ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2017 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Crisis & Conceit: a review

The first review of Volume II of my collected columns:
Great read from a gifted writer

As stated in the description, this book is a collection of Vox Day's published articles from 2006 - 2009, a time of immense changes in the political and economic landscape. This collection is historic and will make some future thesis writer extremely happy with a progression of articles that week by week chronicles the changing face of America and the World, with a lens that addresses religion, politics, soccer, NATO and, most tellingly, economic forces. There he is, in black and white, foretelling the meltdown of world markets.

It may be that his greatest strength is his well versed long view of history. He has the knowledge of the past and the flexibility to apply that learning to the issues of the present. There is a great depth of understanding of macro and micro movers across many civilizations that adds a welcome sense of gravitas to his writing.

His opinion of George W. Bush is not flattering to President Bush, but in hindsight, I believe Vox Day's opinion is painfully accurate. A disappointed libertarian at heart, his view of the 2008 election over the course of the year is a prolonged scream against what most of us did not see coming. His disdain for John McCain as a candidate is almost as venomous as his disdain for Hillary, whom he refers to as The Lizard Queen. The articles also cover other candidates, including some things I had not heard about Obama, but were about rumors swirling around Obama that were not being covered or investigated by the media (February 25, 2007!). I was shocked to realize that the Obama cover-ups started so early.

His articles also foretell the the immigration issues that about to engulf the entire world in a few short years.
An excerpt:

Rainbow mutations
March 27, 2006

What does the shape of a Minneapolis stripper’s naked bottom have in common with a landmark of English finance? And how is it possible that the color of the roadside prostitutes in Italy can harbor any implications for the ability of a New York woman to stay home with her children? The point of commonality, as it happens, is historical patterns of migration.

In 1990, Umberto Eco wrote an article titled “Migrazioni”, which was published in L’Espresso. In that essay, he presciently noted that what Europe was undergoing at that time was not a phenomenon of immigration, but of migration. The difference is significant and one of degree—an individual can immigrate or emigrate, but only a people migrate.

Eco observed that migrations result in inexorable changes to the region of destination, changes to the normal form of dress as well as changes to the color of skin, eyes and hair. A secular humanist in good standing, he adroitly avoids committing the grand faux pas of criticizing this hybridization, fatalistically accepting the inevitability of a new Afro-European culture. For to even hint at criticism would, of course, be crude racist ethnocentrism of the first degree, and not even the reputation of one of the world’s leading intellectuals could survive accusations of that.

But what the great dottore mentions only in passing, and what the defenders of the diversity faith avoid discussing like sorority girls pretending not to hear a bulimic sister purging her caloric sins in the neighboring stall, is that changes to the political culture as well as the physical mean are likewise unavoidable. For 40 years, the people of nations such as Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom believed it was possible to bring Muslim immigrants into their countries in order to replace their declining workforces. They believed their governing elite’s assurances that prolonged exposure to the French or English way of life would suffice to turn these immigrants into ersatz Frenchmen or Englishmen.

What they did not realize was that their governments were not permitting immigration, but were instead inspiring a mass migration. Now, there are demands for Sharia in the land which once mobilized against a Catholic armada, the French are showing signs of wishing to revive Maurice Papon’s practice of baptizing Algerians in the Seine and even the notoriously tolerant Dutch are beginning to question the once-sacrosanct notion that all cultures are created equal.

While in the United States, Islam is still an issue of immigration, not migration, this does not mean that Americans are not facing their own migrational challenge. With the importation of 30 million immigrants of varying degrees of legality in the last 35 years, most from Spanish-speaking countries that have never known individual liberty or free markets, combined with 34 million native women listening to the siren song of feminism and putting family life on the back burner, the probability that America will be able to retain its unique political identity and the tattered remnants of its Constitution are rapidly decreasing.

For example, the vast majority of native-born Americans of African and European descent consider the notion of a supranational American Union with Canada, Mexico and various Central American countries to be unthinkable and would oppose it if they recognized it to be the natural progression from NAFTA and the FTAA. But is the same true of the growing Spanish-speaking population across the Southwest, an outspoken segment of which is already calling for closer ties with Mexico? As recent events in Afghanistan and the Palestinian Authority have demonstrated to all and sundry, democratic institutions are not capable, by themselves, of moderating ideology, religion or cultural identification.

