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

Monday, July 17, 2017

True diversity is national

As is the case with so many things, the Diversity being pushed on the nations of the West is a lie, a false and evil version of the true diversity that can only be preserved through the various peoples of the world remainingly firmly and determinedly distinct:
By marrying and moving into another culture, the women of It’ll Never Last tried their best to join another nation, and their failure to do so illustrates, rather gloriously, that mankind is still diverse. Our differences don’t just reflect our ideals but define our autonomy.

Far from promising peace, those who sing of no countries are really threatening us all with unspeakable violence, psychic and physical.

An empire, by nature, must trample on nationhood, even its own, for it presents the empire’s ambitions as the nation’s necessities, for how else can you get Americans, for example, to go die and fight in Afghanistan or Iraq? Though citing love of nation constantly, our Washington rulers are essentially anti-American, and that’s why a genuine nationalist like Edward Snowden must flee to Russia.

Nationalism is simply the love of one’s language, culture, history and heritage, one’s very identity in short, but as wielded by an empire, nationalism becomes a murderous tool to violate one nation after another. The American empire is destroying the American nation.
You really have to watch at least a few moments of the film mentioned, and linked, in the article quoted above. There really is something observably wrong with women who go that far outside their own culture; you can observe the crazy eyes even before they open their mouths and confirm the observation.

With a few evil exceptions, there is nothing good or beautiful about the destruction of a people and their erasure from history through assimilation. The Israelis understand this, for as Martin van Creveld's wife Dvora once told me, the two greatest dangers to the Jews are a) that they will be hated, and b) that they will be too well loved.

Labels: ,

190 Comments:

Blogger DonReynolds July 17, 2017 7:05 PM  

Here at Vox, we can speak of "diversity" and actually mean it....in the sense of variety, being diverse. But in the rest of the country when they use the word "diversity" it means "anybody except whites", it means anti-white. It does not mean diverse in the least.

In fact, where they claim there is "diversity", such as professional sports, there is very little variety and there is no one who advocates that professional sports become diverse by the inclusion of players who are not Negro. Such a thing would be unthinkable, because "diversity" does not mean diverse, it simply means not white.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 7:17 PM  

Speaking of diversity at work. The cop who shot an Australian yoga teacher in Minneapolis was a much lauded Somalian diversity hire. I cant wait for the police union lawyers defense argument for this shooting.

"Minnesota newspaper The Star Tribune reports Ms Damond was dressed in her pyjamas when she went to the driver’s side door of the police vehicle that responded to the emergency call.

She was talking to the driver when the officer in the passenger seat pulled out his gun and shot across his fellow officer."

http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/australian-woman-shot-dead-by-police-in-minneapolis/news-story/c70e5bd988eb4a995125da452e25d46c

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 7:20 PM  

Globalist diversity bullshit is the submission of the various nations of people under a unified identity, erasing all previous identities. The evil of that concept is beyond words. A much more beautiful concept is that of distinct peoples of the world united as independent entities against their mutual erasure. These peoples must approach things from a non-predatory ethnocentric basis and show support to external ethnocentrists who renounce predation of other ethnicities. One can be a non-X and a pro-X. The greatest error made is the idea that non-X = anti-X. Non-white does not equal anti-white and treating all non-whites as anti-whites is an injustice to innocent non-whites. A similar concept can be applied to a multitude of categories. My non-Christian nature is often mistaken by outsiders as anti-Christian. Nothing could be further from the truth.

True diversity is only possible when a multitude of parties have both in-group preference, an intolerance of predation against said in-group and a refusal to prey on out-group, as respect demanded necessitates respect shown. When great forces are at move in the world, we realize that we are spirits and not animals. Ours is a profoundly spiritual struggle.

Blogger DonReynolds July 17, 2017 7:22 PM  

One of the longest running arguments I had with my Dad was on the subject of racial quotas. He was always opposed to any quota based on race. I was always in favor.

He thought if there were no race quotas then there would be very few non-whites because whites would simply exclude them. I always looked at racial quotas as a way of limiting how much non-whites could take away.

Negroes in the USA are one person in eight and a reasonable person could argue that if they are entitled to a proportionate share of this country, based on population, they would always be limited to one out of every eight....and no more. Where they have or receive more than one out of eight, it should be reduced. Where they have or receive less than one out of eight, they should have more.

The same rule should reasonably apply to any other ethnic or race in the USA. For some, it would be a overnight disaster, and for others it would be a bonanza. But in the end, we could say it was FAIR....and Americans are all about being FAIR and reasonable. Proportionate is much more reasonable than what we have today.

Anonymous Jamie July 17, 2017 7:23 PM  

I hope it's not too late when women realize that their mothers are happier than they are and their grandmothers were happier than the both of them. Traditionalism is a good thing. It developed over thousands of years to as close to perfection as is possible in human society. It surely isn't the evil that the hostile popular culture forces the young to believe.

Anonymous Crew July 17, 2017 7:27 PM  

The fact that a small number of people can marry across racial lines and make a success of it does not mean that everyone should be forced to accept people and cultures that are foreign to them.

Blogger Wanderer July 17, 2017 7:28 PM  

@5 Women only realize that it's too late when their looks have faded away and the casual sex comes to a screeching halt. By that point they're fat, old, tatted up, and have a mulatto baby or two, and their sudden discovery of traditionalism doesn't mean much.

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 7:30 PM  

The greatest error made is the idea that non-X = anti-X. Non-white does not equal anti-white and treating all non-whites as anti-whites is an injustice to innocent non-whites.

most of the non-whites who come here dont respect your border or your laws and are here to enrich themselves at your expense. If America was poor they wouldnt be coming here, just like they dont seek to go to the Baltic countries becaue there's no welfare $$$ for them there

Anonymous Faceless July 17, 2017 7:30 PM  

@6

The trainwrecks in the video are examples of spoiling their daughters by either overeducating them or giving them too much money and too much travel. They stuck with it long enough to become glittering warning signs to others.

It was hilarious to see the British family back home trying to hold out an Oxford education as something amazing, then it cut to the video of their Oxford-educated daughter being taught how to wash a bowl by one of the local tribeswomen.

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 7:31 PM  

@7 Just because their Eureka moment is too late to save themselves does not diminish their value as a cautionary tale to others. These cautionary examples might not eliminate the problem, but any effect they have on reducing it is valuable.

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 7:36 PM  

@8 The overlap between anti-white and non-white is too damn high, I'll admit. However, I consider myself morally obliged to provide wrongdoers a way out. A non-white can stop being anti-white at any point. If they refuse to take that road, any actions I take to repel their aggression against me and mine comes with the knowledge that an attempt at conflict avoidance was made. If anything, I think one is more motivated to repel an attacker that was given a way out. I don't disagree with anything you said but I stand by my statement. An acceptance of financial aid SHOULD be accompanied with the explicit understanding that acceptance of aid necessitates a cessation of the behaviors that made the person request the aid to begin with. We got a long road ahead of us to ingrain that sentiment in our institutions.

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 7:39 PM  

the two greatest dangers to the Jews are a) that they will be hated, and b) that they will be too well loved.

lol, i doubt they'll ever have to worry about that 2nd one.

that the thought even crosses her mind tells me they believe their own BS about all the great things jews are supposedly doing for everyone else.

OpenID leukosfash July 17, 2017 7:39 PM  

DonReynolds: No state should do anything that benefits alien people and cultures at the expense of its own people and culture. What don't you (and your dad) understand about this?

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 7:43 PM  

97.7% of white men marry white women. Should only 62.1% of white men be allowed to marry white women?

Blogger VD July 17, 2017 7:45 PM  

i doubt they'll ever have to worry about that 2nd one.

That is their primary problem in the USA right now. Intermarriage is on trend to see them erased, except for the Orthodox.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 7:50 PM  

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 7:57 PM  

Matthew Funk, "conflict avoidance?" WTF do you call the last 50 years of white (male) prostration and cheek turning?

"Thank you, Sir, may I have another?" Lock magazines and load.

Anonymous VFM #7916 July 17, 2017 7:58 PM  

@10 The problem is that there are too many examples and not enough paying attention to those examples by young women.

@16 "Objectively"? In a world where all cultures are objectively the same, there's no objective issue. This invalidates your argument as your premises are false.

Blogger DonReynolds July 17, 2017 7:59 PM  

leukosfash wrote:DonReynolds: No state should do anything that benefits alien people and cultures at the expense of its own people and culture. What don't you (and your dad) understand about this?

On that topic, Dad and I would agree with you completely. The quotas/non-quotas argument was only in terms of American citizens, and did not include foreign invaders....at all.

Anonymous Crew July 17, 2017 8:00 PM  

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Of course not. However, it is very stupid for people who have no idea what they are in for and who cannot adjust!

It certainly should not be forced on people the way it is today.

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 8:00 PM  

Ralph Raico used to point out that in the 1920's, one out of nine marriages registered in Hamburg was between a Jew and a Gentile.

Food for thought, especially for those who think today's trends will continue and escalate.

Blogger VD July 17, 2017 8:00 PM  

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Why do you hate Jews and want to see them eliminated from the face of the Earth?

Anonymous Fed Up Aussie July 17, 2017 8:02 PM  

Vox, have you seen this story:

https://www.rt.com/usa/396584-minneapolis-cop-shot-aussie-woman/

White Australian woman living in Minneapolis with her American fiance hears a domestic and calls police. Police end up shooting her. Australia is full of outrage.

Turns out that the cop who shot her was a Somalian muslim immigrant named Mohammed Noor who was sitting in the passenger seat while she was talking to the cop in the drivers seat and then he pulled out his gun and shot her. Australian media has not yet released this tidbit.

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 8:02 PM  

There is everything evil about compulsory geographic intermixing of culturally immiscible people (aka Section 8.)

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 8:08 PM  

OT:

http://truthfeed.com/violent-liberal-attacks-the-wrong-trump-supporter-watch-what-happens-next/92366/

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 8:09 PM  

@17 Nearly 100% of the time, conflict is unavoidable when anti-whites put whites in their sights. Nevertheless, it helps to be able to sincerely point to the record and show that you gave them a chance to disengage. I'm not insinuating for a second, and that is obvious if you read the entirety of that sentence, that attempts to avoid the conflict will be successful that often. The statement is coming from the perspective that you had to engage in the conflict and you will have to present your side of the story to third parties at a later juncture. Having it on the record that you were willing to let them disengage can only help your case, it certainly can't hurt it. While de-escalation is certainly the desired result, it's also seldom a reasonable option and actions will be necessary to repel aggression against whites. If you read the text that surrounds those two words, you'll see that I'm not pitching conflict avoidance as the beginning and end of the strategy. In the completely off chance someone is willing to disengage, let them. Chances are they won't and more escalated responses will be appropriate.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 8:10 PM  

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Most common sense advise is contextual. So what's your point? There's a mountain of practical, real world problems with cultural intermarriage for the individuals involved. Over time, it is societal suicide.

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 8:13 PM  

The difference between the British Empire & the USA'S is that the former put adversaries into the same made-up country (e.g., Iraq) but they left them separated. They also largely left the pets in their home lands.

Our leftist rulers are he'll bent on blending the best of America out of existence.

Anonymous NoApologiesMcGregor July 17, 2017 8:15 PM  

Diversity as an accepted, inarguable principle, is on it's last legs. There may be continued pockets of resistance in the Western World (re: White founded), but as legal, social and technological areas advance, it will become an antiquated "religion" that people will laugh about in just 10 years. From self-segregation by blacks and browns, increasingly resentful whites (as our numbers shrink), legal challenges to quotas and affirmative action (blacks and browns will get into it with each other after this next election cycle) and even in-your-face arguments as avoiding confrontation becomes increasingly difficult--the wool is removed.

Whites openly talk about it now that I have seen, even in casual conversations. One of the most interesting developments I've seen is more white women saying aloud what would have been unthinkable even 5-10 years ago--less "coding"...for example, not "bad schools" but, "too many blacks and Latinos/immigrants"...things like that.

Overton windows are flying open in all sorts of places in our culture, as the shift continues apace.

Blogger Quilp July 17, 2017 8:15 PM  

The crazy in those eyes is enough to make one wonder if young British men weren't saved a lot of anguish by those women following their silly fantasies to other lands. But as mentioned above, as cautionary tales to the "not so obviously touched", its a good lesson to broadcast.

Anonymous Icicle July 17, 2017 8:19 PM  

legal challenges to quotas and affirmative action (blacks and browns will get into it with each other after this next election cycle

Good.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:26 PM  

"There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Why do you hate Jews and want to see them eliminated from the face of the Earth?"

There is nothing that is objectively wrong, evil, or immoral with intermarriage.

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 8:26 PM  

White Australian woman living in Minneapolis with her American fiance hears a domestic and calls police. Police end up shooting her. Australia is full of outrage.

why are they outraged? im sure the same thing goes on in your country and by the same culprits

Turns out that the cop who shot her was a Somalian muslim immigrant named Mohammed Noor who was sitting in the passenger seat while she was talking to the cop in the drivers seat and then he pulled out his gun and shot her. Australian media has not yet released this tidbit.

thats convenient. gonna backfire on (((them))) when Australians find out the whole story

Blogger Arthur Isaac July 17, 2017 8:27 PM  

Sounds like the daughters of the Masai are missing some important parts. Thanks Mom!!

Anonymous Icicle July 17, 2017 8:27 PM  

Overton windows are flying open in all sorts of places in our culture, as the shift continues apace.

So people are finally telling the truth?

Blogger AdognamedOp July 17, 2017 8:28 PM  

Maybe after the SJW's finish with the White man they'll start to adress the strict, nationalist, cultural traditions of all those they welcomed with open arms. If they're not occupying mass graves, that is.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:28 PM  

"Most common sense advise is contextual. So what's your point? There's a mountain of practical, real world problems with cultural intermarriage for the individuals involved. Over time, it is societal suicide."

Indicating a weakness on some people's part. But indicating nothing else. People's remaining distinct is in no way objectively good, moral or preferred.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 8:29 PM  

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.
It is a sin against your ancestors, and your descendants. If you refuse to think of your own children, think of your grandchildren.

Anonymous 5343 Kinds of Deplorable July 17, 2017 8:30 PM  

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

And there's a thousand extra things to go wrong that you don't know until you've lived it. I've lived it.

Even so, you're correct - where any specific couple and their choices are concerned.

What is not cool is media and the political elite conspiring to normalize and promote interracial marriage in the face of all the social ills it causes simply for the purpose of furthering their globalist agenda.

Anonymous Stickwick July 17, 2017 8:32 PM  

By marrying and moving into another culture, the women of It’ll Never Last tried their best to join another nation, and their failure to do so illustrates, rather gloriously, that mankind is still diverse.

I'm a Canucko-American married to a Finn, and went into marriage thinking whatever minute cultural differences we had would be charming. Well... the differences turned out to be more significant than I thought. Some of them are charming, but most of them just add a layer of difficulty that my husband and I deal with on a daily basis. I couldn't imagine living in Finland and being fully immersed in those differences. My husband, who loves living in the U.S., has turned out to be far more adaptable than I am.

Knowing what I know now, I would still marry my husband. But any Western woman contemplating marrying outside of her nation should seriously consider what she's getting into. The differences are charming and exciting at first, but after a couple of years, when the honey-glow wears off and you're in the "work" phase of marriage, they're just added stressors.

Men also ought to be circumspect about marrying outside of their nations. Without exception, every man I know who's married to a foreign woman here in the U.S. has to deal with her constant desire to return to her home country.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 8:34 PM  

People's remaining distinct is in no way objectively good, moral or preferred.

Says you. God ordained otherwise.

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 8:35 PM  

Indicating a weakness on some people's part. But indicating nothing else. People's remaining distinct is in no way objectively good, moral or preferred.

if there were say 50 different varieties of birds - beautiful cardinals, bluebirds, hummingbirds, eagles, parrots, toucans, etc - you would prefer they all bred into one fat brown stupid blob?

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:39 PM  

"It is a sin against your ancestors, and your descendants."

It is neither a sin nor a gift to anyone to intermarry. Without the intermarriage there is no descendent to sin against. Ancestors cannot be sinned against as they are not moral authorities.

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 8:40 PM  

Making a conscious decision to being child-free is refusing to pay forward the gift of life your parents gave you. Two people sacrificed a lot of resources to bring you to adulthood and make your life possible. This is an act worthy of appreciation and planning to have two children to pay this debt forward is the best, and possibly only legitimate, way to truly show one's reverence for this sacrifice. If the plans fail for medical reasons or otherwise, you don't have to beat yourself up as you at least tried. Additionally, some compassion is warranted for people who made this observation in the 13th hour and have come to regret squandering their youth on the pursuit of pleasure. But, to be a young adult who is downright proud of prioritizing their own interests over that of a future generation is not a point of pride, but rather of shame.

The aforementioned text is only to demonstrate that advocates of a proud childfree life are just as detrimental to ancestral and descendant based thinking as are interracial couplings. Mixed race people are still worthy of basic human respect, but parents to be should consider the interests of both their grandparents and future grandchildren when choosing a partner.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:44 PM  

"Says you. God ordained otherwise."

The bible says nothing of the sort: Numbers 12:1-15 , Colossians 3:11

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:45 PM  

"if there were say 50 different varieties of birds - beautiful cardinals, bluebirds, hummingbirds, eagles, parrots, toucans, etc - you would prefer they all bred into one fat brown stupid blob?"

My preference is irrelevant. There is nothing objectively wrong or immoral with intermarriage.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:47 PM  

"Making a conscious decision to being child-free is refusing to pay forward the gift of life your parents gave you. Two people sacrificed a lot of resources to bring you to adulthood and make your life possible. This is an act worthy of appreciation and planning to have two children to pay this debt forward is the best, and possibly only legitimate, way to truly show one's reverence for this sacrifice."

How is having a child a sacrifice?

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 8:47 PM  

People's remaining distinct is in no way objectively good, moral or preferred.

Do you think I had no preference as to whom my sons married or with whom they produced the next generation of my family?

You offer new meaning to the notion of being too short for this ride.

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 8:51 PM  

My preference is irrelevant. There is nothing objectively wrong or immoral with intermarriage.

You included "preference" earlier, now you drop it.

Lots of comments occur on the Internet b/c such blatant dishonesty in person would get your ass kicked.

Anonymous 7817 July 17, 2017 8:53 PM  

Vox is careful to spay and neuter his trolls, and sometimes we get to see it in action. Always a good time.

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 8:54 PM  

@47 Resources are sacrificed for child rearing, this is an objective fact. By my subjective evaluation, what is gained is greater than the sacrifice. If I buy an item for $15, I hold the item to be more valuable than the $15 or the amount of resources I sacrificed to gain the $15. By making the purchase, I hold the act to be one of net gain. You and I are in agreement that child rearing is a worthy and rewarding endeavor, I look forward to our first coming along. Child-free advocates think differently. For too long, I thought about things wrong. I was fortunate enough to come to my senses in the 9th or 10th hour rather than the 13th. I'm probably limited to two or three. I learned my lesson late, but better late than never. We cool?

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:55 PM  

"Do you think I had no preference as to whom my sons married or with whom they produced the next generation of my family?

Your preference has nothing to do with whether or not intermarriage is moral or good or not.

"You included "preference" earlier, now you drop it.

You are incorrect

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 8:56 PM  

Indicating a weakness on some people's part. But indicating nothing else. People's remaining distinct is in no way objectively good, moral or preferred.

The proof is in the pudding. How is diversity working out in Europe? I'm sure you're quite pleased with the rape of white women there. Would you call this just an indication of weakness on some people's part?

Is it not preferred for a people with an average IQ of 100 not to mix with Somalians, average IQ 69? I'm sure you would say it's great for the Somalians but certainly not for Western Europeans or the rest of the world for that matter when everyone loses out on the advances 30 more average IQ points could create. This is most certainly evil.

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 8:57 PM  

Nothing objectively wrong, huh? How about a high IQ family being diluted by intermarriage with a family of imbeciles?

IQ's revert to a recent ancestral mean. A nice Episcopalian man from a family whose grandparents and parents were all 140+ marrying a typical Somali woman squanders the genetic inheritance of the paternal family.

If you claim that's meaningless then either you have no kids or are nothing but a filthy troll. Do humanity a favor and eat lead.

Anonymous Icicle July 17, 2017 8:58 PM  

An example of the Future Man they want where every discernible feature is washed out.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0035488/

Asian, European, American and Hispanic.

"Hello, my name is Mud."

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 8:58 PM  

"@47 Resources are sacrificed for child rearing, this is an objective fact"
By that measure, everything is a sacrifice, making it a meaningless measure.

"By my subjective evaluation, what is gained is greater than the sacrifice. If I buy an item for $15, I hold the item to be more valuable than the $15 or the amount of resources I sacrificed to gain the $15. By making the purchase, I hold the act to be one of net gain."

You use "sacrifice" incorrectly.

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 8:58 PM  

There is nothing objectively wrong or immoral with intermarriage

i used to believe this on the individual scale - a few couples here and there, what difference does it make? Now i think about the bigger picture that we are all a part of and also i wonder why some (((groups))) are pushing miscegenation so hard.

These are the same (((groups))) that want to erase my history

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 9:00 PM  

GFY.
SelkirkJuly 17, 2017 8:28 PM
"Most common sense advise is contextual. So what's your point? There's a mountain of practical, real world problems with cultural intermarriage for the individuals involved. Over time, it is societal suicide."

Indicating a weakness on some people's part. But indicating nothing else. People's remaining distinct is in no way objectively good, moral or preferred.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:00 PM  

"Is it not preferred for a people with an average IQ of 100 not to mix with Somalians, average IQ 69? I'm sure you would say it's great for the Somalians but certainly not for Western Europeans or the rest of the world for that matter when everyone loses out on the advances 30 more average IQ points could create. This is most certainly evil."

You are making a utilitarian assessment of what is good and evil. Do I have that wrong?

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 9:02 PM  

And Selkirk just provided an example of why my attempts to be diplomatic are not always the wisest strategy.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:03 PM  

"Indicating a weakness on some people's part. But indicating nothing else. People's remaining distinct is in no way objectively good, moral or preferred."

My mistake. You were correct. I'll retract the use of "preferred" and revert to this characterization: "My preference is irrelevant. There is nothing objectively wrong or immoral with intermarriage."

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:04 PM  

@Selkirk
You are not a moral authority. If I beat your senseless head in, have I sinned against you, or served the cause of Justice?

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 9:05 PM  

Sometimes I wonder if sophist trolls are simply part of Nature's normal, health amplification of trend-change energies, such that we are immersed in a highly motivated mindset ready to pour our energies into eradicating every vestige of the prior errors afflicting us?

Anyone else feel the electricity in their hands?

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:05 PM  

"IQ's revert to a recent ancestral mean. A nice Episcopalian man from a family whose grandparents and parents were all 140+ marrying a typical Somali woman squanders the genetic inheritance of the paternal family. "

Nothing about this scenario is objectively immoral or wrong.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 9:07 PM  

@59 good and evil have practical, real world consequences. The bible makes this very clear not that i think you recognize the bible as your moral authority. Like i said the proof is in the pudding.

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 9:08 PM  

You are making a utilitarian assessment of what is good and evil. Do I have that wrong?

i think its good if higher IQ people have offspring vs lower IQ, many of whom cannot even support themselves much less all their (mostly illegitimate) children

Blogger dc.sunsets July 17, 2017 9:09 PM  

Sophistry has its place somewhere. I surely hope you employ it everywhere. SWIM will no doubt follow through on the things now populating my imagination (and making me smile.)

[Mute button.]

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 9:09 PM  

Sunsets, that sounds like my jokes regarding Angela Merkel being an incredibly brilliant deep cover alt Righter motivating the world towards the Alt Right philosophy. It's an amusing notion, but we must admit at the end of the day that it is merely a comfortable fantasy and not an observable reality.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:09 PM  

"You are not a moral authority."

I haven't claimed to be. However, I am correct that intermarriage is not objectively evil or immoral. There is no warrant for suggesting it is, unless utilitarian morality is your preferred understanding of morality.

Blogger Charles Martel July 17, 2017 9:09 PM  

@16 "There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage."

That's a subjective statement.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:09 PM  

@Selkirk,
You keep using that word, 'objectively'. You use it to mean "I refuse to acknowledge, as I am arguing subjectively and tendentiously"

Blogger Charles Martel July 17, 2017 9:11 PM  

@16 "There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage."

That's a subjective statement.

Anonymous Icicle July 17, 2017 9:11 PM  

We live in (a) very secular society(ies) now, so Evil has lost its meaning. We just say "good or bad" so evil is just more bad on the scale.

Evil is qualitatively different from bad.

Anonymous A Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents July 17, 2017 9:12 PM  

Skimming the comments - dumb Boomer, dumb troll - ah, Stickwick @40

Men also ought to be circumspect about marrying outside of their nations. Without exception, every man I know who's married to a foreign woman here in the U.S. has to deal with her constant desire to return to her home country.


This. One panacea is a local community. For example, a Thai expat wife can be sort of contented with a local Thai community that she can shop and gossip in, so less tempted to go back, I've been told. No idea if that's true but it is reasonable.

But it can get worse if imported wife goes all US feminist and gets unhappy and divorces.

Worse yet when she wants to go back and take children with her.
Even worse yet when her home country has no meaningful extradition with the US, which means if she goes back he may never see his children again, but he will pay for them.

Maybe imported wives worked back in the 50's, when getting out of Europe or Japan to the US meant a big improvement in life, but it seems to be more dangerous now.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:12 PM  

"You are not a moral authority."

I haven't claimed to be.
That's beside the point. Answer the questio, soyboy. If I administer a luser attitude readjustment, have I sinned against you?

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 9:12 PM  

@Selkirk You are not a moral authority.

this too. my ancestors are more of a moral authority than selkirk

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 9:13 PM  

@64 Nothing about this scenario is objectively immoral or wrong.

By what moral standard are defining right and wrong?

Anonymous basementhomebrewer July 17, 2017 9:16 PM  

Selkirk wrote:"IQ's revert to a recent ancestral mean. A nice Episcopalian man from a family whose grandparents and parents were all 140+ marrying a typical Somali woman squanders the genetic inheritance of the paternal family. "

Nothing about this scenario is objectively immoral or wrong.


Have you taken a look at the statistics on inter-racial marriage? How many of them end in divorce? Particularly when the marriage is between a white woman and black man? Condeming your future children to not have a father in their life is certainly immoral.

What are your view on jus primae noctis while we are on the subject? "Longshanks did nothing wrong" perhaps?

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Deplorable Cents July 17, 2017 9:17 PM  

@69 troll
intermarriage is not objectively evil or immoral.

Ayn Rand, is that you? Heard you were dead!

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:17 PM  

By what moral standard are defining right and wrong?

By Selkirk's subjective feelings

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:19 PM  

"@16 "There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage."

That's a subjective statement."

It's irrefutable.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:20 PM  

What are your view on jus primae noctis
That its a ridiculous fairy tale made up to tittilate middle class women and slander Catholics.

Anonymous Bell Worthington July 17, 2017 9:20 PM  

Selkirk is trolling.

But if Selkirk is serious, then he has no problem with niggers marrying your daughters, because reasons.

Forget all the reasons that it's objectively a BAD IDEA to do something, so long as it's not "objectively immoral," then go ahead and do it, and let the rest of society deal with the fallout of your stupid decisions.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:21 PM  

"@64 Nothing about this scenario is objectively immoral or wrong.

By what moral standard are defining right and wrong?"

I'm not.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:23 PM  

It's irrefutable

You're confusing "bald, gratuitous assertion" wit irrefutability.

As if I were to say "Selkirk is mentally retarded, it's irrefutable"

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:25 PM  

By what moral standard are defining right and wrong?"

I'm not.

Then you admit that this is just duck speak.

Blogger Matthew Funk July 17, 2017 9:25 PM  

Forget all the reasons that it's objectively a BAD IDEA to do something, so long as it's not "objectively immoral," then go ahead and do it, and let the rest of society deal with the fallout of your stupid decisions.

This permission you just granted me was far more than I could have ever expected. I thank you for your incredible patience, tolerance and understanding in regards to how I choose to live my life. Up til now, I found it wrong to offload the consequences of my decisions on others, but now that I have permission, my world looks much brighter. Thank you in advance for your understanding in the future.

Blogger Koanic July 17, 2017 9:30 PM  

> Why do you hate Jews and want to see them eliminated from the face of the Earth?

This is a good question for a first date.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 9:30 PM  

By what moral standard are defining right and wrong?"

I'm not.

Then here we have it. Your assertions are entirely baseless rambling.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:38 PM  

"By what moral standard are defining right and wrong?"

I'm not.
Then you admit that this is just duck speak."

No. I admit I'm not defining morality.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:40 PM  

"Then here we have it. Your assertions are entirely baseless rambling"

No. My assertion is that intermarriage is neither right nor wrong, neither good nor evil.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 9:42 PM  

@91 I didn't ask you how you define morality. I specifically asked you what moral standard you are using to define morality. So what moral standard are you basing this assertion on:
" My assertion is that intermarriage is neither right nor wrong, neither good nor evil."

Blogger Duke Norfolk July 17, 2017 9:42 PM  

Stickwick wrote:every man I know who's married to a foreign woman here in the U.S. has to deal with her constant desire to return to her home country.

Imagine that. Who coulda seen that coming?

Blogger Lazarus July 17, 2017 9:43 PM  

Selkirk wrote:There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Actually, there is something objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Ergo, you are wrong.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:44 PM  

"So what moral standard are you basing this assertion on:
" My assertion is that intermarriage is neither right nor wrong, neither good nor evil."

I'm aware of no moral standard that warrants believing intermarriage is wrong or right, good or evil.

Blogger Duke Norfolk July 17, 2017 9:45 PM  

Autiste alert! Autiste alert!

Good grief.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:45 PM  

"Actually, there is something objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

Will you explain what makes intermarriage evil?

Blogger Duke Norfolk July 17, 2017 9:46 PM  

Like talking to a computer.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:46 PM  

Since youve no definition of good or evil, you cannot posit membership or lack of membership of an act. You have not defined the set.
You statement is eqivalent to "ducks are no squalamids". Without a definition of squalamid, its meaningless, duck speak.

Blogger Duke Norfolk July 17, 2017 9:46 PM  

Is that you Spock?

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:48 PM  

I'm aware of no moral standard that warrants believing intermarriage is wrong or right, good or evil.
This is a lie. You certainly know of one or you would not make the statement.

Blogger pdwalker July 17, 2017 9:49 PM  

That video... complete madness on the part of the women ruled by their "feelz"

The older I get, the more I feel that arranged marriages are a better way to go.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:51 PM  

"Since youve no definition of good or evil, you cannot posit membership or lack of membership of an act. You have not defined the set.
You statement is eqivalent to "ducks are no squalamids". Without a definition of squalamid, its meaningless, duck speak."

If you believe intermarriage is evil, then simply tell us how you come to that conclusion. I don't believe you can offer a rational explanation as to why intermarriage is evil, but I'm willing to consider your explanation.

Blogger Lazarus July 17, 2017 9:52 PM  

Selkirk wrote:Will you explain what makes intermarriage evil?

After you explain why it is not evil.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 17, 2017 9:53 PM  

I alrwady offered one, faggot. You weasel worded your way around it and reasserted your nonsense.
Like a dishonest swine.

Blogger Lazarus July 17, 2017 9:55 PM  

Selkirk is simply using a Bare Assertion Fallacy.

No need to respond.

Blogger CM July 17, 2017 9:55 PM  

--How is having a child a sacrifice?--

The same way choosing Christ is...

And marriage...

Its a constant, daily sacrifice of self.

That what you gain is greater and better does not negate the fact there was and is a sacrifice. To claim otherwise minimizes the experiences and struggles of others to do what is right for God and their family while lying and creating a false ideal to those who may wish to be, opening the door to dissatisfaction and wanderlust due to false expectations.

Don't be that man simply because you wish to signal how easy it is for you.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 9:58 PM  

"This is a lie. You certainly know of one or you would not make the statement."

That's true. Well, not a lie, but I misspoke. I recognize that a utilitarian view of morality combined with a series of confirmed statements that interracial marriage is nearly always harmful, could be considered a moral argument against interracial argument. It's not the best argument for it being immoral. A better argument would be showing that a commonly embraced deity deems interracial marriage wrong.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 10:04 PM  

I'm aware of no moral standard that warrants believing intermarriage is wrong or right, good or evil.

Surely you are not using your lack of knowledge of any other moral standard that might differ from your own assertion as proof that no such moral standard exists? Stop dodging the question.

Blogger Charles Martel July 17, 2017 10:06 PM  

@108 "...a commonly embraced deity deems interracial marriage wrong."

My God forbids interracial marriage. That's an objective fact.

Anonymous Bell Worthington July 17, 2017 10:08 PM  

There are a litany of good practical reasons why intermarriage is objectively harmful overall (despite a few rare exceptions): to the individual, the family, the tribe, the state, to earthlings in general--whatever level you choose. To focus on the question of whether it's "objectively immoral" is your typical kikey sideshow that distracts from everyday facts and causality.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 10:08 PM  

"If you believe intermarriage is evil, then simply tell us how you come to that conclusion. I don't believe you can offer a rational explanation as to why intermarriage is evil, but I'm willing to consider your explanation."

Uh huh, so you want to set the bar of proof at your personal standard and then tell us if we've jumped high enough to "prove" you wrong. There are plenty of statics and other real world, objective observations that show intermarriage to be largely unwise if not outright evil.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 10:15 PM  

"Surely you are not using your lack of knowledge of any other moral standard that might differ from your own assertion as proof that no such moral standard exists? Stop dodging the question"

If you can educate me on this question, feel free.

Anonymous Bellator Mortalis July 17, 2017 10:16 PM  

Selkirk wrote:There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about with having sex with 12 year olds ("By the law of Scotland, a woman cannot contrabere sponsalia before her age of seven years. 1 Rol. 343. I. 20. But by common law, persons may marry at any age. Co. Lit. 33. A. And upon such marriage the wife shall be endowed, if the attain the age of nine years, of what whatsoever age her husband be; but not before the age of nine years. Co. L. 33. A." and "1275 English common law criminalizes statutory rape- sex between a man and a woman below the age of consent, which was first set at 12 years.
1576 Common Law age of consent lowered to 10 years.
1700s-1800s Statutory rape at common law adopted in the united states. States set the age of consent at 10 or 12 years.")

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about having sex with animals, since animals are property, and property has no rights.

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about pederasty which was practiced in the Classical age of Hellenic history, and as we all know Classical Greece was a taproot of Western Civilization.

Shall we play another game?

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 10:18 PM  

"My God forbids interracial marriage. That's an objective fac"

Do you have a source for this deity's condemnation of interracial marriage?

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 10:19 PM  

@113 why would i want to? You'll be shown the error of your ways soon enough when the pendulum swings back in earnest.

Anonymous Icicle July 17, 2017 10:21 PM  

What's wrong with intermarriage?

Disney showed me that Pocahontas helped preserve the Indians' culture.

Blogger Were-Puppy July 17, 2017 10:24 PM  

@60 Matthew Funk
And Selkirk just provided an example of why my attempts to be diplomatic are not always the wisest strategy.
---

It is amusing to others though :P

You must learn to discern the trolls.

Blogger haus frau July 17, 2017 10:25 PM  

Oh yes, this game is fun. There is nothing objectively wrong about executing homosexuals. Afterall, they spread disease and molest children at a much higher rate than heterosexuals. Many religions endorse this course of action as a necessary punishment for such perversion.

Blogger Lazarus July 17, 2017 10:27 PM  

Lazarus wrote:Selkirk is simply using a Bare Assertion Fallacy.

No need to respond.

Blogger Lazarus July 17, 2017 10:29 PM  

This is more relevant:

The Biggest Issue of Our Time

https://www.steynonline.com/7981/the-biggest-issue-of-our-time

Anonymous Bowman July 17, 2017 10:30 PM  

@Selkirk nobody cares about your relationship with a goat, or the intellectual BS you use to rationalize it.

Blogger CM July 17, 2017 10:36 PM  

The only examples of interracial marriage in the OT were outside women who completely rejected their own cultures and fully embraced Israel and their God. It wasn't until after they demonstrated their complete rejection of their native nation that they were then married into the tribe.

And we can count them on one hand.

If not considered evil, it was highly discouraged to the point that there are so few examples. There are more examples of polygamy than interracial marriage.

Blogger tz July 17, 2017 10:36 PM  

@22 - I don't want them eliminated, I want them to contribute to the borg multicultural collective. They will live forever somewhere in the mongrel hordes.

We don't have interspecies stuff yet, but maybe parrots can parrot the Torah.

Articles like this (and one of Molyneux' call-in shows) indicate women are the greatest beneficiaries of the patriarchy. Beauty + hypergamy = ruin. The problem with SMV is that it is a market, and like Walmart displaces the local stores, it has closed down the marriage market.

@27 - while it is not strictly a sin, it is highly imprudent. especially in today's world. The bible doesn't directly condemn gambling either, but it leads to poverty. There is also a difference between a Norwegian marrying a Pole and marrying an aborigine who still lives that lifestyle.

@40 Women say there's no place like home, and they mean their father's house even if it is a mud-hut. They want the familiar, and even a 5 star hotel isn't the same as the modest house in the suburbs even in a worse climate.

@47 It isn't the hand that rocks the cradle as much as the hand that changes the diaper at 3am. An unbloody sacrifice, but one none the less. (In Poland there is actually a Marian devotion based on that).

@all One thing we forget today in the airline internet era is that marriage is the fusion between two FAMILIES, not just two persons. So when you say there is nothing wrong with miscegany, I think you are imagining, libertarian like, that it is merely a matter between two people, not unlike some trade. It is the difference between a contract and a covenant. Matrimony, holy or otherwise.

The other imagined thing is that there is some picture in the mind of an Archie and Edith Bunker in Mogadishu who are WASPish but with dark skin, not Muslim and wishing Sharia. There is a chasm between a 4th generation Chinese girl that is completely assimilated to the USA, speaks perfect english and has won a spelling bee, and goes to an uncucked church, and a girl from rural China who barely speaks english, her parents don't, and she has never lived in the USA.

While I don't accept civic nationalism (either the proposition is insufficient or takes hundreds of pages, see Bertrand Russel's proof that 1+1=2), the synthesis might be cultural nationalism instead of the ethno variety (what about white converts to radical Islam). Ameriboo perhaps, but still assimilated in the sense they know American history better than that of their homeland.

Appearance is the original stigma, especially when things are multicultural. In 1950, if you saw someone odd looking but speaking perfect english in American clothes with that hairstyle, you wouldn't think twice. Now the default is they aren't assimilated even if they sound and look "American".

@74 I know a tragic story. Boy meets girl. They go to Thailand to see parents. They come back. Girl goes psycho bitch from hell and threatens suicide. Boy comes to his senses. Later, boy loses his senses, marries, then divorces Thai psycho bitch.

If that is the alternative to celibacy, ... There is the society of St. Linus...

On Miscegany, while one can worry about abstract morality (see Molyneux UPB, universally preferable behavior), Most things which begin "Hold my Beer..." aren't condemned in the scripture per se, but it does talk about fools, which is the term before we had Darwin awards.

Just as there is reversion to the mean, there is also Hybrid vigor, but that won't necessarily insure the vigor is in the trait you desire.

Anonymous Selkirk July 17, 2017 10:37 PM  

"@113 why would i want to? You'll be shown the error of your ways soon enough when the pendulum swings back in earnest."

Ok.

Anonymous Sharrukin July 17, 2017 10:43 PM  

115. Selkirk

Do you have a source for this deity's condemnation of interracial marriage?

Not that you really care because leftism is your true religion.

Daniel 2:43 ESV
As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay.

Deuteronomy 7:3-4 ESV
You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons

Ezra 9:12 ESV
Therefore do not give your daughters to their sons, neither take their daughters for your son

Ezra 9:2 ESV
For they have taken some of their daughters to be wives for themselves and for their sons, so that the holy race has mixed itself with the peoples of the lands.

Hosea 5:6-7 "They shall go with their flocks and their herds to seek the Lord. But they shall not find him: He hasth withdrawn himself from them. They have dealt treacherously against the Lord: For they have begotten strange children.".

Shall we then hearken unto you to do all this great evil, to transgress against our God in marrying strange wives?"
Nehemiah
13:26-27

"And the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, Hittites, and Amorites, and Perizzites, and Hivites, and Jebusites:
And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods.
And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and forgat the LORD their God, and served Baalim and the groves."

Judges 3:5-7

Blogger tz July 17, 2017 10:44 PM  

The most shocking aspect of the post is that it was at LewRockwell.com. This is something I did not think would appear there. The left libertarians must be clutching their cultured or 3d-printed pearls.

Blogger Charles Martel July 17, 2017 10:49 PM  

@115 "Do you have a source for this deity's condemnation of interracial marriage?"

Me.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener July 17, 2017 10:52 PM  

@115 If we're taking God out of the picture then we have no objective basis for condemning either interracial marriage or the mass slaughter of entire peoples. It's all just stuff that happens in a vast universe of which we're an inconsequential part, right?

Blogger Student in Blue July 17, 2017 10:56 PM  

@126. Sharrukin
"B-b-b-but I meant the New Testament only!"

Either that or he ignores it.

Blogger Charles Martel July 17, 2017 10:57 PM  

@126
Sharrukin, thanks for the objective citings. Selkirk is having a wonderful time bathing in all of this attention. Our focus on his comments allows him to temporarily forget the cause(s) of his feelings of inadequacy, and he will surely leave this forum tonight with a sense of triumph. It's been time well spent for him. Now, as for the rest of us...

Anonymous Sharrukin July 17, 2017 11:00 PM  

130. Student in Blue

Either that or he ignores it.

I know.

It's fun to watch them dance however.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener July 17, 2017 11:00 PM  

There really is something observably wrong with women who go that far outside their own culture...

True.

...you can observe the crazy eyes even before they open their mouths and confirm the observation.

I get the strongest crazy eyes vibe from the woman who married the Russian, second most from the woman who married the spearchucker, and not really at all from the woman who married the Italian.

Anonymous andon July 17, 2017 11:01 PM  

OT: i notice Tara McCarthy in the list of authors now on the right side

Blogger Elder Son July 17, 2017 11:03 PM  

There is nothing that is objectively wrong, evil, or immoral with intermarriage.

There is nothing that is objectively wrong, evil, or immoral for rejecting your superior culture and marrying into a lesser one.

Blogger bobby July 17, 2017 11:06 PM  

{4. DonReynolds July 17, 2017 7:22 PM

Negroes in the USA are one person in eight and a reasonable person could argue that if they are entitled to a proportionate share of this country, based on population, they would always be limited to one out of every eight....and no more. Where they have or receive more than one out of eight, it should be reduced. Where they have or receive less than one out of eight, they should have more.}
--------------------

Sure, but quotas ought to work both ways.

For every eight widgets or loaves of bread or dollars worth of value produced in this country, blacks ought to be required to have produced one of them.

Then, and only then, do we discuss quotas of what they get.

Anonymous Mr. Rational July 18, 2017 12:02 AM  

@124  As BBGKB has noted, you only get hybrid vigor when you kill off the runts.

@136  Amen to that.  And restrict them to 1/8 government jobs, too.  Especially USPS.

Blogger pnq8787 July 18, 2017 12:02 AM  

Case 1) The case of the Irish woman who married the Italian doesn't seem particularly special to me. She was an unhappy housewife who couldn't take constructive criticism about her cooking. Then instead of divorcing right away, she compounded the problem by deliberately having a child. Now after the divorce she's complaining about not getting custody. I don't see much wrong here, just a typical western woman, except Italy must be a little less gynocentric so that's good.

Case 2) The Uzbek guy was at least fairly handsome. The Uzbeks seem to have gotten some good genes from both Europe and the Mongols I would guess, because I've noticed that Uzbekistan has many attractive women. They were both fairly attractive so no real complaint here. I do have my doubts that the female is going to be able to hack living as a poor person for very long given the way she was raised though.

Case 3) This chick is butt ugly. In fact all of the British chicks in the documentary were butt ugly except for the Case 2 wife. I agree with a previous poster who commented about the irony of the family getting this girl an Oxford education and being proud of it only to have their daughter go to an African tribe and need to be taught how to clean a bowl. It was beautiful comedy! You know we should only pray that all white women who choose to miscegenate with those of African ancestry would actually move to Africa. I commend this women for doing the right thing by moving to Africa!

A nation is defined by its men. At its core a nation is a group of related men who participate in what is essentially a cooperative mating strategy. Only the men fight for their tribe. In addition only the men farm and develop the land. For example in rural China where a son inherits land, the woman MUST move to live with her husband. She becomes a member of HIS family and has to tow the line. She must do as her mother-in-law says. This is how it should be. Any miscegenating woman should have to move to the nation of her husband. She should be rejected and outcast from her native tribe.

Blogger Koanic July 18, 2017 12:05 AM  

To be fair, I think they're often crazy before they mudshark. But it doesn't help.

Blogger tz July 18, 2017 12:11 AM  

Frisco Kids cause diversity heartache.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd July 18, 2017 12:34 AM  

Sharrukin wrote:And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods.

And that is where it all went to hell. It wasn't the strange wives, it was the strange gods they brought with them. There are huge problems with marrying a strange wife, but they can be overcome. Serving a strange god leads to eternal damnation, and there is no overcoming that.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener July 18, 2017 12:37 AM  

"She must do as her mother-in-law says."

At which point it's the son's duty to keep his mother in line, which is an unfortunate reality in both East and West. If we can find lasting common ground, it lies in the certainty that women ruin everything.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener July 18, 2017 12:40 AM  

Have to say too that horseback riding across Turkmenistan looks freaking awesome.

Blogger Phillip George July 18, 2017 1:29 AM  

As someone who passionately hates CNN and NYT and WP and the BBC it is my duty to go off topic and cut and past post this:



BUSTED: Russian who met with Trump's son worked for the FBI!

True Pundit did a documents request and found out that it was an FBI sponsored gig all the way!

"The Russian translator at the Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. worked with the State Department and the FBI during Robert Mueller's tenure as Director of the Bureau, according to documents obtained by True Pundit.
Mueller, the former FBI director, is currently the United States Special Counsel investigating President Donald Trump's administration and White House aides for alleged connections to supposed Russian factions. While Big Media has tried to portray Trump's eldest son, Donald Jr., as having orchestrated a clandestine meeting with the Russians to attempt to find dirt on Hillary Clinton, few can seem to explain how a person linked to the FBI and Mueller, who was calling the shots for the Bureau at the time, ended up at the very same Trump Tower sit down.

Mueller’s office did not return calls for comment. The translator, Anatoli Samochornov, who also worked for the US State Department until recently, could not be reached for comment either. Former FBI officials with knowledge of the meeting and possible other FBI work performed by Samochornov refused to go on the record

Anonymous Sharrukin July 18, 2017 1:29 AM  

141. Ominous Cowherd

And that is where it all went to hell. It wasn't the strange wives

Nope.

Read Ezra 10

Now let us make a covenant before our God to send away all these women and their children

Didn't matter if they had converted or not.

None were allowed to stay.

Anonymous SciVo de Plorable July 18, 2017 1:46 AM  

It is nice to see a growing consensus in this point. And it will continue to spread, because it is based on Truth; all someone has to do is stop falsely conflating nation with country with state, and blammo there it is, right in front of your eyes: an empire parasitizing off its core nation.

Anonymous Icicle July 18, 2017 2:04 AM  

BUSTED: Russian who met with Trump's son worked for the FBI!

True Pundit did a documents request and found out that it was an FBI sponsored gig all the way!


If that's true, Derp State strikes again.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener July 18, 2017 2:27 AM  

"Russian who met with Trump's son worked for the FBI!"

Democrats are the real Russian hacks.

Anonymous Yep, read this before July 18, 2017 3:14 AM  

As is the case with so many things, the Diversity being pushed on the nations of the West is a lie, a false and evil version of the true diversity that can only be preserved through the various peoples of the world remainingly firmly and determinedly distinct:

Western civilization is a consequence of three things: The European nations, Christianity, and the Graeco-Roman legacy of philosophy and law. To restore it, anything and everything that stands in the way of those three things has to go.

Let us now pray for the Graeco-Romans who live in Greece/Rome who now have to deal with migrants South of Constantinople.

Blogger Koanic July 18, 2017 3:15 AM  

nnnnnggghhhh fine

The Old Testament laws against Israelite miscegenation are abrogated. There's no mention of the idea that Christian Jews were supposed to avoid marrying Gentiles. They're only explicitly supposed to avoid marrying non-Christians.

Christ abrogated lots of useful laws, or laws based on timeless ethical principles. One may make an analogy: The Old Testament commands burial of poop. Nowadays we crap into toilets with running water. This is an improvement. So is genetic testing of one's prospective spouse.

Removing the explicit laws unlocks the higher difficulty level, just like that Mario Kart level through space without siderails.

OpenID leukosfash July 18, 2017 3:47 AM  

@19 DonReynolds:
On that topic, Dad and I would agree with you completely. The quotas/non-quotas argument was only in terms of American citizens, and did not include foreign invaders....at all.

I didn't say anything about "citizens" ....

Anonymous All the non-race based Alt-righters are honkeys. July 18, 2017 3:48 AM  

Koanic wrote:nnnnnggghhhh fine

The Old Testament laws against Israelite miscegenation are abrogated. There's no mention of the idea that Christian Jews were supposed to avoid marrying Gentiles. They're only explicitly supposed to avoid marrying non-Christians.

Christ abrogated lots of useful laws, or laws based on timeless ethical principles. One may make an analogy: The Old Testament commands burial of poop. Nowadays we crap into toilets with running water. This is an improvement. So is genetic testing of one's prospective spouse.

Removing the explicit laws unlocks the higher difficulty level, just like that Mario Kart level through space without siderails.


Translation: Alt-right is like a Mario Kart level: your ethnic background is like a blue shell!

And people say that the Alt-right is racist!

Blogger Koanic July 18, 2017 5:00 AM  

Mario is a half-nigger. King Koopa has red hair.

It's a degenerate Jap miscegenation fantasy in which a drug-addicted swarth dwarf prole with minimal English skills steals a mudsharking blonde daughter from her irascible overprotective father.

Blogger CM July 18, 2017 5:50 AM  

--And that is where it all went to hell. It wasn't the strange wives, it was the strange gods they brought with them. There are huge problems with marrying a strange wife, but they can be overcome. Serving a strange god leads to eternal damnation, and there is no overcoming that.--

The relevant part is not just the gods. It is the culture that comes with the gods. Even if a Jew still worshipped his God, you don't think a wife who isn't sold on the practice of passover or yom kippur would be a tolerable addition? Forsake the traditions, you tend to forget the God who comes with it.

I should also repeat my observation of how rare this was in scripture... almost as if it is hard and a very rare thing for people to abandon their culture and religion in order to embrace another.

Blogger Unknown July 18, 2017 6:39 AM  

By marrying and moving into another culture, the women of It'll Never Last tried their best to join another nation, and their failure to do so ...

goldenslot
สูตรบาคาร่า

Blogger Resident Moron™ July 18, 2017 6:42 AM  

The stupid English woman defending mutilating her own daughters. The article skirts the question of whether she actually went along with this, so her daughters could "become women" ...

The things a woman will do for an erection.

Blogger dvdivx July 18, 2017 7:01 AM  

The people who are for inter racial mixing worship skin color not god. Its just a repeat of the tower of babel with the deliberate destruction of races being the goal. The biggest hit is to the kids. Its not just about IQ. You see problems with half Asians as well.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd July 18, 2017 8:15 AM  

Sharrukin wrote:Read Ezra 10

Yes. Why were they sent away?

Ezra 9:1 ``... The people of Israel, and the priests, and the Levites, have not separated themselves from the people of the lands, doing according to their abominations ...''

Doing abominations with the people of the land, worshiping their strange gods. Of course the idolatrous foreign women had to go.

Rahab and Ruth show us the rare circumstance in which strange wives are acceptable. They didn't bring their strange gods with them.

Anonymous patrick kelly July 18, 2017 9:15 AM  

Not only that they want to take your children and visit every year even if there's a damn war going on there

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd July 18, 2017 9:15 AM  

CM wrote:The relevant part is not just the gods. It is the culture that comes with the gods. Even if a Jew still worshipped his God, you don't think a wife who isn't sold on the practice of passover or yom kippur would be a tolerable addition? Forsake the traditions, you tend to forget the God who comes with it.

Yes, and we're getting back to strange gods.

CM wrote:
I should also repeat my observation of how rare this was in scripture... almost as if it is hard and a very rare thing for people to abandon their culture and religion in order to embrace another.


Yes, indeed.

Koanic wrote:Christ abrogated lots of useful laws, or laws based on timeless ethical principles. One may make an analogy: The Old Testament commands burial of poop. Nowadays we crap into toilets with running water. This is an improvement. So is genetic testing of one's prospective spouse.

Marriage across races isn't really an improvement, or even a good idea, but it's not a sin, also. Strange gods are always a sin.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 9:27 AM  

@dc.sunsets

"You offer new meaning to the notion of being too short for this ride."

It's not really clear whether he actually believes that he's making an argument by saying, essentially, "The world should work the way I want it to, no the way it actually does! Waaah!" Or if it's just cynical virtue signaling.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 9:33 AM  

@Selkirk
"Without the intermarriage there is no descendent to sin against."

And without the murder there is no victim to sin against. Are you actually laboring under the misapprehension that you've made a point here? That's hilarious.

Anonymous Avalanche July 18, 2017 9:37 AM  

@11 "I don't disagree with anything you said but I stand by my statement. An acceptance of financial aid SHOULD be accompanied with the explicit understanding that acceptance of aid necessitates a cessation of the behaviors that made the person request the aid to begin with."

So, how's the weather over there in cloud-cuckoo land? Still getting all the unicorn farts you need to run your appliances? Fairy dust to keep you happy?

Do you just not GET that, for instance, an 'average-IQ-of-69" Congolese WILL NOT EVER achieve an "explicit understanding" of ANYthing?! Or do you think that "we' can somehow FORCE that thing to ACT as if it does get it?

("acceptance"?!? You expect 83-IQ basket cases to somehow "accept" the White Euro-derived, technological, literacy required, etc. etc. way of life?! They're HAPPY to accept our welfare. (The mudslimes call it jizya --they're not getting "welfare" -- we're PAYING them what "Dhimmis must pay" to not be killed or forcibly converted!)

Back in the 1910s and 1930s, when the "black community" in the U.S. was both harshly restricted and forcibly controlled and punished (or at least threatened: pour encourager les autres) -- so, they actually did a semi-decent job of PRETENDING to have, share, and act within American / White / Euro-derived values. And AS SOON as the White thumb was lifted off them (and the damned liberal/commies began riling them up) -- the 'community' went to hell and has only gotten worse.


'Stop the behavior that makes them need the aid'?!

Yeah, like THAT'S ever gonna happen! Do you not see that 'black behavior' (or as I/we call it: TNB) exists in EVERY place where there are blacks?! ("Where there are Africans, there is Africa!") EVERY beautiful White Euro-derived city in that has 'tipped' black has turned into absolute african hellholes.

And I wish people would QUIT saying "it's the Democrat-run cities"! Portland Oregon is exactly that -- idiot liberals trying to make utopia -- and until they began mass importing low-IQ foreigners and providing insane charity for them, Portland was a fantastic, lovely, clean, (yes, Democrat-run) city. Detroilet and Chicongo are BLACK-run; they are AFRICAN-derived hellholes -- the Demoncrat part was only the path to it becoming big-man africa.

Wake up! Come to the real world. No unicorn farts or fairy dust; but more reality and maybe even a FUTURE for us and our White children!

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 9:42 AM  

@dc.sunsets

"You included "preference" earlier, now you drop it."

"Nothing objectively wrong, huh? How about a high IQ family being diluted by intermarriage with a family of imbeciles?"

Ah, but what you're failing to realize here is that "objective" is defined in this context, not by real-world consequences, but solely and precisely by the preferences of the Selkirk. QED. An unbeatable argument... in his own mind.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 9:50 AM  

@haus fraud

"Is it not preferred for a people with an average IQ of 100 not to mix with Somalians, average IQ 69?"

No one capable of employing basic spelling, grammar, and word usage correctly can be as stupid as this guy pretends to be. He's trolling.

That said, in the leftist worldview, taking real-world consequences into account in judging the morality of an act is in itself viewed as a moral failing (even worse than admitting that incentives work). As long as the predictable consequences of an act are unintended, they don't count, and it's considered, not only immoral, but rather gauche, to point them out.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 9:54 AM  

@Selkirk
"You are making a utilitarian assessment of what is good and evil. Do I have that wrong?"

To Selkirk, "objective" has no meaningful definition beyond "whatever Selkirk's feelz tell him at the moment." Do I have that wrong?

Anonymous Avalanche July 18, 2017 10:02 AM  

@40 "My husband, who loves living in the U.S., has turned out to be far more adaptable than I am.
Knowing what I know now, I would still marry my husband. But any Western woman contemplating marrying outside of her nation should seriously consider what she's getting into."

On my 'dating and marrying' advice list, I always pointed out -- in my 'gentle' (i.e. semi-surreptitious) introduction of legitimate "racism") -- discussions of why NOT to marry outside your race, religion, or even nationality -- that even just the North / South (Union / Confederate) differences my beloved husband and I had caused multiple small and large conflicts over the years. (And I had early-on come to agree it was the "War of Northern Aggression"). Still most "cultural" differences are NOT things you think about until you smash into them at 100 mph!

It's hard enough to cross the male / female differences divide in a relationship -- adding ANY other difference is not your best odds!

I also found this to be an AMAZING way to help young White Euro-derived women to be able to SAY (gracefully and out loud) that they 'did not date outside their race': in response to the constant blacks answering their online profiles.
"Giving them permission" (and the words to use) pretty much met the need of every one of them to NOT date outside their race. (And, when necessary, to deal with the nasty responses of the rejected negroes.

Teaching this sort of prep work to your young daughters might not go amiss either! They don't want to 'hurt its feelings' by saying 'bad' things -- so they don't know how to say (and explain) that/why they will absolutely NOT date 'not-them.'

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 10:04 AM  

@Selirk

"I haven't claimed to be."

1. Repeatedly claims to be the sole arbiter of objective right vs. wrong; moral vs. immoral.

2. Badly states "I haven't claimed to be [a moral authority]".

3. Top kek. Keep it up; this is entertaining. An excellent example of both what a certain tribe refers to as "chutzpah," and of Dunning-Kruger.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 10:07 AM  

@Selkirk

"If you can educate me on this question, feel free."

https://www.amazon.com/Bad-Students-Not-Schools/dp/141281345X

Anonymous Avalanche July 18, 2017 10:14 AM  

@74 "Worse yet when she wants to go back and take children with her."

You skipped a step: even even worse is when she divorces and does NOT go back and lives with her kids on welfare...

Marry your own kind -- avoid many many problems!

(An American marrying a Finn pace, Stickwick is still pretty much your own kind! American-Thai (!?), American-Arab/muslim, American-Chinese.... not.)

Anonymous Avalanche July 18, 2017 10:17 AM  

@98 "Like talking to a computer."

Nah, like touching poop.
Over and over and over and over and over....
(Irrefutably.)

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 10:20 AM  

Selkirk is simply using a Bare Assertion Fallacy.

2 levels of it: his primary assertions, "backed up" by constantly claiming that his whims are "objective" (a transparent device meant to imply that everyone else is "subjective").

Note also the technique (typical of a certain group) of constantly demanding sources from others, while treating one's own assertions as the Voice of God.

Blogger bw July 18, 2017 10:36 AM  

remainingly firmly and determinedly distinct

We're looking at the West's new fundie Religion and the greatest crime against it :
Making Distinctions. Pointing out differences.

The Kult Marx Singularity: there can be no differences (among the plebes - the Cryotocracy doesn't believe in what they push except as an obvious system of degredation and the unnatural, and thus easier power/control/management).

Anonymous BBGKB July 18, 2017 10:39 AM  

the two greatest dangers to the Jews are a) that they will be hated, and b) that they will be too well loved

Given the number of jews I have meet IRL I don't see how b) could be a problem.

The cop who shot an Australian yoga teacher in Minneapolis was a much lauded Somalian diversity hire. I cant wait for the police union lawyers defense argument for this shooting.

Rumor has it she had pajamas with pictures of pigs on them.

That is their primary problem in the USA right now. Intermarriage is on trend to see them erased

Isn't that just jew guys with money not wanting to date jew women so they get gold diggers instead?

There is nothing objectively wrong or evil or immoral about cultural intermarriage.Of course not. However, it is very stupid for people who have no idea what they are in for and who cannot adjust!

Just like no tranny would go under the knife if they knew their actual chances of landing a STR8 man.

"You are not a moral authority."

There is nothing moral about having kids stupider & uglier than you. Right now lots of gay couples have adopted niglets & will learn a painful lesson when they grow up. Somewhat disturbing is the number of special needs non verbal niglets being taken.

The most shocking aspect of the post is that it was at LewRockwell.com... The left libertarians must be clutching their cultured or 3d-printed pearls

BGS's is having a sale on lightly clutched pearls. Coupon code BOWTIE

BUSTED:jewess that is not an ethnic Russian who met with Trump's son worked for the FBI!

FIFY

acceptance"?!? You expect 83-IQ basket cases to somehow "accept" the White Euro-derived, technological, literacy required

One redpill was seeing a jewish professor with a BLM shirt beaten by blacks. It made me realize I could put anything on a T Shirt and be protected by illiteracy.

Blogger William Meisheid July 18, 2017 10:40 AM  

Selkirk wrote:"Says you. God ordained otherwise."
The bible says nothing of the sort: Numbers 12:1-15 , Colossians 3:11


Your misuse of both passages is fundamental. Numbers has nothing to do with Moses progeny and marriage choice and everything to do with his calling as prophet and deliverer being called into question due ot his marrying an Ethiopean. God basically calls Miriam on using that extraneous detail to belittle His choice in Moses. As an aside, do any of Moses' descendants make a mark anywhere in Israel's history or in later scripture? No, they do not. Ever wonder why? The closest argument anyone has ever come up with is Ruth and she debunk the multicultural argument because she throws off her former people and culture and claims Israel as her people and their God as her God. You lose there.

As to Galatian, that passage only shows that there is no limit on God's salvation in Jesus Christ based on sex, nationality, or condition in life, not that sex, nationality, or conditions don't exist. You lose there too.

Learn to do exogesis.

Anonymous Avalanche July 18, 2017 10:57 AM  

@156 'The stupid English woman defending mutilating her own daughters. The article skirts the question of whether she actually went along with this, so her daughters could "become women" ..."

Well, since she should be forced to marry them off BACK into their father's nation (i.e., they do NOT belong in White/Euro nations!) who cares?! They must go back!

Anonymous Carlos Danger July 18, 2017 11:02 AM  

if the cultures are compatible its not a problem. I refuse to be involved with women of my own nation- the US. I am happily married to another European culture and grew up in two European cultures and am raising my child in two European cultures. AW don't transfer well to other cultures because they are poor cultural repositories in the first place and have no idea of how to meet the expectations of most European men. AW don't want to hear what men of the world with options truly think of them. It is not pretty. An AW has to prove to me she can hang with the European women before I would have anything to do with her. That is the true source of the friction in those European cultures. The EGK is an example although he is quiet about it. I can run a microwave without them.

Blogger chris July 18, 2017 11:13 AM  

The most infuriating thing is that after moving to Africa and getting knocked up by an African, the woman brings the kids back to the UK so she can cuckold her race and force English men to provide for the African man's kids. English men get the bill, the Masaii African gets the reproduction. Such women should be expelled from society and forced to live in the third world.

Anonymous Überdeplorable Psychedelic Cat Grass July 18, 2017 11:20 AM  

Having read that article yesterday, I was left shaking my head. It's like that crazy chick from Eat Pray Love. They're just interested in HAWT.

DonReynolds wrote:Here at Vox, we can speak of "diversity" and actually mean it....in the sense of variety, being diverse. But in the rest of the country when they use the word "diversity" it means "anybody except whites", it means anti-white. It does not mean diverse in the least.

In fact, where they claim there is "diversity", such as professional sports, there is very little variety and there is no one who advocates that professional sports become diverse by the inclusion of players who are not Negro. Such a thing would be unthinkable, because "diversity" does not mean diverse, it simply means not white.


It reminds me of my six months in Spain 9 years ago. You could eventually tell who was catalán, madrileño, etc. just by looking at them. I'm not just talking based on dress either. The ethnicities were evident if you knew what to look for. That's true diversity in my opinion. I remember my American advisors sending out an e-mail talking about how diverse Spain was and how it was getting more diverse thanks to immigration. Nope immigration = replacement.

Similarly here Stateside, we have enough true diversity. We don't need to import more.

haus frau wrote:Speaking of diversity at work. The cop who shot an Australian yoga teacher in Minneapolis was a much lauded Somalian diversity hire. I cant wait for the police union lawyers defense argument for this shooting.

"Minnesota newspaper The Star Tribune reports Ms Damond was dressed in her pyjamas when she went to the driver’s side door of the police vehicle that responded to the emergency call.

She was talking to the driver when the officer in the passenger seat pulled out his gun and shot across his fellow officer."
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/australian-woman-shot-dead-by-police-in-minneapolis/news-story/c70e5bd988eb4a995125da452e25d46c


"Minnesota police wear body cameras, but the officers involved did not have their cameras turned on at the time.
Police said a squad camera also failed to capture the incident, and investigators were seeking to determine if any video of the incident existed."

How convenient! Ah Somali poilce...he was a good boy. He dindu nuffin. He wanted to be a cop and sheit.

Blogger Cail Corishev July 18, 2017 12:15 PM  

Are body cams ever turned on? Do they think they're jewelry, for decoration?

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 12:36 PM  

@tz

"Frisco Kids cause diversity heartache"

San Francisco was 13% black in the 80s. It's 6% black now. I'm very concerned that this (clearly accidental) ethnic cleansing has greatly weakened a once-great city through the loss of so much valuable diversity. Clearly, we must do more to save this urban jewel by affirmatively favoring fair housing for the melanin-enhanced within its environs.

Anonymous andon July 18, 2017 1:17 PM  

176. Blogger chris July 18, 2017 11:13 AM
The most infuriating thing is that after moving to Africa and getting knocked up by an African, the woman brings the kids back to the UK so she can cuckold her race and force English men to provide for the African man's kids. English men get the bill, the Masaii African gets the reproduction. Such women should be expelled from society and forced to live in the third world.


good points

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 1:25 PM  

@haus frau

"So what moral standard are you basing this assertion on:"

It's based solely on muh (((deconstruction))), of course.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 1:42 PM  


@Selkirk

"I'm aware of no moral standard that warrants believing intermarriage is wrong or right, good or evil."

We're aware of your lack of awareness (of this, as well as many other things). We're also aware that lack of awareness on your part is not an argument.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey July 18, 2017 1:57 PM  

@tz

"The problem with SMV is that it is a market, and like Walmart displaces the local stores, it has closed down the marriage market."

Good analogy.

"One thing we forget today in the airline internet era is that marriage is the fusion between two FAMILIES, not just two persons."

Exactly. This is one major concept that libertarians have on common with the Left: the conceit that no valid social structures exist at levels intermediate between atomized individuals and government.

Anonymous Pennywise July 18, 2017 3:16 PM  

Freedom of association mandates there is nothing fundamentally wrong with a man or a woman who marry outside of their own race, ethnicity, or culture, nor is there anything crazy about such a phenomenon.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd July 18, 2017 3:19 PM  

Francis Parker Yockey wrote:Exactly. This is one major concept that libertarians have on common with the Left:

I've long said that libertarians are leftists who figured out that come the revolution, they won't be commissars.

Blogger Matthew Funk July 18, 2017 3:35 PM  

@163 Good Lord, where did I show any notions optimistic of their capacity to learn and do better? The fact that they repeatedly misuse any aid given them and only grow increasingly entitled and dependent is a damn good reason to stop the aid altogether, even if a few of them literally have to starve to death. Christ, I am against the folly of mass redistribution, not for it. You sure got bent out of shape about a should statement that was expressed as a should statement.

Anonymous Luke July 18, 2017 8:21 PM  

184. Pennywise July 18, 2017 3:16 PM
"Freedom of association mandates there is nothing fundamentally wrong with a man or a woman who marry outside of their own race, ethnicity, or culture, nor is there anything crazy about such a phenomenon."

Even if true, that would be a case of where FOA was in error. Similiarly, if FOA "allowed" a 12-YO virgin girl to be impregnated (and subsequently financially abandoned) by an already-married father, it would likewise be in error.

======================================

Oh, and re the (non-Orthodox) Jews in America having the greatest danger to them be their ~40% rate of intermarriage, I disagree. The greatest danger to them (in terms of internal behaviors) has to be their low reproductive rate, somewhere in the 1.4 child per woman/lifetime range. Sure, only getting 60% of 1.4 puts them around 0.84 CPW/L range. But, if their reproductive rate was 3.6, they could afford that level of outbreeding and still not lose ground. So, I conclude that low reproductive rate is a greater factor in the ongoing demographic destruction of non-Orthodox Jews in the U.S.

Anonymous Luke July 18, 2017 8:23 PM  

"Already married father" in his late 50s, I meant.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts