ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, January 13, 2017

Mailvox: siding with Obama

Does John C. Wright really believe that everyone who sets foot on U.S. soil should automatically be granted U.S. citizenship? Or only those who are citizens of countries he describes as a "slave state"?
I recall the days when you referred to yourself as a libertarian, Vox. Now your obsession has reached a point where, given a choice between siding with Castro's slave state or rethinking your position on racial matters, you side with Castro. Given a choice between siding with Obama, who fundamentally hates every thing you love and who desecrates everything you hold sacred, and rethinking your position on race, you side with Obama.

On a personal note, the Left stopped seeming like humans to me and started seeming like remorseless enemy monsters in human form was when I heard them applauding the midnight military style raid on the house of Elian Gonzales, and cheering the news that the child would be returned to the island sized concentration camp. They hate liberty that much, the Left. They hate humanity, hate life, hate reason,truth and beauty.

Yet each of them was born as an innocent wee babe,cute and cuddly and poopy as were we all.

What changed them? What turns men into monsters?

I suggest that it is the lure of simple, elegant, powerful ideas which become like idols to them. The idol demands a small sacrifice at first, then more, then more.

I have always wondered why the first time one of them found his powerful idea and his cause was leading him into siding with what he himself despised and knew to be wrong, no friend warned him.
First, even when I described myself as a libertarian, I was always careful to reject the capital-L. And even though I voted Libertarian, I did not join the party. Why? Because I rejected both abortion rights and open borders, two strongly held Libertarian positions.

After reading Ian Fletcher's book, then going through the actual free trade arguments of both the classical and Austrian economists and realizing how outmoded and riddled with flaws they were, I began to understand that libertarianism was every bit as utopian, and every bit as impossible, as communism. It's not an accident that adherents of both ideologies rely heavily upon Panglossian hypotheticals, because real-world observations reliably illustrate their total dysfunctionality.

It was possible to argue for communism before technology replaced human labor. It was possible to argue for libertarianism before technology made it possible for immigrants to cheaply travel from one continent to another and remain in contact with their homelands. Now, both ideologies are obviously false and incorrect.

Second, consider the logical consequences of Mr. Wright's stance. Should fathers be deprived of their children and relinquish their paternal rights because the late mother happens to live in a different country? Should all natives of oppressive governments have the right to automatic legal residence in the United States? After all, there are worse governments than the Cuban government; Cuba is only one of 50 countries listed in the Not Free category by Freedom House.

Cuba's freedom rating is more than twice as high as the Central African Republic, five times higher than that of Uzbekistan, and virtually identical to that of China. How can Mr. Wright morally justify offering automatic residence to 11.2 million Cubans while denying it to 31 million Uzbekis and 4.7 million Central Africans who are objectively worse off? Given his reasoning, how can he possibly deny the right of residence in the USA to any of the 1.3 billion people of China?

There is absolutely no reason for me to even begin to consider rethinking my position on race. My position relies entirely on observable facts, sound reason, and the current state of science. The fact that I might, in this one instance, happen to think Obama acted in the American national interest, even if he did so for the wrong reasons, is not in any way relevant to my rational perspective on racial matters. If anyone has a racial obsession here, it is certainly not me.

Indeed, I found it to be both interesting and informative that Mr. Wright looks at this as a question of race rather than one of justice, national interest, or even demographic pragmatism, especially in light of the observations of Osric Pearl, a second-generation Cuban immigrant, in that particular regard.
American of Cuban descent, second generation. I have a few thoughts.

First, I agree with Obama's decision even if I think it was done in bad faith. The US has enough people and it doesn't need any more. The ones who have been arriving as of late have not been the best and the brightest, and have added nothing to the US except for more debt through social services and depressed wages.

Second, I know that this was done because of the elections. Obama is a petty man. Had Hillary won, Obama probably would have sat this one through and let Hillary take it down. Cubans hate the Clintons anyway, so there would be no love lost there. But Steve Sailor has this right, Cubans went for Trump 54%. They voted for him with the same percentage as white women. So yeah, a petty move by a petty man. Although good was done, it was still done under false presences. Had this been an honest move, he would have done it before the election, right around the time relations with Cuba were normalized.

Third, and this isn't something anyone here is going to like to hear, but it must be said. For the poster who stated that the "Exile" should now go back, the "Exile" is dead. Literally. Those Cubans who considered themselves "The Exile" were baby boomers/greatest generation of which most have died. The last member of that generation is my grandmother who is so old she can neither speak nor move. Their children, the Baby Boomers, either came to the US as young children or were born here. They are somewhat culturally Cuban, but this is the gist, the Cuba which they are culturally a part of is no longer alive. CUBA, is dead. Dead dead dead. They may think they are Cubans, but most Cubans don't acknowledge them as such. Indeed, they are very different in values and appearance.

And this is connected to my Fourth point. It's very interesting that in a blog like this, and others, where race matters and where differences of race are considered, few people consider this dynamic in another country, like say, Cuba. If anyone were to scan the faces of those who went to Fidel's funeral, one would see a sea of black people. When one of my family members visited in the 90's, she came back with rolls of tape and a sad heart. "It's just not the same," she said. I wonder why. A great aunt, not quite so PC, asked while watching the video of the trip what "all those black people are doing there." The people who made Cuba what it is, the White/mostly white Spaniards are gone. That means Cuba is gone. This is a tough pill to swallow because no one likes to admit these things since to admit them, one would have to discuss difficult issues about race.

It's been white flight since '56. I know this because the Cubans I grew up with don't look anything like the majority of Cubans who live in Cuba right now. There is no way that second and third generation children will go there and fell at home. This is very different from going back to Europe and being surrounded by a people and a culture who are familiar. As a comparison, my Aunt who found Cuba too Different to visit again goes to Spain all the time and thinks its great.

I am honest enough to admit this, but most Cubans are not. Instead, they will find some excuse or other to stay here. A few recent arrivals who can't cut it may go back, but those who were born here of the original three waves will be in no hurry to go. I suspect that the man whose half-Cuban niece considered going to Cuba after Castro's death will have a mysterious change of heart if she ever seriously entertains the idea and does a few preliminary visits. She may never speak the reason, because to do so will mean she will cross the bounds of social respectability, but she will know it in her heart. Namely, that the Cubans who live in Cuba look nothing like her Cuban parent and extended family. She may as well move to Detroit, with nicer black people.

Race matters. Even in Cuba.

Fifth, Socialism isn't dead there. Castro's death changes nothing. The family is still very much in power, and a successor has been named upon Raul's death. The majority black/mulatto population backs and happily does their bidding even though the ruling class is almost entirely white.

Cuba is dead to me. But it isn't just dead to me, it is dead, period.
From a recent review of Cuckservative:
It’s truly mind-boggling that a so-called “conservative” would support open borders, since immigrants typically vote Democrat, and support things like higher taxes, a higher minimum wage, more welfare, hate speech laws, gun control, and even Sharia law in the case of some Muslims. Immigrants also typically have a higher birthrate than the native white population of the United States, the GOP’s main voting bloc. But fear of being called racist (or xenophobic, or white nationalist, or nativist or some other magic word) is enough to make people like Mitt Romney, John McCain, Paul Ryan, Jeb Bush, Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Glenn Beck, Erick Erickson, Jonah Goldberg, and Bill O’Reilly (who actually supports birthright citizenship) kowtow to the left’s immigration agenda. That, or some of these cuckservatives are financially beholden to corporate donors who benefit from cheap foreign labor. Either way, cuckservatives remind me of a quote paraphrased from the Roman orator Cicero:

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
I submit that if anyone has made an idol of any ideas, it is those who still have faith in the demonstrably false notions of human equality and propositional nations.

Labels: ,

253 Comments:

1 – 200 of 253 Newer› Newest»
Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 11:08 AM  

I disagree with John C Wright's statement that we are all born innocent. We are born sinners by nature. We are broken, fallen wretches, unredeemable save by the work of Jesus Christ. We are born evil and dead in trespasses and in sin. Communism, SJW and chaos are our natural birthright.

Anonymous Faceless January 13, 2017 11:09 AM  

Cubans in Miami since the 50s have made a new nation. It's been three generations since Castro seized power. The policy, for a time, got the friends of America off the island. There haven't been any there for at least a generation, maybe two.

At least they were not all slaughtered like the French in Haiti. Yet, like the French in Haiti, they are all gone from the island now.

Anonymous Faceless January 13, 2017 11:14 AM  

The idea that a policy can run its course and end is anathema to most Americans, but, we are assured, to everything, there is a season, a time and a place under heaven. This policy ran its course and can no longer be justified (aside from inertia) for any reason to prefer Cubans to Haitians to Jamaicans.

Anonymous a_peraspera January 13, 2017 11:16 AM  

I agree Cuba is a bad place, and I sympathize. If the Cubans are slaves, they should rise up and kill the slave masters. But stay there and do it. Don't come here.

In fact letting disaffected Cubans flee to the USA probably prolonged Castro's rule. If all the Cubans who hated Castro had been forced to stay in Cuba, the pressure cooker might have built up to the point that Castro found HIMSELF up against the wall where so many of his enemies were shot.

Really. Don't come here. Mr Wright needs to ask himself what is best for Americans, not what is best for Cubans.

Blogger modsquad January 13, 2017 11:16 AM  

This is all driven by the central bankers. If everyone on the planet was U.S. citizen, they could tax everybody. The goal is to get as many people as possible to sign on the dotted line.

Blogger The Kurgan January 13, 2017 11:23 AM  

Vox,
I'd say there is confusion for many between the pragmatisms of race and the "God view" of all human life being intrinsically valuable.
A post on this topic would be interesting to many I think. Me included.

Anonymous aegis-1080 January 13, 2017 11:25 AM  

Dysfunctional nations like Cuba and Venezuela are going to be either US colonies or Chinese colonies. Your choice.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 11:26 AM  

The Spergy Libertarians would say it doesn't matter whose colonies Cuba And Venezuela become.

Blogger Jourdan January 13, 2017 11:27 AM  

Wright is wrong, especially when he argues that opposing anything Obama does is the right thing to do. That's just blind partisan hatred and unthinking oppositionism.

My take is that this is the first thing Obama has done in years that strikes me as right, in all ways. This is exactly what a departing President is supposed to do: make the politically suicidal decisions that everyone knows must be taken but no one has done it because of the political ramifications. Not having to worry about another election, Obama could act freely here, and he did the right thing.

Not only is it the right policy with regard to Cubans--the Cold War is over and they are now just one of many impoverished latino nations--it also is a vigorous exercise of presidential power with regard to immigration and TURNING OFF A SOURCE OF LEGAL IMMIGRATION, right when such signs and precedent are needed for our incoming God-Emperor.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day, Mr. Wright. Obama got this one spot on.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 11:27 AM  

I will not allow any personal attacks on any Castalia author here, least of all Mr. Wright. If you can't manage to disagree in a civil fashion, or without making it personal, zip it.

Blogger Salt January 13, 2017 11:31 AM  

Jourdan wrote:Even a broken clock is right twice a day, Mr. Wright. Obama got this one spot on.

Too bad it wasn't one of his first acts back in '08.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 11:31 AM  

If the United States was morally obligated to take everybody living in a country that was less free or prosperous than the US, things would get pretty crowded here pretty quickly, not to mention less free and less prosperous. Thank God we have no such obligation. As much as I respect Mr. Wright, and share his hatred of Communism, he is being driven by emotion here, not pragmatism or even theology. Unless their lives are immediately threatened (as were the exiles from Cuba fifty-five years ago) we have no moral obligation to take them. As John Zmirek has pointed out, as Christians, we have a moral obligation to save the souls of those we can, and save the lives of those who need it, so long as it does not endanger our own unnecessarily. We are not morally obligated to do anything that might be beneficial to someone who has less money than we do. If the US really wants to help, we should announce that any Cuban exile who manages to get to America will be settled in a country freer than Cuba, but not the United States. That should separate the wheat from the chaff pretty quickly.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 11:31 AM  

I will not allow any personal attacks on any Castalia author here, least of all Mr. Wright. If you can't manage to disagree in a civil fashion, or without making it personal, zip it.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 11:35 AM  

Unless their lives are immediately threatened (as were the exiles from Cuba fifty-five years ago) we have no moral obligation to take them.

There is no moral obligation for any country to accept the entry of people whose lives are threatened. That's absolutely false.

Blogger pyrrhus January 13, 2017 11:39 AM  

Mr.Wright, I and many other attorneys objected vociferously at the time to the midnight commando raid on Elian Gonzalez and his relatives as an utter trashing of rule of law. There were and are courts in Miami that could decide whether he belonged with his father in Cuba or otherwise....The immigration issue is completely separate, whatever you think about it....

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 11:39 AM  

"There is no moral obligation for any country to accept the entry of people whose lives are threatened. That's absolutely false."

We certainly have an obligation to save their lives if possible. This does not mean letting them become permanent residents of the United States. But as Christians, we certainly have an obligation to save the lives of those who need saving, all other things being equal. To do otherwise would violate the dictates of charity, IMHO.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 11:39 AM  

Every state, no matter how totalitarian, exists only so long as does popular consent. This is self-evident and axiomatic (*Until such time as technology allows the tyrants' will to be executed entirely by robots/machines made from the ground up by said tyrants.)

Some Cubans are victimized. But a substantial plurality must consent to the system or it would fail by want of enforcement agents. Social order explicitly at the barrel of a gun is extremely difficult and costly to maintain.

Our knowledge of Cuba, Venezuela or even the USSR of 1949 is informed by a tiny minority of available bits of information, invariably cherry-picked by those who passed it along to us. We make up our minds based on stories, stories we have no way to independently verify, so in essence, fairy tales and morality plays.

Just because someone is deemed by acclamation a "refugee" in dire need of state-socialized succor doesn't make it so. Those fleeing the Castro Bros' Brothel are no worse off than 5 billion other people.

If Mr. Wright believes it a social imperative that my grandchildren should be disenfranchised in order to succor the world's less fortunate, he will find opposition in me to the core.

High fences. Improve the world via SELF-improvement, presenting the world with an example of "One Improved Unit." Those who think the collective should actively intervene (including welcoming uninvited guests to the Commons) to succor the "less well off" engage in exactly the misinformed conceit that carries our world to the next conflagration.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 11:43 AM  

@16 By your logic you would feed the starving deer in the forest. What happens next?

Deer and men (and children) are all God's creatures, but they also all obey Nature's Laws laid down by God. No? Oh, very definitely YES.

Lifeboat ethics are universal. Those who argue otherwise simply lack the vision to see the next Act in the tragedy, who simply cannot grasp that Nature's limits WILL be respected, if not today with a village, then tomorrow with a continent.

Blogger GK Chesterton January 13, 2017 11:44 AM  

I remember Elien Gonzales. I remember strongly disliking the State response. But Vox is right. As much as there was no need to send storm troopers to retrieve a boy there was also no reason to separate the boy from his father. What is worse, lacking a father or being held in a communist state? For as much as I didn't like "The Road" I think it answers that question very well. No matter how bad things are it is better to have a father.

I think also, as a conservative Christian, like both Wright and I are, it is critical to acknowledge we can't solve the worlds problems. Catholicism and Orthodoxy propose that we hobble along anyway and make the best of ourselves first. They also propose that the rights and responsibilities of the State differ from that of an individual. So, if a Cuban shows up on my door sopping wet I'll try to give him some comfort. That's human and Christian. But I also will assist the State in his repatriation to his own country.

Also we shouldn't as Christians, as Harold Bloom forcefully points out as an _atheist_ in "The American Religion", conflate Christianity with America. Sometimes we think we are the chosen people for being Americans. We aren't. We are chosen for being Christians. Which is _very_ different.

Also remember that VD allowed for an invasion of Cuba. If we _really feel_ that there is an abhorrent crisis going on in Cuba we have the ability to end that state. We should either do it or not do it. But just randomly accepting refugees doesn't help _Cuba_. I should also note that invading Cuba to end the refugee crisis with that country would send a loud signal to a lot of other countries in the world (China, Mexico, all of Africa, et cetera).

Anonymous Stephen J. January 13, 2017 11:45 AM  

"I disagree with John C Wright's statement that we are all born innocent. We are born sinners by nature."

I do not think Mr. Wright would dispute this, nor even that some of us are born with greater predilections to some sins than others; I think his primary point of contention would be that the tendency of some humans for greater temptations to specific sins can be correlated to particular genetic ethnicities with sufficient consistency that the ethnicity itself must be regarded as the sole or primary cause of that predilection, and that an individuals' sinfulness (and, presumably, inferred social merit) can therefore be reliably and justly evaluated based on that ethnicity.

It must be noted that I have never heard Vox argue that any such observed tendencies in a group should trump one's direct knowledge and experience of a specific individual. He has merely argued that social policy based on that level of individual discrimination is not practicable.

Blogger Dave January 13, 2017 11:49 AM  

Great post. I also agree with The Kurgan, in fact, he may have presented an excellent debate topic.

Anonymous Shut up rabbit January 13, 2017 11:49 AM  

Remember when men used to fight for their country? Now they just move to the country with the most welfare leaving their women and children behind and polluting the places they end up squatting.

Life expectancy down, home ownership down, life-time earnings down, crime up, sexual violence up, infectious diseases up, STDs up...

Yeah, if one little brown baby can't live in peace, tranquility and disease free why should anybody else in the whole world ever? Tell me again how the world is a better place by dragging us all down to the lowest common denominator.

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 11:51 AM  

There are issues where I agree with the venerable, excellent Mr. Wright more than I do with Vox, but this is not one of them.

The US should not accept a single further Cuban, no matter how hellish life there is. We're too screwed-up ourselves already.

And I write this as someone with a number of Cuban friends living in Florida. I also think the pre-Castro Cuban culture and society was fantastic and impressive.

It's a crying shame what has happened to that nation, and I like Cubans a hell of a lot more than I do immigrants from certain European nations. (France, Sweden)

Still, political policy should never be a charity.

Blogger pyrrhus January 13, 2017 11:51 AM  

@7 Dysfunctional nations like Cuba and Venezuela are going to be either US colonies or Chinese colonies. Your choice.

Chinese! The US already has Puerto Rico, and can't seem to get rid of it....

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 11:51 AM  

I agree, we should not jeopardize our freedom or our country to help those in need, we are under no moral obligation to do so, and we are certainly under no obligation to allow refugees from anyone or anything to become permanent, voting citizens of our country. But human beings created in the image of God are not deer, and lifeboat ethics, valid though they are, apply only in those situations where they are applicable. For what it's worth, I agree with Obama on this (Lord help us...). Most Cubans, while they live under an appalling system, are not under imminent threat of life or limb. But while I believe that we need to be far more discriminating in our foreign aid, and that we should declare a ten-year immigration moratorium, I cannot simply take the position of "I got mine, let the bastards starve". I simply can't go that far.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 11:53 AM  

Toddy Cat,

The best way to help everyone on the planet is to join with Trump in breaking the power of the Globalists once and for all.

Blogger pyrrhus January 13, 2017 11:53 AM  

@23 Intelligence is at least 70% genetic, behavior is at least 50% genetic. DNA is your culture. Cuban culture disappeared to Miami with the people who created it.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable January 13, 2017 11:54 AM  

But as Christians, we certainly have an obligation to save the lives of those who need saving, all other things being equal.

Once again, the conflation of PERSONAL CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY with the obligation of national governments to secure their borders and act in the best interests of the MAJORITY of their citizens.

Unless you're new here, you should know better by now. Our government has no "Christian obligations".

Blogger VFM #7634 January 13, 2017 11:54 AM  

Chinese! The US already has Puerto Rico, and can't seem to get rid of it....

I think one absolutely essential policy change that needs to happen worldwide is for the metropoles to ban immigration from their colonies. Migration should be only metropole-to-colony. No more poisoning the well.

If the U.S. took this policy with Puerto Rico, we could build it up and cut it loose. We could likely do the same with Cuba in fact. Maybe even Hawaii.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 11:55 AM  

"The best way to help everyone on the planet is to join with Trump in breaking the power of the Globalists once and for all."

I agree completely!

Blogger pyrrhus January 13, 2017 11:55 AM  

@25 Most Cubans, while they live under an appalling system, are not under imminent threat of life or limb. But while I believe that we need to be far more discriminating in our foreign aid, and that we should declare a ten-year immigration moratorium, I cannot simply take the position of "I got mine, let the bastards starve". I simply can't go that far.

So you would let in a billion Africans, who are MUCH worse off than Cubans?

Anonymous OsricPearl January 13, 2017 11:55 AM  

VD, I am humbled and honored that you would share my post, especially since it's full of type os and spelling mistakes. The Exile community was actually formed by Greatest Generation/Silent Generation Cuban Equivalents.

I am an American of second generation Cuban descent, not decent, etc. It was late and I was in a hurry. I won't be able to respond too much but thanks again.
Long time reader since the Morgan of the Lake Days.
~OP

Blogger pyrrhus January 13, 2017 11:56 AM  

And Toddy, who created this "appalling system?" Martians?

Anonymous LurkingPuppy January 13, 2017 11:57 AM  

dc.sunsets wrote:@16 By your logic you would feed the starving deer in the forest. What happens next?
Venison, of course. Animal population booms raise considerably fewer moral issues than human population booms.

GK Chesterton wrote:Also remember that VD allowed for an invasion of Cuba. If we _really feel_ that there is an abhorrent crisis going on in Cuba we have the ability to end that state. We should either do it or not do it.
Or we could just send all the Cubans in America back to Cuba, at once and somewhat better armed than when they left. Make Cuba Great Again!

Blogger Deplorable Gaiseric January 13, 2017 11:57 AM  

It's similar to the new bill Lindsay Graham and Ted Cruz are bringing up to defund the UN. Right thing to do. Stupid reason to do it. Who cares if the UN insulted Israel? What are they, Israel's beta-male white knight? (Yes, that question is rhetorical.)

However, if it truly gets done and isn't just grandstanding to try and impress Netanyahu, then I won't complain too much about why it gets done.

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 12:01 PM  

This reminds me of a great story about Davy Crockett.

At one point, Crockett, then a congressman, was visiting his constituents house by house, introducing himself. He comes upon a farmer. As he extends his hand, the man replies

"I know who you are, Mr. Crockett. And don't worry; I will never vote for you again."

Crockett is taken aback, and asks the reason. The man explains.

There had been a fire in DC a year or two ago. Crockett and some other government officials noticed it, and decided to help. They had never worked so hard, toiling through the night.

Later, Crockett and his friends had decided to divert a few government funds to help the family living there get back on their feet. They had considered it a good deed.

"What right", the farmer asked, "do you have to play personal charity with OUR money?" (Keep in mind this was many decades before the federal income tax, although the government collected tariffs and there were state taxes)

Crockett thought about it, and confessed that despite his good intentions, the farmer was right.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan January 13, 2017 12:01 PM  

It's just sad.

Blogger Deplorable Gaiseric January 13, 2017 12:02 PM  

Toddy Cat wrote:We certainly have an obligation to save their lives if possible.
You need to read up on the philosophy of Farmer Bunce. If you feel that you have an obligation to do so, then go and do what you can. Stop robbing your neighbors via taxation to make yourself feel good because you've imposed your morality on the nation via public policy.

Anonymous 1/13 January 13, 2017 12:02 PM  

I don't think it's a personal attack to say it's very sad to see a man I once respected so highly cuck himself.

To equate not taking mass immigration from Cuba with 'siding with Castro's slave state.' Sad.

Let Mr Wright feed and house violent, poorly educated migrants on his own property and using his own money without forcing the same lunacy on his neighbors.





Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 12:03 PM  

"Our government has no "Christian obligations"."

Very true, but we as Christians living in a constitutional Republic have a duty to advocate for moral policies, according to our beliefs. And I believe that governments do (or at least should) have moral obligations, although these are not identical to those of individuals. And yes, a national government has a primary obligation to its citizens, first and foremost. That does not mean that it has no obligations to anyone else. Others disagree, of course.

And, no, "Deplorable" I'm not new here. I just don't agree with you.

Blogger Deplorable Gaiseric January 13, 2017 12:03 PM  

@36: And by the time I mention it in @38, you've already summarized it. Tag team posting, apparently.

Anonymous Athor Pel January 13, 2017 12:03 PM  

"16. Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 11:39 AM
...
But as Christians, we certainly have an obligation to save the lives of those who need saving, all other things being equal. To do otherwise would violate the dictates of charity, IMHO.
"



Ok.
Go get you one of those refugees and have them live in your house.
Now.
Today.
Before the sun goes down.

It shouldn't be hard to find one. There are literally thousands to pick from.

After you do that, then come back here and tell us all about it.

We'll be waiting for the obituaries.

Anonymous a_peraspera January 13, 2017 12:03 PM  

Well Toddy, if you can't abide them starving, get off your couch, buy a ton of food, head to Cuba and start passing out the food. Put your money where your mouth is and just do it.

But you don't have the right to open the doors of my country to every starving child and take my money by force to feed, clothe and house them all. As we've seen in Europe, while some of the refugees may truly be needy, others will take the opportunity to prey on Americans in various ways, including raping our children.

Even if we turned the entire US government budget toward feeding the billions of people all over the world, we still could not save them all. As others said above, feeding them will just cause them to breed more hungry children so the problem would never be solved.

Eventually we'd hit a point of more hungry people than the entire planet's food production could possibly sustain (12 billion? 15 billion? 20?), and then - war.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 12:06 PM  

Toddy Cat,

The history of advocating government for moral policies based on our beliefs has, with few exceptions, led to more murder, misery and tyranny in America than the Communist Manifesto.

Anonymous Bobby Farr January 13, 2017 12:07 PM  

Wright is essentially arguing for a Germany-style slave state, where the nation is just a large charity hospital and the people and their resources are at the disposal of the elite for whatever supposedly philanthropic projects they want to pursue. People can pursue charity individually. There is nothing libertarian about the state importing hordes of low IQ dependents for the natives to support.

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 12:07 PM  

I think John Wright and any other people who feel the need to force their fellow taxpayers to care for immigrants from other countries need to pack their bags, move to one of those hellish countries, and start doing the hard work of pulling people out of poverty ... over in their OWN COUNTRIES.

Blogger YIH January 13, 2017 12:09 PM  

pyrrhus wrote:@7 Dysfunctional nations like Cuba and Venezuela are going to be either US colonies or Chinese colonies. Your choice.

Chinese! The US already has Puerto Rico, and can't seem to get rid of it....

Derb has an idea of what to do with it.
Racially, linguistically and culturally Cubans are quite a bit closer to Puerto Ricans then they are to the founders and their posterity.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus January 13, 2017 12:10 PM  

Neo-Cons and other anti-Commie types like Cubans because the Cubans (tend to) vote Republican.

But the reason they vote Republican is because the Republicans were the ones who took a hard line on Castro.

In other words, the Cuban voting pattern was not really due to "principles," but (again) due to ethnic matters relating to the "old country." Which immigrants always seem to bring with them.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 12:10 PM  

"So you would let in a billion Africans, who are MUCH worse off than Cubans?"

Of course not, most Africans are not under immediate threat of life and limb, much propaganda notwithstanding, and in addition, there are many other ways of helping them, aside from letting them into the US. Besides, this would obviously jeopardize our country, and, as noted above, we are not morally obligated, or even allowed, to do this. Also, please note, I DO NOT agree with Mr. Wright, we have no obligation to let ANY Cubans in at this point in history. I just do not go as far as Vox, or apparently many of you. Fair enough.

Anonymous Jack Amok January 13, 2017 12:10 PM  

Very true, but we as Christians living in a constitutional Republic have a duty to advocate for moral policies, according to our beliefs.

Kek save us from people who believe in communal salvation. Because if Kek doesn't, it'll have to be John Moses Browning.

Anonymous Deplorable Homeschooler January 13, 2017 12:11 PM  

Seems to me that for Obama (never met an illegal migrant he didn't like) this is more about keeping out the only segment of migrants that tend to lean more right than left rather than doing the right thing (which it is but should be this way for all migrants).

Blogger Ingot9455 January 13, 2017 12:12 PM  

Yet another argument for invading other countries, slaughtering their leaders, and converting them to Christianity. Once they get good and Christian they might be able to handle a Constitutional rights based government, and all these problems would be solved. Easy peasy.

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 12:12 PM  

1/13 wrote:

Let Mr Wright feed and house violent, poorly educated migrants on his own property and using his own money without forcing the same lunacy on his neighbors.



Of course allowing even that seems to me somewhat contrary to one of John Wrights most favorite examples of moral duty, "the village of farmers going to war."

http://www.everyjoe.com/2014/05/07/politics/why-im-no-longer-libertarian/

I mean, why should John's neighbors allow him to house foreigners that likely post a threat to their families?

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable January 13, 2017 12:12 PM  

And yes, a national government has a primary obligation to its citizens, first and foremost. That does not mean that it has no obligations to anyone else.

Does the government of Nigeria or Zimbabwe have an obligation to you? Why on earth should the U.S. government have an obligation to Syrians or Cubans?

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 12:13 PM  

We certainly have an obligation to save their lives if possible.

No, we don't. And your policy is immoral.

Very true, but we as Christians living in a constitutional Republic have a duty to advocate for moral policies, according to our beliefs. And I believe that governments do (or at least should) have moral obligations, although these are not identical to those of individuals.

It is increasingly obvious that we're going to have to either deport cucks like you or embrace totalitarianism if we want to maintain a stable civilization. Your kind cannot be allowed any voice in government.

So be it.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus January 13, 2017 12:14 PM  

Very true, but we as Christians living in a constitutional Republic

Don't know about you, but I'm a 40 year old American who has lived here all my life, and haven't lived in a "constitutional republic" for a single minute.

Anonymous Revan January 13, 2017 12:14 PM  

"And yes, a national government has a primary obligation to its citizens, first and foremost. That does not mean that it has no obligations to anyone else."

That is exactly what it means, the American government's sole obligation is to its citizens. We have our own problems here that you can use your Christian charity to help solve. When 100% of our internal problems are taken care of then we can make a case to look outward at world problems.

Blogger Escoffier January 13, 2017 12:15 PM  

Maybe it's just me but on the subject of race and immigration Mr. Wright's reasoning is always purely emotional. I am aware of no exceptions and have joked with my Wife when reading a thread about race or immigration that it's not over until Mr. Wright comes on and has an emotional break down.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus January 13, 2017 12:16 PM  

And yes, a national government has a primary obligation to its citizens, first and foremost. That does not mean that it has no obligations to anyone else

That's exactly what it means. That's why it's called a "national" government. You want to take care of every two-bit loser in the world, get yourself a global government - but keep in mind you'll be a tool of the antichrist in the process.

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 12:16 PM  

Revan wrote:"And yes, a national government has a primary obligation to its citizens, first and foremost. That does not mean that it has no obligations to anyone else."

That is exactly what it means, the American government's sole obligation is to its citizens.


But ... but ... you left out the Jews!

Blogger Weouro January 13, 2017 12:18 PM  

Wright sounds like Mark Shea there, especially the "wee little poopy baby" line. Degraded prose like that can indicate an addled thought process.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 12:19 PM  

Titus,

I disagree with your characterization of Neo-cons as anti communists. They are Trotskyites. Soviets are Leninists, so really it's an internal struggle between the Trotskyites and the Leninists. Remember, Lenin had Trotskyites assassinated in Mexico, and his followers have never gotten over it.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus January 13, 2017 12:22 PM  

@61 Stg58/Animal Mother

Fair enough.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable January 13, 2017 12:24 PM  

Where Christian obligations are concerned, the parable of the Good Samaritan is relevant. The Samaritan helped the man lying by the side of the road on which he was traveling. He did not go out of his way to virtue signal about the victims of robbery halfway across the world, though there were surely plenty.

It is rank hypocrisy to fret about Cubans and do nothing about the poor in our own streets in front of the very doorways where we go to work. First things first. Let Cubans show charity to Cubans.

Blogger Tim January 13, 2017 12:25 PM  

Actually, I think you are wrong on Cubans, but for a different reason. The Cuban immigrants work. They mostly assimilate, become good productive citizens, and identify as Americans. I expect the cause is the winnowing process of having to get her by crossing 90 miles of ocean in anything you can get your hands on. Take a special sort to even attempt, and a competent special sort to succeed. And it works. Been going 50 years and we have benefited from the process except for a few minor hiccups along the way. So, let it go on as long as it keeps working. And we do need immigrants, without them we are not replacing our population. So keep the good ones....and the Cubans we are skimming off the top seem to be mostly good one.....where else will we get them, I damn sure do not want a bunch of socialist Europeans immigrating.

Blogger Escoffier January 13, 2017 12:27 PM  

I think a shocking amount of our modern discourse is simply disagreement between the various communist factions that won WW2. Once you understand that a lot of things begin to make sense.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 12:27 PM  

They don't identify as Americans, Tim. They are Cubans, first and foremost, and vote for whoever will advocate most effectively for Cuba, their homeland.

If they identified as Joe Sixpack, the Cuban demographic in Florida wouldn't exist and would not be coveted by politicians seeking votes in Florida.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 12:29 PM  

Plus Cuban food is boring and bland as fuck.

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 12:29 PM  

@41

Heh, I appreciate your post, as I didn't even know the name of the farmer in the tale. I had heard the story when I was about 10 years old, and it apparently made such a big impression that I remembered it quite accurately for almost 20 years since, looking up the details just now.

I even recalled Crockett later speaking against a bill intended to give money to the widow of a naval officer, but didn't believe it was as striking or relevant.

It's a perfect illustration of the difference between government duty versus personal charity. A distinction that virtually no one in the US government makes anymore.

Blogger Bodo Staron January 13, 2017 12:30 PM  

Vox, did you read this by chance?

https://www.amren.com/features/2017/01/young-black-man-became-race-realist/

Imagine segregation happens in the US. Then this man would be stuck among people he shares nothing with but the color of his skin.
So, ethnicity is not the main factor, it seems it's IQ.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 12:31 PM  

The Cuban immigrants work. They mostly assimilate, become good productive citizens, and identify as Americans.

No, they don't. Americans historically have not given a flying fuck about Castro or Cuba, except that they don't want Soviet missiles there. They care more about that issue than any other. Ergo, they are not Americans, not even in the civic nationalist sense.

Blogger Elocutioner January 13, 2017 12:32 PM  

"Racially, linguistically and culturally Cubans are quite a bit closer to Puerto Ricans then they are to the founders and their posterity."

Two birds, one big rock just sitting there in the ocean. If old Cuba is truly dead we repatriate all the Puerto Ricans and most/recent Cubans to Puerto Rico and grant them their new independent country, full UN recognition and everything. And forgive their state debt (screw investors like Romney) for a binding no reparations or sue us for anything ever agreement. Either way, cancel their green cards, visas, US citizenship, or whatever and kick them out of our country. Sucks for them, but they ain't Americans.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 12:32 PM  

"cucks like you"
Wow, that's a first. Just because I agree with you on Cuba, but still think we as a society might have moral obligations to others, I'm a cuck who deserves no voice in government? Holy crap, Vox, what the Hell is up with you today?

Anonymous Bobby Farr January 13, 2017 12:35 PM  

@64 Oh, well if they "identify" as American, then I'm sure there is no problem. They are completely indistinguishable from natives and won't change our society. Kind of like how man who identifies as awoman is in fact a woman.

And what are these "benefits" we've received? Please quantify.

The "need for immigrants" is also delusional. Labor participation rate at a historic low, a population that has increased by 100M over a generation, stagnant wages.

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 12:35 PM  

Toddy Cat wrote:"cucks like you"

Wow, that's a first.


Sure it is, Toddy. Sure it is.

Blogger Escoffier January 13, 2017 12:35 PM  

Stg58/Animal Mother wrote:Plus Cuban food is boring and bland as fuck.

No shit right? Puerto Rican is worse!

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 12:38 PM  

Imagine segregation happens in the US. Then this man would be stuck among people he shares nothing with but the color of his skin.

So what? That's not all he shares with them anyhow. DNA > skin color. He even admits that he fell prey to black behavioral patterns. With luck and ambition, he'd be sensibly running the show among them.

Do you really expect me, of all people, to have any sympathy for him? Do you similarly believe that 156 IQ white people are not white?

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 12:38 PM  

"Sure it is, Toddy. Sure it is."

Sorry, I've just never been called a cuck and a Nazi in the same day. Probably due to a Russian hack or something.

Blogger Aeoli Pera January 13, 2017 12:39 PM  

Yet each of them was born as an innocent wee babe,cute and cuddly and poopy as were we all.

Locke's blank slatism is assumed here.

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 12:42 PM  

@64

Again, I like Cubans immensely, and agree that they have assimilated better and added more to this country than most other groups. They're even more right-wing, if the 54% voting for Trump are any indication, than all other immigrants, too.

That still, however, does not mean we should allow more of them in.

Again, the US is just too unstable, with too many problems, to consider allowing in ANY immigrants at the present time.

I'm a Russian Jew, and I would feel the same way about potential immigrants that are Russian, Jewish, or both.

Ideally, the US would stop all immigration, and begin deportations, starting with all criminal invaders ("illegal immigrants"), anchor babies, and Death Cult members.

We would then re-assess the situation and see if more needed to be done, although I imagine this would constitute a tremendous improvement already.

Of course, this is all a pipe dream. The God Emperor and others are making great strides in fighting against the leftist brain rot, but we're way too far ideologically from shutting down all immigration and deporting Death Cultists.

Think of what a fight Trump will have in front of him in merely deporting the criminal invaders who committed additional crimes after their initial invasion.

Anonymous 1/13 January 13, 2017 12:42 PM  

@64 Time the Cuck:

Even Stefan Molyneux agrees, immigrants do not assimilate. How you can read this blog and be blind to this assertion is mind boggling.

You are a cuck traitor, celebrating foreign nationals taking over territory once held by your kinsmen. You think browns are less socialist than Europeans? Fucking incredible.

I'm with Vox - deport cucks like you to your favored brown country.

Blogger tz January 13, 2017 12:44 PM  

Wright notes we have a lot of "remorseless enemy monsters" in our midst. They are an existential threat to everything Wright claims to hold dear, but there is no proposal I've heard to fix this, and unchecked it will turn every county in the US into Greenwich village or SF.

Yet each of them was born as an innocent wee babe,cute and cuddly and poopy as were we all.

What changed them? What turns men into monsters?


This is the wrong or irrelevant question.

Those wishing to come here are not Jeffersonian constitutionalists. Most might be in poverty or even oppressed, but are the "remorseless enemy monsters" (REMs).

It seems too much to ask to only maybe admit those tabula rasa newborns (and not their REM parents), but although we have far too many REMs here already and can't convert them into a JC, he wants to throw open the door to every Morlock, REM, etc. that wants to come in although we don't have enough jobs for existing citizens.

50% minimum of Muslims in the US think Sharia should overrule the Constitution. I doubt Wright lives somewhere he can hear the call to prayer, where they refuse to work around dogs, pork, or alcohol. And worse. But because they are oppressed, he would welcome them to his neighborhood and work out the REM and Sharia problems later? I doubt it.

The elite REMs live in gated communities or ivory towers. There are those like St Mother Theresa that went into the dirty, crime filled streets. But you don't have to be a REM to live in an ivory tower, you just have to avoid ever looking at reality. Evil becomes some abstract enemy even if personalized but only exists in the fictional novels. Baltimore and Chicago, real people are murdered and robbed daily, but that is just a link on drudge - worry about the troll king and his army of orcs since you can write the ending. Dealing with how to fix Chicago? Too hard. No answers. Ignore it.

I have a lot of contempt for (dickens) Telescopic Philanthropy. First, you can find someone homeless in your own city - and it is really cold - and invite him in to shelter in your home and eat your food. Instead, worry about Cuba or Mexico and dump the REMs where people you don't know will have to deal with the problems (e.g. Mogadishu on the Mississippi).

Anonymous Jack Amok January 13, 2017 12:47 PM  

That's not all he shares with them. DNA > skin color. He is only +3SD Black anyhow.

I had a college roommate, Lon, who was Black. Straight outta Compton, back when N.W.A was new on the scene. Lon was a great guy, smart, hardworking, responsible, terrible basketball player but great in football.

His (half-)brother and uncle were in prison for murder (separate cases), and another (half-)brother was dead from a gang war. Lon never knew his father.

He could've been the poster child for NABALT, but his immediate gene pool was a mess.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 12:48 PM  

"We certainly have an obligation to save their lives if possible.

No, we don't. And your policy is immoral."

If by "We" you mean the US government, there's certainly an argument to be made. But if "We" means "We individual Christians" I can't accept this. I cannot accept "we should let them starve, because otherwise they might breed too much" as a Christian position. I may be wrong, of course, but I do not believe that this is what you meant.

Blogger S1AL January 13, 2017 12:49 PM  

"If they identified as Joe Sixpack, the Cuban demographic in Florida wouldn't exist and would not be coveted by politicians seeking votes in Florida."

You're conflating a regional cultural issue with something else entirely. Even people of solely European descent who've been here for generations tend to vote for people who share a name origin. Why do you think Ted Cruz goes by that specific name combination? Why do you think Trump's father changed his last name?

"They care more about that issue than any other. Ergo, they are not Americans, not even in the civic nationalist sense."

First gen... Maybe? This doesn't apply to any of the ones I've met, who want nothing whatsoever to do with Cuba, but they're all second/third gen and speak English as a first, if not only, language. So yes, they're very much civic nationalist. They're about as "Cuban" as I am German.

"Do you similarly believe that 156 IQ white people are not white?"

Says the Red Indian.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus January 13, 2017 12:50 PM  

@ 72 Wow, that's a first.

Somehow I doubt that.

Blogger James Dixon January 13, 2017 12:50 PM  

> I remember Elien Gonzales. I remember strongly disliking the State response.

While I found the state response disgusting, I also thought the people keeping him were idiots for not smuggling him somewhere else where he wouldn't be found.

There was a case years ago in the DC metro area where a stupid kid visiting a pet shop stuck his finger in a ferret cage and the ferret (as is normal for ferrets) bit it. The parents went nuts and demanded the ferret be killed and tested for rabies. The courts agreed (of course), but the ferret "mysteriously" disappeared from the pet shop and was never found. The same tactic should have been used with Elien.

> there was also no reason to separate the boy from his father.

If anyone actually believes the father wanted him back, I have a bridge to sell you, plus some fine ocean front property. That said, in general you are correct.

> Chinese! The US already has Puerto Rico, and can't seem to get rid of it....

I understand Puerto Rico is trying for statehood again. That would be interesting.

> Venison, of course.

Delicious, tasty venison. :)

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 12:51 PM  

Toddy Cat wrote:"We certainly have an obligation to save their lives if possible.

But if "We" means "We individual Christians" I can't accept this. I cannot accept "we should let them starve, because otherwise they might breed too much" as a Christian position.


Then get your ass to Cuba, Toddy, or any other hellhole country, and start helping those people grow food. Stop TALKING about what you think Christians should do and start DOING IT YOURSELF.

Anonymous Casey January 13, 2017 12:52 PM  

Honest question. Has there been a lot of immigration to Cuba from black majority countries or have the indigenous blacks of Cuba simply out bred the Hispanics to the point that Cuba is on the verge of becoming Haiti part II?

Blogger Cail Corishev January 13, 2017 12:56 PM  

Americans historically have not given a flying fuck about Castro or Cuba, except that they don't want Soviet missiles there.

And also we like their cigars. Which has always highlighted the ridiculous hypocrisy of the policy on Cuba to me. We must wall Cuba off from civilization and grind it down into poverty in order to....something....but if you manage to sneak a box of Cuban cigars into the country, very few Americans, including conservatives, wouldn't happily accept one.

So I concluded that the whole thing is a farce, being done for emotional reasons that I've never really gotten because they're from before my time.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 1:00 PM  

Sorry, I've just never been called a cuck and a Nazi in the same day. Probably due to a Russian hack or something.

It's not even noon CST, too.

Look, one demarcation between cucks and the Right deals with the role of government.

Whether you like it or not, arguing that the national government has any obligation whatsoever beyond that of the welfare of its citizens is on the Other Side of the Line.

If you want some sort of collective to rally crowds to do something outside the direct and reasonably expected benefit of citizens, you're free to start a church, a social club, a charity or what-have-you.

Just don't expect your viewpoint to obtain even a hint of respect here if instead you think the political system should be so engaged.

Stop trying to put even a cubic millimeter of poop in the yogurt.

Anonymous 1/13 January 13, 2017 1:00 PM  

@ Toddy Cat:

You're confused, but it all makes sense starting from the basis that you are a whiny little puke.

You expect to not get called out on your pathetic virtue signaling here, of all places?

Your posts since Vox called you out are nothing but trying to position yourself as a victim in order to get sympathy to assuage your butthurt.

e.g.
"Sorry, I've just never been called a cuck and a Nazi in the same day. Probably due to a Russian hack or something."
--Toddy Cat, 2017

OpenID elijahrhodes January 13, 2017 1:00 PM  

@88 Go hang out with Cubans in Miami. Most are of Spanish ancestry. So basically the higher IQ segment, which was more capable of getting here did, leaving the Afros behind.

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 1:00 PM  

@69

It's a fine article, and I applaud the writer for being among the 1-5% blacks who has fully rejected tribalism, but why oh why should any exception be made for him?

As Vox pointed out, is his plight even any different than a white guy or Asian much smarter than the average of his race?

Incidentally, there are much smarter blacks than the writer (who had to transfer to an easier college), who have not shaken off tribalism at all.

I know a black who graduated from MIT when he was 17. Had a science PhD and an MD by the age of 24. Problem is, despite his exceptional, unique intelligence, he is still firmly on the side of blacks and against whites. Supports BLM, and favors a black thug over a white who has everything in common with him except skin color.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 1:01 PM  

@89 I'm reliably informed that cigars produced in the Dominican Republic now surpass those made in Cuba. I have no opinion, given I don't smoke.

Blogger VFM #7634 January 13, 2017 1:02 PM  

In fact letting disaffected Cubans flee to the USA probably prolonged Castro's rule. If all the Cubans who hated Castro had been forced to stay in Cuba, the pressure cooker might have built up to the point that Castro found HIMSELF up against the wall where so many of his enemies were shot.

@4 a_peraspera
Worked for Ceaușescu's Romania.

Emigration or the lack thereof does appear to be a reliable indicator of which Communist regimes collapsed and those which never did. Those which collapsed -- the Soviet bloc in Eastern Europe -- didn't allow their citizens to leave. (Yugoslavia was an exception in that it did allow emigration, but it fell apart for ethnic reasons, as we all know.)

Those which never did are still around: China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and North Korea (illegal emigration through China).

As a matter of fact, this doesn't even just apply to strict "communists", but to SJW-run liberal democracies as well. I'm reasonably certain that if Americans were allowed to emigrate in large numbers we'd be saddled with Hillary now. But we're not, and so we have Trump. Germans, by contrast, can simply move to Hungary if they get too sick of Merkel's gangs of hajjis.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 1:04 PM  

"Stop TALKING about what you think Christians should do and start DOING IT YOURSELF."

With all due respect, Josh, you have no idea what I am doing or not doing. In addition, even assuming that you are correct about me being a hypocrite, my actions or lack thereof have nothing to do with moral obligations of Christians, just as my being an adulterer would not have any effect on the Christian duty to avoid adultery.

One last time. I do not favor any refugees being let into the US at the present time, from Cuba or anywhere else, and I believe that Mr. Wright is engaged in purveying emotive slop when he states otherwise. I believe that national governments have a primary duty towards their citizens, but also have a secondary duty to the common good, as almost all branches of Christianity have taught since the Middle Ages. I personally think that the US government should operate on Christian principle, because those principle are objectively right. And I believe that individual Christians do have a duty towards the poor and hungry, which should be exercised with due regard to the virtue of prudence.

If this makes me a cuck or a Nazi, I guess I'll just have to live with that.

Blogger VFM #7634 January 13, 2017 1:04 PM  

Those which never did are still around: China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and North Korea (illegal emigration through China).


I mean: Those which do allow emigration are still around.

Blogger Bodo Staron January 13, 2017 1:07 PM  

VD wrote:Imagine segregation happens in the US. Then this man would be stuck among people he shares nothing with but the color of his skin.

Do you really expect me, of all people, to have any sympathy for him? Do you similarly believe that 156 IQ white people are not white?


You yourself can thrive in the US, you could live in Japan, you can live in Italy. But you know what I meant: Maybe, the whole ethnicity question is not the main issue, and if you have any kind of immigration (there will always be some) chose according to IQ. Charles Murray hints at this, pointing to science learning more and more about DNA and IQ.
https://youtu.be/SStZxI1rH-A?t=1h45s

Anonymous casey January 13, 2017 1:11 PM  

Interesting little blurb:

https://desdelahabanaivan.wordpress.com/2012/02/25/whitening-the-children-a-desire-of-many-cuban-families/

Anonymous patrick kelly January 13, 2017 1:11 PM  

I'm enjoying this civil debate between two men I admire (VD and JW). Hope it continues as such.

Blogger Almodavar January 13, 2017 1:12 PM  

"Tim January 13, 2017 12:25 PM
Actually, I think you are wrong on Cubans, but for a different reason. The Cuban immigrants work. They mostly assimilate, become good productive citizens, and identify as Americans. I expect the cause is the winnowing process of having to get her by crossing 90 miles of ocean in anything you can get your hands on. Take a special sort to even attempt, and a competent special sort to succeed. And it works. Been going 50 years and we have benefited from the process except for a few minor hiccups along the way. So, let it go on as long as it keeps working. And we do need immigrants, without them we are not replacing our population. So keep the good ones....and the Cubans we are skimming off the top seem to be mostly good one.....where else will we get them, I damn sure do not want a bunch of socialist Europeans immigrating."

We've already skimmed the top. There's not much left over there but a ruined people. I dislike Obama and don't agree with his motives but I agree with ending the special status accorded to the Cubans.

Anonymous 1/13 January 13, 2017 1:15 PM  

@97

A reductionist approach that ignores culture. Brilliant. We'll put the high IQ jihadi immigrants in your neighborhood.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 1:15 PM  

With all due respect to all here, the position that I have taken here is pretty much in line with the position taken by Traditional Christianity since the time of Aquinas. I agree that this position is not a libertarian one, but I still don't think that this puts me on The Other Side.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 1:15 PM  

In case the obvious hasn't occurred to anyone, the real reason Obama changed the policy is that relations between the two countries are in the process of being normalized. Even Democrats don't want 11 million Cubans granted automatic permanent residence on the basis of a single 30-minute flight to Miami.

Blogger Aeoli Pera January 13, 2017 1:16 PM  

The crazy thing about supporting indiscriminate immigration is the sheer mass of false beliefs you have to hold in order to justify it. I mean, you aren't even allowed to believe that psychometric traits are randomly distributed, it's absolutely essential that you believe they are equally distributed.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 1:16 PM  

the position that I have taken here is pretty much in line with the position taken by Traditional Christianity since the time of Aquinas

No, it is not. By all means, cite Aquinas or Augustine or anyone else on this matter... if you can.

Blogger tz January 13, 2017 1:18 PM  

Above, the problem is entirely ideology, and theoretically, I'm on that side, but practically the demographics must be addressed.

I have a black friend back in Detroit that I've stopped talking to, but occasionally she leaves a message. She called and said her daughter is having a baby. Nothing about marriage or a father. A few "God is good" references.

There is a culture. Excepting the divorce industry, "whites don't do that". Muslims are more strict, as are Asians. Blacks find the 3rd world life with first world welfare acceptable.

In 1955, what was acceptable behavior (including limited risky youthful indiscretions) was defined by the 90% white Christian patriarchy, which could support the constitution.

Today, the races demand their identity (politics) as a race be recognized, and 4 generations of shattered families on welfare with many in prison, and that not be considered "deviancy" - like the LGBTQ is extending to pedophilia and beastiality.

You can try to preach and reason, but will be met with the REM's: "you're a racist, sexist, homophobe and xenophobe, and hurt my feels - I need my X identity and YOU must accept my anti-constitutional culture and ideology.

I don't know of anything to fix this. I tried with my black friend, but she cannot conceive her grandchild is likely to be feral. I've tried in other contexts. Yes, not all X are like that. But look at the demographics at a freedom or constitution conference where all are welcome.

It has been a generation in creation, but to save the blacks in Detroit, it is like having to go to the deep circles of hell and dragging them almost against their will out. Whites in the red states haven't crossed Styx, and usually I just have to snap them out of a daydream.

Chamberlain could have added "But Germans are just like us" after proclaiming "peace in our time". Whatever the theoretical truth, the practical reality was war.

Theorize all you want, but try a real life Pygmalion. If it works, then repeat and save as many as you can. Then after you proved you can change REM IDENTITY into constitutionalism, maybe we can let some in. But not until we've retaken the country - otherwise we are lost.

Blogger Deplorable Gaiseric January 13, 2017 1:21 PM  

Jack Amok wrote:Kek save us from people who believe in communal salvation. Because if Kek doesn't, it'll have to be John Moses Browning.
No, it'll be Judeo-Christ.

Anonymous patrick kelly January 13, 2017 1:24 PM  

dc.sunsets wrote:@89 I'm reliably informed that cigars produced in the Dominican Republic now surpass those made in Cuba. I have no opinion, given I don't smoke.

No. This is a bit like the Scotch vs. Bourbon debate.

The quality of the construction of non-cuban sticks has equaled or acheived that of Cuban, but they miss the essential ingredient: Cuban tobacco. Something about the soil, location, climate, blood of capitalist pigs, etc. just produces something unique.

To my somewhat experienced taste Cuban tobacco, whether in the cheapest machine made or the most hyped, premium brand "rolled on thighs of virgins" stick (a myth fwiw), the tobacco has qualities, aromas, and tastes, no matter how subtle, that are *different* than any other.

There are some domestic available smokes that approach these characteristics, but they are much more expensive, even if you pay the highly taxed Canuck prices.

But it's kinda like the California vs. France wine or Scotch vs. Bourbon debates, you either "get it" and like it, or you don't. Heck, stoned hippies in CO probably have debates about whether the local weed is as good as the vintage illegal from Obscuristan.

That's my opinion, worth what you paid for it.

Anonymous NateM January 13, 2017 1:24 PM  

I would agree the old idea of what Cuba is is basically gone at this point. I am friends with a Caribbean girl who attended dental school in Cuba and her experiences there were overwhelmingly bad. To the point where she basically said she'd recommend a short visit there for tourism but nothing else. She described extreme poverty, and a the traditional christian/catholic culture has been replaced with one where women (married or no) are encouraged towards prostitution to supplement income. Basically just a really sad, unpleasant place.

So sure, if all these Cubans moved back with their combined wealth they could make vast improvements on the island, but that would presuppose Socialism fell so that money wouldn't just be appropriated by the government, and a significant number of Cubans would even feel at home there anymore.

Blogger bob kek mando ( Death To The Boor-geois, Keks To The Lol-etariat ) January 13, 2017 1:25 PM  

42. Athor Pel January 13, 2017 12:03 PM
It shouldn't be hard to find one. There are literally thousands to pick from.



literally millions.

in the country, right now.

illegally.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 1:25 PM  

Vox,

Toddy Cat didn't claim Aquinas argued this approach; all he said was it's been argued since the time of Aquinas. Very sneaky. I'm sure you picked up on that.

Blogger Almodavar January 13, 2017 1:30 PM  

@VD "No, they don't. Americans historically have not given a flying fuck about Castro or Cuba, except that they don't want Soviet missiles there. They care more about that issue than any other. Ergo, they are not Americans, not even in the civic nationalist sense."

Bullshit. Cuba was an American satellite after the US got involved in its independence war. But the US has coveted that island straight back to the days of the Founders. There were FAR more Americans in Cuba before Castro than vice versa. Fact is, Americans have always cared a great deal about Cuba, and meddling American policy is one of the reasons the place got so fucked up.

Blogger Scott January 13, 2017 1:31 PM  

The (((Immigration Act of 1965))) basically set in motion the false notion of America as a propositional nation. Before that period it was simply understood that America was white nation. This conversation would not be happening if it weren't for the political activism of that period.

Anonymous BiigGayKoranBurner January 13, 2017 1:33 PM  

What changed them? What turns men into monsters?

They need not be monsters to be unwelcome, parasites are bad enough. Latrina's 21 crack babies have the "money leech" power that might as well be "life leech" for what it's ramifications do to white couples planning families. We have already gotten the right side of the IQ bell curve from Cuba, anyone left would be a welfare state supporter.

The fact that I might, in this one instance, happen to think Obama acted in the American national interest, even if he did so for the wrong reasons

It took 8 full years before he made a mistake in our favor, that suggests everything else went according to his handler's plans.

Unless their lives are immediately threatened (as were the exiles from Cuba fifty-five years ago) we have no moral obligation

Realists sent navy ships to make sure jews fleeing Hitler didn't purposely run around in order to claim refugee status. There were Caribbean nations willing to take them but those nations were not good enough.

Dysfunctional nations like Cuba and Venezuela are going to be either US colonies or Chinese colonies. Your choice.

Given that the Chinese are willing to shoot striking black minors I say let them have all of the failed socialist states. Only realists have a chance at advancing those areas. China isn't stupid enough to have a taxpayer paid ice skating ring in the tropics, as PR does.

Blogger Dirk Manly January 13, 2017 1:37 PM  

@Casey:

That's Haiti II: Electric Boogaloo.

Anonymous Casual Observer January 13, 2017 1:39 PM  

My mom and my mother in law are legal immigrants; they don't fucking assimilate. Their kids are not Americans; if they are lucky their great grandkids will be.

I find it hard to believe you guys read Vox and are then surprised he's calling you a Cuck when you're spewing Cucky bullshit.

Blogger tz January 13, 2017 1:40 PM  

I have always wondered why the first time one of them found his powerful idea and his cause was leading him into siding with what he himself despised and knew to be wrong, no friend warned him.

I tried with my friend and her daughter. But the government told them it was OK, and their church said it was OK even with my arguing from scripture.

REMs - remorseless. Guilt hurts. What they say is "kill your conscience and join us and you won't have to feel bad ever again".

Wrestling with sin, both venial and mortal is painful. The REMs have limited sins: racism, sexism, etc.

And they cheer each other on. That's why SJWs are so broken and insane. If they admit the least truth, they will feel remorse.

As to life itself, locally a young woman has brain cancer. But people are oppressed in Cuba. Why did God permit either? But worse, why is someone who is "oppressed" but isn't starving or in pain so much more important to use public resources to help than this woman going through excruciating pain?

We aren't to love the world or "humanity", we are to love our neighbor.

Do those who advocate open borders have no neighbors in need?

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 1:46 PM  

@113

The (((Immigration Act of 1965))) basically set in motion the false notion of America as a propositional nation.

Oh, shut the fuck up, Scott. It's tiresome to see Stormfags blame legislation created by a white, Christian President from Texas, Lyndon Baines Johnson, supported by a cadre of fellow white Christian traitors, entirely on a Jewish lawyer or two they hired to help them.

Nevermind the idiocy of claiming that everything was hunky dory on that front before 1965, ignoring the extreme increases in immigration under white Christian globalist Woodrow Wilson or the even worse ones under white Christian globalist FDR.

That's not even getting into the "Great Migration" of the blacks to Northern cities like Philadelphia, Chicago, and Detroit, or as Paul Kersey of SBPDL predicts it will be known in future generations, "Manifest Destruction".

Blogger S1AL January 13, 2017 1:49 PM  

At this point I'm a bit partial to "Stormsperg". Hits closer to home.

Blogger VFM #7634 January 13, 2017 2:02 PM  

Fact is, Americans have always cared a great deal about Cuba, and meddling American policy is one of the reasons the place got so fucked up.

@112 Almodavar
Yeah, we get it. You hated Yanquis so much you decided to put the Castro boys in charge. Classic case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Oh, shut the fuck up, Scott. It's tiresome to see Stormfags blame legislation created by a white, Christian President from Texas, Lyndon Baines Johnson, supported by a cadre of fellow white Christian traitors, entirely on a Jewish lawyer or two they hired to help them.

@118 SteelPalm
(((Propaganda))) definitely greased the wheels. Woodrow Wilson? Despite his other manifest sins, immigration did pretty much end once World War I got going and was cut off in the 1920s.

That's not even getting into the "Great Migration" of the blacks to Northern cities like Philadelphia, Chicago, and Detroit, or as Paul Kersey of SBPDL predicts it will be known in future generations, "Manifest Destruction".

If the Great Migration hadn't happened, most Southern states would be majority nog (and Democrat) by now. Certainly MS and SC at least. It's simply part of the consequences of some of our ancestors' sins in bringing in nogs in the first da-n place.

Blogger frigger611 January 13, 2017 2:16 PM  

I remember this conversation on Morning Joe with braindead Soledad Obrien on the passing of Castro. She labored to qualify Fidel Castro's "evilness" as complicated, since he did some good. The "good" she incessantly refers to is the increasing in the population of Afro-Cubans. That's it. Doesn't matter that the avg monthly wage has been reduced to something like $20, all that matters to her is more black faces. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLBGzZsg2x4

She gets to her point around the 5:00 mark.

This buttresses what Osric Pearl has observed.

I have come to understand over the past few years, that this is in fact the gold standard for leftists everywhere. Fewer whites and more minorities = good, no matter if living standards and liberties are reduced for everyone to near zero. See Mugabe for the full realization of this principle.

It is the same with identity politics in America; Obama has been a disaster (more blacks on food stamps and out of work) but the left has been sated because a brown face leads the nation and whites (along with their racist laws and creeds) have been hogtied.

I too have had to give up on many of my dear Objectivist and libertarian notions, because all the reason and theory in the world cannot overcome real-world experience that manifests itself openly as opposition to anything borne of Western Civilization, Christendom and Order.

Blogger James Dixon January 13, 2017 2:22 PM  

> That's not even getting into the "Great Migration" of the blacks to Northern cities like Philadelphia, Chicago, and Detroit, or as Paul Kersey of SBPDL predicts it will be known in future generations, "Manifest Destruction".

Hey, the south had to retaliate for Reconstruction somehow.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 2:24 PM  

Actually, the idea that governments have a responsibility to the overarching common good as well as their own citizens goes back to Francisco de Vitoria and the School of Salamanca circa 1548 and their re-conception of the Roman Ius Gentium, not Aquinas - my mistake.

Here's a link for anyone interested;

https://infogalactic.com/info/Francisco_de_Vitoria

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 2:26 PM  

@120

(((Propaganda))) definitely greased the wheels.

That's as vague a claim as "white privilege". And doesn't make sense for some of the periods we're talking about, or the specific Jews who actually did have influence.

Woodrow Wilson? Despite his other manifest sins, immigration did pretty much end once World War I got going and was cut off in the 1920s.

Might want to consult a graph of immigration. Immigration from 1910-1920 was exorbitantly high, the second highest decade in US history up until that point, with only 1900-1910 being higher.

In fact, immigration from 1911-1920 was much higher than it was from 1961-1970 and even 1971-1980.

And even 1920-1930 was pretty bad, far from "cut off".

However, unlike Wilson, FDR wasn't as bad on that front as I had blamed on him. Mea culpa there.

If the Great Migration hadn't happened, most Southern states would be majority nog (and Democrat) by now. Certainly MS and SC at least. It's simply part of the consequences of some of our ancestors' sins in bringing in nogs in the first da-n place.

I agree on all points. However, containing the blight to the Southern states would have been preferable to spreading the disease all over.

And yes, even Jefferson noted the horrible mistake that African slave labor was, not just on moral/ethical grounds, but on the curse it would be for white civilization.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 2:31 PM  

Oh, shut the fuck up, Scott. It's tiresome to see Stormfags blame legislation created by a white, Christian President from Texas, Lyndon Baines Johnson, supported by a cadre of fellow white Christian traitors, entirely on a Jewish lawyer or two they hired to help them.

That's ridiculous, SteelPalm. Stop leaping to the defense of evil Jews just because they are Jewish. Doing so only makes YOU look like a dishonest, perfidious Jew yourself; it makes precisely the opposite case you hope to make.

The primary architect of the 1965 Immigration Act was not LBJ, or even Ted Kennedy, but Emmanuel Celler, a Jew whose overriding priority was what he felt was good for the Jews. He led the charge against limited immigration for 40 freaking years! The 1965 Immigration Act is absolutely on the Jews in general, and Celler in particular, and you would have to be ludicrously dishonest to deny it. FFS, it's right there on both Infogalactic and Wikipedia!

Celler made his first important speech on the House floor during consideration of the Johnson Immigration Act of 1924. Three years earlier, Congress had imposed a quota that limited immigration for persons of any nationality to 3 percent of that nationality present in the United States in 1910, with an annual admission limit of 356,000 immigrants. This national origin system was structured to preserve the ethnic and religious identity of the United States by reducing immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe, thereby excluding many Jews, Catholics, Italians, and others. Celler was vehemently opposed to the Johnson act, which passed the isolationist Congress and was signed into law. Celler had found his cause and for the next four decades he vigorously spoke out in favor of eliminating the national origin quotas as a basis for immigration restriction.

In the 1940s, Celler opposed both the isolationists and the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration by forcefully advocating that the United States relax immigration laws on an emergency basis to rescue those fleeing the Holocaust. In 1943, he called President Franklin D. Roosevelt's immigration policy "cold and cruel" and blasted the "glacier-like attitude" of the State Department.

As Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee from 1949 to 1973 (except for a break from when the Republicans controlled the House), Celler was involved in drafting and passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In January 1965, Celler proposed in the House of Representatives the Twenty-fifth Amendment, which clarifies an ambiguous provision of the Constitution regarding succession to the presidency. Also in 1965, he proposed and steered to passage the Hart-Celler Act, which eliminated national origins as a consideration for immigration. This was the culminating moment in Celler's 41-year fight to overcome restriction on immigration to the United States based on national origin. The US Gun Control Act of 1968 directly evolved from Celler's Bill H.R. 17735.

Anonymous Athor Pel January 13, 2017 2:34 PM  

"83. Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 12:48 PM
"We certainly have an obligation to save their lives if possible.

No, we don't. And your policy is immoral."

If by "We" you mean the US government, there's certainly an argument to be made. But if "We" means "We individual Christians" I can't accept this. I cannot accept "we should let them starve, because otherwise they might breed too much" as a Christian position. I may be wrong, of course, but I do not believe that this is what you meant.
"



Why are you still here?

You should have emptied your back account, sold your house and car and got on a plane to a random hungry third world nation.

Go.

Now.

Live your Christian convictions.

You know you'll feel so good doing it.

OpenID dreadilkzee January 13, 2017 2:37 PM  

VD wrote:Imagine segregation happens in the US. Then this man would be stuck among people he shares nothing with but the color of his skin.

So what? That's not all he shares with them anyhow. DNA > skin color. He even admits that he fell prey to black behavioral patterns. With luck and ambition, he'd be sensibly running the show among them.

Do you really expect me, of all people, to have any sympathy for him? Do you similarly believe that 156 IQ white people are not white?


This harken's back to previous discussion around European cultural evolution. European's were not always so civilized. It had it's thugs and its philosophers and eventually grew up as a civilization.

The young man in the article is just like the men of old who had to throw of their "thuggish/brutish" past and become something more. The problem today is 3rd worlders want to cheat the process. I don't blame them honestly but long term their plight, their struggle would be better spend elevating their people then running from the challenge.

Baptist missions have recently made stronger emphasis of taking native people, educating them in country, discipling them, and then sending them back to their tribes and people to continue the work. This has proven better than just having the rich american's come and taking the best of the village away. People learn better the message is spread organically.

Mr. Smith from the article would do well to find a mentor but head back to train his people to move beyond their baser instincts. Or he can try to ask to be pulled out of his situation but he will always be an outcast to some degree.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 2:41 PM  

Europeans were not always so civilized. It had it's thugs and its philosophers and eventually grew up as a civilization.

With a little help from the Black Death. The irony is that Man is doing the precise opposite of what helped Europe become civilized. No doubt that is the basis on which the elite justify their plans to significantly reduce the human population.

Anonymous BigStormFag January 13, 2017 2:42 PM  

45where the nation is just a large charity hospital and the people and their resources are at the disposal of the elite

One thing I always hated was hospitals who imported people from the 3rd world for "teaching cases", with imported families supported at the Ronald McDonald house, when they will harass poor whites with health debt for decades.

Of course not, most Africans are not under immediate threat of life and limb

They are surrounded by stupid homicidal blacks a full standard deviation stupider than US Blacks. Read "The Crisis Caravan" written by a former African aid worker to see how bad Africa is from a former liberal equalitarian's view.

Maybe it's just me but on the subject of race and immigration Mr. Wright's reasoning is always purely emotional

At least he opposed Avatar Kora leading the Lesbos invasion of the Spirit world.

Wright sounds like Mark Shea there, especially the "wee little poopy baby" line.

Would he have been ok with a Hispanic male nurse changing his son's diaper?

Imagine segregation happens in the US. Then this man would be stuck among people he shares nothing with but the color of his skin

He would be highly motivated to make the black community better. By having black Einsteins among middle class whites that are their equals, there is nothing to counteract the worst of blacks.

Sorry, I've just never been called a cuck and a Nazi in the same day Not by Ernst Rohm

I have a black friend back in Detroit that I've stopped talking to...her daughter is having a baby. Nothing about marriage

A mudshark distant relative that I have only seen twice in the past decade, was visiting a relative( to borrow money) at the same time I was visiting , & in the less than 20 min she was there got a cell phone call about her neighbors "good boy" son getting arrested for armed robbery.

not be considered "deviancy" - like the LGBTQ is extending to...beastiality.

If you saw the homeless men that beat up NY Times reporters when picked up for sex, Wilber the pig might be a step up.

Stormfags blame legislation created by a white, Christian President from Texas, Lyndon Baines Johnson, supported by a cadre of fellow white Christian traitors, entirely on a Jewish lawyer or two they hired to help them

NASFALT. There was an uninterrupted push from 1913 up till the 1965 act by jews to profit from importing the 3rd world & destruction of the dollar.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 2:42 PM  

So what? That means the concept has been erroneous for a slightly shorter amount of time. There is another lie that goes back even farther.

"Hath God not said..."

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 2:49 PM  

5 bucks says Toddy Cat is Damn Yankee. Where ya from Toddy Cat?

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 2:52 PM  

I'm from the Midwest/Plains, so, yeah, I'm probably a Yankee by your definition.

Blogger tz January 13, 2017 2:55 PM  

To focus "love humanity" v.s. "love your neighbor",

The person who comes here from Cuba is NOT some abstraction or ideal or even imagined good person

The arrival of the refugees in the U.S. created political problems for U.S. president Jimmy Carter, first when his administration struggled to develop a consistent response to the immigrants and then when it was discovered that a number of the refugees had been released from Cuban jails and mental health facilities.

I've pointed out that Asians generally don't cause the kind of social problems other races do, but yet I can't name even ONE libertarian or constitutionalist of Asian heritage. The Constitution is irrelevant for a conformist culture. I'm sure someone exists, but rare and not prominent (and on the Black side, Sowell just retired, and Williams is aging - name a third other than Clarence Thomas).

Russia, Poland, Hungary, the Czech republic, are more likely to shift to our idea of the constitution - rights of "Englishmen" even before the UK (even with #BrExit - their immigration problem is similar), or the US does even with Trump. #CalExit would help.

We haven't stopped Abortion for over 40 years with 60 million dead. We can't convince to stop this holocaust either democratically or as a court-rights (unlike Gay Marriage). It was one of his recent books that had our plane/universe as the one where "mothers killed their babies". Quite. And the REMs consider THAT to be the CONSTITUTION in action. This should be something - if anything - easy to convince is a monstrous evil. "Ideology" can be complex and abstract. Yet we can't do even that. I would settle for ending Abortion here, and it is literally eugenics and black genocide (Planned Parenthood is much more a Nazi organization than the NPI). But it won't happen anytime soon.

Men browbeat if not physically beat their pregnant girlfriends to abort (to avoid child support). Child support isn't really enforced in the "vibrant" areas. Maybe once every few years they will jail the father until his family comes up with a few hundred or a thousand dollars (My friend's daughter was born out of wedlock, and the Father's arrearage was over $30K - he works for cash and generally doesn't care). You can't get blood out of a turnip. I'd extend this to hispanics who might be "catholic" and have tattoos of OL Guadaloupe, but sleep around.

And then there's South Africa (lesser Zimbabwe). The Whites tried to convert the natives, both philosophically as well as lead them to Christ. Instead they are now descending back to nightmare 3rd world hellholes.

We aren't bringing in the oppressed whites from SA here from their refugee-concentration camps. Aren't they oppressed? In mortal peril? Lets talk about Cuba instead...

Blogger Roy January 13, 2017 2:56 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 2:57 PM  

Now, to be fair to the Jews, it was not ONLY the Jews who pushed it through. Obviously, since they did not have the numbers or the influence at the time. But they made alliance with other immigrants - Irish and Italian Catholics - and the Left, and managed to lean on recent memories of the Holocaust to push it through.

From FrontPage:

Jewish organizations had labored since 1924 to unweave national origins quotas by admitting family members on non-quota visas. The B'nai B'rith Women and the American Council for Judaism Philanthropic Fund, among other Jewish organizations, supported this reform legislation while it was yet in subcommittee in the winter of 1965. Roman Catholics had the twin motivations of still-evolving social justice doctrine and the potential windfall of a mass influx of co-religionists from Latin America. Other organized minorities pressured for increased immigration to benefit relatives in their homelands. The ultra-liberal Americans for Democratic Action, the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild joined the chorus. Further, the Communist Party USA supported higher immigration on the grounds that it destabilizes working Americans.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 2:57 PM  

"We aren't bringing in the oppressed whites from SA here from their refugee-concentration camps. Aren't they oppressed? In mortal peril? "

Yes, they are certainly in a lot more imminent danger than the Cubans are. since they appear to be on the brink of a genocide. But, of course, to lots of people the words "White Refugee" just don't compute

Blogger tz January 13, 2017 3:00 PM  

@129 - We have horses, cows, goats, and sheep here and they need to be protected from the "no longer considered deviants". Much is at steak.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 3:00 PM  

Actually, the idea that governments have a responsibility to the overarching common good as well as their own citizens goes back to

I. Don't. Care. And I doubt I'm alone.

Why do you persist in defending a position sure to be attacked in this forum? While I'm not an adherent of the Greek letter theory of social hierarchy, you are surely emulating one of the more notorious ones.

Appeals to the "overarching common good" the most overt, outcome-utilitarian rationalizations for totalitarianism ever created. There is no such thing. All goods have a cost. Anyone who appeals to some vague, indefinable "overarching common good" suffers from an acute lead deficiency.

I come to this blog because the discussion often reveals good insights, many of them about those who comment.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 3:00 PM  

"Actually, Toddy Cat comes across more like a woman."

So only women care about Christian charity in your neighborhood? Must be an interesting neighborhood.

Blogger bw January 13, 2017 3:05 PM  

the words "White Refugee" just don't compute

And found therein is the pattern that exposes that it isn't really about "refugees" at all.

It is, however, about Whites - just not in a way that is any longer acceptable.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable January 13, 2017 3:06 PM  

So only women care about Christian charity in your neighborhood?

Women define "Christian charity" a particular way: give money to whatever the cause of the week might be and receive the credit for doing so.

Men, on the other hand, recognize that genuine charity might involve choosing between some distant, remote, hypothetical "good" and an actual fix that is right in front of your face today, whether people like you for it or not.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 3:07 PM  

If there are three people in the room, any collective decision will favor one or two over the other two or one. Collective decisions should thus be damn near unanimous, else all they do is embed systematic robbery or foment violent revolution.

I sincerely LOATHE anyone who speaks of "common good" beyond the most benign platitudes. Anyone arguing in favor of bailing out X or saving Y is invariably positing I BEAR THE COST in some way.

Such people should generally be shot. That my ancestors didn't do this (or worse, participated in log-rolling, i.e., you support my concentrated benefit at everyone else's cost and I'll do the same for you) is why we face such "interesting" times dead ahead.

Blogger bw January 13, 2017 3:08 PM  

is Damn Yankee

Can she/it Take Me High Enough
To fly me over, Yesterday?

Oh, wait..

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 3:09 PM  

"Why do you persist in defending a position sure to be attacked in this forum?"

Actually, if you go back to the beginning of this thread, I started out by commenting that I agreed with Vox, and disagreed with John Wright, and to be honest, I'm quite surprised at there being so much disagreement. My position is pretty much the same as John Zmirek's, and other Christian Immigration Hawks. As for why I persist in defending it, for the same reason you persist in defending your positions - because I believe that they are right. Also, being willing to engage with those who disagree with you is hardly a sign of some kind of personality disorder or something. I didn't think that these comments were supposed to be some kind of hugbox for True Believers. Anyway, thanks for a spirited debate.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 3:10 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger SteelPalm January 13, 2017 3:10 PM  

@125 That's ridiculous, SteelPalm. Stop leaping to the defense of evil Jews just because they are Jewish. Doing so only makes YOU look like a dishonest, perfidious Jew yourself; it makes precisely the opposite case you hope to make.

You're completely mistaken about what I'm arguing, Vox. I'm not defending anyone, least of all Celler, who I despise as much as you or anyone else does.

Rather, I'm pointing out the absurdity of blaming it on a single Jewish representative while ignoring the 5-10 white representatives and Senators and the white Christian President who signed it into law, cheering all the while.


The primary architect of the 1965 Immigration Act was not LBJ, or even Ted Kennedy, but Emmanuel Celler, a Jew whose overriding priority was what he felt was good for the Jews.


So the Celler-Hart Act had nothing to do with the white Senator Philip Hart whatsoever? And all those white Representatives and Senators voted for the idea for the hell of it?

And Lyndon Baines Johnson, who absolutely despised Jews, didn't veto it, but gladly passed it why, then?

He led the charge against limited immigration for 40 freaking years! The 1965 Immigration Act is absolutely on the Jews in general, and Celler in particular,

Again, no one is disputing Celler's profound perfidy and evil here. I'm just amused that a single member of the House of Representatives, courtesy of being Jewish, apparently passed this bill all by himself, and none of the dozens of white lawmakers, including the freaking President and the Senator with his name on the bill, had anything whatsoever to do with it.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 3:12 PM  

As for why I persist in defending it, for the same reason you persist in defending your positions - because I believe that they are right. Also, being willing to engage with those who disagree with you is hardly a sign of some kind of personality disorder or something. I didn't think that these comments were supposed to be some kind of hugbox for True Believers. Anyway, thanks for a spirited debate.

Which is why, when the splintering reaches its maximum, you and I won't be on the same team, and being on different teams will mean either geographic isolation or one team gets exterminated.

Yes, I do definitely think it will get that bloody and that intolerant.

Blogger tz January 13, 2017 3:14 PM  

She should be good at defending the Constitution after pledging on the Koran

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 3:17 PM  

"Which is why, when the splintering reaches its maximum, you and I won't be on the same team, and being on different teams will mean either geographic isolation or one team gets exterminated."

Well, so much for "No Enemies to The Right". At any rate, I can only hope that you're wrong about that. The world doesn't need yet another white fratricide, the previous two were quite enough.

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 3:21 PM  

Toddy Cat wrote:

Well, so much for "No Enemies to The Right". At any rate, I can only hope that you're wrong about that. The world doesn't need yet another white fratricide, the previous two were quite enough.


What if ... you're not to our right?

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother January 13, 2017 3:25 PM  

What if you're to my left? I'm a lefty naturally, and can shoot with either hand...

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 3:27 PM  

"What if ... you're not to our right?"

So, does this mean that everyone to your Left is your enemy, even if they essentially agree with you on most issues, and are on the Right by any normal definition? If so, you are going to end up with a lot of enemies, possibly including our President-to-be. Who you consider to be your enemy is your prerogative, but this doesn't really sound like a winning strategy.

Blogger The Rev January 13, 2017 3:30 PM  

@146

...the absurdity of blaming it on its primary architect? Of assigning the primary blame to its primary motivating factor?

Blogger tz January 13, 2017 3:33 PM  

Priests of Baal and Molech

And we are worried about oppression in Cuba? The blood is flowing here. Where is Elijah (who killed the 500 prophets of Baal) today?

I have no idea why we are talking about minutiae on the margin when clear flashing neon signs saying "Hell has come here" are all around us and we don't seem to be worried about God's justice. Even with Trump.

My only solace is Trump has and is separating the sheep from the goats.

Romans 1:28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.

It isn't Trump Derangement, it is Depravity. And it is getting worse, not better. That they are in the Hillary Archipelago will just mean a form of Lot leaving Sodom (and the laggards getting salted).

I'm trying to think of a lefty other than Glenn Greenwald that hasn't lost their mind. Most, especially the MSM are melting down while doubling down.

Innocent blood cries to heaven. I think the cries will be heard, and that justice will be meted out in proper proportion even under Trump.

Blogger VFM #7634 January 13, 2017 3:40 PM  

@146 SteelPalm
According to "Behind The Lodge Door", the SCOTUS was almost entirely Freemason in the 1960s, but at no other point in U.S. history. I'm wondering if the rest of Fedgov was similarly stacked with Freemasons or similar secret society members during that period -- wannabe Jews, essentially -- and that's what did it. I'm sure old Lightbulb Johnson was one himself.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 3:43 PM  

Well, so much for "No Enemies to The Right".
Consider this: If you were in a debate, and everyone present was armed and most had the welfare of their wives, kids, grandkids, etc. top-of-mind, how badly do you think you'll want to stand up and argue in favor of an expedition to "help" some other group?

You'll sit down and STFU. I get tired of arguing about the number of angels that will fit on a pin, with clowns who think all this is some sort of parlor debate.

I have kids, I have grandkids, and those who sing their virtuous love of their fellowmen in Nowhereistan seek, in my view, to harm my grandchildren.

Do you REALLY want to be counted in that light? Seeing as how when difficulties arrive, people like me will have not just short fuses, but no fuse at all for such bullshit?

When this shit gets real, men will be primed for any opportunity to rip someone to literal shreds. This is what an extremely negative social mood generates, and the easiest example is found in the legions of volunteers for warfare when times are aligned that way. Men are so subconsciously enraged that any channel that promises them the opportunity to vent it is attractive, even if it's suicidal.

I see that coming. Chicken shit little slice-the-pie debates remind me why US immigrants of German ancestry were LYNCHED around 1917.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 3:46 PM  

FTR, Toddy, you write like someone who hasn't a picogram of testosterone. Sorry, but that's how it reads.

Anonymous BigStormFag January 13, 2017 3:47 PM  

"Actually, Toddy Cat comes across more like a woman." One bullet dodged

So the Celler-Hart Act had nothing to do with the white Senator Philip Hart whatsoever?

Maybe if he didn't get caught on film with Haitian cheese & shekels .

different teams will mean either geographic isolation or one team gets exterminated.Yes, I do definitely think it will get that bloody and that intolerant.

It could be that the blue areas just get cut off from food/power. Having a years worth of survival chow would be a good idea, not just for Mormons. There is a good chance that if things go down 80% of the population could die off from lack of supplies.

Anonymous Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 3:48 PM  

By the way, when I referred to "common good" I meant that there are things that nations owe each other, simply out of common humanity, aside from their citizen's interests. For an extreme example, if there was a policy that the US government could adopt that would double the incomes of every American, but would kill every other human being on Earth, I personally would oppose this, as would (I'll bet) most people on this forum. There are obviously interests that need to be considered by national governments that are not those of their citizens, even though citizens obviously come first.

Blogger Chris Mallory January 13, 2017 3:53 PM  

SteelPalm wrote:And Lyndon Baines Johnson, who absolutely despised Jews,

Yet ol'LBJ rolled over and let Israel sodomize the US every chance he got. So much for despising Jews.

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 3:56 PM  

Toddy Cat wrote:By the way, when I referred to "common good" I meant that there are things that nations owe each other, simply out of common humanity, aside from their citizen's interests. For an extreme example, if there was a policy that the US government could adopt that would double the incomes of every American, but would kill every other human being on Earth, I personally would oppose this, as would (I'll bet) most people on this forum. There are obviously interests that need to be considered by national governments that are not those of their citizens, even though citizens obviously come first.

How old are you Toddy? Are you a man or a woman?

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable January 13, 2017 4:00 PM  

For an extreme example, if there was a policy that the US government could adopt that would double the incomes of every American, but would kill every other human being on Earth, I personally would oppose this, as would (I'll bet) most people on this forum. There are obviously interests that need to be considered by national governments that are not those of their citizens, even though citizens obviously come first.

Silly hypothetical, and you know it.

What you're really positing is that the U.S. government should jump in and do the job of the Cuban government, and the Somali government, and the Saudi government, etc., etc., in securing optimal conditions for their citizens.

To which I say ... uh, no. That's THEIR job, not ours.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 4:00 PM  

@159 What kind of person argues from hyperbolic impossibilities?

Blogger dc.sunsets January 13, 2017 4:02 PM  

I'm with Joshua_D; I think someone forgot to check Toddy's ID at the door.

Blogger mushroom January 13, 2017 4:02 PM  

Faceless wrote:The idea that a policy can run its course and end is anathema to most Americans, but, we are assured, to everything, there is a season, a time and a place under heaven. This policy ran its course and can no longer be justified (aside from inertia) for any reason to prefer Cubans to Haitians to Jamaicans.

Yep.

Anonymous Toddy cat January 13, 2017 4:04 PM  

"What you're really positing is that the U.S. government should jump in and do the job of the Cuban government, and the Somali government, and the Saudi government, etc., etc., in securing optimal conditions for their citizens."

I am positing no such Goddamned thing. Saying that governments have certain minimal obligations to those not their citizens is not the same thing as saying that the US should set itself up as some kind of World Welfare State. This should be obvious.

"FTR, Toddy, you write like someone who hasn't a picogram of testosterone. Sorry, but that's how it reads."

Well, I suppose that I haven't threatened to rip anyone to shreds, or baselessly called anyone a cuck, or threatened to exterminate anyone who disagrees with me, or any internet tough-guy stuff like that, so I suppose that I haven't really proved myself in that regard. Anyway, I guess that we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. For what it's worth, I still think that Vox was right and John C. Wright was wrong.

Blogger Joshua_D January 13, 2017 4:09 PM  

Toddy cat wrote:"What you're really positing is that the U.S. government should jump in and do the job of the Cuban government, and the Somali government, and the Saudi government, etc., etc., in securing optimal conditions for their citizens."

I am positing no such Goddamned thing. Saying that governments have certain minimal obligations to those not their citizens is not the same thing as saying that the US should set itself up as some kind of World Welfare State. This should be obvious.


Well, you've not really posited anything aside from "governments have certain minimal obligations to those not their citizens", and I don't think you've specified what that means yet, unless I missed it.

But my questions remain.

1. How old are you? 2. Are you male or female?

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable January 13, 2017 4:09 PM  

Saying that governments have certain minimal obligations to those not their citizens is not the same thing as saying that the US should set itself up as some kind of World Welfare State.

But ... wait. This started about the U.S. taking in Cuban strays. How is this not the welfare state????

OF COURSE we all know that the U.S. has certain minimal obligations to citizens of other countries, like not strafing them with drones for no good reason, a la Obama.

But THAT's not what we're talking about here, right?

Anonymous buybuydandavis January 13, 2017 4:13 PM  

"Obama is a petty man. ... But Steve Sailor has this right, Cubans went for Trump 54%. They voted for him with the same percentage as white women. So yeah, a petty move by a petty man."

Obama is not petty about votes. The Ruling Reptiles are all about power. They look at those numbers, and think that more Cuban immigrants means more Republican votes.

But I wonder if they are actually correct on that point. Are *current* Cuban immigrants net Republican voters?

I'm guessing not.

Cubans are actually increasingly Democratic, with the younger Cubans more Democratic than older Cubans.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/06/24/after-decades-of-gop-support-cubans-shifting-toward-the-democratic-party/

I think the Ruling Reptiles are actually making a mistake here. They're letting their associations of Cuban Americans as Republicans get in the way of the data.

Math class is tough!

Blogger American Spartan January 13, 2017 4:15 PM  

" without them we are not replacing our population."

You are a moron and a cuck.

Blogger VFM #7634 January 13, 2017 4:24 PM  

@170 American Spartan

Ha. I'd say Tim gave us the moron-cuck statement of the millennium:

"And we do need immigrants, without them we are not replacing our population."

Minor edit:

"And we do need immigrants like a hole in the head... without them we are not replacing our population."

Blogger Karl January 13, 2017 4:24 PM  

Poor Elian, that kid was treated like the Cuban Harry Potter being sent back to Voldemort.

The legal issue were so clear cut - no state court can just up and award custody to a non-parent because the parent lives in a repressive country. Especially where the kid is still technically in federal custody. He was released to the U.S. relations for humanitarian reasons. They could have kept him in Krome (detention center).

And still there was the whole farce where the father had to come to Florida to get him from the feds to "prove" that he wasn't under duress.

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Deplorable Cents January 13, 2017 4:27 PM  

Meanwhile in Hungary, the first cohort of border hunters has been sworn in. Hungary plans a force of 3,000 specifically assigned to detain colonizers on its border with Serbia and Croatia. Hungary is in the process of completing a razorwire fence that will completely seal that border. Turbaning stops at the Orban!

Jewish Israel has a fence. Orthodox Serbia is building a fence. Catholic Hungary is finishing a fence. When does the US get a real fence?

Blogger James Dixon January 13, 2017 4:28 PM  

> By the way, when I referred to "common good" I meant that there are things that nations owe each other, simply out of common humanity, aside from their citizen's interests.

And I'm saying that no, there isn't. Unless we reach a mutually agreeable treaty with another country, we have no obligations whatsoever toward them.

> There are obviously interests that need to be considered by national governments that are not those of their citizens.

Really? Why don't you give us some examples of those obvious interests?

OpenID elijahrhodes January 13, 2017 4:32 PM  

This entire discussion is pointless. I'm reliably informed by Paul Ryan that there will be no mass deportations.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/paul-ryan-trump-mass-deportations-not-happening/

Now that that's settled, I'll go have a Cuban pork sandwich.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable January 13, 2017 4:37 PM  

I'm reliably informed by Paul Ryan ...

One thing we can be absolutely positive about in a Trump administration is that nothing Paul Ryan says matters a whit. I'd estimate he'll be gone in less than 12 months.

Blogger bob kek mando ( Death To The Boor-geois, Keks To The Lol-etariat ) January 13, 2017 4:58 PM  

64. Tim January 13, 2017 12:25 PM
And we do need immigrants, without them we are not replacing our population.



because you can't have a good White Genocide unless you replace the Whites with something not White.

http://whitegenocideproject.com/what-anti-whites-say/

Anonymous Athor Pel January 13, 2017 5:07 PM  

"139. Toddy Cat January 13, 2017 3:00 PM

"Actually, Toddy Cat comes across more like a woman."

So only women care about Christian charity in your neighborhood? Must be an interesting neighborhood.
"


If it walks like a vagina and quacks like a vagina, it must be a vagina.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 13, 2017 5:10 PM  

Toddy Cat

1) Love of invisible and non-personal "people" is not real love. It has zero, nada, individual involvement and cost.

2) There is absolutely no Biblical authority for a Christian to put a burden on another person, much less a fellow Christian. Add to this that taking by force and under threat of violence from another is theft.

4) Governments, even if illegitimate, do enforce laws that may be legitimate. In our form of government, the Constitution is the law which delineates a few powers delegated to the FedGov. For the FedGov to do something not delegated it is called usurpation and the Bible does teach against usurpation of authority. You cannot delegate a power/authority that you do not possess.

Blogger John Wright January 13, 2017 5:13 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 5:13 PM  

Rather, I'm pointing out the absurdity of blaming it on a single Jewish representative while ignoring the 5-10 white representatives and Senators and the white Christian President who signed it into law, cheering all the while.

He was the primary architect and had worked for more than 40 years towards it. Celler is to blame for the 1965 Immigration Act in much the same way Hitler is responsible for the Holocaust. No one claims he managed to do it himself.

So the Celler-Hart Act had nothing to do with the white Senator Philip Hart whatsoever? And all those white Representatives and Senators voted for the idea for the hell of it?

Who talked them into it? Do you really think Celler and the various Jewish organizations who had been pushing to get rid of the immigration limitations since 1924 weren't crying Holocaust in 1965? Haven't you ever read The Chosen? It even describes Jews lobbying politicians in Washington to help them bring more Jews into the USA.

And Lyndon Baines Johnson, who absolutely despised Jews, didn't veto it, but gladly passed it why, then?

I have no idea. But LBJ was not the driving force behind it. Look, there is absolutely no getting away from the historical facts of the matter. And the fact is that it was a coalition of early 20th century immigrants, led by the Jews, who intentionally destroyed the demographics of the United States because they thought it would be beneficial for their various minority groups.

Hart, LBJ, Kennedy, and others obviously merit some of the blame. No question. But the historical facts of who drove the process are undeniable.

Blogger VD January 13, 2017 5:20 PM  

It is customary to read what an argument is before rebutting it, sir. For shame.

I can hardly be blamed, let alone shamed, for the fact that you didn't make an argument, but instead led off with rhetoric about poopy babies, enslaved Cubans, and nonexistent obsessions.

I'll be happy to address any actual arguments you present. But I fail to see how the outcome could possibly be any different.

Blogger John Wright January 13, 2017 5:21 PM  

@1
"I disagree with John C Wright's statement that we are all born innocent. We are born sinners by nature."

We do not disagree on this point, you merely ignore the context of my comment.

We are all born innocent of being Leftists. Leftism is a learned trait.

The word "innocent" means "not found guilty of a crime".

It does not mean "sinless" and it certainly does not mean "not sharing man's fallen nature."

Blogger Benjamin Kraft January 13, 2017 5:21 PM  

@16. No such moral obligation exists. It's an act of kindness/charity/mercy. It's a bonus, not an obligation. Obviously you reap what you sow though, as you should not expect similar help in a similar situation if you do not extend it yourself. However, long term denizens of the USA are, for the most part, quite unlikely to be in a similar situation in the near future on one hand, and on the other most other nations (including Cuba) certainly would not help were the roles reversed.

@17. Hell yes, evil in high places is there by implicit consent of the populace, been saying this for a while.

Also yes, if we allow people to escape the consequences of their actions, they won't learn from their mistakes. Improve other nations by keeping them from fleeing when they screw up.

@20. Hell no. Ethnicity is more than genetics, and sins DEFINITELY have a way of propagating within families and societies. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt when I KNOW you aren't that way, but until then you will be treated with appropriate caution per the average of your appearances. This is entirely rational.

@40. It's not even a moral obligation for actual Christians, and what you're saying is actually totally immoral with regards to the government, because Christianity is nuanced, and we certainly should not be trying to force others to do what we feel like doing. Should Christians provide aid? Yes if they are able and it is entirely their aid to give. Must they or risk hellfire? Certainly not.

The government of a nation has an obligation to function for the benefit of its populace. It has NO OBLIGATION WHATSOEVER to function for the benefit of ANYONE else, EVER.

@64. We're not replacing our population?
#1: So what? Maybe our population is already too high.
#2: This is partially because of "immigration", especially that which lowers the standards of living or cultural morality, or increases financial or other strain on the general populace.
#3: Funny how you think they're hard workers, when the stereotype is "lazy Cubans". Stereotypes are based on averages, and are usually quite accurate in that regard.
#4: Long story short, we don't need immigrants, at all. As a matter of fact, they immigrate because THEY NEED US.

@72. Cuck is both appropriate and accurate. Societies have no moral obligation whatsoever to other societies, and if they did, all of the societies you are talking about generally OWE OURS ALREADY.

@76. I'm not claiming to have that high of an IQ, but even wherever I'm at feels like a completely different race sometimes. Fortunately there ARE a lot of values that scale up appropriates, something I can't say for what I see of black culture.


On-Topic: As far as the "what changes men into monsters" question? While I love your writing, Mr. Wright, you need to do some brushing up on your basic theology.
#1: We are monsters, one and all. Anything less than absolute perfection is utterly monstrous.
#2: The only thing that raises us above wanton bestial monstrosities is God, by his grace.

With regard to altars, I've said it before and I'll say it again. We all, as mortals, necessarily sacrifice our entire lives. The only question is upon what altars. Do we sacrifice it upon the altars of The Lord, our family, and our people in that order, or do we sacrifice otherwise as a pagan monster would?

Blogger Ransom Smith January 13, 2017 5:22 PM  

Has anyone ever done studies on rates of so called assimilation based on country of origin?

Blogger Ingot9455 January 13, 2017 5:22 PM  

But should the Good Samaritan donate two denari to the innkeeper to pay for the wounded traveler's upkeep if he's already twenty trillion denari in debt?

Blogger John Wright January 13, 2017 5:23 PM  

@9
"Wright is wrong, especially when he argues that opposing anything Obama does is the right thing to do."

It is customary to read an argument before rebutting it. What I said was that if an line of thought leads you to an absurd conclusion, that is, you find yourself siding with tyrants and weasels, it is time to check your premises.

Blogger John Wright January 13, 2017 5:26 PM  

@12
"As much as I respect Mr. Wright, and share his hatred of Communism, he is being driven by emotion here, not pragmatism or even theology."

I suppose if I had said that absurd strawman caricature things you ascribe to me, I would be driven by emotion. As it is, all I said was that at a certain point, I stopped seeing Leftists as human, and I ask what causes inhumanity?

I suggest that inhumanity is caused by an unwillingness to check one's axioms when one's conclusions lead into a dead end.

Does that sound like an emotion statement to you?

Blogger Benjamin Kraft January 13, 2017 5:34 PM  

@182. I don't think we're even born innocent of "leftism". Leftism is a convenient term for referencing an aspect of sinful depravity, particularly those parts of it that are currently exceedingly prevalent.

Look at Paul's "old man" and "new man", for one. Apart from being (apparently) a reference to Adam/Adam Kadmon (a very appropriate analogy to Man/Christ), the old man is enslaved by desires and habits he cannot control, exactly like a leftist, who merely embody enslavement to those habits and desires that have recently been most socially acceptable.

If Good is a root for us to grow from, Evil is a seed. We all have that seed within us due to our birth and our blood, and it can grow into every possible kind of evil according to how it is nurtured. Nothing changed them, the monster was there all along, a visceral part of them clawing to be let out. They let it out and have not recaptured it, that is the only difference between them and us.

To me, innocence is a shield. A conscience is the most vivid when it has never been infringed, but once it has been infringed, even with redemption it will never be as powerful again.

To me, you look like someone who has, at the least, allowed the leftist part of your monster out of its cage for a spell at some point in the past, and consequently your conscience just doesn't even notice its influence as easily as it once may have.

Blogger Benjamin Kraft January 13, 2017 5:39 PM  

@187. It has been said, presciently, that the defining trait of humankind is its capacity for inhumanity, as nothing else may be inhuman. Again, the monster is already there, we all have it.

Your unstated implication is that Vox is on the verge of turning into a monster, an implication that is, as best I can tell, based entirely on your feelings. What has he done wrong, who has he harmed, where has he spoken evil? What sign that he has unleashed the monster?

Blogger John Wright January 13, 2017 5:45 PM  

@13

"I will not allow any personal attacks on any Castalia author here, least of all Mr. Wright. If you can't manage to disagree in a civil fashion, or without making it personal, zip it."

This is why I would rather disagree with Vox Day, than agree with an emotion-driven person. If the emotion-driven person agrees with me for emotional reasons, his agreement is worth little.

If the polite and professional Vox Day disagrees, I am confident in one of three outcomes: it is a matter where my logic errs, and I will change my mind with no hard feelings; it is matter where his logic errs, and he will change his mind with no hard feelings; it is a judgement call where reasonable men can differ, and we will continue to disagree in an environment of mutual respect.

I did not write him my note because I do not like him. I wrote him my note because I disagreed with something he said about a relatively insignificant matter done by a lame duck president.

In this case, mine was not so much a disagreement as a question: when you find yourself agreeing with Castro about the wisdom of helping him maintain his slave state immediately offshore of the United States, is it or is it not time to check your premises?

His answer was a negative. My follow up question would be: what is required to make you check your premises? What judgment which is currently sound, or what fact which is currently known, would have to grow doubtful in your eyes before the case is open for re-trial?


I myself favor low immigration or no immigration, and I believe there should be a legal way to strip citizenship from persons unwilling and unable to participate in a democracy (or else otherwise the democracy cannot survive). I certainly do not think anyone who steps foot on this soil is a citizen, nor that we can, should, or ought invite every escaped slave into our midst.

But, in the same way the law handles murder in a fit of passion when a man finds his wife in flagrant violation of her marriage vow differently from handling murder in cold blood, so I would suggest that throwing escaping Cubans back into slavery is different from throwing Mexicans back into their hellhole of a country.

Both are different from accepting refugees from abroad.

Vox and I agree that an invasion of Cuba would have been a better policy. It should have been done the moment the Soviet Union fell, and the puny tyrant had no backer, and no superpowered ally.

Blogger John Wright January 13, 2017 5:47 PM  

@15
"Mr.Wright, I and many other attorneys objected vociferously at the time to the midnight commando raid on Elian Gonzalez and his relatives as an utter trashing of rule of law."

You are entirely right that the two issues are separate. I was using the event as an example of ideology override humanity. That is also overrode the rule of law did not escape my notice.

Good point.

Blogger Benjamin Kraft January 13, 2017 5:50 PM  

I would also add my conjecture of why prison inmates like so much to kill rapists and child molesters. It's a combination of pride and fear. Pride that they, even criminals that they are, are still "above" someone else. Fear that they, as criminals, could easily become an even worse criminal. So they "purge it with fire" and destroy the evil perceived as greater than themselves as quickly and as violently as they may.

I find this psychoanalysis often applicable to non-criminals as well. Leftists like to imply such a connection by use of words like "homophobe", etc. which is quite entertaining, because this is actually an example of them applying the same principle based on a delusional (self-serving) definition of evil.

That you see them as complete monsters is somewhat telling of your own corruption.

I admit that I also sometimes view others as monsters. It's a gut response, a distancing, a delusional implication of "I could never be that vile". I too have stared willingly into the abyss of corruption, and my soul is somewhat blinded for it.

OpenID elijahrhodes January 13, 2017 5:52 PM  

In this case, mine was not so much a disagreement as a question: when you find yourself agreeing with Castro about the wisdom of helping him maintain his slave state immediately offshore of the United States, is it or is it not time to check your premises?

Seems to me you're setting up a logical fallacy. How was Day's support for ending a bad policy akin to agreeing with Castro?

Blogger John Wright January 13, 2017 5:56 PM  

Please excuse me from further discussion: My obligation to help escaped slaves, no matter whether it is real or not, is less immediate than my obligation to an anonymous fan whose review of GREEN KNIGHT'S SQUIRE my wife just read aloud.

If I am more skilled at writing than at lawyering, Ricardo's Theory (which Vox no longer believes) says I should concentrate on what I do best, even if I am a fair hand at lesser things.

I just wrote a scene when one of his Moth cousins sees Gil galloping down the streets of New York into a ravening pack of werewolves. I want to get back to it.

Blogger Avalanche January 13, 2017 5:58 PM  

@16 "as Christians, we certainly have an obligation to save the lives of those who need saving, all other things being equal. To do otherwise would violate the dictates of charity, IMHO."

(As a non-Christian), I though your duty was save SOULS, not bodies? "Lord knows" GOD did not 'save bodies' -- he ordered and approved of much slaughter! He did NOT send his adherents out-and-about LOOKING for people whose BODIES needed saving!

Even the Good Samaritan was held up as an example for taking the injured man TO A HOTEL -- not to his home: to a hotel and paying for him to be kept till heathy enough to go on his way. The G.S. did not invite the injured man in this home and vow to support, fed, and clothe him AND all his descendants secula seculorum! THAT was *in no way* the example Jesus was describing.

(Oh, and p.s. "all others things" are NOT "equal"!)

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey January 13, 2017 6:01 PM  

@Stg58/Animal Mother
"I disagree with John C Wright's statement that we are all born innocent. We are born sinners by nature. We are broken, fallen wretches"

Yup. That's right up there with the Blank Slate and the Magic Dirt in the catalogue of false leftist assumptions. Religious considerations aside, it seems to be conceptually related to the idea of the Noble Savage.

Blogger Avalanche January 13, 2017 6:15 PM  

@73 "The "need for immigrants" is also delusional."

The answer I always give to "we need them" is: "oh, yes, of course, because NO fruits and veg were EVER planted or picked in early America! No hotels were EVER cleaned (or owned!), no construction was done, no chicken or cows were slaughtered and butchered, and there were no nurses in any hospital or school! (Or, more recently, no convenience stores were open at night, and no computer programing or designing was EVER done in the U.S. until the indians and chinese began flooding in. Yup, we "NEED" them or the whole country will stop dead! NOT!"

1 – 200 of 253 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