to argue an untenable point. Income Distribution, Non-convexities and the Fertility-Income Relationship Economica, 2004, vol. 71, issue 281, pages 261-273 Abstract: This paper presents a model of inequality, income determination and fertility, that is consistent with aggregated stylized facts and individual survey data on fertility and income. It shows that indivisibilities in human capital investments limit the possibility of trade-off between the quality and the quantity of children. This generates a non-monotonic relationship between income and fertility at the micro level. On the aggregate, the total fertility rate can increase or decrease with income, depending on the income distribution of the population and on the private cost of education. Copyright The London School of Economics and Political Science 2004. http://econpapers.repec.org/article/blaeconom/v_3A71_3Ay_3A2004_3Ai_3A281_3Ap_3A261-273.htm I believe this is what Ben Tillman was saying not too long ago. 27
Posted by ben tillman on June 10, 2005, 12:26 PM | # It has to be asked: what is the “problem” to which large scale immigration is the “solution”? The existence of white people. 28
Posted by ben tillman on June 10, 2005, 12:28 PM | # As JWH said: Immigration is genocide. The dissemination of that meme is crucial. 29
Posted by h-man on June 10, 2005, 03:41 PM | # From Joyjayray’s 3rd post “And if it comes to why, then why did America need immigration? Should we not have left it to the Indians?” Shouldn’t that question be addressed to an Amerindian? I think I know what his/her answer would be and it might surprise you. 30
Posted by Dougram on June 10, 2005, 04:42 PM | # Hey, Ben! I’ve been lurking around here for about 2 months now, so I know you’re a big fan of Darwin’s Cathedral along with the concept of group selection. But didn’t George Williams and some other biologists disprove this theory a few years back? 31
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 10, 2005, 05:39 PM | # “I’ve been lurking around here for about 2 months now” (—Dougram) Best thing you ever did. Might even be the making of you! 32
Posted by bb on June 10, 2005, 06:14 PM | # “To which, John and GC have the same problem - if ethnie-nationalists are so very unrealistic why bother with us?” Generally I do think white nationalism is unrealistic; my main worry regarding WNism is that it could gain steam given a dire situation. If things go too bad, too quickly, I think many people will be willing to do anything—including persecuting nonwhites simply because they are nonwhite—in hopes of making the dreadful situation go away. Regarding East Asians and other successful nonwhites, I think most people here are simply far too pessimistic. IMHO people are (1)letting their bigotry (such as simply disliking the presence of nonwhites) dictate their views of nonwhites, and (2) projecting their racialism onto other people, both nonwhite and white. 33
Posted by gay homosexual on June 10, 2005, 06:40 PM | # Watch out, bb! The WN’s are gonna flame you like they always do!!!!!! 34
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 10, 2005, 07:18 PM | # BB was getting bored—just couldn’t resist walking back into the lion’s den and doing some deadpan taunting. Final exams must be over or something. Things a bit slow chez toi, bb? 35
Posted by Phil on June 10, 2005, 07:24 PM | # Posts like these demonstrate the utter shallowness of modern political ideas - let in immigrants to get better curries. That is the greatest purpose for man - better curries…..........I shouldn’t have bothered reading Tocqueville or Nietzsche. I could have simply read John Ray. John Ray is a progressive, as are the legions of so-called “conservatives” currently occupying the command positions of what remains of the supposedly conservative parties in the Anglosphere. But progressivism is based on delusion. It is a delusion of perpetual peace and of limitless wealth and upon an ignorance of human nature (not just an ignorance but a wilful disregard for it). The inherent delusions of progressivism will destroy it from within. All that remains to be seen is whether we will survive as a people after the progressive dream has been shattered. 36
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 10, 2005, 08:04 PM | # “Like the GNXPers, he promotes ideals while most of us are here to promote our people.” (—JW Holliday, 1:05 PM) Where GnXpers’ flesh-and-blood interests are concerned they promote their people. It’s only where our flesh-and-blood interests are concerned that they promote “ideals.” 37
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 10, 2005, 08:18 PM | # Braveheart, thanks for that post. When you say “beggars” are you referring to what people who live in U.S. cities call “panhandlers”? Are these young Afrikaners panhandlers of that sort? Or are they serious young people who can’t find work because of the transformation of their country’s economy from First-World to Third-World status (and are “the wrong race,” to boot)? All Afrikaners who would like to move to the U.S. should be granted U.S. citizenship on the spot, transported here for free with their families and belongings, and given a generous stipend to live on while getting settled here, learning the language, and looking for work. Any white person who would question such a policy is a filthy rotten murdering swine who is complicit in genocide. 38
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 10, 2005, 08:27 PM | # Braveheart, could a comment like the one you posted be posted in Flanders or Holland without the Gedapo breathing down the neck of the poster? Are the Dutch or Flemish people sympathetic with the plight of the Afrikaners? Is Holland or occupied Flanders taking steps to help them? Or is everyone leaving them to twist slowly in the wind—leaving them to be horrifically exterminated? 39
Posted by gay homosexual on June 10, 2005, 08:33 PM | # Gedapo whats the gedapo? is that like the gestapo? 40
Posted by bb on June 10, 2005, 08:42 PM | # “BB was getting bored—just couldn’t resist walking back into the lion’s den and doing some deadpan taunting.” No, Fred, that is my honest opinion, and was relevant to this thread. If I wanted to taunt people here, I’d write pagelong diatribes about how whiteness is boring, East Asians are superior, and about what makes East Asian women so damn beautiful. 41
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 10, 2005, 08:46 PM | # Since you think it, bb, go ahead and write it. Don’t hold back on our account—please! 42
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 10, 2005, 08:53 PM | # Yes, Gay Homo, the GEDAPO is very much like the Gestapo—it’s the Flemish Thought Police—the Gedachtenpolitie. 43
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 09:08 PM | # “As usual with hardcore ultra-leftists (!), John “ LOL 44
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 09:20 PM | # “Interesting that a libertarian supports policing as a cure for ethnic strife and violence. I guess we should have a nice conservative-libertarian police state in America, to safeguard our freedom and diversity?’ Most libertarians are minimal Statists—as I am. From such a viewpoint, police and the courts are legitimate government functions 45
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 09:22 PM | # “It’s a delusion to believe that Anglos will survive as a distinctive ethny regardless of how many immigrants come to Australia. As you admitted once before, there will be intermixing, which over time will genetically change the way we are now. It’s unscientific and unrealistic to think otherwise.” Explain all the thoroughly Castilian Chileans, then 46
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 09:28 PM | # “On the aggregate, the total fertility rate can increase or decrease with income” That “model” is supposed to disprove what I said? 47
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 09:30 PM | # Maybe I should make that point clearer: A model can prove anything—depending on the assumptions you feed into it 48
Posted by jonjayray on June 10, 2005, 09:35 PM | # “Blacks in Brazil are starting to get politically aggressive as well” Not really. White Leftists are stirring up blacks would be more accurate Blame the Leftists, not their pawns. Leftism is the problem. 49
Posted by Braveheart on June 11, 2005, 05:15 AM | # The Hell Farm(s) (South Africa) Some answers to questions above: Gedapo is an abbreviation from the Dutch word GEDAchtenPOlitie (the Belgian Thought Police). I once launched that term on this site. More used are: 1)simply “Thought Police”, 2)Centre for Opposition Control or 3) Inquisition. The Afrikaner “beggars” mentioned are serious young people who have the “wrong” white ethnicity to get work. For them, even with a good education it’s very difficult to get work. I also wonder what happens to them at the Hell Farm before they are finished off. If you want to read more: http://groups.msn.com/censorbugbear Asylum? Ireland has just decided that SA citizens can’t be recognised any longer as fugitives, see (in Afrikaans): http://www.news24.com/Die_Burger/Buiteland/0,5824,4-1360_1633954,00.html Such stories -about the Hell Farm(s) in South Africa- can (theoretically) be published in Belgium (Flanders) for the simple reason that in such cases in the opening words can be written something like: Mr. “such or so” has said the following. Then it is not said by a Fleming, which would be more dangerous. To compare: that’s also the reason why for instance Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s interview in L’Express, discussed on this web-site, could be reproduced here in Flanders. If “somebody else” says it, then there is no problem (somebody from abroad and an important person and in an important magazine) . There is sympathy for the Afrikaners in Flanders. For instance, Belgian parliament resolution: Freeze EU-agreements with SA until ANC stops all attacks against farmers see (in Dutch): http://www.dekamer.be/FLWB/pdf/51/1638/51K1638001.pdf Also to note. The Flemish government focuses its external aid completely on Southern Africa. But they do it in a way not to brush off the ANC. Flanders, 50
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 11, 2005, 08:17 AM | # Thanks, Braveheart. When I think how the million Moroccans who’ve been brought into Holland, Brussels, Mechelen, and Antwerp by the usual suspects could have been a million Afrikaners instead, saving the latter from horrific slaughter at the hands of the ANC Negroes there, I feel sick. (To the Gedapo agent who is reading this, I hope you got a good eyeful of what I just wrote. I’m posting this from Vermont, by the way, so I don’t imagine you’ll be able to come here and arrest me. See ya!) I think things have gone way beyond trying to influence things through the E.U. I think all whites who want to leave that ANC hellhole should be brought out free of charge and settled in white countries with generous financial assistance (all whites, that is, who opposed the ANC takeover—which included virtually all Afrikaners. All whites who welcomed it, on the other hand, which is to say most South African Jews and I believe most—or at least a large proportion of—South African gentile Anglo-Saxon English-speakers, should be forced to stay and live in the mess they helped create). If the ANC “government” (the Gedapo’s gonna love the way I put the word government in quotes, by the way—I can just see their faces as I type this! LOL Get a good eyeful, guys! You’re at MR.com now, a free site, not somewhere in occupied Flanders where you can control people. You don’t scare anyone here ...)—if the ANC “government” objects, the U.S. should send a carrier task force down while evacuation operations are proceeding. (Wow, this post is gonna give the Gedapo conniption fits! Great!) 51
Posted by Kubilai on June 11, 2005, 10:34 AM | # That “model” is supposed to disprove what I said? Posted by jonjayray on 06/11 at 01:28 AM A model can prove anything—depending on the assumptions you feed into it Posted by jonjayray on 06/11 at 01:30 AM Well, if you look into it, you may understand that fertility does not have such a simple direct correlation with “income”. Actually what you stated as “higher net incomes go with LOWER birth rates” is false. What the data OCCASIONALLY shows , and not in every single country that it looked at, is that the higher the GDP the lower birth rates and this is mildly correlated. What matters most is the cost of education, education of the the populace, and child labor restrictions. All of these have negative correlations with fertility. It is not surprising to see that in countries that require “bodies” to help the family survive, there is a high fertility rate. It is not surprising to see that education costs stifle birth rates. It is not surprising to see that well educated people take child birth and child rearing seriously and put thought into it before popping out a litter. Individual income has the least correlation with birth rate, to a point. The middle class is the hardest hit with respect to birth rates and income. The lower class is subsidized and the wealthy have no worries with respect to costs, though they tend to be higher educated and this impacts negatively. Now the middle class, if exposed to higher education costs and a net negative effect of disposable income due to higher taxation rates to support these effects of increased immigration, will be negatively affected with respect to birth rates. This is straightforward and logical. Cutting out immigration will allow the middle class to have an extra child or two which they normally would forgo due to the added burden. This also is irrespective of the IQ of the immigrants because the immigrants produce children, which will require all the perks of the government teat. If successful, they help offset the costs, however, they do not cover them in their entirety. And since we know that the first wave of immigrants may be successful, the second and onward usually fall short of this great success. And if we take out the great immigration success story of Australia and look at the UK, USA, and Canada, my assertions are even more glaringly obvious. Now getting back to the original points, you “forgot” to give me examples of all these “greater range of services” we get with immigrants. I’m all ears. 52
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 11, 2005, 11:13 AM | # Kub it’s clear that government policies across a whole range of areas are forcing white birth rates down. I don’t even bother arguing with people like John when they dispute this. It’s a waste of time—just as with race-replacement “immigration,” they’ll never be brought around because they take some sort of pleasure in being contradictory in what they see as a “counterintuitive” kind of way. Makes them feel “more intellectual,” or something. A couple of years ago in a thread at GnXp I spoke of the need for altering North-American and European governmental policies in certain areas in order to permit white birth rate to rise to more natural levels. That was before I realized that GnXp was mainly an anti-white site for white-race-envying, jealous white-race-hating non-whites—before I realized, in other words, that I was preaching to exactly the wrong congregation. Well, what followed was what I now know (but didn’t at all then) was the completely predictable reaction—my idea, to the extent it was noticed at all, was sourly dismissed as unworkable for all the usual reasons someone like John Ray would give: “there’s no correlation between tax policy and white birth rates,” “there’s no correlation between excessive incompatible immigration and white birth rates,” “there’s no correlation between non-white job, university, and business quotas and affirmative-action policies and white birth rates,” “there’s no correlation between governmental dumbing-down of public schools—forcing white parents to plan on paying for private schools—and white birth rates,” etc. In brief, the instant reaction was that nothing whatsoever could be done by a government to encourage more robust native birth rates, so just forget it. Something like one week later an article appeared in the news to the effect that the government had decided to take steps toward encouraging a more robust native birth rate. I promptly cited the article in a thread at GnXp, recalling that when I had proposed exactly that just a week previously or whatever it was, I’d been treated—by those few who took any notice at all—as someone who’d fallen off the flying saucer outbound from the planet Uranus. That article elicited some agreement that maybe there was something to the idea after all. Oh ... almost forgot: the government which had announced those native-birth-rate-bolstering policy changes was ... ... Taiwan’s ... 53
Posted by Kubilai on June 11, 2005, 11:40 AM | # Excellent points Fred. John has a way of spewing out “data” to fit his preconceived notions. However when looking at the data critically, it follows simple logic. That logic being, the more people become educated, the more they take the responsibility seriously of bringing children into the world and give it much more thought than the “impregnate and disappear” attitudes of the Negro and the “what the hell is birth control” attitudes of third worlders. Also, disposable income clearly plays a role for the portion of the population that has huge fluctuation in disposable income, namely the middle class. Most Whites, though not all, usually have children with the plan to SUPPORT them up until university or beyond. To provide for them the best advantage they can provide before setting them out into the world. With the net disposable income dropping due to the increased costs of mass immigration, they cut out certain things and some responsibly (or irresponsibly depending on how you look at it) cut out the number of children they will have. You brought up a good point a little while ago, and that was the incessant screeching by the left on population control because of exploding populations in the Western world. The projections of the populations of Europe, US, and Canada is astronomical now with mass immigration in relation to what they were doom and glooming about a decade or so ago. I wonder why this “population explosion” is no longer such a big concern for the left? 54
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 11, 2005, 12:06 PM | # “I wonder why this ‘population explosion’ is no longer such a big concern for the left?” Yes, the silence on this subject now is deafening, isn’t it. You can literally hear a pin drop ... Eerie ... 55
Posted by Kubilai on June 11, 2005, 12:25 PM | # From AmRen:
$28.6 billion and up for the cost of educating massive illegal immigrant children alone. Add that to all other direct and indirect costs incurred and we are into the hundreds of billions of dollars per year. This translates into ~8 to 12 thousand dollars per White working person in money out of his pocket simply to support ILLEGAL immigration. This does not include the costs of LEGAL, non-White immigration. You can see that the money lost per person is enough to dissuade people from having more children, especially when you break down the numbers like this. This article states that it cost ~300,000 pounds to raise a child in London with a private education to the age of 21 years. That is just over 15,000 pounds or ~30,000 dollars per year for education and childcare alone. I’ll let readers here do the rest of the math. 56
Posted by ben tillman on June 11, 2005, 12:31 PM | # Hey, Ben! I’ve been lurking around here for about 2 months now, so I know you’re a big fan of Darwin’s Cathedral along with the concept of group selection. But didn’t George Williams and some other biologists disprove this theory a few years back? No, they didn’t, and Williams didn’t even claim to have done so. Williams claimed that “group” selection was possible in theory, but it didn’t happen in practice. More recently, Williams has acknowledged group selection at work in the evolution of virulence. See below: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2120/is_n7_v78/ai_20417924 The history of the debate is laid out clearly in the first few chapters of D.S. Wilson’s first book, “Unto Others”. Some of this is discussed here: http://www.bbsonline.org/documents/a/00/00/04/60/bbs00000460-00/bbs.wilson.html Once we realize that what we think of as individuals are themselves groups, the distinction between group and individual selection—and thus any controversy—disappears. 57
Posted by ben tillman on June 11, 2005, 12:36 PM | # This translates into ~8 to 12 thousand dollars per White working person in money out of his pocket simply to support ILLEGAL immigration. This does not include the costs of LEGAL, non-White immigration. Don’t forget the costs imposed by forced deesegregation. Thousands of dollars for private school for each child, or alternatively $5 or 6 thousand in lost wages due to commuting time. 58
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 11, 2005, 01:02 PM | # Whites have been hit with a multifaceted genocidal holocaust, involving—among other things—their being forced not only to get displaced by non-whites but to pay for their own displacement in a thousand little and big ways. And OF COURSE all these governmental policies which Kub and Ben mention and more are part of what’s been driving white birth rates through the floor in the Western world. People such as John R. who deny the plain-as-day link between certain governmental policies and the collapse of white births are being willfully blind to something which is obvious. Birth rates are like inflation: government can influence them up or down at will. 59
Posted by Dougram on June 11, 2005, 02:38 PM | # Once we realize that what we think of as individuals are themselves groups, Just how are individuals “groups?” I assume you’re referring to the fact that they’re an amalgamation of cells with specialized purposes? 60
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 11, 2005, 04:11 PM | # You’re not quite there yet, Dougram, but it’s OK ... just keep reading MR.com diligently, every day without fail, and little by little you’ll get there ... Persistence ... 61
Posted by Dougram on June 11, 2005, 04:19 PM | # I’m pretty sure Ben’s referring to what D.S Wilson said in the link he provided (Essentially, the evolutionary progression of single-celled creatures to complex organisms like you and I can be likened to the progression of individual organisms coming together to form groups and societies like states), but I want to make sure that’s what he’s referring to. 62
Posted by bb on June 11, 2005, 05:19 PM | # I think Kublai and Scrooby are probably right here. While increasing income may tend to correlate with fewer children, this may be simply because the relative cost of having children goes up with income due to taxes (as opposed to subsidies for low-income people having kids) and wanting to avoid bad schools. I know it’s a cliché, but correlation does not necessarily mean causation. Also, while I believe a stable multiracial state is possible, I certainly wouldn’t give South America as an example of multiracialism working well. 63
Posted by JW Holliday on June 11, 2005, 05:43 PM | # Hey John, how about those “Castilian Chileans” as you put it:- DYS19 and DYS199 loci in a Chilean population of mixed ancestry Cifuentes L, Morales R, Sepulveda D, Jorquera H, Acuna M. Programa de Genetica Humana, ICBM, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, Santiago 7, Chile. The current Chilean population originated from admixture between aboriginal populations (Amerindians) and Spanish conquerors of European origin. Consequently, the unions that gave rise to the Chilean population were chiefly between Spanish males and aboriginal females, and not the converse. To test the hypothesis that the Y chromosome of the Chilean population is mainly of Spanish origin, while the other chromosomes are from mixed (European and aboriginal) origin, we studied the DYS19 and DYS199 loci in two samples. One sample was obtained from a high socioeconomic stratum, while a second sample was from a low stratum. We studied male blood donors (N = 187) from Santiago, the capital of the country. Subjects were typed for the autosomal ABO and Rh (locus D) blood groups, and for the Y-linked DYS19 and the DYS199 loci, reported as Y-chromosome haplotypes. The aboriginal admixture was estimated for each genetic marker. The percentage of aboriginal admixture was 38.17% for the ABO system and 31.28% for the Rh system in the low socioeconomic stratum and 19.22% and 22.5%, respectively, in the high stratum. Y-chromosome haplotype frequencies constructed from the DYS19 and DYS199 loci demonstrated that the main haplotypes were DYS19*14/DYS199 C, as is often the case with many European populations, and DYS19*13/DYS199 C. The aboriginal admixture from Y-haplotype frequencies was estimated to be 15.83% in the low socioeconomic stratum and 6.91% in the high stratum. These values are lower than the values found using autosomal genetic markers, and are consistent with the historical background of the population studied. This study highlights the population genetic consequences of the asymmetric pattern of genome admixture between two ancestral populations (European and Amerindian). Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc. 64
Posted by JW Holliday on June 11, 2005, 07:02 PM | # Of relevance for South America and all of John’s Castiliean Chileans:- “Chileans are descended from Spanish and Indians, and are a dark-haired, dark-skinned beautiful people.” “The present Chileans are a racial mix of Europeans and the indigenous tribes of Chile.” 65
Posted by Kubilai on June 11, 2005, 07:55 PM | # Birch, and you were so close in shedding those “extended phenotype” shackles too. Birchy, my assertions apply to “model immigrants” as well as the Blacks and unkempt Browns you are told are no good and not to like. The model immigrants cause a strain on the host population and I cannot say in good conscience that the effect is less due to their “model” behaviour. I have not looked at it, though my guess would be they have unwanted economic (as well as social/racial)effects in different areas and still cause negative effects in toto for the hosts. 66
Posted by John Ray on June 12, 2005, 12:51 AM | # “The aboriginal admixture from Y-haplotype frequencies was estimated to be 15.83% in the low socioeconomic stratum and 6.91% in the high stratum’ I would have thought that proved my point. To get those percentages in the upper stratum, most people in that stratum have to be purely European You have all seen pictures of Pinochet. He is as pink-skinned as I am 67
Posted by John Ray on June 12, 2005, 12:54 AM | # “He has already been refutated” The past participle is “refuted” 68
Posted by JW Holliday on June 12, 2005, 07:49 AM | # John: The aboriginal admixture from Y-haplotype frequencies was estimated to be 15.83% in the low socioeconomic stratum and 6.91% in the high stratum’ I would have thought that proved my point. To get those percentages in the upper stratum, most people in that stratum have to be purely European You have all seen pictures of Pinochet. He is as pink-skinned as I am. Let us assume Pinochet is purely European. So what? He is one man. Is Vincente “part Irish” Fox a good example of the Mexican genepool? John: “He has already been refutated” The past participle is “refuted” John, that was simply a typo. Not everyone here is a real estate retired ‘genius’, with unlimited time to blog. 69
Posted by bb on June 12, 2005, 11:17 AM | # “Birch, and you were so close in shedding those “extended phenotype” shackles too.” This sounds (almost) like a complement, but what do you mean? Do you mean my defense of Jared Taylor’s assertion that one is essentially always more genetically similar to those in their own race or “ethny” than others? In that case I was just pointing out what I was near certain to be factual information. Anyway, just curious. 70
Posted by Kubilai on June 12, 2005, 11:31 AM | # It was a bit of a joke in that you actually agreed to some things written here, yet still had to fall back on your maxim of multi-ethnic states are viable. I don’t understand you though. You do understand genetics more than a little bit, yet cannot bring yourself to the next logical step. Why is that? Upbringing? School mates? Be honest. 71
Posted by JW Holliday on June 12, 2005, 12:04 PM | # The cited autosomal data indicate that the Chilean upper classes are ~ 1/5 Amerindian. To me, that is substantial admixture. Furthermore, one wonders if it is increasing over time, as “natural” racial boundaries become more fuzzy. One can do DNAP testing on Chileans of different age groups. I expect the younger groups to have more admixture than the elderly Pinochets. The ex-President was born, btw, in Valparaíso on November 25, 1915. 72
Posted by bb on June 12, 2005, 12:23 PM | # “You do understand genetics more than a little bit, yet cannot bring yourself to the next logical step. Why is that? Upbringing? School mates? Be honest.” Logical step? I don’t see how genetic distance necessitates racial separatism. To me a genetic distance is nothing more than a number (if an interesting one). Though yes, of course I have grown up in a strongly anti-racist society, and I do have East Asian, South Asian, and Hispanic/Latino friends and acquaitances, in addition of hopes of having a beautiful East Asian girlfriend. 73
Posted by Kubilai on June 12, 2005, 12:40 PM | # I don’t see how genetic distance necessitates racial separatism. This is not true. You see the need to separate from Blacks and Hispanics(most of them). You have said they are genetically “undesirable” due to IQ and propensity for incivility due to this sub-par IQ which is at the very least 50% genetic. You cannot seem to translate that “genetic distance” to other races for some strange reason. To me, that reason is brainwashing and that is why most here have tried to explain it to you and you refuse to open your mind to it. Hence, you avoid the next LOGICAL step and fall back into your comfort zone. 74
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 12, 2005, 01:29 PM | # “in addition of hopes of having a beautiful East Asian girlfriend.” Hey hope springs eternal, as they say, Birch—go for it! (... in your dreams ...) 75
Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 12, 2005, 01:33 PM | # God, we’ve got a lovesick calf here to deal with who’s going to slip in a reference to the poor, unsuspecting Chinese Miss he’s pining after every chance he gets. I won’t deny the situation has its charm ... even knowing, of course, that if she’s anything better looking than an absolute dog a creepy nerd like Birch hasn’t got a prayer with her even if he wins the next Powerball Lottery ... But dream on, Birch, by all means ... No harm in dreaming ... 76
Posted by Phil on June 12, 2005, 04:01 PM | # in addition of hopes of having a beautiful East Asian girlfriend Hopes…........!! Most white males I know get East Asian women as easily as they want them….....That you are still living in hope doesn’t bode well for the future mate…... 78
Posted by bb on June 12, 2005, 04:52 PM | # I’m 21…and a bit on the shy side, as well as somewhat picky. 79
Posted by Phil on June 12, 2005, 05:04 PM | # Well you get the prize mate. I’m 27 and I thought I was the youngest here. At least, you are listening to us (even if constantly trying to refute everything we say). I say, good for you! 80
Posted by Phil on June 12, 2005, 05:06 PM | # BB, You’d have to concede that this attraction towards EA females is an inborn thing. You either have it or you don’t. I saw a few EA females at my University (mostly Korean and Japanese). Wasn’t ever really attracted to them. 81
Posted by bb on June 12, 2005, 05:38 PM | # “You’d have to concede that this attraction towards EA females is an inborn thing. You either have it or you don’t.” Yeah I tend to agree. I think most people do tend to have at least a mild preference for mates of the same race, but there are exceptions obviously. 82
Posted by Svigor on June 12, 2005, 08:48 PM | # The thing that’s odd to me about all the variegated opposition to WNism is that ethnocentrism and allowances for separatism are safer than the alternatives. There is no arguing against this objectively. One can blah blah about individuals and one can blah blah (lie) about the existence of race, but one cannot objectively show that the alternatives are as safe. Btw bb, you might take notice (it’d be a precedent-setter) of the fact that most WNs could give a crap if the people determined to race-mix continue to do so, or if multiwhateveral societies continue to exist; we just want the freedom to do for ourselves. You might acknowledge that our rights are being violated. 83
Posted by Svigor on June 12, 2005, 08:54 PM | # That’s what the oh-so-logical opponents of self-determination and freedom don’t seem to get - in reality allowing for (and encouraging) conservation of HBD is logical, and they themselves are not. 84
Posted by ben tillman on June 13, 2005, 07:43 PM | # I’m 21…and a bit on the shy side…. That’s always a safe bet with guys who like Asian chicks. 85
Posted by jonjayray on June 14, 2005, 06:55 AM | # I had an Indian girlfriend in London once but I DID find cultural incompatibilities 86
Posted by jonjayray on June 14, 2005, 06:57 AM | # I normally look into blue eyes close-up though 87
Posted by Phil on June 14, 2005, 02:21 PM | # I had an Indian girlfriend in London once but I DID find cultural incompatibilities Such as? 88
Posted by Maximilian Klump on May 16, 2006, 05:57 AM | # This JW Holliday fellow is very funny. All his stupid links to stupid studys. Im’ sure in America there aren’t black people, hispanics, native americans, asians, arabs. Only pure white people live in USA, no african blood what so ever. We don’t have a white minority as America, don’t bring those articles saying that in a stupid city in Argentina (La Plata) some people have indian blood. Of course you moron, there is something called inmigration. Ah! i forgot! The other study about black ancestry is a fucking joke, they used 90 individuals. YES that is evidence of african admixture, give a brake!!!!!. Dude, u really need to travell to BA and stop posting those amateur articles with no substantial evidence. You really need an opinion of you own and stop repeating what other moron have to say. And yes i don’t master the english language, duhhh. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED TO BLACK & INDIAN PEOPLE IN ARGENTINA War heroism, in fact, is one reason Argentina lags so far behind in recognizing its people of African descent. Even after the official abolition of slavery, many blacks were still slaves and were granted manumission only by fighting in Argentina’s wars, serving disproportionately in the war of independence against Spanish rule and border wars against Paraguay from 1865 to 1870. Blacks were also granted their freedom if they joined the army, but they were deliberately placed on the front line and used as cannon fodder. Historian Ysabelle Rennie notes that the government deliberately placed as many blacks as possible in “dangerous military service” and were sent into batte, “where they got killed off fighting Indians (another race Argentines were interested in exterminating.)” There is a silence about the participation of Afro-Argentines in the history and building of Argentina, a silence about the enslavement and poverty,” adds Paula Brufman. “The denial and disdain for the Afro community shows the racism of an elite that sees Africans as undeveloped and uncivilized….The poverty in the Afro community was terrible. Although slavery was abolished in 1813, the death rate of freed blacks was always higher than that of white people and of slaves. Why is that? Because in Buenos Aires, slaves were very expensive, so the masters took real good care of them. Once a black got his freedom, his living standards collapsed even further 89
Posted by Gabriel Medici on May 16, 2006, 08:07 PM | # WHITE AMERICAN DID MIXED WITH THE LOCALS: HAVE TALKED TO A COMRADE FROM THE US, THEY AGREE MOST OF WHITES IN THE US HAVE 1/8 INDIAN BLOOD, AND THAT DOES NOT BOTHER THEM , U KNOW WHY? BECAUSE 150 YEARS AGO, WHAT COULD YOU DO ? GO TO SLEEP WITH A COW ?, WHAT THEY WOULDN’T ACCEPT (IT SEEMS, MAYBE I’M WRONG) IS THAT THIS 1/8 WOULD BE FROM BLACK ANCESTOR, BECAUSE YOU STILL COULD TELL, FROM INDIANS YOU CANNOT TELL ANYMORE, JUST CHECK PAMELA ANDERSON, AS I SAID BEFORE SHE HAS A GREATGRANDMOTHER(OR SO) WHO IS OR WAS A CHEROKEE(SHE SAID THAT , NOT ME) SO…ENOUGH WITH “THE WHITE NATIONS IN SOUTH AMERICA AREN’T REALLY WHITE BECAUSE 200 YEARS AGO AN INDIAN CHEEK SLEPT WITH A WHITE GUY.” U SHOULD BE GLAD THAT IN THE SOUTH EXISTS AN IMPORTANT WHITE POPULATION BUT U AREN’T. www.stormfront.org 90
Posted by rustymason on May 16, 2006, 08:22 PM | # Well, Comrade Informant is incorrect—most Whites do not have Indian blood. Some do, but not that many. There just havent ever been that many Indians compared to the number of Whites, and we have been mostly segregated from one another the entire time. Stop typing in all caps. It’s makes you look crazy. Crazy like ... a wild Indian. 91
Posted by ben tillman on May 16, 2006, 10:04 PM | # “There is a silence about the participation of Afro-Argentines in the history and building of Argentina, a silence about the enslavement and poverty,” adds Paula Brufman. Paula Brufman. That says it all. 92
Posted by Jasmine on August 24, 2009, 02:22 AM | # This conversation is incredibly old. I fear my comment might not be seen in a see of things to examine on this site, but I felt the urge to comment. I suppose I was referred to this site because of my conservative views which, according to most people, is uncommon due to my Native American/African/European/Puerto Rican mixed heritage. I appear Black, therefore, most people assume I’m an ignorant welfare abuser who supports Democrats blindly. However, that isn’t the case—slightly because I happen to still be in high school, but that isn’t important. I just felt the need to express my displeasure at this constant stereotype of Black people as dumb fools. There have been studies—ones I could find—that the most educated group in America are the voluntary African immigrants. I happen to have African genes from my slave ancestors, so I don’t count in the “voluntary immigrant” category, but I do happen to test with a just sort of genius IQ. I go to a suburban high school where I’ in the top percentage of my class, taking honors and college credit courses. I constantly excel above my Asian and European classmates. I feel that the stereotypes in the media and a limited contact with people outside one’s race cause a perpetration of incorrect and racist ideas of people. Just as I know White people who judge me to be no contribution to my country, I know Black people who look down upon other races and other races do the same. I think that limiting immigration is a bad idea because countries gain contributing members of society. Workers who assimilate into the culture do good in the fact that they can take up jobs and work where the lazy of a society do not. Immigration can also benefit the individual. Those who come to countries for a new life and better education reap the benefits that might be lacking in their own countries. Shouldn’t we who populate first world countries give chances for those who don’t have opportunities in their countries have them here. Visas won’t work because once they have that brilliant education, if you send the person back, they have nowhere to utilize it. People fleeing genocide should have refuge in other countries because, in the end, we’re all human beings. We should care for each others’ survival. I feel that in countries that have been homogeneous throughout a very large majority of their histories have logical fears of losing their culture. I am not saying that that is correct, but it is logical. As for countries that have gained their culture through various immigrants and empires who have each contributed to the massive collection today should receive less understanding in their ideals of alienating immigrants. There can be policies and holidays implemented to recognize and celebrate the commonly held original culture, but gaining influences from other countries isn’t terrible. As for interracial marriages, I believe that they are far from being the end of any race. In my family, a majority of my Black relatives who marry White people end up having European looking children. They might have fiery red hair, freckles, pale skin and green eyes. They might have slightly tanned skin, blue eyes, and straight, fair hair. People seem to judge by phenotype anyways. As long as you look White or Black or stereotypically Latino, then that is what you are labeled as. While Whites might begin to gain Black or Asian genes, it does not mean they will die off. There will always be people in the world who look like a certain culture. I also believe that for smaller countries, hundreds and hundreds of years later, inbreeding will have natural ill effects if people are unable to mate outside the offered gene pool. While places like China might never see serious effects, Belgium might see it a lot faster. I feel I might have rambled considerably in my reply, but I was urged to speak. —sixteen-year-old, conservative, agnostic, multiracial girl 93
Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on August 24, 2009, 03:15 AM | #
Oh dear. That wouldn’t be Clarence Page’s study, would it? I’d be happy to debunk that one for you. Even if it isn’t that claim is laughably absurd. Of non-Aryan peoples flooding into Western countries East Asians would be the “most educated.”
You don’t get it. “Aryan” = pure blood. Any adulteration = not pure. Aryans cannot breed with racial others without submerging their best characteristics. In a sense it is like a die-off as far as we are concerned. 94
Posted by Jasmine on August 24, 2009, 05:21 AM | # Even if it isn’t that claim is laughably absurd. Of non-Aryan peoples flooding into Western countries East Asians would be the “most educated.” That’s a stereotype. Perhaps what I offered was a stereotype, and then I must apologize. You should hear how many Asians lament over the “model minority” card and about how intelligent they are and how rich they are compared to other minorities. I have to tell you that there are a lot of uneducated East Asians immigrating to America. A lot more than people realize just because the problems of the Asian immigrants aren’t delved into or considered as much as the “louder” minorities. As for education of Aryans, I remember in recent history that there was a call to ban Eastern Europeans from immigrating into the United States due to an increase of ignorant, illiterate, low class people coming over and taking American jobs for cheaper. Much like the stereotype of Mexican immigrants. It’s silly in all cases. The only reason there are more White people with higher IQs is because there are more White people in the United States in general. Just as there are more White people with lower IQs, more White people committing crimes, more White people in every negative category people want to stereotype minorities in. You don’t get it. “Aryan” = pure blood. Any adulteration = not pure. Aryans cannot breed with racial others without submerging their best characteristics. In a sense it is like a die-off as far as we are concerned. Well, I didn’t get that. I apologise. However, I stand by the idea that genetic variety is good for the health of people. I don’t mean that every White person needs to pair off with someone not White. I just mean that if you take this preservation too far and confine people to their own countries, inbreeding will occur. Not anytime soon, but it will occur, and it will be detrimental. 95
Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on August 24, 2009, 05:48 AM | #
It isn’t a stereotype. I’m talking about the statistical rule, not the exceptions to it. And the statistical rule is that East Asians are of higher average intelligence (thus perform better in academics) than any other immigrant group. And the “most educated” thing is useless anyway, non-technical education is for the most part indoctrination. But, of all the “minorities” the East Asians occupy the most high-rung jobs – you know, the sort of jobs which require extensive education.
Slander. Aryan Eastern Europeans are of quality racial stock and I chalk that particular attitude up to the elitist attitudes of WASPs at the time. Yes there was an influx of foreign workers but they were not incompatible with Aryans, being so themselves – but Mestizos are incompatible. Jews also came from East Europe during the time and immediately began to incite radicalism, etc. The problems these Jews caused were blamed on “East Europeans” but Jews aren’t Aryan and so contributed to the defamation of EE Aryans. TJB.
Self-contradictory. Please revise.
Nothing could be more detrimental than adulterating Aryan blood. ——————————————————————————————————————— BTW, I don’t know who you are but I don’t really buy your “story.” There are a lot of agents provocateur on these boards and even a non-sophisticate like yourself could be one of them. 96
Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on August 24, 2009, 06:00 AM | #
I misread this part. But it’s still a faulty premise. Whites are on the high end of the global IQ spectrum so this just doesn’t have any basis in reality. Statistically speaking, only 14% of blacks have an IQ of 100 - which half of whites have. Plus I refuse to believe that the STDV is the same for all races - that’s tosh, Aryans have fairly high variance compared to other races. Plus the white curve is right-skewed - that is, towards genius. Aryans would still have more geniuses than most if there were far less of us. There is ample evidence that Aryans are not only smarter on average than most races, but also that their supra-geniuses are incomparable the world over. In fact, one could argue that all (and definitely most) true geniuses throughout history were Aryan. 97
Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on August 24, 2009, 06:09 AM | # I’ve been careless due to lack of sleep.
I meant to add “To demonstrate this…” at the beginning.
What is officially genius level? IQ 160-ish. You wouldn’t find many East Asians, with their comparatively low variance, in that range. And who else would even come close?
By this I meant people like da Vinci, Bacon, etc. The big dogs of history. 98
Posted by Texan on August 24, 2009, 12:30 PM | #
Really? Are you referring to entertainment media where blacks are grossly overrepresented as doctors, judges, and leaders of all stripes, and absurdly underrepresented as criminals? Can you provide any specific examples of negative stereotypes being propagated by the media?
Right. This is why, historically, Vermont was a hotbed for Ku Klux Klan activities while in Georgia the Klan was virtually unknown. The fact is that people with little contact with other races overwhelmingly hold unrealistically positive views of these races. This is true the world over. (See the Democratic primaries for just one example, where Barack Obama did significantly better amongst whites in states with comparatively few blacks.)
99
Posted by Jasmine on August 24, 2009, 12:56 PM | # ignorant, illiterate, low class people I apologise if it sounded as if I were insulting people of Eastern Europe. I have no animosity towards them, I was summarising what the elitists in the United States felt at the time. Really? Are you referring to entertainment media where blacks are grossly overrepresented as doctors, judges, and leaders of all stripes, and absurdly underrepresented as criminals? Can you provide any specific examples of negative stereotypes being propagated by the media? You mean compared to the beginning where there were no Blacks represented in the media except for dumbed down slaves or criminals trying to “take our White women away”? Anyway, I was speaking more on the music imported to countries with significantly less Blacks than the United States that focus glorified sex rappers decide to rap about in their oversized clothes and drooping pants with scantily clad girls shaking their woman parts. Pretty much all of the “Black” movies feature more stereotypes than a spectrum of people with different personalities sharing the same race. You could say that these are made by Black people, but there are White producers of these movies. And, I don’t just blame the media. Not at all. There are those of other races (and the same race!) that simply will not accept the idea of a Black person being anything other than ghetto no matter how many doctors they play on screen because those people are still treated as the exception to the rule. I might have rambled again, but I would just like to add that I am certainly not putting the blame of Black stereotypes on the White race. I am not grumbling about how “whitey” is keeping them down. I just feel that if Blacks and Whites and Hispanics and Asians were on an equal playing field, then studies on intelligence would show less varied results. 100
Posted by Jasmine on August 24, 2009, 01:01 PM | # Stereotypes about blacks come from living around them, interacting with them, and reading the local newspapers and seeing who appears most frequently in the police blotters. Stereotypes exist, but to base all judgments on them is irrational. It’s like mass punishment for the crimes of some. I don’t think that someone personally who lived around, interacted with Blacks and such would hold onto all of the misconceived notions of stupidity. I grant that there are a large amount of Blacks who eat their friend chicken and drink their kool-aid and butcher the English language, but I wanted to focus on the IQ part of the stereotype. Blacks aren’t scientifically less intelligent than Whites. Asians are not scientifically more intelligent than Whites. Culture, society and access to education are the factors that cause the disparity. 101
Posted by Frank on August 24, 2009, 01:10 PM | # Stereotypes are useful when you know nothing else about a person. Lost in a dark side street of Atlanta, you don’t want to run into a black. If run into a black in more civilised terrain, you’ll likely not talk about anything too complicated lest he feel stupid. Variance in intelligence does exist - among individuals, families, and races. Blacks consistently score lower than whites even when controlled for every factor imaginable. It doesn’t make them less human - it simply makes them different. Culture and nutrition and general health are factors too… Those few blacks who do excel are often pulled down by other envious blacks - being smart is “too white”. In a different environment, sure those few smart blacks would more likely excel. 102
Posted by t on August 24, 2009, 04:03 PM | # Blacks aren’t scientifically less intelligent than Whites. Asians are not scientifically more intelligent than Whites. Culture, society and access to education are the factors that cause the disparity. James Watson disagreed. Are you smarter than James Watson, Jasmine? 103
Posted by Mark IJsseldijk on August 24, 2009, 04:05 PM | #
Upper IQ echelon blacks like Sowell and Keyes can live productive lives in white societies. The middle and lower rungs of blacks cannot. That simple. 104
Posted by gagoonies on October 08, 2010, 01:36 PM | # Well wont you be disappointed in the future at all those happy smiling white faces. May your feet dance in the breeze beneath an old oak tree. You enjoy your freedom of movement throughout the host nation from such. You favor an environment where it is easier for you to feed as a parasite. None the less, you are a poison in the psychic wellspring which shall be purged. You will screech, crying aloud of the false shame & guilt you try to inflict as you and your lot of ill begotten sub humanoids are forced from the backside of your prey & cast willfully into oblivion. No black clouds in my blue sky. Next entry: A libertarian strikes back Previous entry: That Day is Coming - Prepare |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. 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) Ivan commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 05:53 PM. (go) (view) Jimmy Marr commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 05:51 PM. (go) (view) dc commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 05:13 PM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:55 PM. (go) (view) MP commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:43 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 04:31 PM. (go) (view) Selous Scout commented in entry 'Aquilon Speaks: Moscow 2010' on 02/08/12, 04:07 PM. (go) (view) Wild Bill commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/08/12, 04:02 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 03:47 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 Geoff Beck on June 09, 2005, 08:50 PM | #
These folks are Presbyterian, I like them a whole bunch: http://www.littlegeneva.com