It is unlikely that Europe can solve its demographic problems without violence—Eco seems uncharacteristically untroubled when he notes that periods of mass migrations are not known for being peaceful—but it is not necessarily too late for the United States. The answer is simple, but it will require inspired leadership that is conspicuously lacking today. If America is to remain America, sovereign, liberal and free, then her people must completely turn away from the ideologies of multiculturalism, immigrationism and feminism. If they do not—and continue on the present path—she will not be sovereign, liberal or free within four decades.

This country, like her Old World progenitors, stands on the brink of precipitate change. In embracing the rainbow, America has been engulfed in its lethally mutating rays and the resulting cancer will surely kill her if it is not removed in the near future.

Labels: ,

18 Comments:

Blogger Michael Maier June 11, 2017 8:11 PM  

Hate to harp, but will these be released in print? You have too many irons in the fire for me to keep track of which will and won't.

Blogger VD June 11, 2017 8:23 PM  

The first volume already is. The second and third volumes will be.

Anonymous Luke June 11, 2017 8:48 PM  

Good post, but one minor terminology quibble.
I find it more apt to refer to Muslim, etc. enclaves in the West as colonies, as the residents in such places are as clearly colonists (with ZERO prior intention to assimilate) as were the whites permanently relocating to North America prior to independence. (A few lone men or castoff women on the frontier, analogous to current omega men now, or mudsharking sub-3.0 lower-class white women now, do not suffice to disprove that assessment.)

Blogger VD June 11, 2017 8:49 PM  

The Muslim train is fine.

Blogger Cecil Henry June 11, 2017 8:58 PM  

Just LOOK what our politicians are actually up to-- all the time:


Check out Deb Schulte MP (@_DebSchulte) on Twitter:

Seems her ONLY real job is ethnic non-White activism.

Endless pandering to non-White ethnic interests. Eagerly!!


Tweet her and Justin. Let them know what you think


'It wasn't because we liked immigrants, but because we didn't like Britain. We saw immigrants - as allies.

Anonymous Ben Cohen June 11, 2017 9:27 PM  

Vox, would you consider doing a column again, or is it obsolete? Many people found you through WND back in the 2000s.

Anonymous Avalanche June 11, 2017 10:16 PM  

Way OT, but germane to this blog's readers/commenters?

"Fetuses in the womb respond to face-like images."
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/06/scientists-show-images-to-babies-in-the-womb/529566/

from which:
"... They were more than twice as likely to track the movement of the upright face-like triangle than the inverted one—exactly the same pattern you find in newborn babies. “This tells us that the fetus isn’t a passive processor of environmental information,” says Reid. “It’s an active responder.”

It also confirms that the preference for faces isn’t the result of experiences that happen after birth. Some scientists have suggested that babies imprint on the first things they see—usually their mother’s face—in the same way that baby chicks or ducklings do. It’s very hard to test that idea: If imprinting happens and is important, it would be unethical to deprive a baby of that stimulus. “But this study rules that out,” says Reid. The preference already exists in utero."

Blogger CM June 11, 2017 10:24 PM  

Another OT: What are the origins of America for anyone who wants to be American?

I questioned its advent and am getting push back but have no idea how to search for this idea.

Blogger Fenris Wulf June 11, 2017 10:34 PM  

Since we're the subject of strippers' bottoms, the particular shape and musculature of white girls has always been "just right" for me. I always feel a vague sense of resentment when the media pushes non-white as the new sexy. It's like owning a vintage Gibson SG and somebody breaks into your house and replaces it with a Korean knockoff.

Blogger Matthew June 11, 2017 10:56 PM  

Pygeiognomy is real, Fenris.

Blogger Matthew June 11, 2017 10:57 PM  

And yes, the media is pushing anything-but-white as beautiful.

Blogger Lazarus June 11, 2017 11:28 PM  

Luke wrote:I find it more apt to refer to Muslim, etc. enclaves in the West as colonies,

It is appropriate. Islamic colonization. The land the mosque sits on no longer belongs to the country it is in, but to the Ummah. This is also related to the push for recognition of Sharia law.

If they have their own sovereign land and own sovereign law, any monies they receive from the state are considered a Jizya style tax that the dhimmis must pay to their masters.


Anonymous Daniel H June 11, 2017 11:33 PM  

If I can find a glimmer of hope in the mass migration of millions of middle and South Americans to the USA it is in the fact that the majority of these migrants are essentially native Americans, aka, American Indians. At worst maybe it will return us to a social dynamic of 16th, 17th century America (North and South). Far, far preferable to an Afro-Maghreb, Islamized Europe.

Blogger Fenris Wulf June 11, 2017 11:35 PM  

Matthew wrote:Pygeiognomy is real, Fenris.
Heh!

Blogger Snidely Whiplash June 11, 2017 11:57 PM  

Daniel H wrote:If I can find a glimmer of hope in the mass migration of millions of middle and South Americans to the USA it is in the fact that the majority of these migrants are essentially native Americans, aka, American Indians.
The problem is, they are Central and South American Indians, not North American ones. We have a modus vivendi with North American Indians, but not with the demon worshippers of the South. I don't see how one is possible.

Blogger JP June 11, 2017 11:58 PM  

@Daniel If that's comforting, look up the history of the Aztecs, Mayans, etc. Hell, look up the history of the Comanche.

How much better it is is debatable.

Blogger ((( bob kek mando ))) - ( Give us this day our daily bait, that we may crush our enemies, see their weaksauce driven before us and hear the lamentations of their women, thank you Baby Jesus, Amen ) June 12, 2017 1:28 AM  

8. CM June 11, 2017 10:24 PM
I questioned its advent and am getting push back but have no idea how to search for this idea.



no kidding.

the normally estimable Mr. John C. Wright, Esq is attempting to convince me that Superman is representative of the founding ideals of the nation.

sigh.

Conservatives gonna Conserve the Liberal Progressive position of ~40 years gone by.


further OT, Steve Sailer notes that most American college seniors ... are idiots:
http://www.unz.com/isteve/are-colleges-adding-value/
"At more than half of schools, at least a third of seniors were unable to make a cohesive argument, assess the quality of evidence in a document or interpret data in a table, The Wall Street Journal found after reviewing the latest results from dozens of public colleges and universities that gave the exam between 2013 and 2016."

Anonymous a deplorable rubberducky June 12, 2017 3:04 AM  

Daniel H wrote:If I can find a glimmer of hope in the mass migration of millions of middle and South Americans to the USA it is in the fact that the majority of these migrants are essentially native Americans, aka, American Indians. At worst maybe it will return us to a social dynamic of 16th, 17th century America (North and South). Far, far preferable to an Afro-Maghreb, Islamized Europe.

Why in the world would you cling to this hope? Central and South American Indians were not very like the North American Indians at all. Look, the American Indians that Americans faced during its critical periods have almost all been absorbed into American culture.

The only ones who haven't are on the reservations, and they are a small minority whose bloodline claims are very confused and tangential. We don't have pure-bred American Indians in the United States anymore. It's a battle over fractions of blood of people who hoping to parachute into the tribes in order to leverage progressive identity-politics games. Like Liz Warren.

My state's history highlights affairs regarding the Cherokee, Shwanee and Mingo tribes, but that's only a tiny fraction of the Indian tribes dealt with. As I look back through the records, there seems to be countless!

And, they weren't slaughtered off by racist Anglos, either. They were actually dealt with honorably by the English king, even after the betrayal of the French-Indian War.

They melted away, mostly. They folded into the ever-growing American nation. They didn't have a choice about that, true, that expansion was going to happen. Most of them rolled with it and became Americans, and disappeared forever as a people.

That's what happens when great migrations occur. Hello, people???

Chingochkook didn't die so dramatically on a hillside as the last of the Mohicans. He went to town, found work, and disappeared into the system.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts