ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, February 15, 2013

The Left's reluctant racists

A bien-pensant progressive reluctantly admits that vibrant multiculturalism and immigration has made a reluctant racist of her:
In the Nineties, when I arrived, this part of Acton was a traditional working-class area. Now there is no trace of any kind of community – that word so cherished by the Left. Instead it has been transformed into a giant transit camp and is home to no one. The scale of immigration over recent years has created communities throughout London that never need to – or want to – interact with outsiders.

It wasn’t always the case: since the 1890s thousands of Jewish, Irish, Afro-Caribbean, Asian and Chinese workers, among others, have arrived in the capital, often displacing the indigenous population. Yes, there was hateful overt racism and discrimination, I’m not denying that. But, over time, I believe we settled down into a happy mix of incorporation and shared aspiration, with disparate peoples walking the same pavements but returning to very different homes – something the Americans call “sundown segregation”.

But now, despite the wishful thinking of multiculturalists, wilful segregation by immigrants is increasingly echoed by the white population – the rate of white flight from our cities is soaring....  I, too, have decided to leave my area, following in the footsteps of so many of my neighbours. I don’t really want to go. I worked long and hard to get to London, to find a good job and buy a home and I’d like to stay here. But I’m a stranger on these streets and all the “good” areas, with safe streets, nice housing and pleasant cafés, are beyond my reach. I see London turning into a place almost exclusively for poor immigrants and the very rich.

It’s sad that I am moving not for a positive reason, but to escape something. I wonder whether I’ll tell the truth, if I’m asked. I can’t pretend that I’m worried about local schools, so perhaps I’ll say it’s for the chance of a conversation over the garden fence. But really I no longer need an excuse: mass immigration is making reluctant racists of us all.
It's not an accident that the loudest liberal voices still preaching the glories of immigration and multiculturalism live in safely lily-white enclaves.  The vocal anti-racist McRapey lives in Bradford, Ohio, which the 2010 Census describes as "98.9% White, 0.2% African American, 0.1% Native American, 0.2% Asian, 0.1% Pacific Islander, 0.3% from other races, and 0.3% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 0.9% of the population."

Meanwhile, tends of thousands of progressive and pro-affirmative action liberals with children who can't afford to live in an elite, heavy-security White Zone are fleeing their increasingly vibrant communities for the very communities that their kind have spent the last fifty years decrying.  Their actions speak much, much louder than their words.  And their actions are far more intrinsically racist and segregationist than the words of George Wallace or Enoch Powell ever were.

Immigration in very small numbers tends to strengthen a society.  Mass immigration, on the other hand, is simple invasion and it destroys a society through occupation, disruption, and displacement.

Labels: ,

148 Comments:

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 15, 2013 1:05 PM  

"something the Americans call “sundown segregation”."

Um, my understanding is that "sundown" meant something quite different in the context of American segregation.

Multiculturalism: it means never having to actually understand other cultures.



Anonymous scoobius dubious February 15, 2013 1:07 PM  

"Asian and Chinese workers, among others, have arrived in the capital, often displacing the indigenous population. Yes, there was hateful overt racism and discrimination"

Why is resistance 'hateful' in the context of an indigenous population being displaced or replaced?

Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull and Ho Chi Minh and Patrice Lumumba: heroes.
Enoch Powell: ZOMG that evil hateful raaaaaacist man, I'm going to vomit!!!11!

Anonymous JartStar February 15, 2013 1:19 PM  

I see London turning into a place almost exclusively for poor immigrants and the very rich.

So London is turning into a typical Third World city. Jolly good.

Blogger tz February 15, 2013 1:20 PM  

2nd paragraph after the quote, "Meanwhile, tenDs of thousands of..."

Anonymous Anonymous February 15, 2013 1:22 PM  

Diversity be our strength, yo.

~€

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis February 15, 2013 1:23 PM  

I don't think mass immigration is necessarily a negative for a society, provided that society makes it a point to facillitate assimilation. But that is ultimately the problem with the multiculturalism to try and instill ones own culture as the culture that must be adhered to runs counter to it's very tenants.

Why is it that

Blogger Bogey February 15, 2013 1:25 PM  

"Young fool. Only now, at the end, do you understand."

Anonymous Shawn February 15, 2013 1:28 PM  

It upsets that she is able to leave. Should those who wanted massive immigration had to stay, we might be able to reverse it.

Anonymous alexamenos February 15, 2013 1:29 PM  

1 million muslims in London? There must be what, a couple of hundred thousand military aged muslim males parked in the heart of jolly old england? That can't be right.

50+ million hispanics in the US? That'd give the US the worlds third largest hispanic population -- there aren't that many hispanics in Spain. That can't be right either.

I prefer to avert my eyes from the impending trainwreck.

Blogger tz February 15, 2013 1:30 PM  

My building is probably at least 60% black, but it is a highrise requiring at least a moderate income. However I think it gets whiter as it gets higher.

The city is integrated too, but fights to keep the adjacent "Detroit" spirit out.

I wonder if within the petty "racism" was a proper demand the earlier minorities conform to the indigenous culture, at least in public. Something on the order of "I don't care if they relieve themselves on the carpet when you are guests in your native land, you will NOT do so here". Insofar that "racism" is pushing to do the (objectively, not multiculturally) right thing, it is a high virtue.

They were discriminated against until they integrated, were assimilated, became Englishmen, complete with proper pronunciation of the Queen's English, fondness for rugby as well as football - cheering the UK team, etc. Same here with the southern and eastern Europeans in the early 1900's.

Don't want to be thought of as stupid or a rube? Don't sound or act like one. There are still Hicks and Hillbillies who are quite white, but they aren't given much of a pass. Or weren't. I forgot President Billy Jeff.

No one is comfortable being around strangers, even if they are your fellow citizen neighbor. Now the push is to call this discomfort an evil (which it is not unless you are the one behaving badly).

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis February 15, 2013 1:32 PM  

I don't think mass immigration is necessarily negative for society, provided that society demands and enforces that new migrants adhere tothe nations culture standards. The problem is that doing so runs counter to multiculturalism, which essentially states that all cultures are inherintly valid and equal, and results in groups of individuals that never assimilate. Multiculturalism is the reason why Europe is now dealing with increased Muslim extremism, which will only result in increased European nationalism. If the left had never swallowed that mutlicultural hoogwash they now spout then we may have avoided all this conflict. After all, how can you reasonably expect someone to be loyal to a nation that doesn't even value or love it's own culture?

Blogger tz February 15, 2013 1:34 PM  

Put another way, if there is someone who is an alien in their own culture because they have strong family values, has an entrepreneurial spirit, likes taking responsibility and independence, I see no problem with giving them entry - they are already more than half-way assimilated. Inviting indolent rabbits to infest our land and consume our substance (see Australia for a literal example, or during our Dust Bowl) is madness.

Anonymous PC Geek February 15, 2013 1:38 PM  

"Young fool. Only now, at the end, do you understand."

I wonder how many times in history this statement (not the exact words obviously) have been said to people with the exact same foolish beliefs as modern libtards/taddies/rabbits.

Of course, knowing them, they kept hopping along furiously, not in fact understanding even at the end, the foolishness of their beliefs.

Yet their beliefs are overwhelmingly the dominant ones of our age. We are truly screwed in so many ways I can't even begin to express (NOT in THAT way Tad, in case you were getting your hopes up).

Anonymous Schnoorky February 15, 2013 1:42 PM  

Normal people call what this progressive describes "ethnic cleansing". Ethnic cleansing of White people from specific areas will work in Great Britain only for so long. Then even more drastic action will need to be taken by the anti-whites in their campaign of White Genocide.

America is also experiencing this - I refer specifically to the ethnic cleansing occurring in southern California. The more drastic measures to resolve the "race issue" in America will surface much later than in Great Britain due to the much larger geographical area. Perhaps the Whites in Great Britain will "die for our sins"? Will we American Whites repent and push back against the genocidal anti-whites? I know I am already. I urge all you wide-awake Whites to join me.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 15, 2013 1:47 PM  

"I don't think mass immigration is necessarily negative for society, provided that society demands and enforces that new migrants adhere tothe nations culture standards."

The question is not whether mass immigration is a negative for society, it is the fact that it is a negative for WHITE society.

1. The overwhelming majority of mass-immigrants are non-white. They only mass-immigrate into white societies.

2. White genetic traits are mostly recessive; the product of a union between a white and a non-white is, essentially, usually a non-white for all intents and purposes. Whites generally lose this genetic faceoff thrice: not only have white reproductive capacities been used to produce a non-white, but also white reproductive capacities have been squandered with respect to themselves, resulting in one less white (the statistical equivalent of an abortion), and furthermore, white resources are almost invariably the resources which are squandered in raising the non-white. Furthermore (witness Obama), the overwhelming tendency of a mixed white/non-white child is to identify with the non-white heritage.

3. This massive influx of non-whites into white countries occurs precisely at a time when white fertility is catastrophically low, while non-white fertility is high. The resulting dearth of white partners for other whites, as well as media propaganda promoting miscegenation, and the sociocultural fact that so many non-white men have a fetishistic obsession with white women, results in a further imbalance with respect to the stability of the white population.

4. Assimilation is therefore an existential catastrophe for whites AS whites, and the mathematical logic suggests a slow but steady genocide.

5. Mass immigration + assimilation = the de facto genocidal elimination of whites as a human phenotype, as well as a unique, and uniquely brilliant, culture.

Mass immigration is anti-white genocide.

Period.

Anonymous cheddarman February 15, 2013 1:57 PM  

Call me an optimist, but the inevitable implosion of the wellfare state in the U.S. and Europe will bring all of this increasing vibrancy to a screeching halt, perhaps a lot sooner than most of us realize.

Anonymous Mystery Man February 15, 2013 2:01 PM  

But at least there's more halal food for the hipsters to sneer at as being "mainstream".

Anonymous Daniel February 15, 2013 2:07 PM  

This reminds me of the black author who won the World Fantasy Award, but loathed that the trophy was a bust of H.P. Lovecraft, without whom there would likely be no World Fantasy Award.

“On the World Fantasy Award: The award is a bust of H.P. Lovecraft, a notable author but also notorious racist. Nnedi Okorafor, who won the award in 2011, wrote that she approved of China Miéville's solution, who claims: "I put it out of sight, in my study, where only I can see it, and I have turned it to face the wall. So I am punishing the little fucker like the malevolent clown he was, I can look at it and remember the honour, and above all I am writing behind Lovecraft’s back.”

Jane Kelly is moving away, but punishing her practical racism like the malevolent clown she believes it to be. Ridiculous. Accept the award or don't, but don't take it and then pretend like you were ashamed to win.

These idiots are playing for the door, but I can't guess what reasonable visitors might be handing over $5 when all they wanted was a drink.

Anonymous Tallen February 15, 2013 2:11 PM  

A descriptor comes to mind: "motleyculturalism." A quick google search reveals I am not the first to coin the term however.

Blogger The Anti-Gnostic February 15, 2013 2:13 PM  

I don't think mass immigration is necessarily negative for society, provided that society demands and enforces that new migrants adhere to the nations culture standards.

Mass immigrants do not assimilate, mass immigrants transform.

The US at its founding was Anglo-American. It did not make Italians, Jews, Irish, etc. into Anglo-Americans. Rather, they became Italian-American, Jewish-American, Irish-American, etc. They transformed every locale where they became market-dominant.

Africans have been in America 400 years and have never assimilated. They are, in every sense, African-American.

Han Chinese and Hindu supremacists will not assimilate. Their gods made them and gave them their lands and your lands too since you can't even be bothered to light incense for your acestors.

Arab Muslims will not assimilate. They are proud people of the Book. You're just a decadent upstart.

Pan-Hispanic mestizos and Aztecs will not assimilate. They long for the day they can make you swim back to Europe.

None of these groups will assimilate. They will transform.

Get that in your head, and then pull your head out of your ass.

Anonymous Mystery Man February 15, 2013 2:15 PM  

Accept the award or don't, but don't take it and then pretend like you were ashamed to win.

What, and miss out on the opportunity to bitch afterwards? What are you, some kind of faux-martyrist bigot?

Anonymous Imatiger February 15, 2013 2:15 PM  

I think what I find ironic is that England is feeling a bit of what, reverse imperialism?, at this point.

Anonymous Daniel February 15, 2013 2:19 PM  

Seriously, she's framing this up linguistically to make it sound like she's a victim of racism for being racist.

Anonymous Imatiger February 15, 2013 2:23 PM  

@ scoobius

Yeah. You should probably just give up now.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 15, 2013 2:25 PM  

"It did not make Italians, Jews, Irish, etc. into Anglo-Americans. Rather, they became Italian-American, Jewish-American, Irish-American, etc. They transformed every locale where they became market-dominant."

A key difference between these classes of immigrants and the recent tidal wave of non-white mass immigrants is that the white-ethnics made considerable contributions, and considerable difficult labor, in building this country back when it still needed to be built in some measure. The more recent waves of immigrants do not build America, they merely poach on what has already been built. They take, and gnaw, and displace. They are parasites on any conceivable metric.

Termites don't think they're destroying anything (well, nothing that matters to a termite anyway, which is instructive), they just think they're munching on wood.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 15, 2013 2:28 PM  

"You should probably just give up now."

An intelligent argument would be nice. Not that I ever expect one from people with such sentiments.

Anonymous 11B February 15, 2013 2:29 PM  

I don't think mass immigration is necessarily a negative for a society, provided that society makes it a point to facillitate assimilation.

Mass immigration essentially is at odds with assimilation because if groups are allowed to immigrate in large enough numbers, there is no reason to assimilate. Hence the name 'mass immigration.'

What are the numbers involved that make assimilation unworkable? I don't know. But I do know this. In the past 30 years Mexico has sent as many or more people to the United States than Germany, Italy and Britain combined have over the past 400 years! Yes, Mexico has sent as many immigrants over 30 years as the next 3 nations combined have since Jamestown Colony in 1607. And that number is only going to grow.

Also, how much can a different population really assimilate? And what constitutes assimilation? For example, if the Mexicans learn English and drive SUVs, does that mean they have assimilated? Or will they just become another English-speaking segment of the population, like blacks, who are socially dysfunctional and require heavy government assistance to get by? If that is the case, then why would you seek to import another such class of people?


Anonymous Daniel February 15, 2013 2:32 PM  

Yeah! Come out with your hands up Scoobius, or we'll accidentally burn your cabin down!

And termites aren't destroying wood. They are feasting on the fruits of a vibrant society. After all, without termites who would eat the wood that needs eating?

Blogger Markku February 15, 2013 2:32 PM  

Yay for racism

Anonymous Imatiger February 15, 2013 2:33 PM  

@ scoobius

No, I agree with you. There is nothing to be done to fix the problem. There will never be a law passed in the US at least, disallowing immigration of non-whites. There will never be enough money devoted to enforcement of the massive US borders to prevent illegal immigration. Demographics indicate that the younger generations are more and more accepting of mixed race marriages, so even trying to convince older people of what is happening is eventually futile because, to be blunt, their opinions will die faster than being replaced. There are some battles you cannot win and should not even be pursued. Better to put energy towards battles that can be won.

Anonymous 11B February 15, 2013 2:38 PM  

A key difference between these classes of immigrants and the recent tidal wave of non-white mass immigrants is that the white-ethnics made considerable contributions, and considerable difficult labor, in building this country back when it still needed to be built in some measure. The more recent waves of immigrants do not build America, they merely poach on what has already been built. They take, and gnaw, and displace. They are parasites on any conceivable metric.

I think what this commenter is trying to point out is that the so called immigrants of yesteryear where not immigrants. They were settlers and pioneers. Settlers and pioneers go to an empty wilderness and carve out a home. Immigrants come to a civilization that has already been created by said settlers and pioneers to take advantage of the economic opportunities and political stability the former have created.

Even the later 20th century Europeans who were immigrants are still not in the same class as today's immigrant. Those Europeans from 100 years ago did come to a well established civilization, but had to sink or swim on their own and did not have a government social safety net to catch them.

Today's immigrants really can't fail. Everything will be provided for them, free education for their kids, section 8 housing vouchers, food stamps, EBT cards, etc., etc. The system is setup so that the 1 million or so legal immigrants cannot fail. As the previous guy stated, the bulk of today's immigrants are mooches.

Anonymous CitizenOutkast February 15, 2013 2:41 PM  

Leftists should be forced to live in "vibrant" neighborhoods until they can explain how liberalism and it's associated beliefs are wrong and vote for those who oppose it. Leftists won't learn how badly they screw up areas until they can't leave and have to actually live with the consequences of their moronic ways. Rich people who voted for Obama are fleeing the country because of taxes, leftists fleeing immigrants because they are starting to see how criminal minded many of them are....no, both groups should be made to stay and suck it up like everyone else, or in place of everyone else. Only then would they learn a true life lesson and maybe decrease the amount of idiots in the country.

Blogger The Anti-Gnostic February 15, 2013 2:44 PM  

There are some battles you cannot win and should not even be pursued. Better to put energy towards battles that can be won.

Out-marriage remains a marginal phenomenon, particularly when you don't have to go back to the old country to fetch a bride; she's right there in the ghetto/barrio/pale/etc. with you!

So your battle-is-lost/lie-back-and-enjoy-it argument is premature. There will be several new countries where the current one is within a few decades.

This thing is just getting started.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis February 15, 2013 2:48 PM  

Mass immigration essentially is at odds with assimilation because if group are allowed to immigrate in large enough numbers, there is no reason to assimilate. Hence the name 'mass immigration.'

I agree provided that those immigrants are congested in one geopgrahic area, as we see with many recent hispanic immigrants. The issue is, as you pointed out, is that it is really hard to determin what is a level of migration that exceeds a nations capacity. The US had more migrants immigrating as a percentage of our population back in 1900 than we do now and we managed just fine (yes I know there are individuals that will point out that those immigrants were white europeans while many from mexico are metizo but 100 years ago many thought the Irish and Italians could never assimilate into the Germanic-Anglo United States.)

The absolute numbers of those obtaining legal residence status remain largely unchanged from 100 years ago, whihc would mean the percentage of the population that are new migrants would be lower.

Of course the real issue isn't those who legally migrated to America, and are therefore far more likely to abide by it's laws and customs, but with illegal immigration. I personally would love to see the laws become less byzantine, I have seen far too many skilled and intelligent individuals who came to America legally, and acquired skills that we could use, that wanted to remain, but were forced to either leave, or become illegals due to our byzantine laws. On the flip side, we absolutely need to secure our borders, and to stop with this multicultural bullshit that is partially balkanizing our nation.

Anonymous DonReynolds February 15, 2013 2:49 PM  

My favorite of course is the Rev. Wright, who is now retired from black hate sermons on Sunday from his pulpit. He retired to an overwhelmingly white gated community, safe from his own kind, while he awaits the hottest fires of hell.

No matter how pacifist, no matter how Liberal, no matter how Leftist....they do not know that their idealism and silly notions are actually a suicide pact. The future they imagine is NOT anything like the dreams of their future masters. Their utopia will never arrive, but they will someday find themselves immersed and hopelessly outnumbered by ungrateful lunatics, who will only want their guts on a bed of rice.

The only glimmer of hope is the quick debunking of these reluctant racists. Maybe it will happen after they get mugged or raped a few times by the very people they hoped to adopt as house pets. The Abolistionists prior to the Civil War were in love with black slaves primarily because they had never met any. Had anyone convinced them of what these freed slaves would do to New England and the major cities of the North in a century, they would have let slavery continue, if only as a way of keeping blacks in the South.

Blogger Rev. Right February 15, 2013 2:52 PM  

Immigrants assimilate. What we are witnessing now in the West is more accurately termed colonization.

Anonymous karen February 15, 2013 2:56 PM  

There's a park around the corner from my house and on any given day, I am in the extreme minority (white) when I go there to exercise. Most of the people don't even speak English (or at least aren't speaking it when I am around. One night I went walking with my husband and out of about 100 people at the park, there were only 3 white people (myself and my husband being 2 of the 3). It was shocking to witness, to be such a visible minority. I told my husband that American whites will be so pissed off when they finally wake up to the destruction of our way of life that we've permitted to occur in front of our eyes while we were busy living. The problem with white people is they can't imagine the evil intentions behind this destruction. We think because we would never do this to others that it is impossible it can be done to us. Until we face with courage the truth of the lie that is diversity, we are doomed.

Anonymous 11B February 15, 2013 3:05 PM  

The absolute numbers of those obtaining legal residence status remain largely unchanged from 100 years ago, whihc would mean the percentage of the population that are new migrants would be lower.

The absolute numbers are higher now. You might have an argument based upon percentage of population, but then again, 100 years ago and earlier the nation was still not filled up and fully developed.

Also, from 1924 to 1965, not quite 100 years ago, we only averaged 180,000 legal immigrants per year. For the past two decades we have been taking in well over 1 million legal immigrants per year. So in absolute numbers, we are taking in more today at a time when we don't need mass numbers of people to settle a wilderness.

Consider some other figures. From 1607 to 1958 around 42 million mostly Europeans came here. From 1965 on, about 50 million mostly non-Europeans have come here. Essentially more non-Europeans have now immigrated here than Europeans. Why is this important? Many argue for fairness in immigration and believe it was unfair for the Europeans to come here in greater numbers. So out of fairness they support non-European immigration. Since Europeans are still the majority, these people think the continued immigration of non-Europeans is just and fair. They think this because they don't account for the fact that several generations of Europeans have been born here which accounts for the numbers difference.

At what point do we get to throttle back? I would take the immigration levels of 1924, provided we took the cream of the crop.

Blogger Bogey February 15, 2013 3:10 PM  

Yet their beliefs are overwhelmingly the dominant ones of our age. We are truly screwed in so many ways I can't even begin to express.

I was discussing this today with a family member, it feels like God was holding the worst for the last.

I have a feeling Palpatine's quote is going to be useful for quite some time now.

Anonymous Imatiger February 15, 2013 3:12 PM  

@ The Anti-Gnostic

From Pew Research Center (2010):

Most Americans say they approve of racial or ethnic intermarriage – not just in the abstract, but in their own families. More than six-in-ten say it would be fine with them if a family member told them they were going to marry someone from any of three major race/ethnic groups other than their
own.


So, while it is also true that only about 14% of marriages were out-marriages according to this report, the percentage has been increasing over the years. That, combined with the increasing tolerance of young people to out-marrying, suggests that this battle is lost. Instead, why not move out to Idaho, enjoy the great natural beauty, and create a conclave of like-minded people?

I've been hearing the argument that there will be new countries springing from the US' ashes for decades now. I remain confident that isn't going to happen. Too many people are too comfortable to go to war, especially because so many of these immigrants are coming from places that are dealing with war, or at least crazy levels of armed violence caused by the War on Drugs.

Blogger Bogey February 15, 2013 3:16 PM  

Immigrants assimilate. What we are witnessing now in the West is more accurately termed colonization.

That's a pretty good way of looking at it Rev. I'm thinking War of the Worlds, an anti-colonial work. The aliens have landed and I don't think they're feeling very multicultural.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 15, 2013 3:20 PM  

"At what point do we get to throttle back? I would take the immigration levels of 1924, provided we took the cream of the crop."

Why do we need any immigrants at all? There are now ~310 million people (legal or not, "American" or not) in the US. Besides, our job market is in the toilet as it stands. Why on earth do we need any more -- even the talented ones?

Back in the 1940s, when America conquered half the planet, there were only about 150 million in the US, mostly white, and we ruled the world. Now there are double that number, a huge percentage non-white, and our global reputation, our grip on power, and our standards of living are all in steep decline. Granted correlation does not etc etc, but remind me again... what exactly was the benefit of importing all these extra people?

We're always hearing about what's "fair" to a bunch of foreigners, as if the United States were a bag of Halloween candy which needs to be divided amongst a group of children. But of course it is not, it is a country, a nation, a people, a civilization. (Well, none of these things for too much longer.) The question that is never asked is, What is "fair" to the American people? One hears the claim that illegal immigration is wrong because it is "unfair" to those foreigners who legally waited in line. It is never asked, What is "unfair" to the people whose blood and toil went into making this place. It is not charity to give away that which is not yours to give -- in fact, the word for that is stealing.


Why take the cream of the crop? Why take any cream, or any crops? We've got plenty of our own crop-land and milk-cows. Those people fought our wars, built our skyscrapers, landed us on the moon. They're a pretty inventive bunch. Even if he is a decent software engineer, I don't see how letting Brahmaswamaputra come live here is good for anybody in America, except for Brahmaswamaputra --- and his dozens of mooching relatives.

Anonymous Shorty February 15, 2013 3:21 PM  

Mass Russian, Irish, Polish, and Italian immigration in the late 1800s-early 1900s also brought forth the predominance of Socialist doctrine and the rise of Progressive ideologies, in addition to destroying labor markets. It's hard to say that those effects were good for America in the long term. Immigration should have been capped then and used as a justification for limiting the immigration of left-leaning Mexicans in the late 1900s.

Maybe NEXT time we'll get it right.

Anonymous 11B February 15, 2013 3:29 PM  

Why take the cream of the crop? Why take any cream, or any crops? We've got plenty of our own crop-land and milk-cows. Those people fought our wars, built our skyscrapers, landed us on the moon. They're a pretty inventive bunch. Even if he is a decent software engineer, I don't see how letting Brahmaswamaputra come live here is good for anybody in America, except for Brahmaswamaputra --- and his dozens of mooching relatives.

Because the cream of the crop is European. Europe is our wellspring. How the fuck do you think we got to the moon? We did it on the backs of German immigrants. We need the cream of the crop of Europe to continually rejuvenate. You apparently are so brainwashed that you no longer associate excellence with Europeans.

Blogger hadley February 15, 2013 3:37 PM  

98.9% race pure white for McRapey! Wow! Do you realize how long he had to look to get that kind of race purity? He'll, he is right squap in the middle of some real cesspits on the map. Check it out. Dayton is closest with 51%W, 43%B, 3%His; then Cincinnati with 49W,45B, 3His; then Columbus, with 61W, 28B, 6His; then Indianapolis, with 58W, 27B, 10His; then Muncie with 84W, 11B, 2.3His.

Do you realize how hard folks in his Sundown Town of Bradford must have to wor to keep the Nigras and Mexes out? How could you live right squap in the middle of that cesspit, surrounded on all sides and remain so race-pure? No way that could happen by accident. No way at all. What we see here is a classic case of Institutional Racism. Why these Bradford folks are bone-deep racists. No other excuse possible. I'll bet they keep out liberal refugee settlement programs, ban Section 8 housing, don't provide low income housing, and they damn sure don't provide public transit (I checked!).

What is it with all these race-pure white boys like McRapey anyway? Living in a race-pure white nirvana, and pointing the finger outward at everyone else. Race purity like Bradford don't happen by accident is all I can say! You gots to work at it--work real hard!

So when are McRapey's Bradford friends going to confess their racist sins and make Amends for their historical segregation? When are they going to welcome the manifold blessings of multiculturalism? When are they going to let a colored man spend the night in a Bradford motel or eat in a Bradford restaurant?

Anonymous 11B February 15, 2013 3:43 PM  

Mass Russian, Irish, Polish, and Italian immigration in the late 1800s-early 1900s also brought forth the predominance of Socialist doctrine and the rise of Progressive ideologies, in addition to destroying labor markets. It's hard to say that those effects were good for America in the long term. Immigration should have been capped then and used as a justification for limiting the immigration of left-leaning Mexicans in the late 1900s.

First, you wrote mass Russian immigration. Do you really mean Jewish immigration from Russia? For that comprised the bulk of what came from there.

Second, you wrote that immigration should have been capped then. It essentially was. It was called the 1924 Immigration Act. But one man in particular did not like this act, and spent the next 40 years of his House career trying to overturn it. He finally succeeded in 1965.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch February 15, 2013 3:43 PM  

I'm tired of the self-destruction of whites. I say, let this shit happen.

The West deserves this, collectively. Let it all happen.

Anonymous anon123 February 15, 2013 3:44 PM  

Hilariously this deep thinker is listed as a contributing editor for The Salisbury Review aka "The Quarterly Journal of Conservative Thought-'Seriously Right'"

Anonymous GreyS February 15, 2013 3:47 PM  

Here's the video she mentions in the article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2263905/Muslim-patrol-Hooded-vigilantes-walking-streets-London-telling-women-cover-taking-alcohol-hands-revellers-behave-Islamic-way.html

Anonymous Jimmy February 15, 2013 3:52 PM  

"Mass immigration, on the other hand, is simple invasion and it destroys a society through occupation, disruption, and displacement."

You can't get displaced if you try to adapt to the culture of the new immigrants and/or stay to build up the white population. This is why I'm skeptical to liberals who talk a good game about integration, but flee it when confronted with the reality of life with different people.

Anonymous JI February 15, 2013 4:02 PM  

I don't know that the Left is very reluctant to be racist. I think they've just been yearning for a good excuse to be racist.

Blogger Kentucky Packrat February 15, 2013 4:03 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis February 15, 2013 4:04 PM  

@ 11

In 1905 the number of immigrants entering the nation were the same as they are now in numbers, and as a percentage of population much higher than they are now. Granted, immigration levels were significantly curtailed from the 1920s onwards.

I personally don't care whether the immigrants are European or not, I am not in agreement with race realists, provided that they are willing to adhere to our cultural norms and are not the dregs of society. Our issue is far more about multiculturalism than immigration, since even 1 million immigrants a year would be less than a 1% of the naturalized population. Provided that the immigrants don't locate themselves in one single region then I think the US could easily assimilate 1 million immigrants a year. This of course is ignoring the fact that this isn't happening in the southwest, which also suffers from a large illegal population.

Ultimately the issue is one of culture. We coud have very low levels of immigration and the ills of multiculturalism would still threaten this nation. And this is irrespective of whether the immigrants coming to America are European or not, just look at Europe's history, it's written with a lot of blood*.

*As an aside this is something that infuriates me about leftists. They talk about how violent Americans are, all the while ignoring that ,far more individuals have been killed in Europe in the last 200 years than the United States.

Blogger Kentucky Packrat February 15, 2013 4:05 PM  

Africans have been in America 400 years and have never assimilated. They are, in every sense, African-American.

Have to disagree a bit here. Quite a few blacks tried to assimilate, and most who did try were successful. A lot were forced out of assimilation by Jim Crow and by economic discrimination.

I am amazed by the sheer success of LBJ and the "young" punks like Jesse Jackson. Southern Democrats and the generation after King took a movement that wanted to make assimilation work, and completely reversed it. Within a generation with welfare and "education is white", the "black redneck" culture became "my heritage". The upper class liberal blacks around here have "embraced their culture" and wonder why the "school system" is trashing their young.

What amazes me is how the white community is devolving even faster around here. I actually fear the products of middle-class day care and Ritalin much more than "Lexico" and Georgetown Street. The white kids around here come out of school with huge egos, no skills, and an absolute certainty that no one in the world really cares for them.

If there's a true zombie horde over the horizon, it's the white kids that will start it.

Blogger ajw308 February 15, 2013 4:06 PM  

One Standard Deviation, what's it take to get permission to read your blog?

Blogger Rev. Right February 15, 2013 4:07 PM  

"Yet their beliefs are overwhelmingly the dominant ones of our age"

The fruit of universal suffrage.

Anonymous The One February 15, 2013 4:25 PM  

Come On Vox, where is the meteorite (thread) that occurred a few days after the pope announces retirement.

Blogger Markku February 15, 2013 4:31 PM  

It had a fear of a black planet.

Anonymous Shorty February 15, 2013 4:37 PM  

Their respective religions have no bearing on where they came from. Irish and Italian Catholics, Russian and Polish Jews, and I'm sure a small percentage of Protestants were all unionized under socialist ideologies. Immigration was indeed capped, 30 years too late. Marx and Engels were already ingrained in both New England's working class and higher class with the leaders of New Deal policies already in office and working their way through the ranks.

Anonymous Crude February 15, 2013 4:39 PM  

What is it with all these race-pure white boys like McRapey anyway? Living in a race-pure white nirvana, and pointing the finger outward at everyone else. Race purity like Bradford don't happen by accident is all I can say! You gots to work at it--work real hard!

I could be misremembering, but back when Le Pen was doing well in the French elections (years ago), I recall some reporters noting with confusion and dismay that - for some strange reason - people who were most in favor of immigration tended to live in areas with very few immigrants. Le Pen (quite anti-immigrant) was seeing more support in the areas with the highest amounts of 'multiculturalism'.

Anonymous Sam Scott February 15, 2013 4:40 PM  

I foresee such sentiment as the author's increasing.

For example, I have (non-Jewish) friends in the United States who criticize Israel as being a "racist" state. My reply: Should not England (in theory) look out for the English and France for the Franks and Israel for the Jews, and so on?

But my friends prefer to want to see a world without ethnic groups, which to me is short-sighted at best and dangerously foolish at worst. I tend to find that it comes primarily from Americans who, only knowing a state comprised of many nations, do not understand that the vast majority of states in the world have been primarily populated by a single nation of people.

You take that away, you end up with conflict between nations within a state as the world as the world as seen in parts of Africa and the Balkans and so on. Humans, for better or worse, naturally self-segregate. It's why you see neighborhoods in cities comprised mainly of a single ethnic group. For better or worse, it's human nature.

Anonymous Sam Scott February 15, 2013 4:49 PM  

OT personal question for the Ilk --

For work and related reasons, I stare at my laptop at home for 12+ hours a day, and my eyes are have been constantly bloodshot for a few months now. The veins on the edges of my eyes are enlarged and red.

My doctor here in Israel is referring me to an opthomologist (spelling), and she thinks it's likely eye strain from the computer but perhaps an infection or allergy. (She also gave me a prescription for Visine that also sterilizes the eyes just in case.)

Anyone have any thoughts or advice and can help a guy out? Thanks!

Anonymous Sam Scott February 15, 2013 4:52 PM  

OT personal question for the Ilk --

For work and related reasons, I stare at my laptop at home for 12+ hours a day, and my eyes are have been constantly bloodshot for a few months now. The veins on the edges of my eyes are enlarged and red.

My doctor here in Israel is referring me to an opthomologist (spelling), and she thinks it's likely eye strain from the computer but perhaps an infection or allergy. (She also gave me a prescription for Visine that also sterilizes the eyes just in case.)

Anyone have any thoughts or advice and can help a guy out? Thanks!


Oh, for what it's worth --

1. Eyes are red as described
2. They feel dry and often like they are burning
3. Sometimes there's a minor dull pain associated with the eyes

Just computer use? Or perhaps something else? Again, thanks for any thoughts. :)

Anonymous Asher February 15, 2013 4:58 PM  

Dammit. I read thi entire thread hoping for a comment from Tad ...

Blogger Markku February 15, 2013 4:59 PM  

Do you feel an appetite for brains?

Anonymous Sam Scott February 15, 2013 5:01 PM  

Markku

Do you feel an appetite for brains?


I presume that was directed at me? If so, why would I come here if I had been wanting brains? ;)

Anonymous 11B February 15, 2013 5:03 PM  

I personally don't care whether the immigrants are European or not, I am not in agreement with race realists, provided that they are willing to adhere to our cultural norms and are not the dregs of society. Our issue is far more about multiculturalism than immigration, since even 1 million immigrants a year would be less than a 1% of the naturalized population.

Why do you not care? Do you believe that the success of the USA is only due to luck or geography? Do you believe if other races had settled this place the results would be as good? I don't think so. Culture matters, but I believe there are differences in races and ethnicities too. We already have a problem with our 400 year old black community which to some extent has still not assimilated. Why would we want to keep importing more people that will probably form a separate underclass too?

As Pat Buchanan wrote, increasing diversity increases inequality. Think about that for a bit. Notice how nations like Japan, South Korea, Norway and Finland seem to be relatively equal where there are not the huge disparities in wealth that we have in more vibrant nations. Putting vastly differing groups of people together will inevitably lead to a sorting that takes place where groups with higher abilities will come to dominate and accumulate more wealth. This doesn't happen in homogenous places like Finland. So by throwing open the door to the third world you are asking for more, not less, of the inequality that is already seen here between white and black and now between white and Mestizo. Get ready for permanent government action, known as affirmative action, to try to fight mother nature on this because it won't go away so long as people are in a free market.

As far as numbers and percentages go, I think you are wrong to casually say that taking in 1 million per year is no big matter since it is less than one percent of the population. That's probably what they thought back in 1970 when we were at 200 million. Now we are at 310 million. So taking in 1 million per year is not a very big deal. It is less than 1/3 of 1 percent. Just think when we hit 400 million people, then that 1 million per year will be even less of a percentage of our population. In fact, we can even take in more and keep the same percentage. And this will go on and on and on as the population creeps up to 500 million and maybe even higher.

But is that what you want? Personally I would rather be closer to 200 million than 300 million. Why do we need so many people here? I like the wide open spaces. I don't want to put more stress on the land and water resources. I don't want to keep growing until we resemble India. Keep in mind India had 450 million people as recently as 1960. And I am sure people thought it was quite congested even then.

And then there is the matter of government. Whether the population is 200, 300 or 400 million, we will have 100 Senators and 435 Representatives. The difference is that as the population increases, the congressional districts increase as well which means you are even less important to your elected representative than you already are.

Do people realize that right now we, excepting China and India, the USA is the word's most populous nation? Population champ is one title I don't even want to compete for.

Anonymous Ben L February 15, 2013 5:05 PM  

I propose starting fund for McRapey. It can be to buy a house for him in a vibrant neighborhood near his town. That way he won't have to endure living in such a bland city.

I will open the drive with pledge a of $10. I think that in some of the most vibrant neighborhoods (maybe Detroit?), we can probably find a house for a couple hundred dollars.

Anonymous ENthePeasant February 15, 2013 5:13 PM  

The last couple of weeks have been devoted to multicultural outreach... although, not by choice. Living in California gives one a front row seat at the end of Western Civilization. I briefly mentioned that a couple of weekends ago I had a conversation with an Hispanic lad on the evils of black culture ("we're doing the jobs they will never do well... which is any job."). Yesterday I had lunch with a Hindu from Northern "Injia". Spoke perfect redneck English and was married to a Christian women (more on that in a second). Turns out his family fled the North for Europe/US because of the harshness of Muslim rule in that part of India. Both of his elder brothers were living in Londinistan and hated it. They were (according to him) terrified of what London was turning into. I'm not sure if this is true or not, I've not heard or read of this from anyone but him, but he says the police is largely becoming Muslim and they are corrupt and supportive of Muslim culture ONLY (Last time I was in London was 07 and it seemed like there were a lot of "dusky" Bobbies, but how the hell does one tell if they're Muslim?). Then he got onto his wife who's the daughter of British missionaries. He railed against her Liberal idiocy and at one point said that if he didn't have children with her he would have left long ago. I said, "thanks, we really needed another liberal asshole in California". I meant it as a joke but his answer was sobering, "I feel quite badly about her at times, but you bring this on yourselves. She would not have had much power had we stayed in India." This probably gives VD a stiffy, seeing as how this conversation was his life's work all turned into one lunch. However, the instructive part for me was seeing the world through "successful" minority eyes. None of what's being done with multiculturalism benefits anyone but the most incompetent. The left is working hard to create a failed state. As they import their base to win elections there's going to be no real answer to that other than war... and in places like California and London it will be a many sides Cluster #%^& with no chance of a working society coming out of it.

Anonymous Clay February 15, 2013 5:14 PM  

Asher, Tad had to step out for a bit, to get fitted for a new butt plug. The old one kept popping out every time he farted.

Blogger Markku February 15, 2013 5:15 PM  

I presume that was directed at me? If so, why would I come here if I had been wanting brains? ;)

Good, it's not zombie plague, as you clearly don't have a sixth sense for big, juicy brains.

Anonymous 11B February 15, 2013 5:17 PM  

Their respective religions have no bearing on where they came from.

Yes it does. Jews are an ethnic group as well as a religion. Much of the blowback against early 20th century immigration was the result of radicalized Jews coming here from Eastern Europe, regardless of their nation of origin. Due to their station in Old Europe, these Jews brought with them a left wing ideology that shocked the natives. It is a reason why there has always been an association here that Jews and communism go hand in hand.

Now look at the potential difference between a Russian Orthodox Christian and a Russian Jew immigrating here in the early part of this century. The Russian Jew would have come when the Czar was in power. He would have been fleeing what he saw as an intolerable situation and might have been radicalized in leftwing politics such as support for overthrowing the Czar.

The Russian Orthodox Christian might have come after the Bolshevik Revolution. He might have been a supporter of the Czar and detested the communists for what they did. So my guess is he would not have come to the US as some sort of leftwing agitator. He would have been strongly anti-communist in much the same way as the early Cubans who fled Castro.

Blogger Kentucky Packrat February 15, 2013 5:18 PM  

Scott: I tend to get those symptoms when working in drywall or other projects in the house, and its caused by fungal infections. In the US, there are over-the-counter drops for that. Get the eye doctor to check this. Also, never hurts to check for needing glasses.

Work on avoiding black text on the white background (I prefer grey on black), and get the font sizes larger. Bigger windows, and more screens. (I love my Mac with multiple virtual desktops for this.) Make sure the top of the monitor is near eye level, and your posture is correct. Turn the screen brightness down some.

Most importantly, get rid of any glare you can. Glare off the screen, especially from harsh overhead lights, is a killer.

Blogger tz February 15, 2013 5:30 PM  

@Sam Scott:

1. Try darkening both the room and then the screen and see if that helps. I have a collection of black T-shirts because they didn't reflect on CRTs.

2. On weekends, leave and go for a walk, drive, or something where you are staring at something at least 200' distant.

3. Try sunglasses. In any bright or even moderate light. Avoid UV or get something like clear "safety glasses" that absorb UV.

Anonymous fnn February 15, 2013 5:34 PM  

"Have to disagree a bit here. Quite a few blacks tried to assimilate, and most who did try were successful. A lot were forced out of assimilation by Jim Crow and by economic discrimination."

Blacks were a big problem in the pre-Cultural Revolution period too.Their problems were hidden from the majority of the white population due to the strong social controls of the Jim Crow South and the strong social controls of generally negrophobic ethnic Irish big city police depts that didn't have to worry about Affirmative Action and discrimination lawsuits.

A lot of info on conditions before Civil Rights and the Great Society at this blog:

http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/search/label/Crime

Blogger tz February 15, 2013 5:36 PM  

There is an advantage to multiculturalism. Exorcists are difficult to find, so if you find a witch it is easier to drag them ... "there" where the vibrant Papua New Guineans will prepare a very warm welcome.

Except that I don't think the PNGs do proper diagnosis, I think they have the correct approach, much as Muslims are attempting to keep the media toxic waste (feminism, pornography, etc.) the hell out of their country.

Our problems are not so much exogenous, but our own backsliding. There used to be laws against lying down with dogs. Now we celebrate flea infestations.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 15, 2013 5:52 PM  

Their actions speak much, much louder than their words.

Odd, this reminds me of another group of people. Hmmm, who could I be thinking of?



The West deserves this, collectively. Let it all happen.

I'm not a collectivist, so up yours.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 15, 2013 5:56 PM  

@Sam Scott

For work and related reasons, I stare at my laptop at home for 12+ hours a day, and my eyes are have been constantly bloodshot...Anyone have any thoughts or advice and can help a guy out? Thanks!

Every few minutes, look up and focus your eyes on something several feet away. Do "exercises" that involve changing your focal distance.

Blogger Markku February 15, 2013 6:01 PM  

Also, if you are near-sighted and have glasses, you are in luck. Any optician worth his salt can calculate what strength of glasses you'd need, so that the distance to the display exactly maps to looking at infinity with normal glasses.

Anonymous ENthePeasant February 15, 2013 6:05 PM  

I'm talking about a many sided cluster F#@& and it's going on right now in VD's old neighborhood, that bastion of Scandinavian multiculturalism, Minn.

http://www.minnpost.com/glean/2013/02/long-simmering-tension-south-high-leads-all-out-brawl

Blogger Markku February 15, 2013 6:06 PM  

Although bureaucracy may prevent you from explaining what you want in large chains. You'd probably have the best chances in a tiny, one-man store. The concept is easy if you know the math, but the monkey at the counter isn't going to understand it.

Blogger tz February 15, 2013 6:46 PM  

Although bureaucracy may prevent you from explaining what you want in large chains. Marley had no trouble explaining it to Scrooge, the problem was with Scrooge.

it's going on right now in VD's old neighborhood, that bastion of Scandinavian multiculturalism, Blonds have more fun, but perhaps it is because ignorance is bliss.

Blogger Doom February 15, 2013 9:00 PM  

I still think we should wall the liberal fucks in with what they have brought to us all, let them become part of the horde, or just die out. Personally, I don't care which. To me, THEY, coming to MY area, are part of the invasion. They are no more welcome here than what is chasing them out is to them.

Anonymous zen0 February 15, 2013 10:03 PM  

Sam Scott:

Just computer use? Or perhaps something else? Again, thanks for any thoughts. :)

Micro amounts bio weapons used in Syria drifting with the winds.

Its there, its in the air, get used to it.

Anonymous zen0 Seinfeld February 15, 2013 10:05 PM  

Why is it that everyone acknowledges in principle that being naive and uniformed is dangerous for one's survival except when liberal idols are involved?

What's up with that?

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Johns Hopkins Ophthalmology February 15, 2013 10:07 PM  

For work and related reasons, I stare at my laptop at home for 12+ hours a day, and my eyes are have been constantly bloodshot for a few months now. The veins on the edges of my eyes are enlarged and red.

My doctor here in Israel is referring me to an opthomologist (spelling), and she thinks it's likely eye strain from the computer but perhaps an infection or allergy. (She also gave me a prescription for Visine that also sterilizes the eyes just in case.)

Anyone have any thoughts or advice and can help a guy out? Thanks!



I'm guessing asthenopia (eye strain) as well. Dry eyes (xerophthalmia) is also a symptom of that. Allergy is possible. When the strain is from computers specifically it is referred to as Computer Vision Syndrome. That hyperemia (redness) is the superficial vessels in the front of the eye of the conjunctiva being inflamed. If (IF!) it's an infection it would probably viral or fungal (rare) conjunctivitis, not bacterial since it has lasted so long. The ophthalmologist really needs to check them with a phoropter to be sure. That is that big-ass eye glasses thing you stare through, "is it better, or worse now?" as they change the lens as you look though.

Also, Visine does not "sterlize" the eyes. It is for inflammation working as a vasoconstrictor. Your tears contain something called lysozyme to kill bacteria by damaging their cell walls. If the Visine does not work usually you can up the ante with eye drops that contain corticosteroids like dexamethasone, but in that case the intraocular pressure needs to be watched carefully if the drops are used longer than a week. Corticosteroids are usually combined with antibiotics in the cases where infection is suspected.


Oh, for what it's worth --

1. Eyes are red as described
2. They feel dry and often like they are burning
3. Sometimes there's a minor dull pain associated with the eyes

Just computer use? Or perhaps something else? Again, thanks for any thoughts. :)


"Minor dull eye pain" is totally useless most of the time for determining eye problems, since that is such generic symptom like saying I have a "headache" or "stomach pain." Lemme rub it and make it all better, tell you that you are the special patient and better than all the other patients.

Now on the other hand, "excruciating", "stabbing in eye location A", or "massive eye pain" means with are cooking with laughing gas. Couple that with vision changes and that helps etiology a lot. Most of the time it is Glaucoma. Maybe Acanthamoeba infection if want to get all sexy and exciting.

Anonymous David of One as zen0 as SoupNazi February 15, 2013 10:10 PM  

Your ask too many questions.

You haven't finished your soup. It is not hot. It is perfect. Perfect soup. Eat your soup. It's good soup ... just say yes.

You think too much. Eat your soup. It was made just for you.

Anonymous The other skeptic February 15, 2013 10:17 PM  

OT, but this seems to describe McRapey

The corollary is that because less attractive individuals have fewer options, they are under more pressure to compromise and thus their behavior more closely matches the opposite sex's preferences.

In fact, McRapey behavior seems indistinguishable from some aspects of female behavior.

Anonymous Kickass February 15, 2013 10:30 PM  

Sam, I had this happen. As much as possible take a break once an hour. I would at least look outside at far objects. A walk is best. Rub some coconut oil into your eyes before you sleep. Worked on one of my children. Tea bags, potato slices, cucumber slices and even chilled spoons laid on your closed eyes during a break work. Less caffine and more lemon water. I will pray for you.

Anonymous Anonymous February 15, 2013 10:34 PM  

Greencarman here...

Shut up, Scoobius.

"The more recent waves of immigrants do not build America, they merely poach on what has already been built. They take, and gnaw, and displace. They are parasites on any conceivable metric."

About 430,000 Asians — or 36 percent of all new immigrants, legal and illegal — moved to the United States in 2010, compared with 370,000 Hispanics, or 31 percent of all new arrivals.
Drawing on Census Bureau and other government data, a 2012 Pew Center study found that Asians are the highest-earning and best-educated racial group in the country. Among Asians 25 or older, 49 percent hold a college degree, compared with 28 percent of all people in that age range in the United States. Median annual household income among Asians is $66,000 versus $49,800 among the general population. In addition, 54 percent of those respondents stated having a successful marriage was a desirable goal; 67 percent said being a good parent was important.

Alexis de Tocqueville observed that “the bond of language is perhaps the strongest and most lasting that can unite men.” Newcomers to America need to learn English. Marcelo Suarez-Orozco directed one of the most thorough longitudinal studies of immigrants to the United States. In that study, 500 children of immigrants in New York and California were asked whether they thought learning English is important, “the overwhelming majority—99 percent—responded with a resounding yes.” The study provided evidence that “English rapidly becomes the dominant language for the vast majority of children of immigrants".

Parasites, indeed!


"Mass immigration is anti-white genocide."

Tell that to the Native Americans who were here way before the Europeans.


Imatiger stated this situation perfectly..."There is nothing to be done to fix the problem. There will never be a law passed in the US at least, disallowing immigration of non-whites. There will never be enough money devoted to enforcement of the massive US borders to prevent illegal immigration. Demographics indicate that the younger generations are more and more accepting of mixed race marriages, so even trying to convince older people of what is happening is eventually futile because, to be blunt, their opinions will die faster than being replaced. There are some battles you cannot win and should not even be pursued. Better to put energy towards battles that can be won."

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 15, 2013 11:02 PM  

"But doctor, I have a headache!"
Shhhhh! No talking when the doctor is raping!

The theme song for the decline of the Multiculti Kingdoms all over the world. Also I like how it fits Chris Dorner perfectly.

The Trammps - Disco Inferno

Satisfaction came in a chain reaction. Do you hear?
I couldn't get enough, so I had to self destruct,
The heat was on, rising to the top.

Burn baby burn! Burn that mama down.

Anonymous Shawn February 15, 2013 11:05 PM  

"Tell that to the Native Americans who were here way before the Europeans."
So you concede that it is genocide of the white race and have even rationalized it.

Anonymous AlteredFate February 15, 2013 11:18 PM  

This website may be a bit "low brow" for the upstanding citizens here on VP, but I mention it because it relates closely to the siscussion here. Dont judge me too harshly. On bestgore.com Mark has several posts on the subject of immigration, and the bonus comes in the form of videos and photos of 'victims' of the utopian fantasy of multiculturalism. One especially eye opening one is photos of a Swedish woman who was raped repeatedly before being killed and thrown into a dry river bottom. The kicker? Her murderers were black muslim immigrants and she was a very vocal supporter of immigration and immigrant's rights.

Anonymous David of One February 15, 2013 11:25 PM  

OT - This is target rich ... Scaldlipzi is first to be mentioned in the comments:

http://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/2013/02/14/why-women-ruin-everything-for-women/

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 15, 2013 11:31 PM  

"Tell that to the Native Americans who were here way before the Europeans."
So you concede that it is genocide of the white race and have even rationalized it.


All that time here in North America, and yet, they still couldn't build New York, write the Constitution, or voluntarily abolish slavery. Must have been that glass teepee at work.

If we leave, can we be sure to take all the cool "white people stuff" with us too, like potable water, cars, and major cities?

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 15, 2013 11:34 PM  

"Bill of Rights?"

Yeah... it's a white person thing. You would not understand that, not being a member of the Traditional Diversity.

Anonymous TangoMan February 15, 2013 11:40 PM  

Greencarmen,

Scoobius wrote: "The more recent waves of immigrants do not build America, they merely poach on what has already been built. They take, and gnaw, and displace. They are parasites on any conceivable metric."

Greencarmen wrote: "Median annual household income among Asians is $66,000 versus $49,800 among the general population."

You criticize one aspect of his criticism, that of parasitism, but neglect the other aspect of his criticism, displacement.

Amy Chua in her book "World on Fire" made the following observation regarding Chinese immigrants to the Philippines:

Since the creation of Microsoft, the software industry has produced the largest crop of billionaries and multibillionaires in American history. Now imagine that all of these billionaires were ethnic Chinese, and that Chinese-Americans, although just 2 percent of the population, also controlled Time-Warner, General Electric, Chase Manhattan, United Airlines, Exxon Mobil, and the rest of America's largest corporations and banks, plus Rockefeller Center and two-thirds of the country's prime real-estate. Then imagine that the roughly 75 percent of the the US population who consider themselves "white" were dirt poor, owned no land, and, as a group, had experienced no upward mobility as far back as anyone can remember."

Is there such a thing as cultural patrimony, the passing on of what one generation has built to a younger generation? Or does all that was built in one society belong to anyone from anywhere in the world who wants to take advantage of it?

I happen to think that when a society is welcoming in newcomers via immigration that they should have a national discussion on what goals the immigration process are supposed to fulfill. Do they want to import a new overclass to rule them, to displace their own children over a multigenerational time frame? Do they want to import a new underclass to serve them? Do they want to import a new peoples and give them equal standing in society and allow these new people to use their voting power to transfer wealth from the existing peoples to the new peoples? Do they want the new people to bring wealth to the existing people and make the lives of the existing people better? Do they want to share their own wealth and make the lives of new immigrants better? I favor this type of dialog more than I favor "Shut Up" responses.

Are the people of the Philippines happy that most native Filipinos have been displaced from the top tiers of their own society? Maybe they are, maybe the enhanced lifestyle they enjoy from a more vigorous economy makes up for their loss of opportunity or rank in their own society. Is that a bad question to ask of them?

The displacement argument works like this - the societal "tools" to do well were developed in the West and these new immigrants don't have counterparts in their own society who do well using identical tools so the success they experience in America is in large part due to the society that was built in the West. Now comes the tricky part - who inherits that society and the beneficial "tools" which allow success to flourish? Also, to the degree that success is a zero-sum game (there is only one VP-Finance per organization) if the new immigrants are disproportionately successful in society it follows that in these zero-sum realms that natives will be less successful. Is the benefit of an expanding pie (the non zero-sum aspects of society) enough of a benefit to compensate the natives who are being out-competed?

Is society a perfect libertarian battle-dome or is society a means to transfer wealth, culture, opportunity, and other factors from one generation to another? Is it some combination of both? If so then what is the appropriate balance?

This is a topic rich with nuance and deserves more than "shut-up" rejoinders.

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 15, 2013 11:41 PM  

Since white immigrants came when the Native Americans were already here, that means they were the original diversity. And diversity is always good!

Therefore, white immigrants = always good! It's the transitive property from math.


Celebrate Traditional Diversity!

Anonymous Idle Spectator, Vibrant with Traditional Diversity February 16, 2013 12:05 AM  

"98.9% White, 0.2% African American, 0.1% Native American, 0.2% Asian, 0.1% Pacific Islander, 0.3% from other races, and 0.3% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 0.9% of the population."

He is one lucky man to live there. At 98.9% White, that is clearly a vibrant area full of the vibrantly vibrant descendants of the Traditional Diversity. We still need to work on making that 1.1% more traditionally diverse, maybe through vibrant interracial marriages of Hispanics, African Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and others to the vibrant Caucasians.

As we all well know, the Traditional Diversity is in danger of being less diverse as the populations of the newer, less traditional and therefore less vibrant diversities increase.


We must carefully guard against that by being more progressive and open-minded.

Anonymous Noah B. February 16, 2013 12:52 AM  

Greencarman, not only are you apparently too stupid or lazy to figure out how to actually enter a name in the little box, but you consistently manage to demonstrate the correctness of your opponents. The most intelligent thing you seem to be capable of expressing is telling those you disagree with to shut up.

So the obvious question is, what government agency do you work for?

Anonymous paradox February 16, 2013 1:20 AM  

"Tell that to the Native Americans who were here way before the Europeans."

Not necessarily, the Europeans may have been the First Native Americans.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 16, 2013 1:37 AM  

"Tell that to the Native Americans who were here way before the Europeans."

Not necessarily, the Europeans may have been the First Native Americans.


The Amerindians were adventurous people in their own right. In the global context, they're better than most. People get a bad image because of the "Reservation Indians" but honestly, what ethnic group doesn't have layouts and drunks when the government promises a craptastic living without needing to work for it.

Oh, sure, the ones that got relegated to the jungles aren't so great, but that's what you get with people forced into marginal environments. I'd take the rest of em 2-1 over anyone not from Europe.

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 16, 2013 1:52 AM  

Not necessarily, the Europeans may have been the First Native Americans.

That's going to piss of the diversity lobby badly. Which means we should broadcast it as much as possible.

I have also seen direct evidence that some of the first people in Latin America were also European-type Caucasians. Chachapoya, also called the "Cloud People" by the Incas, were generally tall, blond-haired, and blue-eyed. What are they doing in the middle of the Andes Mountains?

Ancient Europeans


Seems like the Egyptians such as King Tutankhamun also had Caucasoid features. Here is his reconstructed face revealed for the first time: Face Tut

Remarkably white looking. Just like Cleopatra, who was actually Macedonian.


King Tut the Melonhead

Also, look at King Tut's skull. That is clearly the oeuvre of a melonhead skull. It was not deformed by boards or fabric, or the result of a birth defect or disease, but a trait passed down genetically in his family. I love how anthropologists rush in and go "despite being elongated, it is still within normal ranges." NORMAL?! Does the back of the head look NORRR-MAL to you?

Who the hell is measuring that, Andre the Giant?


Paging Koanic, paging. There's a phonecall for you at the front desk.


And with that, I hear the hearts of one thousand diversity directors suddenly explode in self-loathing like an Aztec sacrifice...

Anonymous Jesus H. Christ, aka your Savior. February 16, 2013 3:10 AM  

"Brethren, forgive me, for I have sinned. I imagined myself licking the asshole of Rihanna. I am ashamed, but only because my Son of Man cock shot a wad the size of Palestine during Joel Osteen's sermon. Where is that woman who washed my goddamned feet when I really need her."--Jesus H. Christ, as told to Kirk Cameron

Anonymous 11B February 16, 2013 3:16 AM  

Parasites, indeed!

Tell that to the Native Americans who were here way before the Europeans.

You are not getting his point. He is contrasting those who built the place with those who enjoy the benefits. Asians might not be sucking down welfare like Africans and Hispanics, but they are enjoying the benefits of a civilization created by others.

Trying to make an analogy between European settlers 400 years ago and non-European immigrants from today is not apt. The Europeans did not come here for the culture of the Native Americans. The Puritans did not choose to land at Plymouth to take advantage of nearby Boston. There was no Boston, no infrastructure, or anything else.

The natives were primarily hunter-gatherers which is why their population on such a large continent was so sparse. There was nothing here except wilderness which is what one would expect from hunter-gatherers.

So those Europeans and the follow-on ones who rode the wagon trains west, were the settlers and pioneers who created this place that so many now seem to want to join.

Contrast that to the non-Europeans of today. Asians flock to Boston because the descendants of the original Puritans built the greatest concentration of world-class universities anywhere on Earth. They did the heavy lifting. The Asians, no matter how talented, are still just taking advantage of a civilization that others created.

Anonymous Razoraid February 16, 2013 4:09 AM  

And with that, I hear the hearts of one thousand diversity directors suddenly explode in self-loathing like an Aztec sacrifice...

Holy !! I almost had an aneurism...

Anonymous AdognamedOp February 16, 2013 5:30 AM  

"Seems like the Egyptians such as King Tutankhamun also had Caucasoid features. Here is his reconstructed face revealed for the first time: Face Tut "

I put no faith in these "reconstructionists". Using my own scientific method I was able to reconstruct Tut to more accurate dimensions:
[IMG]http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt80/Opdawg/Tutsnipes2.jpg[/IMG]

Anonymous marenostrum February 16, 2013 5:33 AM  

What you americans name as hispanics (your immigrants) are mostly mestizos and indios (because they are coming to USA and are easier to differentiate), not european stock; I doubt you'll call a white mexican or argentinian hispanic just seeing him; only after hearing his name you'ld call him hispanic.
Spaniards are whites (i.e. europeans) of mediterranean variety (there are other whites of mediterranean kind, in Maghreb, Syria, Palestine, Turkey; white != germanic white); many will consider an insult to be called not white.

Anonymous AdognamedOp February 16, 2013 5:34 AM  

http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt80/Opdawg/Tutsnipes2.jpg

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 7:01 AM  

Until recently I viewed racism as just silly racial pride. Far better to be a individual then a faceless color. But I see so many hypocrites that are finger pointing racists that I have given up trying to excuse them.

I am now a committed Racist and one that is Honest about it.
I don't care what color you are. if you just admit you're racist while you're pointing the finger at another race. Then You are OK with me.

I can deal with someone who is honest with themselves. But those who point the finger without doing so at themselves are not to be trusted.

And that goes double for Nnedi Okorafor and ScalziWag.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 7:06 AM  

You're probably right about Asians, But at least they are taking advantage of the situation and can be seen as a contributer to society. Which is a lesson black culture(beside Bill Cosby) has yet to learn.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 8:09 AM  

Greencarman here...

“You criticize one aspect of his criticism, that of parasitism, but neglect the other aspect of his criticism, displacement.”



Tangoman, you and others say displacement, I and others say assimilation. We are a nation of immigrants, and our American mantra has been and always will be, “Come here, work hard, serve God, and you too can live a great life”, regardless of who originally is responsible for creating that life. ALL immigrant groups have contributed to making the American life better in some fashion. 


“Is there such a thing as cultural patrimony, the passing on of what one generation has built to a younger generation?”



Yes.



"Or does all that was built in one society belong to anyone from anywhere in the world who wants to take advantage of it?”

Yes.

“Do they want to import a new overclass to rule them, to displace their own children over a multigenerational time frame?”



Law of the jungle, right? Social Darwinism at its finest, correct? The cream rises to the top. If natives cannot compete with the newcomers, then they are left behind. Just one component of “the game”.

“Do they want to import a new underclass to serve them?”

Are we not assuming that the majority of immigrants are in this category?

“Do they want to import a new peoples and give them equal standing in society and allow these new people to use their voting power to transfer wealth from the existing peoples to the new peoples?”

It’s called the naturalization process.

“Do they want the new people to bring wealth to the existing people and make the lives of the existing people better?”


Yes.

“The displacement argument works like this - the societal "tools" to do well were developed in the West and these new immigrants don't have counterparts in their own society who do well using identical tools so the success they experience in America is in large part due to the society that was built in the West.”

The societal tools were NOT exclusively built in the West. The people of each society tend to regard their culture as their “own”, as if all of the existing ideas and objects were invented by people in their culture. Sometimes people minimize their culture’s debt to other cultures. Each culture contains a minimum of traits and patterns unique to or actually invented by that culture, but as a rule cultures draw upon and/or are influenced by other cultures’ ideas and objects. Western culture is no different.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza February 16, 2013 8:11 AM  

Ah! Some critics of mine around town say OH was sooo much better as I am ignoring them they say OH is going to make a com back blah, blah. The best thing about OH was leaving in 8.2000 then leaving in 7.2012.

It is weird to think I was only about 45 miles from ScaMcRARA. I mean, Bradford OH isn't Steubenville OH. Steub is its own bromecca, like Chicagoland. Bradford is like a quiet beach retirement town in FL.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 8:15 AM  

Greencarman here...

"Greencarman, not only are you apparently too stupid or lazy to figure out how to actually enter a name in the little box, but you consistently manage to demonstrate the correctness of your opponents. The most intelligent thing you seem to be capable of expressing is telling those you disagree with to shut up."

Noah B., where is your counterargument to refute my points? Until then, shut up, Noah B.


"So the obvious question is, what government agency do you work for?"

The CIA. Enjoying your brown bag?

Anonymous Ain February 16, 2013 12:23 PM  

"I don't know that the Left is very reluctant to be racist. I think they've just been yearning for a good excuse to be racist."

And a good word to rename it to.

Anonymous Nonplussed February 16, 2013 12:55 PM  

It wasn’t always the case: since the 1890s thousands of Jewish

I see. Seems to be a recurring theme if one cares to look. Mind you, not the sole reason but definite over-representation.

Anonymous 11B February 16, 2013 2:55 PM  

We are a nation of immigrants,

Greencarman,

This statement really needs to be examined and parsed. Too many people subscribe to this 'we are a nation of immigrants' meme.

First, what is an immigrant? An immigrant is one is leaves his country of birth for another. Presumably his son, grandson, great grandson, etc. are no longer immigrants.

Second, to say we are a nation of immigrants implies that the majority of the nation are, and always have been, immigrants. But this has never been the case. I believe today approximately 13 percent of people in this nation are foreign born. I don't think that number has ever been much higher than that, let alone greater than 50%.

Third, if you go back far enough into every family tree in every nation, you could make this claim about every nation. Are Anglo Saxons immigrants to England? Are Lombards immigrants to Italy?

Fourth, the earliest Englishmen who founded the place were not immigrants. To be an immigrant one must leave his country of birth for a new country. Those Englishmen left England for a colony of England, and thus were not really going off to a new country. The proper term for them is not immigrant, but rather colonist or settler. In fact anyone who came here before there was a United States of America is probably not an immigrant in today's meaning of the word since no country existed prior to our Revolution.


Anonymous Noah B. February 16, 2013 3:26 PM  

It must be frustrating to be such an idiot douchebag and not be able to offer any kind of effective argument. If you actually attempt a debate rather than telling people to shut up, I'll discuss. Until then, screw you, pig.

Anonymous Idle Spectator February 16, 2013 4:08 PM  

"Seems like the Egyptians such as King Tutankhamun also had Caucasoid features. Here is his reconstructed face revealed for the first time: Face Tut "

I put no faith in these "reconstructionists". Using my own scientific method I was able to reconstruct Tut to more accurate dimensions:
[IMG]http://i599.photobucket.com/albums/tt80/Opdawg/Tutsnipes2.jpg[/IMG]


Congratulations, you managed to completely forget this thing called "the third dimension."

Let's all give Dawhg-Op a big round of applause. With perfectly flat manifolds of course, since we don't want our hands having any depth perception.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 4:20 PM  

Greencarman here...

Noah B., you do realize there are a number of posters here who use that "Shut up" line on Tad, and you seemingly have no problem with it.


"It must be frustrating to be such an idiot douchebag and not be able to offer any kind of effective argument."

It's all on you to show me how my post was ineffective. Come on, rabbit lover, we are all waiting.


"First, what is an immigrant? An immigrant is one is leaves his country of birth for another. Presumably his son, grandson, great grandson, etc. are no longer immigrants."

11B, the phrase "we are a nation of immigrants" rests on the foundation that our country has been founded, and created, by people who come here to live. Americans are mindful of their ancestors who arrived to the United States and of their journey to immerse themselves into the dominant culture.


"Second, to say we are a nation of immigrants implies that the majority of the nation are, and always have been, immigrants. But this has never been the case."

11B, in New England from 1630-1640, there were approximately 21,000 immigrants who came to this region. The population of New England in 1640 was between 2000 and 3000 people. So, here is one historical instance (and I am sure there are others) in which the majority of the American population was immigrants compare to "nativists".


"To be an immigrant one must leave his country of birth for a new country."

Let's examine closely the definition of immigrant...A person who leaves one country to settle permanently in another -or- a plant or animal that establishes itself in an area where it previously did not exist. Seems to me that those individuals who left England sought to reside somewhere else, i.e. a new place, and that the country itself was engaging in the practice known as colonization.


"In fact anyone who came here before there was a United States of America is probably not an immigrant in today's meaning of the word since no country existed prior to our Revolution."

So what if that land was not "officially" recognized as a country? The meaning of immigrant does not change to suit your worldview. The definition is clear and concise. Fact...people from England permanently moved to an unfamiliar land in the 1600's.

Anonymous Noah B. February 16, 2013 4:44 PM  

Tad has a long history of sniping at people and refusing to answer direct questions. That's why he gets the "Shut Up" treatment from so many people.

You seem to do it because you don't like what people say, which reveals you to be nothing more than a small minded fool.

"The CIA. Enjoying your brown bag?"

You have objected to many of my characterizations of police, and yet with this statement, you imply that an American citizen should fear reprisal from the federal government for exercising his right to free speech. It would appear that you are far to dimwitted to understand that this condition would require a government every bit as corrupt and tyrannical as the one I have repeatedly described. With your ridiculous attempt to intimidate me, you only prove my position to be correct.

Anonymous 11B February 16, 2013 5:55 PM  

11B, the phrase "we are a nation of immigrants" rests on the foundation that our country has been founded, and created, by people who come here to live. Americans are mindful of their ancestors who arrived to the United States and of their journey to immerse themselves into the dominant culture.

Greencarman,

That can be said about every country on Earth, yet I doubt many consider themselves a nation of immigrants.

Also, you wrote that our 'country has been founded, and created,...'. Immigrants don't create and found countries, settlers do. You refuse to acknowledge this. Whether you do so because you cannot comprehend this fact, or you wish to align facts with your worldview, I do not know.

My dad is an immigrant and he seems to have no problem comprehending this difference.

Anonymous 11B February 16, 2013 6:13 PM  

To help you understand the difference think of a settler as the founder of a new business and the immigrant as an employee.

A founder of a business creates from scratch a new company where none had existed. Employees come to work for that business. Many employees are highly valuable and help the business grow. But the founder is the one who created it, and thus created the economic environment for the employee to come and make a living.

Both the founder and the employees are human beings. Both are in the same industry. And both might even be of the same intellectual ability. But without the founder, there is no business, and thus no opportunity for the worker.

Without the settlers, no immigrant would come to the US. And without English settlers specifically, the US would be about as attractive to immigrate to as Mexico.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 16, 2013 7:33 PM  

"We are a nation of immigrants"

No, we are a nation of white people.

Plus an ever-expanding set of other people who mooch off white people.

The rest of your remarks are so obtuse, and contain such blindness, faulty analysis, and wilful stupidity, one can't be bothered to reply.

If this is really the way you feel, you're an insect. And if this is the manner of your thinking, well, give me an insect for an interlocutor instead of greencardman any day.

Ciao.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 7:36 PM  

Greencarman here...

"Tad has a long history of sniping at people and refusing to answer direct questions. That's why he gets the "Shut Up" treatment from so many people."

Noah B., I'm just mocking the "Shut Up" mantra. That's what alphas do. And, speaking of refusing to answer direct questions, you still have yet to counter my post.


"You have objected to many of my characterizations of police, and yet with this statement, you imply that an American citizen should fear reprisal from the federal government for exercising his right to free speech."

Never made the implication, you did. You made the false claim that I worked for the government, so I gave you an occupation. What are you worried about, anyways?

"It would appear that you are far to dimwitted to understand that this condition would require a government every bit as corrupt and tyrannical as the one I have repeatedly described."

Is there corruption in our gummint? Of course. Is it tyrannical? Hmmm, last time I checked I am able to vote, speak my mind, clean my gun in preparation for deer hunting, travel, etc. So, no our gummint is not tyrannical from my perspective. Debatable constitutional foundations to some of those policies, certainly.


"With your ridiculous attempt to intimidate me, you only prove my position to be correct."

Right, that's me, trying to intimidate a person on a blog. Sorry, dude, I have better things to do. Project much?

Again, refute the post that you claim had ineffective arguments with specific evidence.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 7:39 PM  

Greencarman here...


"Immigrants don't create and found countries, settlers do.'

11B, settlers, who are immigrants, leave their country to seek new opportunities. Immigrants, who are newcomers to a foreign land, settle to an area they desire. Regardless of the semantics or language used, the concept remains the same--people move from one area to improve their lot in life. The English settled a new territory. They were immigrants who founded a land that we call America. Even my Polish ancestors understand this point.

So settlers can be immigrants, and immigrants can be settlers. Settlers, as immigrants, and immigrants, as settlers, can create and found a country and help it grow through their contributions.

Today's immigrants are settlers. A settler is a person who has migrated to an area and established permanent residence there, which MAY include colonization. Regardless, settlers generally work to make the area they moved to a better place. Without immigrants, there would be no settlements. Without settlements, there would be no immigrants.


"To help you understand the difference think of a settler as the founder of a new business and the immigrant as an employee."

11B, you are forgetting an important part. I can create an ice cream stand. I hire workers. Without the labor of my workers (e.g. customer service), without the input of my workers (e.g. new products), as examples, my business is going no where, especially if I desire to expand. So without the workers, there is no business, and thus no opportunity for the business owner to earn profits. Works both ways. This relationship is symbiotic.

The settler (business owner) is an immigrant (worker) in the fact that he/she had to organize that business from the start. Today's immigrants settle into an established area and help to create new opportunities for that settlement for the benefit of all of its residents. It's about the concept, not the verbiage used to describe the concept.


Now, do we need to curb immigration? Sure. Should illegal immigrants be given a path to citizenship through amnesty? No. Do today's immigrants benefit America? This source says yes.

http://www.neighborhood-centers.org/page.aspx?PageID=330

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 7:49 PM  

Greencarman here...

"No, we are a nation of white people. Plus an ever-expanding set of other people who mooch off white people."

Scoobius, we are a nation of immigrants. People who came here from all areas of the globe, some willingly and others by force. I can't help it if you don't want to face this reality. Regarding the "mooching", that's your opinion.

"The rest of your remarks are so obtuse, and contain such blindness, faulty analysis, and wilful stupidity, one can't be bothered to reply."

Scoobius, it's so easy for people to make this statement, because it requires little thought one's part. This blog focuses on positions backed by evidence. Anything of substance to refute my statements, other than the ridiculous notion that I am an insect?

Anonymous Koanic February 16, 2013 7:53 PM  

Idle Spectator - your wicked truths bring a tear to my eye.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 8:31 PM  

If you cherry pick the stats you certainly can turn a blind eye and make a case that illegal immigration is good for the country.

You have to forget about all the tens of thousands of Americans a year who are the victims of said crime. anywhere from rape and murder to the average illegal who after a auto accident cannot produce any insurance.

The truth of the matter is that they benefit the same people who create all systems of govt since the dawn of politics. And that's the Rich.

You want to know how little racism has to do with this. realize back in the 80's the Republican Controlled Govt was given reports that showed Illegals and the many offspring of illegals from Mexico would become the majority by as soon as 2050.

And these Racist Fools did absolutely nothing about it. And never did anything about it. Even Rick Perry was last year giving free college grants(Americans tax dollars) to illegal aliens to come here.

Now what you should ask yourself (and already done so) is WHY?
IF they are so damn racist then why would the do such a foolish thing as turn American into Mexico.

Its all about there Big Bidness Buddies who gave them kick backs for the cheap labor.

Why do you think the media keep reporting that it was jobs Americans won't do.(yeah like no body mowed lawns before or houses were not built)

Now as always they had a half truth to believe in this Half Lie because I know from experience that people left many fields they had worked there whole life in and had to find other work because what they used to charge the rich 15 to 20 bucks a hour to do, now had to compete with Illegals who would do it for 10 dollars or less.

This was the Great Crime Rape of America.

Racism is was and always will be alive as long as there are humans. But it is the ugly little cousin to the real controlling system of Classism.

Class warfare has been going on for thousands of years now. And it's still the 1% kicking the shit out of the 99%

Wake Up People.

Anonymous Anonymous February 16, 2013 8:35 PM  

Oh and the above goes especially for the Scalziwag uncle tom numbnuts who think they are better then the rest because they hate the majority to make themselves look better.

You know half the truth. I grant you that. Its the other half that's gonna bite you in the ass.

Anonymous 11B February 16, 2013 9:15 PM  

11B, you are forgetting an important part. I can create an ice cream stand. I hire workers. Without the labor of my workers (e.g. customer service), without the input of my workers (e.g. new products), as examples, my business is going no where, especially if I desire to expand. So without the workers, there is no business, and thus no opportunity for the business owner to earn profits. Works both ways. This relationship is symbiotic.

I gather you have never created a business. I did. I quit my cushy job, burned my savings and created something from scratch. For one year my co-founder and I did not take a salary, worked onsite about 80 hours per week, and never took a day off. Along the way we faced the temptation of just cutting our losses and going back to work in the corporate world. However, we persisted and after we perfected the process, from the way the system operated to the way customer orders were taken and billing was done, we began to hire people.

The new employees walked right in to a complete setup with health and SEP retirement benefits. They had no clue or concern for the hell that my co-founder and I had gone through. Little did they know what it took to get to this stage, and I highly doubt any of them, save one, would have had the wherewithal to do what we had done.

Those guys were great and I don't wish to demean them. But the bottom line is those guys were not instrumental in the creation of the company. The fact that a guy could leave and be replaced by someone else was testament to that fact.

On the other hand without my co-founder and myself, taking great personal financial risk with uncertain rewards, that business and the opportunity it created for so many would never have been.

We are all human beings, but company founders are special. All nations are full of potential workers, but without the special few who risk it all to start a business, those workers are a dime a dozen and will remain idle. If a plentiful supply of potential employees was all that was needed to create a great nation, than Mexico, Nigeria and countless others would be economic super powers.

Likewise, without our settlers and pioneers, the masses of immigrants streaming into the United States would not be. Another thing, had the roles been reversed and America was founded and settled by third worlders, I doubt first worlders would be streaming in today as immigrants. The place would be a dysfunctional crap heap like Latin America.

Anonymous dh February 16, 2013 9:57 PM  

11B--

A great testament to the enduring spirit of American entrepreneurship. What pushed you into going out on your own?

Anonymous 11B February 16, 2013 10:21 PM  

A great testament to the enduring spirit of American entrepreneurship. What pushed you into going out on your own?

I was a couple of years out of college working at my first job. I realized I would never be happy in that environment. I was just not cut out to work in an environment where you had to be as adept at the political and social aspects as you were at the technical ones.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 16, 2013 10:53 PM  

@greencardman: "Anything of substance to refute my statements"

I made numerous substantive statements earlier in the thread, and your response was, Shut up. You have forfeited any claim to civil discourse, and I am under no moral obligation to reply to you with anything but my spittle. You're a boor.

You don't even understand the meaning of a simple word like "settler". I'll speak to you in civility and substance when you can speak the English language correctly, and when you apologize, twice: once for your impertinence, and once for your tedious stupidity.

"That's what alphas do."

See, it's a little like the etiquette of drinking sake: you never pour your own cup, you pour the cups of your tablemates, and they, in courtesy, pour yours. If you pour your own sake, you're a rube. If you have to call yourself an alpha, it means no one else is doing you the courtesy. Come back when you have a more accurate sense of self. Even insects know what they are, so I guess I was wrong about you after all.

Anonymous Noah B. February 16, 2013 10:55 PM  

Again, refute the post that you claim had ineffective arguments with specific evidence.

My claim was that you demonstrated you opponents to be correct, not that your arguments were ineffective. You accomplished this by equating recent immigration to European settlement of the Americans and the resulting displacement of Native Americans. Your argument was effective -- in showing scoobius to be correct.

Noah B., I'm just mocking the "Shut Up" mantra.

And I'm pointing out what a moron you are, because telling people who express opinions you dislike to shut up is completely different from dealing with an obvious troll who is unwilling to debate, yet you don't seem to understand the difference. Or alternatively, you're too stupid and/or lazy to actually present a counter-argument when you disagree with someone.

Anonymous The Master Cylinder! February 17, 2013 7:55 AM  

"People who came here from all areas of the globe, some willingly and others by force."

Who came to this country by force? I mean besides the victims of Russian and Israeli sex traffickers. I'm curious who these mysterious people are who are being "forced" to live in the richest country in the world.

Anonymous The Master Cylinder! February 17, 2013 8:01 AM  

"we are a nation of immigrants. People who came here from all areas of the globe"

Up until about 1970, excluding Africa, if by "from all areas of the globe" you mean Ireland, the British Isles, and parts of continental Europe up to about as far east as Kiev, then maybe you've got a point. The contributions from other "all areas of the globe" would have been statistically trivial, would that it were still so.

History FAIL.

Anonymous Anonymous February 17, 2013 10:47 AM  

Greencarman here...

"I gather you have never created a business. I did...We are all human beings, but company founders are special."

Fantastic, 11B, you are a person with a special talent, not a special person.

"If a plentiful supply of potential employees was all that was needed to create a great nation, than Mexico, Nigeria and countless others would be economic super powers."

11B, simplistic logic. There are many complex factors that make a country "great".

"On the other hand without my co-founder and myself, taking great personal financial risk with uncertain rewards, that business and the opportunity it created for so many would never have been."


"Those guys were great and I don't wish to demean them. But the bottom line is those guys were not instrumental in the creation of the company. The fact that a guy could leave and be replaced by someone else was testament to that fact."

Yet, you did find a way to demean them by belittling their overall contributions when your company first started to grow. Moreover, not every company can simply replace one person with another person, especially if a field is lacking in expertise or personnel.

The employees chose to work for you, uncertain the business would take off. Without the available labor pool and their own abilities to maximize productivity and profits, you could not have achieved success without their efforts.

"Another thing, had the roles been reversed and America was founded and settled by third worlders, I doubt first worlders would be streaming in today as immigrants."

The immigrants who came to America and settled the land were considered "third worlders" by the standards of the times, i.e. undesirables. See Puritans of Massachusetts. See Quakers of Pennsylvania.


"I made numerous substantive statements earlier in the thread, and your response was, Shut up."

Scoobius, lament all you want, you still have yet to challenge my assertions. Apparently, you and Tad share the same disposition.

"If you have to call yourself an alpha, it means no one else is doing you the courtesy."

Scoobius, tell that to VD (even though he claims he is not an alpha).

"My claim was that you demonstrated you opponents to be correct, not that your arguments were ineffective. You accomplished this by equating recent immigration to European settlement of the Americans and the resulting displacement of Native Americans. Your argument was effective -- in showing scoobius to be correct."

Noah B., in order to prove your assertion, you have to demonstrate specific instances in which scoobius has a more effective argument than my own argument. You have yet to provide anything of substance. I provided context to the word "settler" and "immigrant". It is now on you to refute, rather that repeat the claim that I do not understand their definitions.


Master Cylinder, you do not comprehend history. African-Americans came here by force through the slave trade beginning in the 1600's. Their contributions despite facing the most adverse of conditions are well-documented. Furthermore, the United States has had immigration from Asia, Africa, and Latin America well before 1970; Chinese workers, for example, came here in the 1860's to work on the railroads when there lacked a steady labor supply in the American West.

Anonymous The Master Cylinder! February 17, 2013 11:31 AM  

"African-Americans came here by force through the slave trade beginning in the 1600's."

I was waiting for you to say that. Slavery ended in, oh... 1865. 150 years ago. The forcible importation of persons ended many decades before that. I repeat: no one living in America today has been brought here by force, and not for a very, very long time. African-Americans can leave any time they want, nobody is stopping them. Curiously, despite the manifold horrors(!) of raaaaacism(!!!), they mysteriously choose to stay. Huh.

"Their contributions... are well-documented."

I'll say they are. FBI crime statistics, prison population statistics, rape statistics, illiteracy statistics, failed school statistics, white-flight to escape their charming company statistics, welfare dependency statistics, economic drag statistics, the descent into chaos of all black-run cities (Detroit, Birmingham, Newark, Camden). Yes, you are correct. I'd say their contributions are very well documented indeed. And in return for all this misery, we got... what? Louis Armstrong, Romare Bearden, Langston Hughes, Miles Davis, and Spike Lee. Such a deal!

"the United States has had immigration from Asia, Africa, and Latin America well before 1970"

Well sure; but as I say, it was statistically trivial. It in no way impacted the core culture or demographics of the US, as we see today with the greater numbers and different proportions. Emmanuel Celler, you got your wish! You destroyed the only country that was ever nice to your kind.

"Chinese workers, for example, came here in the 1860's to work on the railroads"

The Chinese workers were paid guest workers: they did their work, took their pay, and were then sent packing home to China. They were not permitted to settle here, and they were not permitted to bring their women, so they could not start families. (Great but tragic episode about this in Steinbeck's "East of Eden," btw). Some did manage to stay of course, like the monster in "Alien" clinging to the side of the spacecraft --witness all those China Towns-- but their numbers, again, were statistically trivial. When, later in the century, they tried to barge their way in here in numbers that mattered, we saw the enactment of the Chinese Exclusion Act. In order to keep the country white.

History RE-FAIL.
Essay portion DOUBLE-SECRET FAIL

Anonymous Noah B. February 17, 2013 11:44 AM  

"Noah B., in order to prove your assertion, you have to demonstrate specific instances in which scoobius has a more effective argument than my own argument."

Let's try this again without the big words. Scoobius didn't need to say anything. He didn't even need to make an argument. You did it for him. You provided an example of the bad things mass migration can to do a native population, which was his whole point. Now if you can't understand what you did, you're an idiot, no matter how much you flail and pretend that I haven't said anything of substance.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 17, 2013 7:32 PM  

"Scoobius, tell that to VD"

Ah, hiding behind the actions of another man.

Well like you say... it's what alphas do.

Heh.

Anonymous Anonymous February 17, 2013 9:05 PM  

Greencarman here...

Master Cylinder, here's what you stated originally "Who came to this country by force?" When I properly corrected you, then you had to say, "No one living in America today has been brought here by force, and not for a very, very long time." Busted!

Regarding the statistics you provide, it's not about race, but about social class standing. Poverty, specifically. It just happens that blacks constitute those numbers today. Why don't you work to expel minorities from our country and see how far you get?


"The United States has had immigration from Asia, Africa, and Latin America well before 1970"

"Well sure; but as I say, it was statistically trivial." MasterCylinder, tens of millions from your estimation is trivial? Did you even graduate high school?

"The Chinese workers were paid guest workers: they did their work, took their pay, and were then sent packing home to China. They were not permitted to settle here, and they were not permitted to bring their women, so they could not start families."

MasterCylinder, the majority of Chinese immigrants remained in the United States, settling along the West Coast, most notably California. Over 300,000 came. Their labor ensured the success of the transcontinental railroad. Imagine that, being sought to build something substantial.

"You provided an example of the bad things mass migration can to do a native population, which was his whole point."

Noah B., the only thing I said was that Europeans arrived as immigrants to North America and "displaced" (nay, they slaughtered) Native Americans, who were here first and had a thriving civilization. I made this statement as a counter to this inane comment "Mass immigration is anti-white genocide". The term genocide is being here to rouse anti-minority sentiments, primarily because some white people are deadly afraid of the fact l that in the future they will become the minority, and subsequently, be possibly subjected to discrimination and prejudice. I suggest you grow up and deal with the inevitability that blacks, Hispanics, and Asians will eventually outnumber whites in our country.

My position has remained consistent...the United States is a nation of immigrants. Different groups of people have settled here and have made contributions to the growth and development of the United States.

Anonymous scoobius doobious February 17, 2013 10:00 PM  

"primarily because some white people are deadly afraid of the fact that in the future they will become the minority, and subsequently, be possibly subjected to discrimination and prejudice"

It is impossible to have any further serious discussion with a person who so flippantly dismisses such a grave prospect.

Like I said, You're an insect. Adieu.

Anonymous Noah B. February 18, 2013 12:21 AM  

Greencardman, all you're doing is repeating yourself. That doesn't change the fact that you're so inept that you made scoobius' argument for him. And if we're making suggestions, I suggest you go fuck yourself.

Anonymous Anonymous February 18, 2013 9:51 PM  

Greencarman here...

Scooby snacks, it is impossible to have any further serious discussion with a person who so flippantly mischaracterizes the situation at hand.

And, Noah, wash, rinse, repeat.

Anonymous scoobius dubious February 18, 2013 11:13 PM  

I can't help but notice that Mister Alpha here has acquired a peculiar habit of mimicking my rhetorical structures in a whiny tone. Remember that dorky kid in the schoolyard whose only comeback was to repeat what other people said in a snotty sarcastic tone of voice?

Like that.

But substantively... eh, who f#ckin cares, Elvis has left the building.

Anonymous Anonymous February 18, 2013 11:32 PM  

Greencarman here...

Why are you dissin' VD?

Anonymous marenostrum February 21, 2013 1:31 PM  

Anyway, as someone said on this blog before, if the percent of whites in world population diminishes, they will still be on top. In general, white is considered more beautiful and those darker seek to get a whiter spouse if they can. Look at southeastern Asia (how people of chinese origin, who are whiter than locals, are at top of society), at blacks who'll have any whiter woman than themselves (anyway, they being the bottom of barrel in respect to intelligence and to almost everything, have no space to negociate or choose). The stratification will look something like Mexico, I'd say.
More malignant are those who propagate these nonsense with white guilt (globalists, freemasons, capitalists, you know, those who despise the poor working honest man and woman, who above else desire power over their fellow men).

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts