ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Mailvox: answering a simple question

Will Shetterly poses questions for me and for NK Jemisin. I don't know if she will see fit to answer him, but I certainly don't mind doing so:
What do you want, besides book sales? You both have strongly-held beliefs, Critical Race Theory and Human Biodiversity, but you're both silent about the practical application of those beliefs.

Vox Day, you say:

"I have repeatedly pointed out that the existence of different human sub-species and/or races does not make those different sub-species and/or races any less validly human. A dog is a dog whether it is a Bichon Frise or a Great Dane. A man is a man whether he is Yoruba or Prussian. My basic argument on race and civilization can be most accurately summarized as the observation that if you wish to pull a sled, you would be well advised to select Siberian huskies rather than chihuahuas or pit bulls."

If people with your beliefs were in power, what changes would there be? Legal segregation of the races as you understand them? A ban on miscegenation? Breeding programs to increase the virtues you see in the different human races, stronger blacks and smarter Asians to serve the more "alpha" whites?
Let me first point out something that many people fail to keep in mind when they are occupied with being offended at something I have said. I am a libertarian, so it should always be kept in mind that I am intrinsically skeptical of the idea that government can be effectively utilized to solve most societal problems, or even avoid making them worse, regardless of how serious we all agree those problems happen to be.  The fact that I point to something as being a problem should NEVER be taken as an implicit suggestion that the solution can be found in government action.

With regards to race, I would be more than content to see the U.S. federal government and other governments across the West firmly respect the right to self-determination, the right to free speech, and the right to freedom of economic association on the part of individual, as well as the political sovereignty of the several States.

This would likely lead to legal segregation in some states, most likely beginning, ironically enough, with the States where Hispanics are expected to soon be the majority. In most of the rest, I expect a return to Constitutional federalism and the concept of democratic laboratories would merely lead to bans on enforced desegregation and government violations of the freedom of association; history indicates that people have a tendency to naturally segregate as that is how most of the various population groups were formed in the first place.

I do not support bans on miscegenation nor do I believe they would be required in any environment that permitted genuine freedom of speech and association. Despite being inundated with heavy doses of pro-miscegenation and pro-equalitarian propaganda in the media, relatively few women of any race have shown themselves to be open to sexual involvement with men of other races.

Being an anti-eugenicist, I do not support breeding programs of any kind, especially not government-sponsored programs.

As for the idea of stronger blacks and smarter Asians serving whites, that could not be further from my own position on ideal interracial relations. My belief is that every population group, every human sub-species, every nation, is better served by furthering a homogeneous group interest.  To put it crudely, whites would do well to pick their own cotton and count their own money, blacks would do well to build their own power stations and grow their own crops, and yellows would do well to develop their own technologies and establish their own university systems. Let Israel be Israel and let Myanmar be Myanmar.

Inter-societal communication and assistance is a good thing, so long as it is the sort that involves teaching men to fish and not fishing for them... and if the fishermen are left alone to deal with the consequences of their catch. Trade is generally good. Information exchange is generally good. Even immigration can beneficial in small and limited doses. But the benefits of moderation does not extend to the extremes. For example, trade can benefit both sides, but truly free trade will inevitably destroy the more prosperous side.

It should be noted that the consequences of mass migration are all but indistinguishable from the effects of invasion and occupation, and multi-ethnic societies have shown a strong historical tendency to collapse amidst vicious ethnic violence. No one who recalls the intra-black violence in Rwanda, the intra-white violence in Yugoslavia, or the intra-yellow violence in Vietnam should be misled into thinking that expanding the range of population heterogeneousity is going to alleviate, rather than exacerbate, the eventual inter-ethnic violence.  Ms Jemisin may be more right than she knows about how everyone will eventually be forced to take a side, whether they want to or not.

I understand that three generations of Americans who have been raised to venerate the Civil Rights movement will find it hard, if not impossible, to grasp that history may ultimately prove to be firmly on the side of those they have always believed to be monsters of bigotry. But if what logic suggests is the most probable outcome indeed comes to pass, I suspect that forced segregation and non-violent ethnic cleansing will be the best case scenario in consequence of the damnable social engineering of the grand multicultural experiment that began in 1965.

It may already be too late for a peaceful return to historical segregation patterns. But if history is an even remotely reliable guide, the West will return to them one way or another. And keep in mind that my expectations of the future have nothing whatsoever to do with my personal preferences, any more than I wanted to see the global financial system seize up when I predicted the 2008 economic crisis six years before it happened.

There is a flaw in someone's assumptions. The error may be on my part. But based on the known historical patterns as well as the way in which increased integration throughout the West has observably increased racial tensions rather than eliminating them as the multiculturalists so confidently asserted, I very much doubt it.

So, to answer the original question, what do I want? I want to preserve the greatest, most advanced, and most humane civilization the human race has ever known. I want the West to avoid descending into violence and chaos on a scale that will threaten to end our advanced civilization as we know it. And I believe continued mass migration, forced desegregation, reconciliation, government intervention, and racial integration only serve to increase the likelihood of a nightmarish scenario taking place.

Labels: ,

353 Comments:

1 – 200 of 353 Newer› Newest»
Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 9:24 AM  

Well said. Well done. Well played.

I leave you gentlemen in peace until I discover something that needs clarifying or I give in to the urge to compulsively elaborate, politely of course. Enjoy yourselves.

Anonymous hadscrabble farmer August 18, 2013 9:28 AM  

Excellent response, thanks for doing it so eloquently.

*tightens chinstrap on steel pot and hunkers down in trench*

Anonymous Open Minded Liberal August 18, 2013 9:29 AM  

Mr. Day:

Since you are a righ-wing nazi... is it true you would generally support a worldwide national socialist state complete with corporate rule, women in burkas, scienece education replaced by forced christian indoctrination, and segragation and/or genocide of blacks and homosexuals?

Anonymous Bill Shutterbrain August 18, 2013 9:31 AM  

Vox Day: How many times a day do you beat your wife?

Anonymous trk August 18, 2013 9:32 AM  

Vox was freedom, NK Jenism wants an EBT card and a job teaching women studies at all white school and to live in a gated community.

Anonymous Kyle In Japan August 18, 2013 9:38 AM  

Good stuff here.

I realize this makes me sound like a big honking hypocrite, but I don't want more white guys moving to Japan. I'm a special snowflake who took years to learn the language and culture so that I can more or less live here unobtrusively. I can live, work, and have a family with minimal friction because I'm part of the 2% that's actually beneficial and cares about fitting in, instead of making the country my personal gaijin playground like most of the irresponsible English-teaching monkeys. (Note: I don't teach English, I have a real job.)

One of the things I love about Japan is that it's ethnically homogeneous, I'm more than happy to endure the occasional stare from some grumpy old guy in exchange for the many benefits of societal homogeneity.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein August 18, 2013 9:44 AM  

Excellent post. Leftists will not understand it, or they will accuse you of lying because their default position is always "We have to DO something." To the left," Legal segregation of the races as you understand them? A ban on miscegenation? Breeding programs to increase the virtues you see in the different human races, stronger blacks and smarter Asians to serve the more "alpha" whites?"would make perfect sense if innate racial differences are a reality. Thus, to a progressive, they can'tbe.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein August 18, 2013 9:46 AM  

I can typing.

Need. Moar. Caffeine. Yes?

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 9:47 AM  

Very good, Vox. Excellent response, in my opinion.

While I am not a Libertarian (notice the capital "L"), I tend to oppose government assumption of new roles, powers, and authority, anywhere there is no compeling public purpose. Unlike some Libertarians, I believe some public goods and services are a practical (even if inefficient) necessity. A purely Libertarian approach is an intellectual parlor discussion....highly entertaining and delicious to consider. It may even be possible in benevolent societies or isolated communities....heck, I am even willing to give it a try. Partly because I know in my own heart that some things simply will refuse to be privatized in the long run and I suspect that being abused by large private corporations is not much different from being abused by a government, except that maybe government can be restrained by its own law.

In the meantime, we face a beast that continues to grow by the day in power and strength and reach, unfettered by the law that may have kept the beast from eating us all for breakfast in the past. That beast cannot be tamed or reasoned with. He can only be defeated and that will require extreme prejudice....not force of argument or massive non-violent picketing.

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 9:52 AM  

Well stated, Vox.

I do have one observation.

In the case of ~South Africa, it's not that blacks served whites, but that blacks did not learn from them. The opportunity afforded towards civilization was squandered in favor of their own devices. But, perhaps that is the way it should be?

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 9:54 AM  

hadscrabble farmer...."Excellent response, thanks for doing it so eloquently."

*tightens chinstrap on steel pot and hunkers down in trench*

Ha Ha. A difficult decision! Do you want the blast to knock off your steel pot empty or with your head still in it? Ha Ha.

Anonymous darwinist August 18, 2013 9:55 AM  

A few more questions for Mr. Day (if that's your real name)...

- Are you now, or are you now, a member of the Republican Party?

- The Handmaid's Tale, do you agree or disagree?

- Your policy for homosexuals, similar to Iran or not?

- Do you believe Genesis or Creationism or "god" is powering your computer at this moment instead of science?

- Does your vision of government fall more in line with Francisco Franco or Augusto Pinochet?

- Slavery of blacks, OK?

- A women's sacred right to choose... you'd prevent this at gunpoint?

Anonymous harry12 August 18, 2013 9:59 AM  

darwinist August 18, 2013 9:55 AM
A few more questions for Mr. Day (if that's your real name)...

- Are you now, or are you now, a member of the Republican Party?

- The Handmaid's Tale, do you agree or disagree?

- Your policy for homosexuals, similar to Iran or not?

- Do you believe Genesis or Creationism or "god" is powering your computer at this moment instead of science?

- Does your vision of government fall more in line with Francisco Franco or Augusto Pinochet?

- Slavery of blacks, OK?

- A women's sacred right to choose... you'd prevent this at gunpoint?


Real trolls? Or someone looking for a weekend diversion?

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 9:59 AM  

Open Minded Liberal...."Since you are a righ-wing nazi... is it true you would generally support a worldwide national socialist state complete with corporate rule, women in burkas, scienece education replaced by forced christian indoctrination, and segragation and/or genocide of blacks and homosexuals?"

This is an example of "Open Minded"?

OK.....just checking.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 10:01 AM  

A few more questions for Mr. Day (if that's your real name)...

1. No.
2. I don't know, I have never read it.
3. I don't know, I am unfamiliar with Iranian domestic policies.
4. No, although I don't believe electricity is science.
5. I don't know.
6. No.
7. I don't know. Her right to choose what? Flavor of ice cream? The Endlosung?

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 10:02 AM  

This is an example of "Open Minded"?

I believe that would be what is commonly known as "a joke", Don.

Anonymous John Regan August 18, 2013 10:07 AM  

VD, this is very thoughtful. I don't agree with much of it. I think there's an argument to be made that Christianity has been the world's only real civilizing influence, that without it barbarism is the rule among all races and ethnicities - including whites - and that the failure of proper evangelism that was largely a consequence of the protestant reformation has had an adverse impact both on the expansion of true civilization and the decline of societies that had already been civilized.

As the 20th century demonstrated so well, civilization is a precious and fragile thing. I think perhaps that is the rule in this world also, that precious things are rare, or fragile, or both.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 10:12 AM  

I think there's an argument to be made that Christianity has been the world's only real civilizing influence

It has been one of the most significant, that much is true. But you will have a very hard time explaining Greek civilization, Roman civilization, Egyptian civilization, Babylonian civilization, and Chinese civilization with that argument.

You could realistically argue that Christianity has been integral to peak civilization to date, but not that it is the only real civilizing influence.

Anonymous Steveo August 18, 2013 10:16 AM  

Word.

Blogger tz August 18, 2013 10:17 AM  

The line is between a libertarian who will defend everyone against the use of coercion and violence, and a utopian who will do anything, no matter how heinous, to impose her utopia even to the point of considering wrong thoughts a crime.

I can't see Vox ever doing violence to Jemisin for anything she thinks or does that doesn't involve harming him. Conversely, I wouldn't put it past Jemisin to - by government jackboot proxy - killing Vox and his entire family if they don't cooperate.

I would only note that the civil rights movement was correct, but its error was to become more evil than the racism that they were replacing. Jim Crow laws that forced businesses that banned businesses from integrating were just as evil as laws forcing the integration. And government itself - the "literacy tests" were harder to pass for blacks than most bar exams, while for whites they were just allowed to vote. We must be equal under the law, and there must be a rule of law, not men. But here is why Satan wins most of the time. Power is so tempting that men refuse to give it up. Instead of destroying the weapons of the oppressors, they take them up. No one ever beats a sword into a plowshare.

It isn't racial - it is about power. Those who took over the government after storming the Bastille were all Frenchmen. They replaced the Bastille with the Guillotine.

But minorities will always have less power. A minority likes classical music, so there isn't as much available. When there is a majority, they should be free to do what they want when it doesn't involve violence or theft, but so should the minorities. But if the minorities find themselves in power, do they continue a cycle of revenge or do they break the cycle and return to freedom.

Freedom can only be universally depended, and most importantly, you must love freedom so much you will tolerate and defend the right of dissenters to abuse the freedom. This includes tolerating those who speak against the very freedoms that are being defended. That is why the Constitution is probably the best example of a Natural Law document. It doesn't discriminate between things which it defends, it says these are fundamental rights, so must come first. A racist and a civil rights leader both have the right to speak, to bear arms, to be secure from searches and self-incrimination.

Otherwise there is nothing to defend but the current fad of those in power. Jemisin may be happy there are thugs available to shove her views down the throats of her opponents, but what happens when things reverse and the thugs start working for someone else.

Christians were happy with all the anti-terror laws under Bush. Are they still happy under Obama? Jemisin may be happy now.

Anonymous Holmwood August 18, 2013 10:20 AM  

TL;DR My family is a pretty crazy mix of background, including African. I think Vox is wrong some of the time, and he certainly discriminates (e.g. against the stupid), but I sense no prejudice against individuals, and I cannot characterize him as a racist unless I torque the definition of racist substantially.

Open Minded Liberal, did you read anything he wrote? He fairly clearly supports nothing of the kind, save entirely voluntary segregation without governmental involvement either way. A powerful state is anathema to the Vox's of this world.

I am glad that you at least recognize national socialism is primarily a creature of the left, hence adding "right-wing" to Nazi.

I find Vox's thinking provocative, and useful in challenging my own. Personally, I think racial, ethnic, tribal, intellectual, political, artistic and religious (to name but a few forms) diversity is a good thing. It must, however, be sufficiently small in scale and focused on some reasonable degree of cultural integration over time.

(Vox may or may not agree; he implies some limited agreement at least to neutrality when he discusses modest immigration above).

A mythical Japan that is 100% ethnic Japanese has likely never existed (Consider the Ainu at least), but if it did exist, I believe it would be inferior to a Japan that is 95% Japanese, and 5% white, black, Korean, other asians, aboriginals, etc.

The threshold figure might be higher (or lower) than 5%, but 5% seems a plausible figure in looking around the world, and throughout history.

Moreover, there are humans (a number of them are mentally challenged, but surely not all) who seem to lack the inherent self-preferences that are with us from an astonishingly early age, and are unlikely to be cultural in nature. Trisomy 21 children, for example, are far less selective -- and far friendlier -- than most other humans.

It is possible that my own family is one such group, perhaps we are brain-damaged. My own background is white, some Cree, and African. If I look at my parent's grandchildren, including my own children (all by stable two-parent conventional couples with good professional STEM-style achievements), we can add in West Indian for one set, Korean-Canadian for another, and whiter than white for a third.

When one is part of an interracial couple (I despise the phrase, but liberals love it), and a family of observably complex mix one gets to know pretty quickly who the bigots are.

In my years of reading Vox, I've never had the sense that he is one such. Indeed, were I to be in a room alone with him, I suspect we'd shake hands and talk about something of mutual interest. If he were pressed by a liberal to talk about my family he'd say the obvious: "it works for you, good luck, God bless, best wishes".

Jemisin? I would not want to be alone in a room with her, ever. Not unless there was a lot of video footage, and independent observers watching through one-way mirrors. I suspect she would gin up some crazy accusation against me and attempt to destroy me. In this case it would not be based on my genetic racial background but on my culturally expressed race, which is kind of White/Korean/Cree with a small touch of African. And the fact that I'm roughly Christian-Libertarian.

-Holmwood

Anonymous Laz August 18, 2013 10:21 AM  

Vox: Could you please define "non-violent ethnic cleansing"?

Anonymous Apollo August 18, 2013 10:22 AM  

And keep in mind that my expectations of the future have nothing whatsoever to do with my personal preferences, any more than I wanted to see the global financial system seize up when I predicted the 2008 economic crisis six years before it happened.

I liked this part. Its almost as if you were writing this response to cater for idiots who are looking for a reason to mIsunderstand you. Dont know how you managed to get that impression...

Blogger tz August 18, 2013 10:24 AM  

Without government coercion, whether your neighbor is a racist or believes in integration, is of the same or different race or culture is a matter between you and your neighbor - Note the story of the "Good Samaritan" (Samaritan would be a racial epithet of the day) is about loving your neighbor and who is your neighbor. The one who shows mercy. Who shows more mercy, Vox or Jemisin?

With government coercion, you and your neighbor are enemies, spies for the state, you cannot show love or mercy, nor justice. You each compete to see who can send the storm-troopers to destroy the other.

Or prevent the defense of the innocent as in Abortion. Maafa21 documents that evil, but I find it ironic that the race who was treated as "not human" are so quick to declare their own children "blobs of tissue" so they can kill them. Somewhere in Hell, the KKK section is laughing and mocking the mothers who have slaughtered more black children than they could ever dream of doing.

Anonymous Old Master Kung August 18, 2013 10:25 AM  

"I think there's an argument to be made that Christianity has been the world's only real civilizing influence, that without it barbarism is the rule among all races and ethnicities"

*cough cough cough*

Honestly. I've been standing right here for over two millennia.

*cough*

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 10:28 AM  

"Critical Race Theory"

A fascinating phrase. Like "Holy Roman Empire", not a single one of these words contains a shred of actual meaning.

I used to know a guy who claimed that all the evils of the world could be traced back to the single word "workshop". In spirit I agree, but in practice, I think he missed a few (see above).

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 10:29 AM  

John Regan....."I think there's an argument to be made that Christianity has been the world's only real civilizing influence, that without it barbarism is the rule among all races and ethnicities - including whites - and that the failure of proper evangelism that was largely a consequence of the protestant reformation has had an adverse impact both on the expansion of true civilization and the decline of societies that had already been civilized."

Lemmie guess......you might be Roman Catholic, since you claim (by some tortured logic) that Protestantism adversely impacted the expansion of TRUE civilization.

Latin and South America was largely unrestrained by Protestant influences for centuries. I guess you would find them the peak of the true civilization, as opposed to certain Protestant countries like the USA, England, Canada, South Afrika, Holland, and parts of Germany and Switzerland. None of these would qualify as "true" civilization since they were adversely impacted by Protestant faiths?

Is it just my imagination or have Roman Catholics become a bit more pushy since they got a new Pope?

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 10:31 AM  

>relatively few women of any race have shown themselves to be open to sexual involvement with men of other races.

Oh, I don't know -- here in Vancouver (roughly half old school European, half 1st generation South+East Asian) mixed marriages are up to 7.2% in the official stats, and just looking around you the ratio of cute little Asian girls 'open to sexual involvement' with the white bros is quite easily on the order of quadruple that. Wait for said cute little Asian girls' parents (which as a broadly true generalization have immigrated in the last 20 years and are STRONGLY anti-miscegenation) to die off and I would not be surprised in the slightest to see that 7.2% double or triple.

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 10:32 AM  

"It isn't racial - it is about power."

--It's a floor wax!
--No, it's a dessert topping!
--Quit fighting, you two. It's a floor wax AND a dessert topping!

It's racial, AND it's about power.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus August 18, 2013 10:32 AM  

I want white genocide by mass immigration and forced integration to end.

I want us not to be be deprived of the future. I want us to be able to live with an eye to our own real posterity, like our ancestors did, without it being a positive aim of government policy in every white country to blend us out of existence and guarantee that any field we sow will be reaped by others or left to spoil like Detroit. I want all the efforts and sacrifices of all our past generations not to be rendered meaningless by our reduction to genetic and cultural "noise" and by the destruction of our cities and nations. I want all our art and culture not to be turned into meaningless trash by the end of our ethos, of which our genetic legacy is an essential part. I want a future in which later and hopefully better generations will have a chance to overcome the corruption that's been forced on us by an anti-white ruling class that wants to deconstruct every cultural and political institution necessary to our perpetuation. I want us not to be genocided but to live: perpetually, spiritually, intellectually, creatively and physically.

For the cherry on top I would like all of our particular nations to survive. France for the French. Greece for the Greeks. Estonia for the Estonians. And so on.

If I had all that and was asked for my next request, with practicality no object, I would like the rich, evil people who have sold the white working class into destruction put on trial, and made to pay fines till they have the same savings and lifestyle as the working class whites they have been throwing onto the scrap-heap with their policies. Peter Sutherland, former Attorney General of Ireland, is the sort of wrong-doer I have in mind. From his position of wealth, power and immunity he's pushed the idea that “the European Union, in my view, should be doing its best to undermine” any “sense of our homogeneity and difference from others”. I think he should be living paycheck to paycheck, working tables for a living, in a country that's not his own, where there is no sense of a community of his own blood and tradition, where there is no future for him, where the end of his single worthless life, at however advanced an age, means essentially nothing. I think that would be fair. That is what he has been doing to working class whites of all European nations, to the best of his ability, so that is what should happen to him.

Anonymous Holmwood August 18, 2013 10:32 AM  

@Kyle In Japan Hadn't seen your comment when I commented above. Picked Japan at random. To be crystal clear: migration that does not strive hard to adopt the linguistic and cultural norms of the nation's civilization is destructive migration.

We may agree or disagree that some degree (up to 5%) is my guesstimated figure of foreignness in a nation can be beneficial, but I agree fully with your arguments on the Gaijin playground issue. I have seen much the same at play in Seoul.

Anonymous John Regan August 18, 2013 10:34 AM  

@VD: Yes, I like your formulation better: integral to peak civilization to date. Certainly defensible than what I said.

Not to nitpick, and although all achieved some degree of civilization, pre-Christian Rome was pretty barbaric, same with Babylonia and Egypt. Greece maybe not so much if you mean Athens and not Sparta, but then again even Athens had slavery. I don't know enough to even superficially comment on China.

All that aside, though, even that comparative sampling of civilizations is pretty heterogeneous in racial and ethnic terms, isn't it?

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 10:35 AM  

"A racist and a civil rights leader both have the right to speak,"

I think what you mean to say is, A racist and a different type of racist both have the right to speak...

Or, conversely, you could say, A civil rights leader and a different type of civil rights leader both have the right to speak...

Anonymous John Regan August 18, 2013 10:39 AM  

@DonReynolds: Well, without getting into all that, just in practical terms internal divisions would invariably detract from efforts to expand external influence, right?

Anonymous Mike M. August 18, 2013 10:44 AM  

Laz:

I'll tackle it. Non-violent ethnic cleansing is the separation of peoples without the widespread use of violence.

Switzerland, for example, had a serious dispute between Protestants and Catholics. They solved it by letting each canton choose to be Protestant or Catholic...and anyone from the other religion had to convert or leave. It resulted in a peaceful reshuffling of people - and prevented a religious civil war.

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 10:46 AM  

"cute little Asian girls' parents (which as a broadly true generalization have immigrated in the last 20 years and are STRONGLY anti-miscegenation)"

SHORTER ASIAN IMMIGRANT PARENTS: We want to move to the nice white countries and enjoy all the nice white benefits and send our children to the nice white universities to study nice white sciences and nice white arts, but we DO NOT want our daughters dating those evil white ghost devils!!!!11! Vancouver is for the Asians!! We moved here and took advantage of you, fair and square!!

Ah, the joys of multiculturalism.

Blogger tz August 18, 2013 10:48 AM  

(Pagan) Rome was a civilization as well as China, and neither were Christian. Worse, "Christianity" has come to mean nothing - especially with the feminized churches. The wildfire of the holy spirit has become a spark in an internal combustion engine.

The Tao, the Natural Law is the foundation of civilization. Christianity merely tries to recognize it more clearly and posits there is Divine power available - Divine providence even for Deists, but something more profound for believers who trust in God over trusting in men - even though we often fall. The Catholic Church has always failed to live up to it - its history is one of scandals. The protestants haven't done much better.

Also don't confuse material prosperity and technological advancement with civilization - the Muslims also had and have a civilization.

I'm not sure I disagree with Vox on genetics, but on a practical level we need to diagnose the problem. Zimbabwe and South Africa are dying. Or even Detroit. Before treating the patient, we need to find out if they have an infection, auto-immune disease, or cancer. Most of the rhetoric sounds not much different than the Tobacco lobby saying there is no connection between smoking and lung cancer and people have a right to smoke. But both individual and communities have to take responsibility for their actions.

How many people have to die - and people are literally dying - to maintain the egos of those who want to do good, but haven't bothered to diagnose things? Not unlike vaccinations.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza August 18, 2013 10:49 AM  

Great post.

Sadly, its a lost in translation, lost in the painful gout of what is stateside; lawlessness and if there is a law, the law is circumvented, abused or trampled upon.

There is no solution other than marinating upon them or us saying what we wished for or wanted. Theorizing about them is therapeutic for us all. matriculating for those who are trying to understand V's positions, but really, they don't have the stones or the cerebral bent to face the hard truths. But maybe they will level up their thinking to his, who knows.

All statesiders face is doom whether its economic doom or personal doom.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 18, 2013 10:50 AM  

so it should always be kept in mind that I am intrinsically skeptical of the idea that government can be effectively utilized to solve most societal problems, or even avoid making them worse, regardless of how serious we all agree those problems happen to be.

Isn't it really the case that "government is being used to solve some small set of people's problems" most likely to the detriment of the rest of us.

Isn't it also most likely that Will Shetterly hankers to be one of the people pretending to solve our problems so he can gain the benefits of being one of those controlling "the government."

Blogger LP 999/Eliza August 18, 2013 10:50 AM  

The illnesses are untreatable; there is no treating mental blocks that people suffer from. There is not a treatment to address those who don't listen, won't listen and won't learn.

Yet again, I could be wrong.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 10:52 AM  

Vox: Could you please define "non-violent ethnic cleansing"?

The forced legal expulsion of a minority without the use of official or unofficial violence. There are numerous historical examples, from Switzerland and the expulsion of the Jews from Spain and other European nations to the relatively non-violent expulsion of 2.6 million Germans from Czechoslovakia and one million Mexicans from the USA in the 1950s.

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 10:53 AM  

No, John Regan.

More people were killed in Belfast recently, so there is no need for two Irishmen to continue the scuffle here.

In practical terms, the internal divisions (Reformation) you find so distracting would never have occurred had the Church been a bit more faithful and little less corrupt.

Very recently, the new Pope sidestepped a direct question on "gay rights" to say that his "biggest problem" is Freemasons. (Gays are fine as long as they are nice people.) Yes, we still have divisions, but fortunately they are no longer internal....they are eternal. But who knows, you may get the Episcopalians back in the fold in the future.

Anonymous Mr.A is Mr.A August 18, 2013 10:55 AM  

Perhaps slightly OT: I find Mr Shetterly's "answers" within the linked post intriguing:

Now, being a socialist, I have answers:

1. Discard the idea of race, one of humanity's most foolish notions. Fortunately, it's only a few hundred years old and not part of human nature; we can toss it in history's trash pile along with feudalism and bloodletting and so many other ideas that seemed good at the time.

2. Turn the US from capitalism to socialism. It's time to share the wealth so no one will be economically dependent on anyone else.


Mr Shetterly seems to live on the Planet of Rainbows and Unicorns™ with a limited knowledge of the history of Planet Earth.

Anonymous Mr.A is Mr.A August 18, 2013 10:59 AM  

@tz

I apologize if I have missed it in the past, but when you are referring to "the Tao", is this the concept brought forward by C.S. Lewis?

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 10:59 AM  

"It may already be too late for a peaceful return to historical segregation patterns. But if history is an even remotely reliable guide, the West will return to them one way or another."

Which is exactly why TWMNBN wish to eradicate and erase the West entirely, from the foundations: so that nobody will remember that history is indeed a guide, and no one will recall what they have lost (or more properly, what has been stolen from them), so that they won't even know enough to want it back.

"continued mass migration, forced desegregation, reconciliation, government intervention, and racial integration only serve to increase the likelihood of a nightmarish scenario taking place."

Of course, some people think that mass migration, forced desegregation, government intervention and racial integration are already a nightmarish scenario which is already taking place.




Anonymous ericcs August 18, 2013 11:01 AM  

Leftists and progressives are the very things they always accuse the right of being, specifically leftists are absolute Manicheists. Their representative responses on this blog and elsewhere repeatedly prove this. They will forever be unable or unwilling to understand nuanced thinking that involves 4 different (albeit at some points partially intersecting) choices of [A, absence-of-A, not-A, absence-of-not-A]. Their binary mode of "thinking" simply gives them further excuse to promote their inner screaming demons of envy, revenge, and lust for power. They are verbal terrorists against anyone they perceive to be opposition, and with enough power they will send you to a re-education camp for the final solution as proven by such sterling representatives as Robespierre, Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, et al.

The left constitute a suicide cult that will eventually eat its own, but not before it eats you first. This is war, and ultimately your life and those of your progeny depend on the outcome.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 18, 2013 11:01 AM  


"2. Turn the US from capitalism to socialism. It's time to share the wealth so no one will be economically dependent on anyone else."

Mr Shetterly seems to live on the Planet of Rainbows and Unicorns™ with a limited knowledge of the history of Planet Earth.


Nope. He simply wishes to one of the more equal people.

It's pathetic, really.

One of the only things of use that I think SJ Gould said was: "When you wish to deceive other people you first have to deceive yourself."

However, maybe Gould cribbed that from someone else.

Anonymous Dirty zen0 August 18, 2013 11:01 AM  

Just read Fred this morning on this topic.

Fred on Multicult

Have you ever noticed when you get together with friends and their dogs that your dog takes on other dog's "bad" behaviors without learning good ones?

Well, did you, punk?

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 11:02 AM  

Probably the biggest example of non-violent ethnic cleansing was the creation of Muslim East and West Pakistan from Hindu India at the time of independence from the British. Tens of millions of people relocated to their respective new country without violence by the government forces. There were occasional clashes and riots by the people themselves, but the government actually did a good job of keeping sectarian violence to a minimum.

Anonymous Big Bill August 18, 2013 11:03 AM  

I wouldn't expect a response. Nora Jemison is pretty busy this week. She is working admission at NY Poly for the new batch of affirmative action Brooklyn kids they enroll into their General Studies (read: "GED") program.

Nora has a tough job. NY Poly got a lot of racial grief by limiting their enrollment to qualified students, Her job is to see if she can get the NAMs through enough for-real high school courses such that they stand a chance of actually enrolling in NY Poly in a year or two.

She and her fellow staffers have to mentor their NAMs to get up in the morning, go to class, do homework, go the the library, study, not fight (aka "conflict resolution strategies") and all the other things that NYC high school students really haven't had to deal with.

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 11:06 AM  

> and send our children to the nice white universities to study nice white sciences and nice white arts, but we DO NOT want our daughters dating those evil white ghost devils!!!!11

Which going by personal observation, seems to actually encourage the daughters' desire for miscegenation pretty much the instant they arrive at the nice white universities. Which works for pretty much everybody except the parents, since cute little Asian girls are cute.

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 11:06 AM  

"Turn the US from capitalism to socialism. It's time to share the wealth so no one will be economically dependent on anyone else."

Let's begin by sharing Mr. Shetterly's wealth. 60 hours a week of unpaid corvee labor for Mr. Shetterly, so we can socialize his energy and talents, sharing it all with recently-arrived third world foreigners who don't know Mr. Shetterly, and don't give a rat's ass about his well-being, but damn sure want the benefits of all his free labor. And there WILL be a lot of it for Mr. Shetterly to share.

Oh, and it'll be 60 hours/week of pure bone-breaking scut-work, Mr. Socialist Shetterly. Nothing even remotely uplifting or dignified; no tutoring ghetto children for you: you'll be scrubbing bedpans and digging ditches.

Socialism! It's great! You go first!


Anonymous John Regan August 18, 2013 11:11 AM  

@DonReynolds: 1) I'm an SSPXer myself, and not by any means a papal fetishist :)

2) Agree Catholics of the time largely brought the Reformation on themselves.

3) Agree to the truce as well.

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 11:14 AM  

"going by personal observation, seems to actually encourage the daughters' desire for miscegenation pretty much the instant they arrive at the nice white universities"

My observation has been the opposite. In recent years on various colonized campuses I mostly see Asian/Asian couples. I think the cute Asian girls have gotten the memo that white guys are no longer alphas, no longer in charge, they have surrendered their entire nation lock, stock and barrel to the multicult invaders; whites are now cowards and pussies and a defeated, humiliated people. Cute Asian girls have taken notice, and so they now date mostly Asian guys as a result. I can't remember the last time I saw an Asian F/White M couple.



Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 11:19 AM  

My sincere apologies, John Regan.

Two Irishmen can always make peace when they are not fighting for other people.

Just read about SSPX. Best of luck.

Anonymous zen0 August 18, 2013 11:25 AM  

the troll:

since cute little Asian girls are cute.

I hope those white boys realize they get just as fat and nasty as they age as other ethnic groups.

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 11:37 AM  

REG:

"If people with your beliefs were in power, what changes would there be? Legal segregation of the races as you understand them? A ban on miscegenation? Breeding programs to increase the virtues you see in the different human races, stronger blacks and smarter Asians to serve the more "alpha" whites?"

Is this a para-phrase of Huxley's "Brave new world" Where children were 'birthed' out of the womb with genetic modifications?

I guess a better question is "Has Will Shetterly been visiting the KKK sites again?"

The reason I asked is that he had quoted David Duke as saying something like that on a blog site Shetterly hosted and you posted a link to Shetterly's comments a few weeks ago. Never have been to one of those sites, I have to take Will's word for it being an option. It could also be a snide question to link you to the the unmentionables.

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 11:38 AM  

> My observation has been the opposite. In recent years on various colonized campuses I mostly see Asian/Asian couples

'Mostly', sure. But at UBC and SFU the big metro Vancouver campuses I'd peg mixed Asian/white couples at around 20-25% of identifiable attachments. And as noted, the percentage of mixed couples currently getting married is documented at 7.2%, so there's your floor of how many there actually are no matter what you observe, which is already well on its way from "few" to "significant" I think we can all agree. I figure that 7.2% is going to head up to the 20%-odd my eyes show me as the immigrant parents lose their control over their daughters' behaviour, but I'm certainly open to the possibilities that my observations may be skewed or prognostication abilities less than perfect. Check back in another decade and we'll see how the miscegenation's progressing then!

Anonymous Mutualist August 18, 2013 11:42 AM  

funny how you right-libertarians miss the "rule' part in corporate rule...

educate yourself about real liberty. read Noam chomsky, for example.

Even Morty Rothbard, one of your economists was known to say he supported left/socialism vs. corporate rule.

Anonymous zen0 August 18, 2013 11:44 AM  

the troll:

I would not be surprised in the slightest to see that 7.2% double or triple.

Far as I can find, Stats canada says almost 6%. Besides, B.C. is an anomaly in Canada, with 40% of the population being born outside the country, while the average is 20%.

Anonymous Sigyn August 18, 2013 11:45 AM  

I think the cute Asian girls have gotten the memo that white guys are no longer alphas, no longer in charge, they have surrendered their entire nation lock, stock and barrel to the multicult invaders; whites are now cowards and pussies and a defeated, humiliated people.

Oh, absolutely. I mean, I'm not an Asian chick or anything, but I can completely understand "flight from white" ever since I saw this one "undocumented immigrant" in the office...

Seriously, something in me just responded on a primal level. There's a kind of manliness in him that I think it's impossible for American men or maybe even white men to achieve.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 11:46 AM  

funny how you right-libertarians miss the "rule' part in corporate rule...

Why do you believe we miss it? Why would you think we support corporations? Do you not understand that corporations are government-controlled entities? I do not support corporatism in any way, shape, or form.

Corporatism is not capitalism.

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 11:48 AM  

> they get just as fat and nasty as they age as other ethnic groups.

Sure, but the bros are a lot more likely to place importance on the observable fact that as a group the cute little Asian girls are on the order of 3 points of BMI closer to the feminine ideal NOW :)

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 11:50 AM  

"It may already be too late for a peaceful return to historical segregation patterns."

I think it is too late. What is coming will be very, very unpleasant.

- REMF

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 11:54 AM  

Gentlemen, no one gives a damn how attractive you happen to find "cute little Asian girls". Either drop it or find a blog where you can discuss the Kardashians or whatever else it is that interests you to your heart's content.

Anonymous Koppernicus August 18, 2013 11:57 AM  

@DonReynolds

You are right. I've been much pushier since Pope Francis was elected. Last week at work I pushed a Protestant girl down the stairs, and IT WAS GLORIOUS!

Non violent ethnic cleansing is known in this country as gentrification.

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 12:01 PM  

> B.C. is an anomaly in Canada, with 40% of the population being born outside the country, while the average is 20%.

And that B.C. anomaly is almost all Metro Vancouver, to boot -- I doubt anywhere outside the Lower Mainland hits 10%. The stats you found are probably BC as a whole, not Vancouver in particular, the difference sounds about right for that.

Anonymous Mutualist August 18, 2013 12:06 PM  

You say you don't support corporate rule, yet you fight tooth and nail against sensible government control of corporations and capital... ??

what about homosexuals? if you right-wingers gained power, would you put gays "back in the closet" with 1950s-era repression, or would you go farther e.g. re-education camps to forcefully create "ex-gays" ... or restricting gay employment or access to health care or other gay rights? or just knock a wall over on them an masse?

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 12:07 PM  

The west is dead.

The option of selecting "blank", in addition to the standard choices of "male" or female" on birth certificates will become available in Germany from November 1. The legislative change allows parents to opt out of determining their baby's gender, thereby allowing those born with characteristics of both sexes to choose whether to become male or female in later life. Under the new law, individuals can also opt to remain outside the gender binary altogether.

The subsequent EU report on potential changes to European Union law, which was published in 2012 and co-authored by Agius, found that discrimination against trans and intersex people was still "rampant in all EU countries."

"Germany's move will put more pressure on Brussels," Agius concludes. "That can only be a good thing."

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 12:11 PM  

> You say you don't support corporate rule, yet you fight tooth and nail against sensible government control of corporations and capital... ??

That would be because, having eyes in our heads, we see clearly that "sensible government control" in practice means regulatory capture by the corporations and effective furtherance of their rule.

Exhibit A: Copyright. Compare the original wording and intent with the reality that Mickey Mouse will never enter public domain. Explain why without admitting the truth of what I just said. Can't do it, can you?

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 12:12 PM  

You say you don't support corporate rule, yet you fight tooth and nail against sensible government control of corporations and capital... ??

Provide evidence for this or retract. I strongly suspect you are arguing against a strawman of your own imagination. I don't believe governments should be permitted to create corporations or limit liability in the first place.

Anonymous Daniel August 18, 2013 12:17 PM  

Heh. "sensible government control." That's a good one.

Anonymous Mutualist August 18, 2013 12:23 PM  

"I don't believe governments should be permitted to create corporations or limit liability in the first place."

then perhaps you are a socialist? you agree then government should have 100% total control of trade, commerce and capital? if so, we're finally getting somewhere...

Blogger Will Shetterly August 18, 2013 12:27 PM  

Thanks for your answer. It'll be interesting to see of Jemisin responds.

Regarding interracial romance, in 2010, 1 in 12 married couples in the U.S. were interracial, according to the Pew Center, and Gallup notes that only 4% of Americans approved of marriage between blacks and whites in 1958, while 77% approved by 2007.

As for socialism, that's much too large a topic to deal with in a sentence, but I got to say that assuming all socialists would act like Mao or Stalin is like assuming all capitalists would act like Hitler or Mussolini. My socialism is more informed by Jesus than by Marx, and was nicely summed up by John the Baptist's "He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise."

Anonymous Mr.A is Mr.A August 18, 2013 12:27 PM  

> Mutualist
Wow. This one appears to be "extra" thick. *popcorn*

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 12:28 PM  

then perhaps you are a socialist? you agree then government should have 100% total control of trade, commerce and capital? if so, we're finally getting somewhere...

You have it completely backwards. Again, provide evidence or retract.

And stop attempting to put words in other's mouths. That is an inept way to argue and indicates you only have the ability to address a limited set of arguments.

Anonymous Mr.A is Mr.A August 18, 2013 12:29 PM  

"He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise."

Note that neither John nor Jesus implied that this was anything other than free choice, rather than the "rule by the gun" that socialism must be to survive.

Anonymous Sigyn August 18, 2013 12:32 PM  

My socialism is more informed by Jesus than by Marx, and was nicely summed up by John the Baptist's "He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise."

And enforced by Caesar's minions, or...?

By the way, how many homeless people do you sit down to dinner at your place every day, since you bring it up?

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 12:35 PM  

Regarding interracial romance, in 2010, 1 in 12 married couples in the U.S. were interracial, according to the Pew Center, and Gallup notes that only 4% of Americans approved of marriage between blacks and whites in 1958, while 77% approved by 2007.

When one utilizes whites, blacks, and Asians, the actual number is 2.36 percent, not one in 12. By the Pew definition, my own marriage is "interracial".

And if one limits it to black/white only, the number is 1.02 percent. It's not only trivial, but it is likely near or approaching peak.

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 12:39 PM  

Daniel...."Heh. "sensible government control." That's a good one."

The last time I heard a bunch of people using the word "sensible" in reference to government control was in reference to more gun control. Nothing sensible about that.

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 12:45 PM  

Vox...."When one utilizes whites, blacks, and Asians, the actual number is 2.36 percent, not one in 12. By the Pew definition, my own marriage is "interracial"."

My mother's side of the family is Scottish and my father's side is Irish (protestant). Both sides of the family still thinks they married outside their race.

I continued with the practice by marrying a Swede from Kenosha, Wisconsin, and we were together for twenty years. Yeah, that is inter-racial too.

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 12:48 PM  

"It's like the way "Something wicked this way comes" is a meaningless phrase if you don't understand the definition of "wicked."

Actually, my dear, it's a meaningless phrase unless you're in, or watching, a performance of Macbeth.

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 12:49 PM  

And if one limits it to black/white only, the number is 1.02 percent. It's not only trivial, but it is likely near or approaching peak.

Sure doesn't apply to the trailer parks around here.

/snark

Anonymous buzzcut August 18, 2013 12:53 PM  

Satan's got "Social Engineer" written in directly below his name on his business cards.

Anonymous Morty Rothbard August 18, 2013 12:54 PM  

I was misquoted.

Blogger Cinco August 18, 2013 1:01 PM  

if you right-wingers gained power, would you put gays "back in the closet" with 1950s-era repression...

Draw a circle, in the center of the circle make a dot. That dot represents freedom/liberty. Now on the outside of the circle plot communism, socialism, republicanism, etc. Now take any political argument and plot it within the circle nearest to the ideology it corresponds with. If that point doesn't fall square on the "freedom/liberty" point, many if not most of the people that comment here are not going to agree with it.

You really are not going to find many "right-wingers" here, most people here can look at an issue objectively and do not need the help of ABCNNBCBS FOX to form their opinions on a set of issues.

Blogger IM2L844 August 18, 2013 1:03 PM  

There's a kind of manliness in him that I think it's impossible for American men or maybe even white men to achieve.

Not for those of us blessed with genius, wealth, rugged good looks and enormous penises

Blogger buzzardist August 18, 2013 1:07 PM  

Regarding interracial romance, in 2010, 1 in 12 married couples in the U.S. were interracial, according to the Pew Center, and Gallup notes that only 4% of Americans approved of marriage between blacks and whites in 1958, while 77% approved by 2007.

Interracial marriages may have risen slightly over the decades, but not by much. 11 out of 12 choosing a marriage partner of the same race is pretty overwhelming, and it's even more so if we take Vox's adjusted numbers.

And what does the "approval" of interracial marriages have to do with anything? This simply means that more people think it's O.K. for OTHER people to marry whomever they want. It does not mean that they would marry someone of another race themselves. And even if 77 percent were to SAY that they would consider marrying outside of their own race, at most about 8 percent actually do. That says a lot about the disconnect between people's professed opinions in surveys and their actual behavior.

And this also explains why a lot of polls are complete shams. People will often answer the way they think they should answer. Especially in a politically correct environment, many people will cringe to answer honestly if they think doing so will earn disapprobation. People lie to save face. Look instead to their actions.

Anonymous Anonymous August 18, 2013 1:09 PM  

"what about homosexuals? if you right-wingers gained power, would you put gays "back in the closet" with 1950s-era repression, or would you go farther e.g. re-education camps to forcefully create "ex-gays" ... or restricting gay employment or access to health care or other gay rights? or just knock a wall over on them an masse?"

I'd only have this done to blacks. Then again, today, I'm feeling generous. They will all be shipped back to Kinshasa, 1st class.

- REMF

Anonymous The other skeptic August 18, 2013 1:10 PM  

And in other news, the Greek economy has contracted for 20 quarters.

Is that some kind of record?

Anonymous Catan August 18, 2013 1:11 PM  

then perhaps you are a socialist? you agree then government should have 100% total control of trade, commerce and capital? if so, we're finally getting somewhere...

You are clueless. It is the collusion between big business and big government that permits the corrupt corporation to begin with. Without the use of favoritism and force to back it up, it would have to compete in the open market against smaller competitors that are capable of innovating and changing direction more quickly. So, huge corps naturally want to stagnate and hold on to what they already have, and Govt can make that happen.

Your flaw, socialists, is that you think the problem is greed, and that greed is what needs to be removed.

Greed is in human nature. It is part of our individuality, our fallen nature. You will never get rid of it. Why do you think the USSR failed, fools? Capitalist insurgents, like they liked to blame?

Power corrupts. You cannot avoid this fact. You will never have a world where greed is eliminated and power does not corrupt. Learn to work with the world how it actually is, not what you dream up in your head. The world and humanity has rules, we aren't a blank slate at the macro level you can just shape at will.

I think socialists confuse micro and macro. Principles that work with people close to you, like sharing, etc. works ONLY with people you trust. People who don't know you are tempted to take advantage of appeasement.

Socialists believe they can achieve a huge country where everybody trusts everybody and nobody would dream of taking advantage of others.

If you believe that is possible, you have a mental illness. Your religion is universal equality, despite having no scientific proof that equality even exists.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 18, 2013 1:14 PM  

Regarding interracial romance, in 2010, 1 in 12 married couples in the U.S. were interracial, according to the Pew Center, and Gallup notes that only 4% of Americans approved of marriage between blacks and whites in 1958, while 77% approved by 2007.

1 in 12 is 8.5%. This seems unlikely unless you count all those white hispanics as a different race than the white non-hispanics.

Blogger buzzardist August 18, 2013 1:14 PM  

My mother's side of the family is Scottish and my father's side is Irish (protestant). Both sides of the family still thinks they married outside their race.

That's giving me a good laugh, Don, considering that many, if not most, of the Irish Protestants were Scots relocated to Northern Ireland by the Stuarts several hundred years ago in a bid to colonize Ireland and break the Irish. If your father's ancestors were Irish converts to Protestantism, that's different, and just about everybody in the U.K. would nod vigorously that, yes, these people are of different races.

The racial animosity is often no less just because people share a skin color. "Race" got colored black and white in America, but it's decidedly not so just about anywhere else in the world.

Which is part of what makes the black-white tinges to Jemisin and Co.'s Critical Race Theory so absurd.

Anonymous Rex Little August 18, 2013 1:16 PM  

I do not support bans on miscegenation nor do I believe they would be required in any environment that permitted genuine freedom of speech and association. . .relatively few women of any race have shown themselves to be open to sexual involvement with men of other races.

To the extent that racial mixing does happen, do you consider it to be a good thing, a bad thing, or neither? Is it perhaps like immigration and trade, where a limited amount is good but too much would have ill effects? (Assume it all takes place freely; an epidemic of rape by one race upon another would obviously be a problem.)

Anonymous demonl August 18, 2013 1:19 PM  

Limited liability companies was an invention by the state so that the old aristocracy could enter ownership of the newly industrialised businesses, along with the merchant banker class (i.e those that financed trade - insurance and transportation costs to bring products to market) -> eventually creating the modern corporate "1%" super class.

During the industrial revolution most factories and businesses were partnerships with unlimited liability, additionally the owners were the managers more often than not and so the success of failure of their venture was on their own head. It also meant that the owners actually knew the processes and people that make the business a success.

Now you get corporate raiders and banksters who wish to extract any economic surplus of a business, to cut back staff and produce inferior rubbish that has lead to the western deindustrialisation.

So yes, corporatism is nothing to do with libertarianism. Those who own the corporations have almost no responsibility and accountability for the actions of their company... The entire reason why we have had a bankster, government, corporation unholy alliance is born from the limited liability and registration of companies.

Anonymous log August 18, 2013 1:24 PM  

As long as we live in a society which accepts the economic principle of quid pro quo as normative, we are doomed to the eventual dissolution of each governing body, to see its replacement by another, as factions arise squabbling for resources and control ad nauseam. The most stable, and therefore successful, civilizations historically have generally enforced a regimented societal structure - here, I'm thinking ancient Egypt and China - decidedly unlibertarian. Yet, even those civilizations ended.

The real problem is quid pro quo and the enmity between men which necessarily produces this principle of interaction. The primitive Christians, in possession of the faith of Christ once delivered to the apostles, understood that quid pro quo is incompatible with the faith of Heaven - see Acts 2:41-47. The true faith of Christ produces the mighty change of heart whereby men may live together in a society where they have all things in common, and have the powers of Heaven visibly among them, for they truly love one another, and seek in all things to serve their brethren.

You either accept the rule of men, along with the principle of quid pro quo and the inevitable resulting instability, or the rule of God, and you cannot have both. And the rule of God comes with rules and governance, leadership and duties.

Anonymous Sigyn August 18, 2013 1:36 PM  

"There's a kind of manliness in him that I think it's impossible for American men or maybe even white men to achieve."

Not for those of us blessed with genius, wealth, rugged good looks and enormous penises


*snerk* Yeah, okay. When I meet one of these unicorns, I'll be sure to say "hi".

Anonymous Jack Amok August 18, 2013 1:45 PM  

I think what you mean to say is, A racist and a different type of racist both have the right to speak...

Or, conversely, you could say, A civil rights leader and a different type of civil rights leader both have the right to speak...


Scoob, I think maybe the best way to put this is, people who disagree with me have the same right to speak as people who agree with me (and I'll add, "but nobody has to listen to either side").)

Anonymous 10th Level Paladin August 18, 2013 1:47 PM  

Hitler, Mussolini, Steve Jobs, Henry Ford, Google, the National Socialist Workers Party, free markets, limited government, Five Year Plans, rule of law... SAME THING GUYS!

Anonymous McLeftist August 18, 2013 1:49 PM  

Jesus says gimme your coat, or else.

Anonymous 10th Level Paladin August 18, 2013 1:54 PM  

Will:

John the Baptist said I need to use your car next week. Drop it off at 900 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington DC by 9:30 pm tommorow.

Put up or shut up, to quote St. Paul.

Anonymous Jack Amok August 18, 2013 1:54 PM  

Limited Liability Corporations are not an inherently evil structure. In fact, they are probably better for the small capital holder (e.g. the middle class) than the big wigs, as they allow capital from many different sources to come together for an enterprise. It allows 100 small fry to invest in a good idea without needing to worry about being on the hook. Absent limited liability, only a damn fool would be a minority shareholder in any sort of venture. Absent limited liability, only the very rich could ever afford to do anything big, and the middle class would be trapped, unable to make effective use of their unpooled surplus capital.

The problem isn't the limited liability of the shareholders, it's the limited liabilty of the management. Hold decision makers responsible.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 1:55 PM  

With regards to race, I would be more than content to see the U.S. federal government and other governments across the West firmly respect the right to self-determination, the right to free speech, and the right to freedom of economic association on the part of individual, as well as the political sovereignty of the several States.
What this means is that the States would be free to legally discriminate in the application of their laws.

"freedom of Economic association" = charging people you don't like any price you want, in order to punish them for coming into your area. A home owners association that charges the right tribe $100 a month dues, and person from the wrong tribe $1000 a month in dues.

This would likely lead to legal segregation in some states, most likely beginning, ironically enough, with the States where Hispanics are the majority.
This is complete and utter and total garbage. There are no US states where Hispanics are the majority. None. Hispanics & Latinos, combined, are 46.3% of the population of New Mexico, and that includes illegal immigrants. Meaning, the introduction of this situation would not, in any way, lead to what you claim. It would, in fact, lead to legal re-segregation of the South - certain southern states punishing blacks and other minorities by codifying segregation and the resulting discrimination. We all know you are plenty smart. Why would you jump to a conclusion which is based on incorrect facts, and not point out the most obvious historically supported likelihood - that the same place which had legal segregation until it became illegal would revert to the former political order.

In most of the rest, I expect a return to Constitutional federalism and the concept of democratic laboratories would merely lead to bans on enforced desegregation and government violations of the freedom of association;
This means, of course, that all manner of formerly public accommodations and businesses would will be able to discriminate against people on the basis or race or religion. Which is the method by which people legally create "whites only", or "blacks only", or "hispanic only" zones.

history indicates that people have a tendency to naturally segregate as that is how most of the various population groups were formed in the first place.
History actually indicates that individuals want to move to where they have a better quality of life.

And in the end, your proposal will green light preventing individuals from moving to where they have a better quality of life.

I have an important question. What "forced desegration" laws are hoping would be repealed? The most likely one is Fair Housing Act?

Anonymous Anonagain August 18, 2013 1:56 PM  

Shetterly is an atheist who uses Jesus as a tool to manipulate others.

Anonymous a. newbie August 18, 2013 2:01 PM  

"but I got to say that assuming all socialists would act like Mao or Stalin is like assuming all capitalists would act like Hitler or Mussolini."

Doesn't the poster here have to provide back-up evidence that "Hitler/Mussolini = Capitalists"? What do this blog's rules say? That's a pretty big claim to make without any evidence whatsoever?

Blogger Bogey August 18, 2013 2:04 PM  

Man, what a drag. Segregation? All I have to say to this nonsense of segregation is you first (the theoretical you, not Vox). This close to the ocean and the mountains, believe me whoever decides this isn't the place for me has a real fucking fight on their hands.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 2:06 PM  

What this means is that the States would be free to legally discriminate in the application of their laws.

"freedom of Economic association" = charging people you don't like any price you want, in order to punish them for coming into your area. A home owners association that charges the right tribe $100 a month dues, and person from the wrong tribe $1000 a month in dues.


Precisely. That is why the Founding Fathers specified those rights in the Constitution.

This is complete and utter and total garbage. There are no US states where Hispanics are the majority. None. Hispanics & Latinos, combined, are 46.3% of the population of New Mexico, and that includes illegal immigrants. Meaning, the introduction of this situation would not, in any way, lead to what you claim.

Technically true, but substitute plurality for majority and the point stands. Because you are not a native American, but are an immigrant from Europe, you probably do not understand that Hispanics are FAR more segregationist than whites. I suggest you read a bit about the history of blacks in Mexico.

This means, of course, that all manner of formerly public accommodations and businesses would will be able to discriminate against people on the basis or race or religion.

Of course. And voluntary trade is a good thing. You seriously prefer involuntary and imposed trade to voluntary trade? Do you not grasp that we are already seeing consequences of your embrace of involuntary trade with the Obamacare tax on a failure to engage in economic activity? That follows directly from the "anti-discrimination" laws.

History actually indicates that individuals want to move to where they have a better quality of life.

True. But you won't have a better quality of life if no one wants to buy your wares or sell you food. As is their basic human right. You don't seem to understand that once you embrace the principle of forcing trade, there is no natural limit to it. The government that can force you to let a black man stay in your hotel therefore has the ability to force you to sell your car to a white man for ten percent of its real value.

You're complaining about features as if they are bugs, while actively supporting the situation that caused you to flee from your native country in the first place. Thus further proving my point about the way most immigrants have a tendency to try to recreate the very situations from which they fled.

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 2:07 PM  

My mother's side of the family is Scottish and my father's side is Irish (protestant). Both sides of the family still thinks they married outside their race.

buzzardist...."That's giving me a good laugh, Don, considering that many, if not most, of the Irish Protestants were Scots relocated to Northern Ireland by the Stuarts several hundred years ago in a bid to colonize Ireland and break the Irish. If your father's ancestors were Irish converts to Protestantism, that's different, and just about everybody in the U.K. would nod vigorously that, yes, these people are of different races."

When those Scots get here in the colonies, we know them as Scot-Irish.

All of the Reynolds came from the same place...Devon in the west of England, between Cornwall and Wales. The original name was Regenwald, Anglicised as Reynolds, a Swiss tribe that crossed the channel with William (the Conqueror), Duke of Normandy. The king passed out lands to his followers around the country, so the family was set in Devon. Some of them migrated to Scotland to be McReynolds. My own tribe crossed over to Ireland later. No idea when they converted to the English church, probably when Henry came along.

Mom's people are the Campbell tribe in the Argyll on the west coast of Scotland and they have their own history. I guess they have been Presbyters since about John Knox.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 2:08 PM  

This close to the ocean and the mountains, believe me whoever decides this isn't the place for me has a real fucking fight on their hands.

Steve Sailer makes a similar point. He says California is too geographically desirable to be left to Hispanics, so he expects a more ruthless people to force them out.

Anonymous MrGreenMan August 18, 2013 2:09 PM  

@dh
"freedom of Economic association" = charging people you don't like any price you want, in order to punish them for coming into your area. A home owners association that charges the right tribe $100 a month dues, and person from the wrong tribe $1000 a month in dues.

It is eminently more civilized then how the violence and threats from the black youth of Detroit drove the Poles out of their old homes in the city (I have elderly neighbors, threatened directly by black youth violence for being white, who were driven from Detroit and Hamtramck, a city their people built), or how the intimidation of the Muslim mob is driving non-Muslims out of Dearborn, or how Hispanic violence is driving the elderly blacks from places like Compton and Watts.

You either let people go about a reasonable way deciding who they will live with based on what they can buy and hold, or eventually, the criminal element will make it clear who is and isn't welcome based on what they can take and hold. I'm sure the black fellow who threatened to carve up my white ass for daring to attend a rock and roll show in his 'hood, and promised that he and his buddies would be laying in wait to kill a white guy that night, was so much more in the right to use violence to get his way rather than the simple idea - those who own something get to decide what to do with it.

Anonymous MrGreenMan August 18, 2013 2:11 PM  

@dh
"freedom of Economic association" = charging people you don't like any price you want, in order to punish them for coming into your area. A home owners association that charges the right tribe $100 a month dues, and person from the wrong tribe $1000 a month in dues.

Further, it really is their choice to decide whose dollar they will accept. If there is enough economic incentive, even the most bigoted salesman will make the sale. I think the Atlanta Compromise understood this far better than forced busing.

Anonymous Jack Amok August 18, 2013 2:12 PM  

Exhibit A: Copyright. Compare the original wording and intent with the reality that Mickey Mouse will never enter public domain. Explain why without admitting the truth of what I just said. Can't do it, can you?

Exhibit B: the law requiring extensive testing of children's products passed after the worlds largest toymaker sold lead-poisoned toys made in substandard Chinese factories. It put small US toymakers who had never had any such problems out of business because they couldn't afford the testing that was easy for the world's largest toymaker to afford. Except the worlds largest toymaker didn't need to afford it because their lobbyists got them an exemption.

Blogger RobertT August 18, 2013 2:23 PM  

this could go viral

Anonymous Jack Amok August 18, 2013 2:25 PM  

Steve Sailer makes a similar point. He says California is too geographically desirable to be left to Hispanics, so he expects a more ruthless people to force them out.


That's why I kind of laugh at the post-breakup America maps that show the current Red/Blue divide as codified into new national boudaries with the multi-culti socialists having the east and west coasts and traditionalist Americans stuck in the interior.

Once they finished destroying our remaining social norms and expectatins, does anyone really think the cultural heirs of Hillary Clinton will be able to physically defend themselves against the cultural heirs of George Patton? I mean, Texans sure love Texas, but I bet they'd love southern California even more if they could live there without being surrounded by the idiots currently running (and ruining) the place.

Anonymous Jeromus August 18, 2013 2:34 PM  

Vox, this has to be one of the best posts I have read from you since I started reading nigh two years ago. Bravo!

Anonymous John August 18, 2013 2:34 PM  

"---This means, of course, that all manner of formerly public accommodations and businesses would will be able to discriminate against people on the basis or race or religion. Which is the method by which people legally create "whites only", or "blacks only", or "hispanic only" zones.---"

Blacks create "blacks only" zones because of their behavior. Whites create "whites only" zones similarly because of black behavior. This is more commonly known as white flight; a quite reasonable response to the behaviors.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 2:37 PM  

There are no US states where Hispanics are the majority. None.

But there will be soon. Which is the point; no one is expecting anything out of the ordinary to happen tomorrow. We are talking about sometime in the next 20 years. But in the interest of accuracy, I changed it to: "States where Hispanics are expected to soon be the majority"

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 2:42 PM  

Vox...."Steve Sailer makes a similar point. He says California is too geographically desirable to be left to Hispanics, so he expects a more ruthless people to force them out."

I believe everyone who ever wanted to go to California has already been there, stayed a while, and left for somewhere else. There have been better times in California but in my lifetime there has been a bit of diaspora of white non-Hispanic Californians. I meet there everywhere.

Maybe there will be someone who will rally all the former Californians to return to the place, like Odysseus, when he returned home to Ithaca. (Yes, he was not impressed by all the suitors hanging around his house, trying to woo his wife Penelope. He and his son Telemachus would probably qualify as "a more ruthless people" when they cleaned house.)

Blogger Nate August 18, 2013 2:44 PM  

"*snerk* Yeah, okay. When I meet one of these unicorns, I'll be sure to say "hi"."

Hi.

Anonymous scoobius dubious August 18, 2013 2:46 PM  

Hi.

Blogger Bogey August 18, 2013 2:46 PM  

I mean, Texans sure love Texas, but I bet they'd love southern California even more if they could live there without being surrounded by the idiots currently running (and ruining) the place.

Not all of us here in the Golden state are commies.

Anonymous Anonagain August 18, 2013 2:47 PM  

Vox, there is no such thing as Checkmate in the Leftist mindset. Jemisin, dh, Shetterly, i.e., Leftist retards, are impervious to reason, logic, truth, facts, reality. Political correctness is the entirety of their hollow being. Self-righteous delusions combined with a complete lack of morality and scruples wins over reason - every time.

While you're waxing poetic and winning arguments, your opponents are mindlessly steamrolling over your society and civilization.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 2:50 PM  

True. But you won't have a better quality of life if no one wants to buy your wares or sell you food. As is their basic human right. You don't seem to understand that once you embrace the principle of forcing trade, there is no natural limit to it. The government that can force you to let a black man stay in your hotel therefore has the ability to force you to sell your car to a white man for ten percent of its real value.

This is not the case. There is no power to compel you to sell to a white man, and not a black man, for ten percent of its real value. That is a critical difference you gloss over. The concept of "forcing trade" is simply about access.

You're complaining about features as if they are bugs, while actively supporting the situation that caused you to flee from your native country in the first place.

What feature? Intense and widespread segregation didn't help preserve anything. It's hard to say if it made anything worse.

Thus further proving my point about the way most immigrants have a tendency to try to recreate the very situations from which they fled.

I think you are projecting. I am not the one advocating massive, radical, precedent setting change. That's you, from Europe.

Anonymous Jack Amok August 18, 2013 2:52 PM  

Not all of us here in the Golden state are commies.

Right, but you're not running the place. I was born in CA and lived there until I was 30. I saw enough of fools ruining paradise to last many lifetimes.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 2:53 PM  

It is eminently more civilized then how the violence and threats from the black youth of Detroit drove the Poles out of their old homes in the city (I have elderly neighbors, threatened directly by black youth violence for being white, who were driven from Detroit and Hamtramck, a city their people built), or how the intimidation of the Muslim mob is driving non-Muslims out of Dearborn, or how Hispanic violence is driving the elderly blacks from places like Compton and Watts.

It is more civilized, I agree. However, the difference of what you are saying is that the people doing the driving out are criminals. The proposal that VD is making would simply make this activity 100% legal. It would not only be legal, but really encouraged, to segregate.

Anonymous Laz August 18, 2013 2:53 PM  

"There's a kind of manliness in him that I think it's impossible for American men or maybe even white men to achieve."

Define "manliness". Not so easy, is it?

Also, there's 100,000+ disabled service personnel from the last decade of war that I think would have something to say about that.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 2:54 PM  

I want to preserve the greatest, most advanced, and most humane civilization the human race has ever known.

What civilization is that?

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 2:56 PM  

When one utilizes whites, blacks, and Asians, the actual number is 2.36 percent, not one in 12. By the Pew definition, my own marriage is "interracial".

And if one limits it to black/white only, the number is 1.02 percent. It's not only trivial, but it is likely near or approaching peak.


VD, this is utterly useless. You are of a generation that gets married. You must examine the numbers from the perspective of couplings, not marriage.

Anonymous DonReynolds August 18, 2013 2:58 PM  

John...."Blacks create "blacks only" zones because of their behavior. Whites create "whites only" zones similarly because of black behavior. This is more commonly known as white flight; a quite reasonable response to the behaviors."

Let's be honest. Whites create their own zones with economic filters and barriers. Basically, they keep out blacks and hispanics by charging outrageous prices. Part of the price you pay in a nice restaurant, private club, or a nice neighborhood, is for the privilege of not having to look at Negroes or Hispanics at the next table or next door. Why do they spend a ton on money on PRIVATE elementary and secondary school education? So their daughters won't be dating Dewon and Juan when they get to be teenagers and their sons won't end up in a skinhead gang for self-defense.

Of course, there is always "stuff white people like" (SWPL) that tends to keep away the ethnics and the riffraff. That is one reason white people are willing to tolerate higher levels of code enforcement and regulation of property and maintenance. They know that ethnics do not want to bother with zoning codes and subdivision of land regulations. The whites do not like inspectors and code enforcers either, but they know the stuff is like garlic to the vampires.

Anonymous George August 18, 2013 3:00 PM  

"And in the end, your proposal will green light preventing individuals from moving to where they have a better quality of life."

So Negroes and Mexicans are utterly incapable of making a better life in their own communities? they desperately need subsidization by the white man to do so? Nothing prevents them from "making a better life" right where they are.
Mr. Brown of _Brown v. Board of Education_ wanted to escape Negro dysfunction by running off and living with the white folks. The Talented Tenth is always trying to run off and escape other black folks rather than staying and making their own neighborhoods and communities better.

Sad and perverse. Sad because it shows their deep hatred and fear of their own blood. Perverse because they then rely on white folks to support the very kinfolk they abandoned and left behind.

Blogger IM2L844 August 18, 2013 3:01 PM  

*snerk* Yeah, okay. When I meet one of these unicorns, I'll be sure to say "hi".

;)

Anonymous Jack Amok August 18, 2013 3:05 PM  

This is not the case. There is no power to compel you to sell to a white man, and not a black man, for ten percent of its real value. That is a critical difference you gloss over. The concept of "forcing trade" is simply about access.

And here I think we finally have our answer to how dh, in most other respects a sensible, decent person, can remain a liberal. He's got that peculiar liberal myopia that prevents him from seeing evil done by his co-religionists. He assumes liberals will only ever use government power the way he thinks it should be, or the way they claim it will be.

It's an odd sort of blind spot. Most liberals have no problem imagining George W Bush or any other "conservative" misusing government power in all sorts of wicked, evil ways they never actually do, but are utterly incapable of seeing the very real misuse of power liberals like Obama engage in daily.

In theory, it's simply about access, but in practice, once government has a say, it will be used either to further the ends of some politically connected insider, or to punish political opponents.

dh, you should really stop assuming you are on the side of the angels. There are no angels in government.

Anonymous 10th Level Paladin August 18, 2013 3:08 PM  

Maybe Shetterly can lecture us again about the themes of the book Liberal Fascism which he never read?

Anonymous realmatt August 18, 2013 3:15 PM  

But...I really...really..like Asian girls.

Blogger Will Shetterly August 18, 2013 3:16 PM  

"Shetterly is an atheist who uses Jesus as a tool to manipulate others."

I'm staying out of differences of opinion, but since this is a question of fact: I am not an atheist. If you find Jesus's words manipulative, good. Google "Christian socialism" and you'll learn more about what motivates me, and who the Christians are who I most respect.

Anonymous Catan August 18, 2013 3:19 PM  

Christian socialism?

Please quote us where Jesus advocated the use of force to forcibly redistribute wealth.

Anonymous Catan August 18, 2013 3:20 PM  

This is the difference between true Christians and "Christian Socialists".

Christian Socialists are trying to create heaven on earth, the "city on a Hill", or Zion.

Anonymous realmatt August 18, 2013 3:21 PM  

No one is saying letting everyone do what they want (within reason, lets not be stupid) will be wonderful. We're suggesting that it won't be any more disastrous than the rights trampling the government has been doing the past century and a half.

It will never be good. Nothing will ever be "good". Just different degrees of horrible.

But fun loving 2nd generation Asian girls...yeah. They're al right.

Anonymous fnn August 18, 2013 3:26 PM  

Google "Christian socialism" and you'll learn more about what motivates me,,,

Another Christian Socialist intellectual:

Vincent Reynouard

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 3:27 PM  

This is not the case. There is no power to compel you to sell to a white man, and not a black man, for ten percent of its real value. That is a critical difference you gloss over. The concept of "forcing trade" is simply about access.

(laughs). The power to compel you to trade with someone for a fixed price requires no more than the power to compel you to trade with someone to provide access. Do you really not understand the concept of price controls?

What civilization is that?

The traditional Western Christian civilization that you came running to when your second world multiethnic country melted down into ethnic violence.

I think you are projecting. I am not the one advocating massive, radical, precedent setting change. That's you, from Europe.

I'm not advocating anything here. I am answering some questions and making a prediction.

You must examine the numbers from the perspective of couplings, not marriage.

That makes no sense. Couplings aren't marriage and they don't form the foundational unit of civilizations, the family. You might as reasonably point to the rape statistics as evidence that black men are willing to marry white women. And that's assuming that the white women they impregnate are willing to marry the black man, which is not necessarily true. The claim was about interracial marriage.

The proposal that VD is making would simply make this activity 100% legal. It would not only be legal, but really encouraged, to segregate.

That is simply false. Permitting housing associations and communities to do whatever they want with regards to economic activity is not tantamount to decriminalizing property offenses. I think you need to slow down and think through what you're saying here, as you're usually not this wildly off-base.

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 3:28 PM  

@Will Shetterly

What evidently motivates you is Churchianity. You're a pagan with christian trappings.

Anonymous Catan August 18, 2013 3:35 PM  

Still waiting for Will to show us where Jesus called for a Government to use force to enforce all his teachings and make them mandatory.

Will, Jesus wanted people to do things voluntarily. The culture comes first, or bottom up approach. Progressives keep insisting that the cart can come before the horse. It can't.

Blogger Crude August 18, 2013 3:44 PM  

dh,

VD, this is utterly useless. You are of a generation that gets married. You must examine the numbers from the perspective of couplings, not marriage.

I don't think that's utterly useless. The inferences one can draw from the data may be limited, but it's still data that would seem to support Vox's point. Especially since I imagine that many people may date someone of another race (with 'another race' being more likely to be white-hispanic or white-asian or hispanic-black than white-black), but if they're going to get married or have kids intentionally, things change.

Now, here's some more data. Apparently 40% of whites have no non-white close friends, as did 25% of blacks. Also, speaking more to your point, "Some 25 percent of people under the age of 30 who have a spouse or partner said their significant other was of another race, in contrast to only 13 percent of those over the age of 40."

So, take that for what you will.

Blogger Will Shetterly August 18, 2013 3:44 PM  

Catan and others, I suppose I should've said I'm a democratic socialist, not a totalitarian socialist, just as, I hope, y'all would identify as democratic capitalists, not totalitarian capitalists. My position has also been called left-libertarian. I realize that the One True Scotsmen among you will claim that there's no such thing, but, well, I'll just have to shrug. As for my Christianity, anyone who thinks their branch is the One True form is welcome to another shrug.

Blogger Scott August 18, 2013 3:45 PM  

Articulate and sincere. You speak the truth. Well done, VD.

Blogger Cinco August 18, 2013 3:46 PM  

I recently participated in a class which consisted of 5 white people. The teacher was a Russian immigrant married to a military guy. One other guy was a first generation American, the son of a Hungarian immigrant and a Canadian. The other three people in the class, (my self included) were at least third generation Christian Americans. The Russian teacher and the son of the Canadian/Hungarian were both atheist, liberal, and proud.

As best as I could tell, they had no respect whatsoever for the concept of liberty or private property. These people draw their morality from one place, the state. The government can do anything it wants as long they pass a law first. The Supreme Court was their messiah, and writes the scriptures accordingly.

Close the borders people, they aren't all as reasonable as dh, and they don't have dh's life experience either.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 3:48 PM  

That makes no sense. Couplings aren't marriage and they don't form the foundational unit of civilizations, the family. You might as reasonably point to the rape statistics as evidence that black men are willing to marry white women. And that's assuming that the white women they impregnate are willing to marry the black man, which is not necessarily true. The claim was about interracial marriage.

People don't get married like they did when you were young and more vital. People don't make families like they used to, either. Marrying is increasingly for old people.

The number of biracial babies being born is at least 4x times the roughly 1% number of biracial marriages you come up with. (See: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-04-26/local/35453458_1_mixed-race-multiracial-children-census-data).

That is simply false. Permitting housing associations and communities to do whatever they want with regards to economic activity is not tantamount to decriminalizing property offenses
What property offenses are you talking about? Threatening people is not a property offense.

The traditional Western Christian civilization that you came running to when your second world multiethnic country melted down into ethnic violence.

I should at least point out that it's not like the melt-down country I came from was ever a country until it was directed that way in the wake of WWI and more significantly WWII, by course, the western powers.

Regardless, what you are advocating is to make the US and other western countries MORE like Yugoslavia, not less. You think that the various tribes could move where ever they wanted in pre-breakup Yugoslavia? You think there was legal protection for minority rights?

No one expects low-class people to intermix peacefully. That is clear. Not the left, not the right. What you are asking to do is the lift the restrictions that allow people to desegregate themselves.

As far as you not advocating:

I want the West to avoid descending into violence and chaos on a scale that will threaten to end our advanced civilization as we know it. And I believe continued mass migration, forced desegregation, reconciliation, government intervention, and racial integration only serve to increase the likelihood of a nightmarish scenario taking place.

and

I would be more than content to see the U.S. federal government and other governments across the West firmly respect the right to self-determination, the right to free speech, and the right to freedom of economic association on the part of individual, as well as the political sovereignty of the several States.

You have an odd definition of..."advocate". What you are describing means to massive radical change to the law in the US (and potentially the Constitution, but that's not really relevant).

Finally:
(laughs). The power to compel you to trade with someone for a fixed price requires no more than the power to compel you to trade with someone to provide access. Do you really not understand the concept of price controls?
It would helpful for you to expand. You claim a right, for an individual, to decline to make a trade, based only on the race of the other party. This would be the right of economic association.

The CRA protects: "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin."

Please state that you would be "more than content" to have this provision gone.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 3:50 PM  

Close the borders people, they aren't all as reasonable as dh, and they don't have dh's life experience either.

I happen to agree with that. The only reservation I have is empowering the state to keep people in, when they want to leave. That leaves a sort of nasty taste in my mouth.

Anonymous Anonagain August 18, 2013 3:50 PM  

I'm staying out of differences of opinion, but since this is a question of fact: I am not an atheist. If you find Jesus's words manipulative, good.

Then I was mistaken, and retract my assertion of your atheism.

Your insinuation here that I find Jesus' words manipulative is not only incorrect but specious, as well. It should have been obvious that is it you who I find to be manipulative, as I do all Leftist scum.

Anonymous Catan August 18, 2013 3:51 PM  

'm a democratic socialist, not a totalitarian socialist, just as, I hope, y'all would identify as democratic capitalists, not totalitarian capitalists.
Sorry, there's no such thing. Socialists and Progressives believe in thought control, which they call "raising awareness" or "consciousness-raising", and other such manipulations.

They have no qualms whatsoever in telling people what to believe. What you therefore propose, is a closed feedback loop whereby the people elect their rulers, and the rulers control the thoughts of the people. In this situation, who do you think is really picking the rulers?

You refused to give people their independence, then expect them to have independent thought?

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 3:52 PM  

Some 25 percent of people under the age of 30 who have a spouse or partner said their significant other was of another race, in contrast to only 13 percent of those over the age of 40."

So, take that for what you will.


That perfectly supports my supposition, which is that VD's generation is out of step with what is happening right now. About 25% of coupled people under 30 are mixing, almost double the rate of those over 40.

People are mixing more, not less.

Anonymous Anonagain August 18, 2013 3:53 PM  

Shetterly is a socialist who uses Jesus as a tool to manipulate and control others.

Anonymous Catan August 18, 2013 3:55 PM  

On paper, wasn't the USSR supposed to be democratic socialism?

Isn't the word "Soviet" translated similar to "rule by council"?

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 3:59 PM  

Of course, there is always "stuff white people like" (SWPL) that tends to keep away the ethnics and the riffraff. That is one reason white people are willing to tolerate higher levels of code enforcement and regulation of property and maintenance. They know that ethnics do not want to bother with zoning codes and subdivision of land regulations. The whites do not like inspectors and code enforcers either, but they know the stuff is like garlic to the vampires.

This is what I mean when I say no one expects low-class people to mix well. I live in a very nice place. I don't care about your race, but you must keep up the nice place where we live. I am far more concerned about someone of low class moving in, who would rather get drunk at 10am in the morning than mow the law, clean the gutters, and keep things tidy. I would be more concerned about a poor white family moving in next door to me than an equally upper-middle class black family moving in next door to me. I am happy to let me kids associate with the black children in our neighborhood whose parents are a doctor and a stay at home mom, and than I am to let them associate with the welfare class kids who happen to be white across town.

As always, with the left, class is instructive. It's also not a stretch to say that I am racist, because I am. I will absolutely prejudge you. And, all of my liberal effete friends are also racist. You will have the burden to prove you are acceptable.

The difference is that whatever my beliefs on the topic, I do not wish the government to allow those beliefs to be codified into restrictions. The only thing preventing my and several other communities from legislating out the minorities is the federal Fair Housing Act.

The fundamental difference I have with VD is that I do not inherently believe that government has no practical ability to influence outcomes. There are certainly some things which are immune or almost immune to policy. But there many things which are not.

Blogger Bogey August 18, 2013 4:01 PM  

Economics, blah blah blah, the hardest thing would be to convince Vox and other people of color to give up on the blondes.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 4:02 PM  

People don't get married like they did when you were young and more vital. People don't make families like they used to, either.

Which also supports my argument. Those heterogeneous couples are less likely to marry and form families than homogeneous ones, thereby further weakening civilization.

Regardless, what you are advocating is to make the US and other western countries MORE like Yugoslavia, not less. You think that the various tribes could move where ever they wanted in pre-breakup Yugoslavia? You think there was legal protection for minority right

You're missing the point. What made the USA more like Yugoslavia was the 1965 immigration act. And that is why the USA is going to end up like Yugoslavia did, with the collapse of the central government amidst ethnic strife. What I'm advocating is the soft option. What you're advocating is to maintain the status quo until the hard option presents itself.

What you are describing means to massive radical change to the law in the US (and potentially the Constitution, but that's not really relevant).

So what? It was massive changes to the law and ignoring the Constitution that got us here. I'm describing a return to basic Constitutional principles. You're supporting the continued violation of them.

Please state that you would be "more than content" to have this provision gone.

You'll have to first define "public accomodation". Are you talking about a privately owned restaurant or the Department of Motor Vehicles here?

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:02 PM  

Isn't the word "Soviet" translated similar to "rule by council"?

The USSR was started as an exercise in direct democracy under socialism. Soviet's root is from assembly or council. That was the meaning of the USSR, essentially the "union of many soviets".

Blogger Crude August 18, 2013 4:04 PM  

That perfectly supports my supposition, which is that VD's generation is out of step with what is happening right now. About 25% of coupled people under 30 are mixing, almost double the rate of those over 40.

People are mixing more, not less.


I don't see that, since Vox was pretty explicit about why he was using the marriage metric. To use a line similar to something he already said, I wouldn't judge American's attitudes about race in the 1940s by how many soldiers had sex with asian prostitutes in Japan. If it's the case that there are abundant interracial relationships, but actual marriages are still negligible, that itself may be data supporting Vox's point.

The weird thing is, as near as I can tell by looking at the actual pew research, no one is reporting the actual proportional makeup of the interracial couples. Maybe I missed something there.

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 4:05 PM  

Please state that you would be "more than content" to have this provision gone.

I, for one, would. Then slurpers like this guy might just disappear, or get a job.

Why bother getting a job when you can jam out, surf and enjoy sushi with your bros, thanks to government food stamps?

He's most certainly enjoying a public accommodation. Your belief system, dh, makes it possible.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 4:06 PM  

That perfectly supports my supposition, which is that VD's generation is out of step with what is happening right now. About 25% of coupled people under 30 are mixing, almost double the rate of those over 40.

Oh, please. I dated black girls, yellow girls, and brown girls. And so did many of my friends. But none of them married one except for the guy who didn't marry until he was over 40 and probably won't have children.

You keep trying to substitute sex for marriage. It doesn't work that way. Especially since interracial marriages tend to fail at twice the rate of homogeneous ones.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:13 PM  

You're missing the point. What made the USA more like Yugoslavia was the 1965 immigration act. And that is why the USA is going to end up like Yugoslavia did, with the collapse of the central government amidst ethnic strife. What I'm advocating is the soft option. What you're advocating is to maintain the status quo until the hard option presents itself.

I see that now, thanks for clarifying. This is certainly one option. However, you must agree it's not the only option. Also, you must recognize that, unlike the Yugoslav groups, the groups migrating here do not hold an ancient grudge about who is the "rightful" holder of some slice of land. So while history can be helpful, it's is not written in stone that it will repeat.

Which also supports my argument. Those heterogeneous couples are less likely to marry and form families than homogeneous ones, thereby further weakening civilization
You are once again showing how old and out of touch you are. Family formation is not solely indicated by marriage anymore. Certainly it is one way families are formed, but it is not the only way at this point in time.

So what? It was massive changes to the law and ignoring the Constitution that got us here. I'm describing a return to basic Constitutional principles. You're supporting the continued violation of them.

That's fine, just don't pretend that I am the foreign radical while you are simply asking for minor adjustments. What you are saying is radical departure, and it would have the practical effect of allowing the States and local communities to legally punish minorities for absolutely no *individual* cause. You have structured your response to the initial query to indicate it to be whites that would face discrimination, perhaps 20 years into the future, completely glossing over the fact as soon as moments after the law was changed blacks, especially in certain areas, would face immediate re-segregation under force of law. This is the most logical assumption - that things would return to how they were once the law that changed the status quo is reverted.

Your argument seems to be that we must permit people to legally discriminate against each other, because otherwise, in the future, we might hate each other so much that the entire country will break apart and start killing each other.

However, to make your case, you have done very little. You can't even show that interracial violence is worse now than in the past. Yet, at some undetermined future point, things are going to get so bad that massive violence will break out. Calling on past history of other civilizations is your best justification. It is not persuassive.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother August 18, 2013 4:14 PM  

We Texans also really, really love oil, and the Monterrey basin is sitting on shale deposits that are estimated at 15 BILLION BARRELS of recoverable oil. We ain't going to let a bunch of retarded milk drinkers squat on that land without developing that energy.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:15 PM  

You keep trying to substitute sex for marriage. It doesn't work that way. Especially since interracial marriages tend to fail at twice the rate of homogeneous ones.

VD, you keep interjecting yourself into what is happening now. You are of an entirely different generation. We are talking about now. Family formation doesn't happen the way it does for Gen Xers anymore.

I would take a better stat if we had it, but we apparently don't.

Anonymous realmatt August 18, 2013 4:17 PM  

I don't know many, if any, white men who would see a girl who dated black men, or even one black man, as marriage material. Or girlfriend material, for that matter.

Anonymous The other skeptic August 18, 2013 4:17 PM  

Kevin MacDonald already identified what will happen in his piece on: The Mesira Mentality: Laws are Made to Be Broken.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:18 PM  

He's most certainly enjoying a public accommodation. Your belief system, dh, makes it possible.

Yes, it does. He gets $200 a month in food stamps (I saw it the first time it was posted, watched the whole clip). I am not saying the piece is fake, but there is a lot more to let his lifestyle happen than his $200 in food stamps. It is not explained how he has money for a relatively nice car, clothes, gas, etc, but it is quite clearly not from the $200 a month EBT benefit he gets.

Regardless, the CRA has nothing at all to do with food stamps. The "public accomodation" you reference is quite literally not related to taking from the tax payers.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 4:21 PM  

We are talking about now. Family formation doesn't happen the way it does for Gen Xers anymore.

This is nothing new, this is an indication of a society in the early stages of collapse. What you are describing is the very familial breakdown that is part of the end game.

Do you know nothing of history? Do you know nothing of the Lex Julii and why Augustus was desperate to get Romans marrying Romans and producing children again? Or why Putin is doing the same thing in Russia?

Do you seriously think the fact that an X man is willing to fuck a Y woman is something new? Russian soldiers raped every German woman they could get their hands on. But they weren't about to marry them, provide for their children, and make a family with them.

Blogger Cinco August 18, 2013 4:22 PM  

That's fine, just don't pretend that I am the foreign radical while you are simply asking for minor adjustments. What you are saying is radical departure, and it would have the practical effect of allowing the States and local communities to legally punish minorities for absolutely no *individual* cause.

It's not discrimination to not allow someone on your property for any or no reason whatsoever. It's called property rights, and all those rights belong to the property owner. The CRA is an abomination that destroyed the concept of property ownership.

I think what dh is getting at is that somehow an entire community/town/city would choose to not allow a given minority to live, dwell, shop, etc. within its borders. This is simply not the case. The community/town/city doesn't OWN the individual properties, and should have no right to decide who comes and goes from any individual property. Once again dh, you cede too much authority to the state.

Blogger Crude August 18, 2013 4:25 PM  

dh,

Also, you must recognize that, unlike the Yugoslav groups, the groups migrating here do not hold an ancient grudge about who is the "rightful" holder of some slice of land. So while history can be helpful, it's is not written in stone that it will repeat.

Do you think Mexican views about how the Southwestern US was 'theirs first' are negligible? I'm not saying they aren't, but I'm wondering where and how you factor in your above statement with the influx of a large number of people from a border state.

Anonymous realmatt August 18, 2013 4:29 PM  

VD, you keep interjecting yourself into what is happening now. You are of an entirely different generation. We are talking about now. Family formation doesn't happen the way it does for Gen Xers anymore.

Who are these people you're talking about? What makes you think that the number of white people my age (mid-late 20's) who want to have families without marriage, are any where near the majority? Asians are certainly not doing that. Blacks are not lining up to marry white people. And white people sure as hell are not doing it in record breaking numbers. And if the point comes that it does start to happen, society will have already collapsed, leaving people with no cultural identity, no sense of self, living as walking billboards for diversity groups. But that will not happen, as we see in Europe.

I am me and you are you and there's no changing that. Difference = conflict. Now and forever.

That the number of unattractive white girls allowing themselves to be accidentally knocked up by Tyrone from across town is rising, or you see a few more Asian girls with white boyfriends changes nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Legitimacy is king.

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 4:32 PM  

The "public accomodation" you reference is quite literally not related to taking from the tax payers.

I must therefore take it that you neither advocate for private property or freedom of association. You must be fine with Obama's desire for government mandated racial mix neighborhoods and public schools.

There's a redneck business I've never done business with. Perhaps there should be a law that I patronize it every so often, as to spread my spending around, as government sees fit?

Anonymous realmatt August 18, 2013 4:33 PM  

Do you think Mexican views about how the Southwestern US was 'theirs first' are negligible? I'm not saying they aren't, but I'm wondering where and how you factor in your above statement with the influx of a large number of people from a border state.

It's funny to hear the young, misinformed Mexicans talk about how it was "theirs" first. They know nothing of the atrocities committed against the South West American Indians by the Mexican government.

The Aztecs and Mayans certainly were not here, so I don't know what they think they're talking about. Unless they mean some ancient brotherhood of Amerindian extraction. Either way, their ideology is on shaky ground.

In the end, only the numbers count. Number of people willing to kill their enemies, that is. Willing to kill for what they want.

How much Irony is taught in Texas schools?

Anonymous Anonagain August 18, 2013 4:35 PM  

For someone who identifies as a Christian, Shetterly appears to avoid being associated with this religion except when pushing his socialist agenda, or twisting it into something completely unrecognizable in his fantasies. One is hardly surprised.

Anonymous VD August 18, 2013 4:36 PM  

You are once again showing how old and out of touch you are. Family formation is not solely indicated by marriage anymore.

Right, because THIS time it's different. Never heard that idiocy before. And yet strangely, it never is. And drop the passive-aggressive bullshit. Being "in touch" with "the young people" might matter if I was designing clothes, it doesn't make it any easier to understand the statistics.

Your argument seems to be that we must permit people to legally discriminate against each other, because otherwise, in the future, we might hate each other so much that the entire country will break apart and start killing each other.

If you want to considerably simplify it, that will serve. Only not might, will.

However, to make your case, you have done very little. You can't even show that interracial violence is worse now than in the past. Yet, at some undetermined future point, things are going to get so bad that massive violence will break out. Calling on past history of other civilizations is your best justification.

I haven't made a case at all. Stop being such an idiot, DH. Someone asked me a question. I had the decency to answer the question in more detail than you have ever answered any question here. And now you're whining and crying that in answering the question a fair amount of detail, I haven't made a complete and comprehensive case to conclusively prove that my opinion is absolutely correct in every detail.

Well, no shit. I haven't attempted to make the case. I haven't even begun attempting to make the case. So don't give me this nonsense about "oh, but you haven't mathematically proved everything therefore it must be all wrong because it makes me feel bad."

Here is what you should be concerned about. I didn't prove anything back in 2002 either. But I was right.

Anonymous Catan August 18, 2013 4:46 PM  

'm a democratic socialist, not a totalitarian socialist, just as, I hope, y'all would identify as democratic capitalists, not totalitarian capitalists.

This is such a worn-out line. The bottom line is, you will never be able to get the government to only do what you want it to do. That power is always going to run amok. There's nothing you can do about it. The economic problems alone make top down Government unfeasible, so when the rulers inevitably fail, they get nasty.

Which is when the left starts calling them right wingers. They're doing that to Obama already.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:47 PM  

Here is what you should be concerned about. I didn't prove anything back in 2002 either. But I was right.

Indeed. So was it a broken clock being right on occasion, or do you know what you are talking about?

Hold on, before you answer, that let's ask Pres. Hillary Clinton or Pres. Romney for their opinions. And we can have that notorious hack Nate Silver run the numbers.

I am not asking for mathematical proof. But something more than "it's happened before, therefore it must happen now" would be a good start to justify undoing a legal framework which is the only thing preventing a large number of people from being, literally, second class citizens.

Finally, you are trying to cowardly hide behind the fact that you are not "advocating" and "only answering questions". No one is buying it. This is advocacy. It is radical.

Anonymous Sigyn August 18, 2013 4:51 PM  

"*snerk* Yeah, okay. When I meet one of these unicorns, I'll be sure to say "hi"."

Hi.


Well, aren't you just a special snowflake, darlin'?

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:53 PM  

A few people made the point: yes, the CRA essentially ended the absolute right of free association and private property. If you are in business, the CRA forces you to do so on an equal basis. That plus a few few other Federal laws make it basically illegal to discriminate.

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 4:54 PM  

undoing a legal framework which is the only thing preventing a large number of people from being, literally, second class citizens.

But they are, second class, being citizens notwithstanding. The blacks across town are not my peers. Force our association and it will, in time, get ugly.

Anonymous Peter Garstig August 18, 2013 4:55 PM  

undoing a legal framework which is the only thing preventing a large number of people from being, literally, second class citizens.

but they already are. you said so yourself in this very thread.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:56 PM  

But they are, second class, being citizens notwithstanding. The blacks across town are not my peers. Force our association and it will, in time, get ugly.

That's fine, I agree with you. We are only arguing if it shall be legal and encouraged for that segregation to be codified into law, and enforced with the power of the state.

Anonymous dh August 18, 2013 4:57 PM  

but they already are. you said so yourself in this very thread.

Close - they are second class individuals. Or persons. Or whatever. But *not* second class citizens.

Blogger Nate August 18, 2013 4:57 PM  

"Well, aren't you just a special snowflake, darlin'?"

Special?

Dear girl... the word you're looking for is "exceptional".

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother August 18, 2013 4:58 PM  

DH,

Why is discrimination inherently evil? Shouldn't I be able to discriminate in the choice of babysitters for my children? Should I be able to discriminate when choosing companions for my teenage daughters, such as discriminating against a pack of black teenagers or muslim teenagers? All based on the numbers, of course.

Blogger Nate August 18, 2013 4:58 PM  

And once again here we see the real root of DH's liberalism.

The man is deeply afraid of savage brown people getting restless and killing people and breaking things... and thus... he wants to employ the government to keep the as happy as possible.

Anonymous Mutualist August 18, 2013 4:59 PM  

y'all are totalitarian-libertarians in my view. you support the unfettered power of Capital against workers. you support the dollars of capitalists over working class folks. you say your "property rights " trump the rights of others to get acess to health care , education and a fair standard of lving. that's tyranny in my book.

real democrazy is one person = one vote, not one dollar = votes!

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus August 18, 2013 5:00 PM  

dh: "It is radical."
-
Duh. Practically all Vox Day's opinions are radical. He thinks things out to the root rather than just reacting. This is why reading his views is a better use of time than staring into space and drooling.

Anonymous Sigyn August 18, 2013 5:01 PM  

Define "manliness". Not so easy, is it?

Oh, I wouldn't take it upon myself to define manliness. All I know is, that one man stirs my second X chromosome like no other man ever had before or since. It's like it's some kind of inborn trigger that I had never felt tripped before!

Also, there's 100,000+ disabled service personnel from the last decade of war that I think would have something to say about that.

Including the women and gays? I'm all ears.

Yeah, you American men send women into combat. How is a girl supposed to take you seriously if you can't even muster enough alpha to keep us under control?

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 5:03 PM  

That's fine, I agree with you. We are only arguing if it shall be legal and encouraged for that segregation to be codified into law, and enforced with the power of the state.

That's what 50 different experiments are all about. I'd guess that a few would codify. Some might just ignore it, allow people to decide since freedom of association is individual. That's what I'd be for.

Anonymous Peter Garstig August 18, 2013 5:05 PM  

We are only arguing if it shall be legal and encouraged for that segregation to be codified into law, and enforced with the power of the state.

you fail to see that it's multi-culti that needs the power of state. segregation and discrimination can do without.

Anonymous Sigyn August 18, 2013 5:06 PM  

Special?

Dear girl... the word you're looking for is "exceptional".


Okay, sure. You're an "exceptional unicorn snowflake", darlin'.

Heh, because you can prove it over the Internet.

Anonymous John Galt August 18, 2013 5:07 PM  

"I want to preserve the greatest, most advanced, and most humane civilization the human race has ever known"

Why bother to preserve a corpse?

Burn it down, I say.

Anonymous Stg58/Animal Mother August 18, 2013 5:07 PM  

Mutualist,

Please explain where the "rights" to health care, education, medical care etc come from.

Anonymous Anonagain August 18, 2013 5:13 PM  

The bottom line is, you will never be able to get the government to only do what you want it to do.

Considering that government is nothing more than a self-selected group of the most power-hungry, control freak, know-it-all individuals in the population, it should be apparent to any blithering idiot that government not only has no more capacity for good than any single individual, its capacity for evil is directly proportional to its power. This is Human Nature 101.

Anyone who wants to empower the power-hungry collective of humans, known as government, is either a complete and utter moron, or expects to gain from the ensuing corruption. These government bootlickers are the very tools whereby oppressive governments are made.

Anonymous Salt August 18, 2013 5:15 PM  

That's fine, I agree with you. We are only arguing if it shall be legal and encouraged for that segregation to be codified into law, and enforced with the power of the state.

So, are you okay with desegregation being "codified into law, and enforced with the power of the state"?

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein August 18, 2013 5:18 PM  

'Sup, Sigyn?

Blogger Bogey August 18, 2013 5:24 PM  

you fail to see that it's multi-culti that needs the power of state. segregation and discrimination can do without.

That's actually a good point, multiculturalism has already given the state way too much power in the guise of good intentions of course.

It looks like segregation will begin at the grassroots (pardon the expression) and not by whites:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/25/local/la-me-0126-compton-20130126

They don't even need any laws to effectively segregate their neighborhood. Curious to see how lawless this area becomes, if Mexico is the model then they're already fucked.

Anonymous Sigyn August 18, 2013 5:25 PM  

I am blizzarded with snowflakes, TBG. How're you?

Anonymous Rex Little August 18, 2013 5:26 PM  

The bottom line is, you will never be able to get the government to only do what you want it to do.

Unfortunately, that applies to the libertarian vision of government as much as to any other. Believe me when I say that it gives me no pleasure to know this.

Anonymous realmatt August 18, 2013 5:29 PM  

Noam Chomsky is a faggot.

1 – 200 of 353 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts