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

Thursday, November 23, 2017

Mailvox: midwit history

It's no secret that I am not a fan of midwits. These responses to my previous post on Fake Americans and their Fake History may help explain why. They are the walking, talking examples of Dunning-Kruger in action. When I talk about them being relative retards, this is exactly the sort of thing I'm describing. Be sure to note how JM actually thinks he is correcting me.
According to your theory Britain, Canada (until two decades ago or so), Australia and New Zealand should be the best examples of freedom loving people in a land where the rule of law exists, where the government is not massive and social and economic freedoms are respected, in other words, Switzerland or close to it since their populations are by far MUCH MORE ANGLO than whatever you find in the U.S., less "tainted" by Germans, Italians, French and so on. I think we can all safely agree and that ALL the countries mentioned and less free and their populations endure more oppressive governments (female idiocy to the max, PC quasi-dictatorship, socialist policies, end to the right to bear arms, etc etc.). The worst part is that peoples of those countries CLAIMED FOR, ELECTED, AND ENACTED their governments actions with glee, only a tiny minority resisted or tried to do so. 
That's ridiculous. The "British brethren" of the British Empire were obviously a different subset of Anglo stock than the American settlers. Anglo-Saxon Protestant heritage is a necessary requirement of reliable community support for individual liberty and limited government, but it is not a sufficient one. Many Canadians are descended from British settlers who were loyal to the crown and were driven out. Australia is descended from criminal deportees; if you ever wondered why Sydney is a center of gay depravity, look up the crimes for which many of those criminals were deported.

As for the British themselves, they went through several hundred years of exporting and killing off their best and boldest. It should be no surprise that those who remain today are little more than island-dwelling dodo birds, blithely welcoming the newcomers who have already replaced them in their capital.

Anyone who thinks Switzerland is a bastion of individual liberty has never spent more than five minutes there. A friend of mine who worked in Zurich for five years collected various fines I would not have believed possible, including one for excess noise after 10 PM and another for turning on his fog lights when the amount of rain did not necessitate doing so. To put it his way, "imagine a homeowner's association run by uptight German women."
Whether you like it or not, your theory is full of holes and cannot explain why the peoples whose entrance you decry were allowed to enter en masse by the "virtuous protestant men of British stock" that inhabited the US back then, while the countries that should be shining examples of freedom due to their Protestant ethic (hahaha) and Anglo-saxon "pure" heritage sink ever so low. You don't seem to realize that Irish and Italians were brought as low cost labor not out of a "duty bring white men of good character". You don't seem to realize that if anything, the mixture of European peoples in the U.S. might have slowed down the destruction of the liberties that many Americans take for granted etc.
This guy's binary reasoning is so inept that he would similarly argue that my theory of NFL defense is full of holes and cannot explain how the Vikings were able to score on the Rams; obviously if the Vikings reached the end zone, then the Rams must have intended for them to do so.  And the idea that the addition of various peoples with no tradition of liberty or limited government somehow managed to slow down the destruction of now-vanished American liberties that their most illustrious members openly worked to destroy is simply too stupid to be mendacious.

Every generation has a faction arguing that relaxing the rules can't possibly do any harm. The Founders were no exception; the fact that they were naive about immigration and failed to adequately protect their posterity from themselves does not change the fact that their original vision for the United States in no way approximated anything even remotely close to what we see today. The irony is that in JM's arguing for American civic nationalism and the irrelevance of national origin, he is actually making a strong case for utterly ruthless ethnic cleansing, as evidently permitting even one otherwise unobjectionable exception is sufficient cause to give future civic nationalists grounds to destroy the nation.

Sertorius is similarly confused, but less obnoxious:
The Framers absolutely intended a British ethnostate, yet welcomed all white men of good character. Which was it? And since "intention" implies instrumentality, where exactly are the plans--even if they're just jottings on a cocktail napkin--that will bring forth such a polity?
Both. First, they had a very different definition of "white" than we do today. Second, they only intended to allow enough whites of good character to permit them to fully assimilate through interbreeding. (Notice that they didn't establish a reliable mechanism for policing "good character" either, therefore they must have intended to import criminals and Satanists, right?) Third, they had set up a structure in which the several States were supposed to be entirely sovereign. They felt that this arrangement would suffice to address any fundamental differences; what would it matter to Massachusetts or Virginia if Pennsylvania was adulterated by Germans? Of course, the Civil War proved them wrong only four-score-and-change years later.

The Founding Fathers didn't intend a single British ethnostate, but rather, a number of distinct British ethnostates as well as a few mixed white ethnostates. If you recall, they were rather favorably influenced by the historical Greek city-states. This is exactly why citizens of the USA should be praying for a reasonably peaceful breakup and non-violent ethnic cleansing instead of desperately trying to preserve the unsalvageable.

The real problem the civic nationalists have with history is that it clearly spells out the horrors that are likely on the way for the West. They avert their eyes and offer silly, nonsensical arguments about the intentions of the Founders in order to dispel the fear that is quietly gnawing at their bellies. But it won't work, and in any event, nothing they say, and nothing I write, is going to make any difference whatsoever. I have no doubt that back in 372 AD, there was a Roman living in the town of Marcianopolis who was looking on in disbelief as 200,000 desperate Visigoths were permitted to cross the Danube to protect them from the Huns. Because refugees.

What could he have done about that? What possible difference could his arguments and his opinion have made? I like to think that Roman was smart enough to leave Marcianopolis and go very far away before Fritigern rose up to pillage the Roman north and slaughter the Emperor Valens at Adrianople six years later.

Labels: , , ,

164 Comments:

Blogger The Observer November 23, 2017 6:29 AM  

I really do enjoy it when people bring up Singapore and Switzerland up as examples of successful multicultural societies while ignoring the effective one-party state, panopticon and huge amounts of propaganda and draconian laws required to keep everyone in line, as well as the still-effective Chinese supermajority in Singapore. Those of Chinese stock may be fine with such laws; westerners probably less so.

Take those away, and you get the basket case that is Malaysia across the causeway.

Anonymous Magna Carta November 23, 2017 6:45 AM  

@1 The Observer -- "Singapore"

"In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion." -- Lee Kuan Yew, founder of Singapore

Anonymous Fed Up Aussie November 23, 2017 6:46 AM  

Australia's second largest proportion of founding stock are Irish criminals and rebels. This clown has no idea. There were also a lot of free settlers from Continental Europe during the 1800s, particularly German.

Blogger wreckage November 23, 2017 6:51 AM  

"Britain, Canada (until two decades ago or so), Australia and New Zealand should be the best examples of freedom loving people..."

Compared to any state with an ethnic plurality, they ARE.

And let's not submit to the nonsense that America is particularly free; it is drowning in red tape and micromanagement to a far greater degree than, say, New Zealand, which with a narrower ethnic base than Canada, Australia or the UK AND more liberal regulations in every respect, rather proves the reverse. And the UK, where the multi-cult has reigned for a decade, is largely less free than Australia, where try as it might, and corrupt as it might, it has never gained control of immigration laws.

Can the author kindly point to liberal and peaceful democracies with a weak or non existent ethnic majority? Because the argument presented is quibbling over the definition of multi-ethnic AND the definition of freedom.

Notably, Australia, as the dumping-ground for criminals and political prisoners, has always had a fair Irish plurality in the working class, competing with a strictly Anglo political class. The author might be unaware of the degree of ethnic tension this has created, but any serious student of Australian history should not be.

Canada has always had a disparate French population.

The UK has been an imperial state with regards to Ireland for quite some time, and it might have escaped... you know what, screw the niceties. Has this dense prick not heard of the IRA? Did he think it was full of ethnic Britons?

I am emotionally opposed to the ethno-state, and deeply afraid of what might happen if it has to made to happen. But these examples display , superficially, a spectrum of diversity-to-freedom that EXACTLY defies the author's attempted point.

Anonymous Ages November 23, 2017 6:51 AM  

Anglo-Saxon, I have always felt, is a bit of a misnomer. The Saxons were there, but the Frisians had as much or more influence on foundational Anglo culture.

Blogger wreckage November 23, 2017 6:54 AM  

TLDR: these are midwits who lose the argument to a 2/3rds mad, 1/2 cripple, ex-farmer with a merely adequate IQ.

Are you sure they're midwits? Isn't that 120-ish? Because they read like a well-trained retard.

Blogger Wanderer November 23, 2017 7:03 AM  

@4
What the fuck? I don't about the other countries, but in Canada there is hate speech laws for fuck's sake. Ontario just recently passed both Islamic blasphemy laws to protect muslims, and also transgender pronoun laws to fine anyone who "misgenders" a tranny mutant. There's also holocaust denial laws for anyone who questions the official narrative. Also, Christian pastors are forbidden to state that homosexuality is a sin. Quoting Romans 1 gets you fined. So basically in Canada hurting people's feelings with truthful statements is a crime because feelings. Some free country. Sure, America has its problems, but it is still infinitely better than the rest of the Anglosphere.

Anonymous badhairday November 23, 2017 7:06 AM  

'As for the British themselves, they went through several hundred years of exporting and killing off their best and boldest. It should be no surprise that those who remain today are little more than island-dwelling dodo birds'

Hitler held a similar view in the 1930s.

Blogger Wanderer November 23, 2017 7:07 AM  

wreckage wrote:I am emotionally opposed to the ethno-state,
lmao

wreckage wrote:and deeply afraid of what might happen if it has to made to happen.
You have to go back home, Paco.

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 7:08 AM  

Are you sure they're midwits? Isn't that 120-ish? Because they read like a well-trained retard.

Midwit is 105 to 120. Yes, only a midwit is dumb enough to try to strike a superior pose to someone two standard deviations more intelligent. The binary either/or is also a giveaway, as is the basic knowledge of history exhibited.

The average individual wouldn't even be able to cite the historical examples that are incorrectly cited.

Blogger J.M. November 23, 2017 7:08 AM  

First off thank you for your response. Just to clarify:
I don't believe in civic nationalism, the closest you can get to it in a bloodless and sustainable way is a Switzerland kind of agreement, otherwise you are doomed to the choices and fates you have already explained in detail.
2. I am not American and don't currently live there.

But to your point, while mine was overly simplistic so is yours. The entrance en masse was allowed and sponsored in many ways (should I remind you the Homestead act?), not something that happened in spite of the government of that time. It seems to have set an example for what happened today with your Mexicans and Asians, today just in a bigger scale. Therefore your Vikings vs Rams NFL analogy doesn't work...

Regarding the British, the point you expose is interesting, however how can you explain Scandinavian countries which were aggressive even until the 1600s, didn't suffer the continuous bloodletting that Britain endured for centuries and yet are even more leftists and suicidal than degenerate Brits? I just think there are other forces at work and that such bloodletting may not even be the determinant one. After all Russia in WWII lost more than 25 million of their men and, while such catastrophe might have thwarted their worldwide domination dreams as a Soviet Union, it hasn't destroyed (completely) its people's character and common sense.

Regarding Switzerland, sorry but it's not for everybody, however it has more economic freedom than any country in the Anglosphere.

Anonymous Anonymous November 23, 2017 7:15 AM  

Some people don't get the idea that evolution or whatever has conditioned human beings to prefer to be around people much like themselves. They feel safer and more satisfied with life among their own.

Modern "liberals" (not just SJWs) think this is bad somehow --- especially if white folk think that way. But it is just nature. It is much like I have never seen an African woman that I found good looking. I don't hate them, but I am definitely not attracted to them in any way.

So the real question that should be addressed is how do we get the people mixed into proper groups here in North America? How do we explain to the mid-wits and wits of all kinds that we are headed towards catastrophe and need to change direction?

The "its ok to be white" meme has been all over twitter. I like that.

Blogger The Kurgan November 23, 2017 7:18 AM  

I'm partial to the city-state model myself.
Preferably reinforced, heavily armed and fully Christian.
And a definite willingness to examine any prospective citizen.
And by examine I mean Holy Inquisition version of it.

Perhaps if we could gather all the 3SD+ Christians in one place it could work.
It's a nice utopic idea to think about anyway.

Anonymous Rocklea November 23, 2017 7:22 AM  

"So basically in Canada hurting people's feelings with truthful statements is a crime because feelings. Some free country."

In Australia we have The Racial Discrimination Act of 1975, to which was added, some 20 years ago, this little gem.

Section 18c:
(1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:

(a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and

(b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.

The unwritten exception of course is the privileged. Gun laws and over regulation have all occurred within my lifetime. Mass urbanisation being one of the main causes and Australia is the most urbanised country in the world apparently.

"Sure, America has its problems, but it is still infinitely better than the rest of the Anglosphere."

America is breaking apart and will have less influence on our politics. From an Aussie perspective that means we get the joy finding out who actually owns this country. Hard to be a vassal when the Empire is crumbling.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 23, 2017 7:33 AM  

Don't permanent immigrants to Singapore have to be Han, or European at this point? That's what a couple of expats were saying.
The Singaporeans have always been openly, deliberately conscious of the problems that come with multiculturalism, so they cN manage it a little better, but even there Han nationalism seems to be the dominant force. Maybe they have been affected by what the Malays have done to their coethnics in Maylasia. Don't the Malay have affirmative action for themselves, even though they are the vast majority? That's kind of pathetic.

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 7:34 AM  

I don't believe in civic nationalism, the closest you can get to it in a bloodless and sustainable way is a Switzerland kind of agreement, otherwise you are doomed to the choices and fates you have already explained in detail.

Do you not know that Switzerland engaged in internal wars and both ethnic and religious cleansing in order to establish its current system? The Italian Swiss were occupied by the German Swiss from 1515 until 1803. Not only that, but Switzerland is still set up on the sovereign state model that the USA was until the Civil War. The Constitution of Ticino sets one of its cantonal responsibilities as "preserving the Italian culture".

Regarding the British, the point you expose is interesting, however how can you explain Scandinavian countries which were aggressive even until the 1600s, didn't suffer the continuous bloodletting that Britain endured for centuries and yet are even more leftists and suicidal than degenerate Brits?

I think their relative isolation and undesirable northern location left them safely unmolested until recently. And their most aggressive descendants were scattered everywhere from Sicily to the USA.

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 7:35 AM  

So the real question that should be addressed is how do we get the people mixed into proper groups here in North America? How do we explain to the mid-wits and wits of all kinds that we are headed towards catastrophe and need to change direction?

If history is any guide, war and ethnic cleansing. We don't. It's too late. The catastrophe is all but certain; the only question is the time frame. I believe the USA has less than two decades left.

Blogger Duke Norfolk November 23, 2017 7:39 AM  

Of course what most, if not all, civ nats REALLY want is to have their cake and eat it too.

They want a white supermajority while still being able to pontificate about how open-minded and virtuous they are. About how many colored folks they know and like who break the stereotype, etc. ad nauseum.

The fact that their ideology inevitably leads to third world chaos; well, that's conveniently tucked away in their little brains.

Anonymous ZhukovG November 23, 2017 7:43 AM  

@J.M.: Just because Culture, as Vox rightly observes, is downstream of Identity doesn't mean that it therefore scores '0'.

Why is it that when Vox posts something, people immediately seize upon it as though that is the only thing that matters in the entire universe.

Nations are Identities. But within the 'State', the direction those Nations take their states are influenced by a number of factors.

An Australian Alt-Righter should still prefer a Australian socialist state to a Chinese socialist state.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 23, 2017 7:43 AM  

Is it true that the aborigines serve essentially the same role as Blacks in America? If so, that sucks. There are aspects of their culture that are interesting. They are the ugliest race hands down, looking like a different species of hominid, and certainly they have low I.Q.s, but that sucks if eternal victimhood, crime, and aggression dominate their culture now. Though I can see how an aborigine would go past any limit to get a white woman over one of his own.
You guys have a fascinating country.

Anonymous Rocklea November 23, 2017 7:43 AM  

"I think their relative isolation and undesirable northern location left them safely unmolested until recently."

Stop vitD supps.

Blogger JACIII November 23, 2017 7:44 AM  

The loss of those separate and several states has cost us. There is very little one can do to escape the onrushing Matron State within the confines of the US border. The impulse to be left alone to create and procreate has fast been flushed out of what remains of the original ethnos.

Blogger Duke Norfolk November 23, 2017 7:45 AM  

And these people absolutely ignore that the only way to possibly institute and maintain the civ nat country is with an overwhelming dominating, intrusive, and ruthless regime. Extensive interview and subsequent surveillance to ensure that their citizens do indeed support the founding tenets. And of course that would fail eventually.

Blogger Resident Moron™ November 23, 2017 7:45 AM  

Singapore is the Switzerland of Asia: it is ordered, tidy, clean, safe, and obsessively focused on staying that way.

It is a testament to the iron will of Lee Kwan Yew that he was able to achieve this at all, let alone maintain it for decades.

Both countries have mixed multitudes and have adopted quite rigid legal and cultural mores to prevent violence between them, in the context of hostile neighbours who would have happily overrun them at any sign of internal weakness.

And while traveling between Switzerland and Germany elicits only minor ripples of cultural dissonance, traveling from Singapore to almost anywhere is a shock and traveling from Singapore to her nearest neighbours is like going to the moon...

Yes, the rules in Singapore are overbearing to a westerner's senses. OTOH, your teenage daughter could run half-naked through the park at midnight and be in danger only of a medium fine for disturbing public order.

Singapore is the one place in all the world that has actually delivered on the social contract. Yeah the terms are not what we would have them, but the contract has been kept. We cannot say that about our own nations, can we?

Blogger Harry Goldblatt MD November 23, 2017 7:46 AM  

>>Regarding the British, the point you expose is interesting, however how can you explain Scandinavian countries which were aggressive even until the 1600s, didn't suffer the continuous bloodletting that Britain endured for centuries and yet are even more leftists and suicidal than degenerate Brits?<<

None of the Scandinavian countries have ever had socialist systems. And none of them had the critical mass of manpower post 1700 to do imperial adventures.
I will grant that on some parameters these countries are more collectivist, but it is likely due to the fact that they are much smaller than Britain.

Ethnicity is one important aspect affecting liberty, others are religion, institutions and history. That is why many assumptions about the Scandinavian nations break down upon closer inspection.

Blogger The Observer November 23, 2017 7:47 AM  

Don't permanent immigrants to Singapore have to be Han, or European at this point? That's what a couple of expats were saying.

I am not aware of any such ruling.

Blogger Duke Norfolk November 23, 2017 7:49 AM  

Rocklea wrote:Stop vitD supps.

Actually, you may be on to something there. The modern diet may be a contributing factor. I'm assuming that the Scandis have largely turned away from much of their traditional foods (as have so many other peoples of the world), and subbed with grains and other crap of the modern diet. This could be influencing them in ways we are just starting to understand (gut biome, etc.).

Blogger Phillip George November 23, 2017 7:49 AM  

Vox,

in the meme wars

"White is the New Black. White Lives Matter"

and

"White and Not Guilty"

How to build a nation on Thanks Giving Day

1. the Ten Commandments
2. Prayer in School
3. there is no other Jesus
4. Reading, Writing and Arithmetic
5. Cherry Pick the rest of history for anything that empirically worked.
6. Repeat 2.
7. That's your day off. So play something.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 23, 2017 7:58 AM  

At this point clear thinking should be considered mandatory to speak on this issue. How in the hell could any white man look at that video of the mall of America dominated by savage Somalis and support civic nationalism? It really is amazing that any white man 30+ could promote "diversity." Their kind of delusion can't last, as you and Vox have pointed out so perfectly.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 23, 2017 8:00 AM  

Maybe it was bs on their part. Hindus lie constantly so they may have wanted to slander the place (though that would be far from slander to anyone with sense).

Blogger The Observer November 23, 2017 8:01 AM  

Maybe they have been affected by what the Malays have done to their coethnics in Maylasia.

Many Malaysian Chinese try to find work in Singapore because they find themselves discriminated against in their home country.

Don't the Malay have affirmative action for themselves, even though they are the vast majority? That's kind of pathetic.

They do, in many ways. For example:

-Licenses for certain businesses can only be held by Malays. This usually means that a Malay will enter a business partnership with a Chinese, the latter does the work, and the former sits around all day and periodically renews the license.

-Spaces in Malaysian universities are held for Malays. Shockingly, this fails to do them any good once they leave, and gravitate to public service - which again have the same quotas.

The publicly given reason for this difference in life outcomes on both sides of the causeway is - shockingly - to blame the white man, that the horrible, evil, and prejudiced British colonialists declared the Malays to be "lazy" and the Chinese to be "economic animals", and the power of the white man's magic racism spell is so strong that even after more than half a century of running oneself both races have not managed to shake off this dark magic.

Which conveniently leaves out how the same pattern is repeated with Chinese elsewhere, but eh. =/

Blogger Lovekraft November 23, 2017 8:04 AM  

I think attention has to be put on the debt financing, and how it basically enslaves a population. Global financiers targeting countries with emergency aid, allowing unsustainable social programs to flourish rather than die on the free market, and permitting a shell game of accountability.

I cannot pin down who is to blame, but I imagine a major hurdle to any nation in breaking free of globalist shackles is this debt structure.

Going to put it out there: I imagine certain 'groups' took deliberate and strategic efforts to place nations and their citizens under the debt yolk.

Blogger Resident Moron™ November 23, 2017 8:06 AM  

There are lots of immigrants in Singapore; the only criteria is that you earn. Very much like Switzerland in that respect; everything is about money. They're both very open about it and don't apologise for it or pretend it's all about not hurting anyone's feefees. Got money? You're in? Layabout no-hoper? Fuck off.

(They don't jerk around when it comes to deportation either; another contract condition our nations have all betrayed us on.)

Taking a taxi I asked the driver about immigration and why Singapore is so safe, as this seems to me the major paradox. He said, you know all those people who cause trouble in other places? The Pakis and Indians, the Shia and Sunni, etc? They all come here, and they don't make trouble because if they do we cane them, fine them, and deport them.

I don't call that draconian: I call it common sense, effective, and fair.

Anonymous NH November 23, 2017 8:07 AM  

VD,

Anglo-Saxon Protestant heritage is a necessary requirement of reliable community support for individual liberty and limited government, but it is not a sufficient one

Adding "reliable" to this theory is vague and doesn't save it from its flaws. For it to be true, non-anglo-saxon Protestants would not be able to adopt, in any way for any amount of time, these two principals, to any degree. Else, what would be the mechanism that allows them to do so "reliably?" I have yet to hear one serious answer from people that believe this theory and this is observable false.

Nor is there any reason, beyond technological, industrial, or financial happenstance, for demanding the concepts exist culturally only in the extreme, since as you note yourself with the Civil War, they didn't for very long, if at all. In your opinion, how long was the ink dry before the ideas began to be subverted?

Blogger urthshu November 23, 2017 8:11 AM  

My family were pre-Colonial New York Dutch settlers and they took part in The Revolution. I have little problem understanding VDs posts and endorse them, despite that it effectively points out how us New Yorkers have a distinct character unassimilated after all this time. We are still Dutch - still argumentative and 'rude' and still affixing a price to everything. And, no, Dutch were not considered top-flight white back then.

Anonymous Bobby Farr November 23, 2017 8:14 AM  

This guy should have started his diatribe by saying he is, or is married to, a Pole, Jew, Greek, etc. so he could be more efficiently dismissed as a foreigner trying to justify his presence.

Blogger Resident Moron™ November 23, 2017 8:15 AM  

@34

You should read SJWADD. You're deliberately conflating culture and blood, so you can make this ambiguity-based argument.

Stop it.

Blogger Lovekraft November 23, 2017 8:18 AM  

@29 WynnLloyd re Mall of America:

further to my point above, if we divide earned and debt-financed, then this Obama-sponsored wave of thirdworld settlement is fake, is easily written off and corrected.

Obama and his minions supported this program for various reasons, all of which are suspect.

Reciprocity is a severely-understated condition in these discussions, but one which I believe people have strong feelings about, on a subconscious basis. For example:

"Sure, Obama, I'll accept these Somalis coming here and setting up breeding enclaves AS LONG AS you yourself take in and live among them, as well as you ensure they are financially beneficial, and that Somalia also allow our institutions and people to start setting up in your lands (not that anyone would want to though).

Blogger pyrrhus November 23, 2017 8:19 AM  

VD--As for the British themselves, they went through several hundred years of exporting and killing off their best and boldest. It should be no surprise that those who remain today are little more than island-dwelling dodo birds, blithely welcoming the newcomers who have already replaced them in their capital.

Indeed, this "boiling off" of Britain's best and most freedom oriented continued well into the 1980s from personal knowledge. When I asked one British engineer at our company why he had emigrated, he said "there's no opportunity there."

Anonymous Rocklea November 23, 2017 8:19 AM  

"Is it true that the aborigines serve essentially the same role as Blacks in America?"

They are a smaller percentage of the population, 3% from memory. They were casually violent from the get go and spearings were a regular occurrence throughout Australian history. They are also superb bushman and brilliant trackers. If you want to know more and be entertained at the same time, read Hell West and Crooked by Tom Cole. One of the best books I've read. Tom was a drover, a buffalo and crocodile hunter and worked with aboriginals through it all.

One of the unintended consequences of giving aboriginals the vote and equal wages was ending the relationships forged on the stock routes between blacks and whites as the stations couldn't afford to keep em on.

Anonymous NH November 23, 2017 8:22 AM  

@37 you should read the quote again, Sparky.

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 8:25 AM  

For it to be true, non-anglo-saxon Protestants would not be able to adopt, in any way for any amount of time, these two principals, to any degree. Else, what would be the mechanism that allows them to do so "reliably?" I have yet to hear one serious answer from people that believe this theory and this is observable false.

I don't discuss things with binary-thinking midwits. I trust you will enjoy the ethnic cleansing to come with the satisfaction that the theory explaining it is observably false.

Anonymous normally a lurker November 23, 2017 8:26 AM  

@8
>Hitler held a similar view in the 1930s.

No, he didn't. Hitler was a giant Britaboo who admired the British deeply, so much in fact that he cultivated trends from the isle among his followers and was appalled at the losses the British suffered at the hands of his nominal allies in the SEA theater.

Blogger pyrrhus November 23, 2017 8:28 AM  

Taking a taxi I asked the driver about immigration and why Singapore is so safe, as this seems to me the major paradox. He said, you know all those people who cause trouble in other places? The Pakis and Indians, the Shia and Sunni, etc? They all come here, and they don't make trouble because if they do we cane them, fine them, and deport them.

Isn't the simplicity breathtaking? Here in Southern Arizona, the city populations are about 5% black. They generally have jobs and make zero trouble--BLM is unheard of. Why? Perhaps because they know that the Spanish/hispanic/white alliance that runs the place, and particularly the Spanish and hispanics, have absolutely no use for them, and would retaliate Bigly....

Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 23, 2017 8:29 AM  

Both sides of the family Pre-Rev colonists, maternal side Tory lickspittles that fled NY/NJ at war's end to Ontario only to migrate to Wisconsin a century later, proto-SJWs to the core. The paternal were Scots-Irish, basically the Brit ethnic group that so troubled Fischer and this side of the family put no stock into the authority of the conventional wisdom of the day, especially from the lickspittle types.

Anonymous NH November 23, 2017 8:36 AM  

VD

I don't discuss things with binary-thinking midwits.

Dude. I get the guy you're arguing with here is probably annoying as shit, but this is a subject you and I have discussed before. As I consider you very intelligent, I was looking forward to you batting my criticisms back to me to think about more.

And the binary thinking is on your behalf in your own quote.

Blogger pyrrhus November 23, 2017 8:37 AM  

"I cannot pin down who is to blame, but I imagine a major hurdle to any nation in breaking free of globalist shackles is this debt structure."

As I recall, both English and French Kings simply defaulted on loans from foreigners, while Henry II seized all of the property from wealthy jews at death, including loans to himself. French Kings frequently executed major creditors who proved unruly...

Blogger pdwalker November 23, 2017 8:45 AM  

60 years ago, Canada was free. 35 years ago, not so much.

Now? Are you kidding me? As long as I follow certain rules, i am as free or freer in Communist China. I shit you not. Every time I go back for a visit (rarely) I can see noticeable changes in what you can, or cannot do. There are a log of frogs simmering in the pot there and they think the waters fine.

Bah.

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 8:46 AM  

I was looking forward to you batting my criticisms back to me to think about more.

Your criticisms are stupid and it's not my job to make you think. What more do you need me to tell you? Figure out why they are stupid.

For it to be true, non-anglo-saxon Protestants would not be able to adopt, in any way for any amount of time, these two principals, to any degree.

That's wrong, to such an extent that it is almost approaching the "not even wrong" category. Here is a hint: You are completely ignoring the intrinsic context of "human behavior" which precludes your semantic objections. You're not criticizing, you're playing midwit word games.

Blogger wreckage November 23, 2017 8:52 AM  

@7, just go and do the research will you? The USA has IN SOME RESPECTS a higher legislative burden than the states listed, especially New Zealand.

@9 I didn't say ethnic nationalism or Voxian omninationalism was incorrect. I said emotionally, I wish it to be. As to having to go back, I am of British descent and living in Australia; wait, I'll just go back to the land of my people's ruler, Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II. Oh, look, that was quick. Any other requests?

Anonymous NH November 23, 2017 8:54 AM  

Your criticisms are stupid and it's not my job to make you think.

Is this not the Dojo? I can see myself out if you prefer.

That's wrong, to such an extent that it is almost approaching the "not even wrong" category. Here is a hint: You are completely ignoring the intrinsic context of "human behavior" which precludes your semantic objections. You're not criticizing, you're playing midwit word games.

Yes,I'm aware it's wrong, as your theory likely isn't true.Else what mechanism allows adoption for any length of time we might prefer to call reliable?

Blogger Brad Matthews November 23, 2017 9:35 AM  

New ones will be created. Someday, like in the Bible, we will have to give two names for a place, the current one and the old one.

Blogger J.M. November 23, 2017 9:51 AM  

VD wrote:Do you not know that Switzerland engaged in internal wars and both ethnic and religious cleansing in order to establish its current system? The Italian Swiss were occupied by the German Swiss from 1515 until 1803. Not only that, but Switzerland is still set up on the sovereign state model that the USA was until the Civil War. The Constitution of Ticino sets one of its cantonal responsibilities as "preserving the Italian culture".

I am aware of it. That's why I said i didn't believe in Civic Nationalism but I think different peoples can live and cooperate to a certain extent in a plurinational state, having seen the precedent in the Swiss Model. I guess you are aware that Switzerland has evolved since the 1500 hundreds and that nowadays no one is up in arms against the central government. Look I am not saying Switzerland is perfect, much less eternal, however is a prosperous and peaceful country.

By the way I would say Germanic women, Swiss "Germans" speak "Dütsch" dialects, not Hochdeutsch. XD

Blogger dienw November 23, 2017 9:54 AM  

At least some English still have fighting genes.

Anonymous NH November 23, 2017 10:19 AM  

You are completely ignoring the intrinsic context of "human behavior" which precludes your semantic objections.

Your theory isn't necessary to explain human violence and domination, among other things. Nor to safeguard against it.

Is that your strongest point in the theory in your opinion?

Blogger Cubby8126 November 23, 2017 10:21 AM  

If you are stuck in the USA, for school and things, with no real ability to escape before the genocides begin where would you think living would be best when they start? Somewhere north and cold near a farm or two? Near the ocean?

Anonymous Avalanche November 23, 2017 10:28 AM  

I've seen a couple folks suggest "White and Not Guilty." I think that is entirely the wrong kind of meme or rhetoric.

The immediate (emotional/rhetorical) response (hell, even from some of us Rightists) is: "yes they are!" (Us: "of some things"; our enemies: "yes, of everything bad that has ever happened anywhere to anyone!") It INVITES us to start out on the lefties' terms and premise!

"It's okay to be White" establishes a quandary they cannot jump over: whether they try to agree or not, they're screwed!

"White and Not Guilty" results in a LIST of bad things Whites have done, and then you have to start arguing which bad thing was worse, and who did it and why and was it reasonable or unreas..... (By USING their premise, you've given them a huge headstart!) Complete fail!


I think (some rhetoric speaker please correct me if I've missed something) that you must consider the premise(s) and response(s) -- ours, but especially theirs -- underlying any memo or motto. The premise of "and not guilty" is "I'm defending myself against your charge that I AM/my people are guilty" - which means you are trying to address with logic and facts THEIR mindless attack that Whites ARE guilty! That is a sure loser from the get-go!

Blogger wreckage November 23, 2017 10:36 AM  

Woah woah woah. AFAICT Vox admits to the possibility of independent States in some sort of Federation; this would reflect, roughly, Taleb's definition of "Empire"; a disinterested military machine whereunder otherwise self-governing and self-determining states exist. Of course, I call that Federation, with Empire being for the top-down legal conformist model the USA has devolved into.

He has also stated that it's the rigidity of the current USA that will cause it to fracture, fragment, or devolve, with some implication that the original model could have worked, "but Civil War".

@57, a monoethnic rural area with a stable population, would be my interpretation. You want to be strongly ensconced in the community but not in prominence of any kind, and you want to look like the locals. Then form ties, be fun and well liked, but not the object of envy. Have lots of kids, the more marriages into local families, the safer you are.

Blogger wreckage November 23, 2017 10:39 AM  

@58 "White and not guilty" might serve very well, if: 1. You stick with "I AM not guilty", and 2. You're seeking to see a vehement response from them. Rhetoric that goads your opponent, may persuade the bystanders precisely because the opponent becomes enraged and loses the "moral" level of war. Jesus Himself used this approach, IIRC, and Paul certainly did.

Blogger Solaire Of Astora November 23, 2017 10:45 AM  

Looks like the first guy conflates government small in size with government small in authority. I can understand his confusion since people use small government to refer to both but that doesn't mean they're identical. A government that is small because it governs a small area and population can be more effectively authoritarian if anything because it's scale dependent. A government small in authority could theoretically be larger in those respects but be less intrusive. Guess he didn't stop to think about that.

Anonymous Avalanche November 23, 2017 10:45 AM  

@564 "At least some English still have fighting genes."

Well, at least English women...

Anonymous Avalanche November 23, 2017 10:56 AM  

@60 "White and not guilty" might serve very well, if: 1. You stick with "I AM not guilty", "


"I am not guilty" sounds an awful lot like "I'm not the racist; the DEMOCRATS are the real racists!"

"I am not guilty" invites the response: "White privilege, you evil racist! And you don't even SEE it!"

You're STILL starting on their premise that somehow Whites ARE guilty! ()And then trying to determine how much and of what...) And then trying to talk them out of that --you know, use reason and logic and facts and reality to make a DENT in a leftie!!

Blogger Dire Badger November 23, 2017 11:00 AM  

@Avalanche-

"White and not guilty" is not a meme for non-whites.

It's not a question as to whether or not the various european races have done anything wrong.
It's simply that WE are not 'feeling' any guilt. I don't know about you, but I haven't shot an Indian or hanged a negger. What my ancestors may or may not have done is no reason for me to feel guilty.

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 11:04 AM  

Do not falsely characterize what I say or what I want again, Sertorious.

Speak for yourself. Do not EVER attempt to speak for me, summarize me, or explain what I am thinking. I don't put words in your mouth. Do not try to put them in mine.

The moment you write "Vox wants" or "Vox thinks", you are treading on extremely thin ice. Don't do that.

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 11:06 AM  

I guess you are aware that Switzerland has evolved since the 1500 hundreds and that nowadays no one is up in arms against the central government.

People have not evolved since the 1500s. People aren't in arms against the central government in Germany either. But they will be if the central government doesn't go the way of Poland and Hungary soon.

Blogger tz November 23, 2017 11:08 AM  

@34 You miss there is a bell curve of even these behaviors. WASP heritage guarantees the majority will want liberty. Different percentages of other cultures will want different amounts, so there can be an overlap. If WASP is a 10, there can be averages of 8 or 6 or even 2 for different heritages (Japan and China? India? Africa?).

So it is not WASP liberty v.s. everything else tyranny.

Also Liberty can tolerate those who desire something more strict, or to put it differently, WASP relies on ostracism and the church to enforce rules, not guns and government. But it doesn't work the other way around. The tyrants will not let me live in liberty - either religious (Cromwell) or secular (Gay Marriage).

If you import a non-liberty culture, either via democracy (see Virginia's Governor's race) or financial oligarchy (The North wanted the South's tarriffs to pay for everything and subsidize their manufacturing instead of apportioning it like the constitution said) they will eventually destroy liberty.

Blogger Dire Badger November 23, 2017 11:09 AM  

If it makes you feel better, I have a Tee-shirt I made a few years ago that I occasionally trot out when I am grumpy that says "White Privilege is hard work."

Blogger Weouro November 23, 2017 11:12 AM  

I was always a little worried that the destruction of liberal democracy would lead to tyranny, but the reality is liberalism and the Constitution guarantee tyranny. The only thing that has prevented it for so long is the character of the American people. If we had a king instead. George Washington should have been king. Then he really could have actively preserved the blessings of Liberty for their posterity instead of subjecting us to a piece of paper disingenuous actors can make say whatever they want. They couldnt do that with a king.

Blogger Desdichado November 23, 2017 11:24 AM  

If Phillip George thinks "white and not guilty" as such a great meme, he should make and propagate it himself. Of its as good as he thinks it is, it'll get retweeted.

Blogger R Doom November 23, 2017 11:25 AM  

It reminds me when I was on a Left Wing Hate gaming forum, and the denizens *corrected* me when I said the 19th century was a great century of growth for America...I was told in no uncertain terms that the 19th century was a terrible time for America, and moreover that the only reason big economic projects could happen then was through a fiat currency system instead of the "useless" gold standard.

And there was nothing I could do to explain otherwise.

Blogger Cloom Glue November 23, 2017 11:25 AM  

ZhukovG wrote:
An Australian Alt-Righter should still prefer a Australian socialist state to a Chinese socialist state.


I am in Canada and I so much preferred my country fail as a multicultural socialist state than a pretend-Canadian socialist state, that I refused to vote for the Cuckservative, Stephen Harper. I let Trudeau win.

That is a measure that socialism/atheism repulses me more than the national socialists, and the alt-lite, think possible. In other words, I liked Vox Day's debate with the left, who try to call themselves Alt-Right.

Anonymous NH November 23, 2017 11:26 AM  

So it is not WASP liberty v.s. everything else tyranny

Necessary for reliable liberty and limited govt.

I completely agree that human behavior and ideals exist beyond even a spectrum. This theory can't have it both ways.

Anonymous Homesteader November 23, 2017 11:38 AM  

Cubby wrote:
"If you are stuck in the USA, for school and things, with no real ability to escape before the genocides begin where would you think living would be best when they start? Somewhere north and cold near a farm or two? Near the ocean?"

You don't buy a farm, you buy a community.

What I've learned along the way.

1. High trust (white). Check your demographics. My community is over 95% white. It matters. I read once that once a community becomes 11% black, white flight occurs. I assume the same is true for the other Diversity, Inc.®
team members as well.

2. Location. Someplace several hours away from a major population center. Look up "Lines of drift".

3. Weather. Cold keeps the riff-raff out, they say. But you want a growing season, too. My growing season here is poor. Oh well- can't have everything.

Defensible- Can a small group of determined men hold the position?
My valley has two effective entrances, both in cliff walls. One team with .308s could hold them with little difficulty.

Gov't- The more remote you are, the more the 11th commandment comes into play- that is, "Don't Get Caught". Your freedom is proportionate to your invisibility. And a thin, overworked bureaucracy is your friend, always.
Better too little, than too much.

Resources- Firewood. Water!!! (You buy the water, not the land.) Fertility and grazing pasture. Size and topography- how much, and how much IS USABLE?Don't buy steep hills unless it's a hunting cabin- working steep land is an exercise in difficulty.

Beauty- Subjective. I like open views. Others prefer dense forest. I hate traikers. Others find them cute. Esthetics are either a tax or a subsidy. Choose accordngly.

Accessabikity- 5 miles of rutty dirt road will be an asset in hard times, and a liability. Driving it daily can wear you down. Choose wisely.

Infrastructure. Meanwhile, schools, hospital, groceries, hardware- all the day to day. How far away is your toilet paper? Mine is about 10 miles.

That suits me. Others may want 100. Again, being outsidea SMALL town seems to work best. But you have to decide.

Work- How far can you be from your job or work? That may limit your choices.

I chose the Pacific Northwest. YMMV. Startnow, though- it's too late once the fun begins.

Anonymous Avalanche November 23, 2017 11:58 AM  

@63 "White and not guilty" is not a meme for non-whites.
It's not a question as to whether or not the various european races have done anything wrong.
It's simply that WE are not 'feeling' any guilt. I don't know about you, but I haven't shot an Indian or hanged a negger. What my ancestors may or may not have done is no reason for me to feel guilty."

No, it's trying to be a meme for idiot liberal Whites who DO feel guilty! What's the point? "I don't feel guilty" seems to be just more "here's about meeeeeeee?"

Or are you patting yourself on the back for being 'one of the good ones'? (And, one of the good ones on strictly dialectic / logic / fact / reason bases?!) Yeah, THAT will help forward our cause!

It does not matter how you feel and (legitimately) rationalize why you don't feel guilty! The "bunnies" DO feel guilty: what kind of rhetoric is it to say: "well, you should NOT feel that way?" ("Well, the Dem are the real racists!" Yah cain't fight flaming idiots with dialectic.)

I'm not disagreeing that we have no reason whatsoever on ANY terms to feel guilty -- hell, all those NOT-US should be on their knees thanking God FOR us! But, if the purpose of a meme is to create an 'earworm' -- to put an idea or concept into the brain of an idiot lefty (or idiot rightist), then it is preferably based in a truth that cannot be challenged -- OR be twisted and used against us! (You guys killed #### people for this-or-that -- you ARE guilty!!And the fact you don't feel it PROVES that you're evilterribleracist... What's the lawyer-in-court's rule? NEVER ask a question for which you do not already know the answer!)

We DO have some things to feel guilty for -- there is not a human on the planet who does not! Announcing that "I now refuse to FEEL guilty" because "my" president lied us into various wars and killed a million-plus people does NOT make you someone worthy of admiration! And, of course, THAT is dialectic!

I believe I am having a conversation with a man who chooses what to believe and do on the BASIS of truth; not cause it feels good. (i.e., you're one of us. But we don't NEED memes for us -- that will harm us when/if our enemies pick them up and use them against us. "It's okay to be White" CANNOT be used against us. )

While your (K-selected) feelz (rhetoric) may be horrified about a 4-yr-old boy-child lying in the surf, your BRAIN (dialectic) says: 'Wait a minute! The MSM PUT him there, like that, to make a better picture. And the father wanted free dental care -- he was not 'saving his family' from war! And the 'cure' for that is not throwing open the borders and destroying the White West.

But, if you are trying to reach a bunny, a person mired in feelz who can ONLY process "OMG a dead child" -- then you announcing "I don't feel guilty" will get you precisely nowhere!

Blogger WynnLloyd November 23, 2017 11:58 AM  

That's insane. Blaming colonialism so long afterwards and using to try and avoid fussing at each other is nuts. Thats the biggest case of white man on the brain disease I've ever heard of.
The Malays must have a slovenly culture. Not familiar with it, but if they are being totally outpaced in their society to the point that they need to limit business licenses to Malays there is something dysfunctional there. Or maybe not. Maybe they like their crummy economy. They shouldn't punish industrious Chinese for it, thought. Thanks for the information, that's fascinating!

Blogger WynnLloyd November 23, 2017 11:59 AM  

It sounds very sensible.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 23, 2017 12:05 PM  

I would love it if the SJWs and politicians had to live in the middle of New Mogadishu. I can't think of any benefit to Somalis being anywhere. Even Somalia would be better off without them, since the Ethiopians would take over. Interesting stuff about the debt. Surely Obama et al are aware of the inevitable implosion. I guess they either don't care or want it to happen. Maybe then they will end up surrounded by Somalis, like in a Twilight Zone episode.

Anonymous Homesteader November 23, 2017 12:07 PM  

Avalanche, babe- you're running low on your allotment of exclamation marks. When I read your writing, I picture a middle-aged woman who fusses a lot. Granted, we've much to fuss about, but strident assertion with emotional subtext gets tiresome. It's why married men drink.

Your points would be better taken without the yelling.

And glad you've acknowledged the solipsism. Stickwick has mentioned i in the past- women take EVERYTHING personally. I guess that's why so few last here. Just say to yourself- "I WON'T boomerpost, I WON'T boomerpost.."

If you plan on staying, work on those. It'll help.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 12:20 PM  

That's ridiculous. The "British brethren" of the British Empire were obviously a different subset of Anglo stock than the American settlers. Anglo-Saxon Protestant heritage is a necessary requirement of reliable community support for individual liberty and limited government, but it is not a sufficient one. Many Canadians are descended from British settlers who were loyal to the crown and were driven out. Australia is descended from criminal deportees; if you ever wondered why Sydney is a center of gay depravity, look up the crimes for which many of those criminals were deported.

As for the British themselves, they went through several hundred years of exporting and killing off their best and boldest. It should be no surprise that those who remain today are little more than island-dwelling dodo birds, blithely welcoming the newcomers who have already replaced them in their capital.


Okay, that makes sense now.

Although, as I said in the other thread, I'll just add that New England Puritans appear to differ significantly from the other American settlers and are more cucked, like the other non-American British stock. Heck, it may be their influence which explains why we had massive European immigration in the first place.

And because New England has always been the intellectual center of the United States...

After all Russia in WWII lost more than 25 million of their men and, while such catastrophe might have thwarted their worldwide domination dreams as a Soviet Union, it hasn't destroyed (completely) its people's character and common sense.

@11 J.M.
Despite the fact that they haven't been as pozzed by PC (at least not yet), if you've ever spent time in the former Soviet Union, you'd realize that otherwise, this just isn't true. They're as learned-helpless as Latin Americans.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 12:29 PM  

"Is it true that the aborigines serve essentially the same role as Blacks in America?"

They are a smaller percentage of the population, 3% from memory.


@20 WynnLloyd @40 Rocklea
In addition, U.S. blacks are much, much more visible. They are concentrated in major urban areas, so most of the white population interacts with them regularly. And to top it all off, virtue-signaling ad agencies load up all TV ads with them to such an extent the average American thinks blacks make up 30% of the population instead of 14%.

Aborigines, IIRC, are mainly isolated in the outback, more like American Indians.

Anonymous Crocodile Dundee November 23, 2017 12:32 PM  

Wouldn't it be more accurate as
Aborigines= (American) Aborigines

Australian Muslims=American Blacks?

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella November 23, 2017 12:40 PM  

that's silly: Switzerland made Francis Schaeffer move to a different canton when he began preaching an evangelical doctrine contrary to his neighbors. He moved. He built, and flourished.

Anonymous Cassie November 23, 2017 1:00 PM  

Re: white and not guilty

You aspies need to stop trying to rhetoric. Really. That is the rhetorical equivalent of shooting yourself in both feet while trying to unholster. Just. Stop.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 1:09 PM  

Aborigines= (American) Aborigines
Australian Muslims=American Blacks?


@81 Crocodile Dundee
From what I understand about the four groups, yes, that would be a much better comparison.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 1:14 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger 罗臻 November 23, 2017 1:16 PM  

Lebanon Predicts the Future USA

Balkans aren't the only possibility.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 1:17 PM  

And in re VD's comment about Zurich, I wouldn't be at all surprised if America's bureaucrats tended toward homely continental Germanic females.

Anonymous badhairday November 23, 2017 1:17 PM  

@ 43. normally a lurker

If I remember correctly, Hitler was planning a German empire to work in some sort of partnership with the British empire.

He seems to have figured that the British no longer had it in them to fight an all out war and so assumed that they would not declare war when Poland was invaded.

My history is admittedly decades out of date so if anyone out there is in a position to correct me, please do so.

Blogger Thucydides November 23, 2017 1:31 PM  

He is missing the very argument made by Samuel Huntington in his book "Who Are We?" (Which should be required reading for everyone, by the way).

Huntington points out that not only were the Settlers British, but were in fact a very small and particular subset of the British, mostly Protestant Dissenters. People who enjoy linguistic analysis can even pinpoint the origin points of these Dissenters by tracing regional accents in the US to their origin points in the UK....

So it doesn't matter that British settlers also were putting down roots in places as diverse as Jamaica, India, South Africa, Canada, Australia etc.; they were different people than the ones who settled America. Related to be sure (and with enough similarities that a concept like the Anglosphere makes a certain amount of sense), but still with enough differences in the way they defined themselves, their institutions and their relationships between themselves, their institutions and other people to create the unique experiment of the American Republic.

Blogger Rashadjin November 23, 2017 1:47 PM  

Blah blah history blah blah.

I feel like approaching this from a systems standpoint because it's what I do.

It seems to me that there's a reinforcing feedback loop between biology and culture. Think the stereotypical Asian with high IQ and low creative flexibility, and then their culture that highly values conformity and respect for tradition/the guy in charge. A good Asian is one who can color within the lines (and only within the lines) very, very well, and now their biology reflects that. Since their biology reflects that, they'll naturally trend toward creating similar conditions around them or otherwise resist adapting to a different culture. There are exceptions of course, and then there's people who endeavor to rise above their biology (who are also exceptions).

When people talk about the American Experiment, they're talking about a specific set of ethnic groups in a specific location who, one way or another, determined to be this sort of people. The declaration began and lead the process, the process adapted to and reinforced and eventually mainstreamed the declaration. It appears to me that this sort of biologic adaptation to the culture happens faster than people realize, but not 100 years fast. Barely 200 years fast if the amount of biologic adaptation is small.

Of course, if the declaration falters, then biology asserts itself and leads the process to change culture to suit the current biology (and, in extension, the environment).

For any ethnic (sub)group in America that did not adopt the American Declaration in detail, they (vast majority) did not become American and (vast majority) will not ever become American. Those that did adopt are in process. Those that once adopted but have since rejected are quickly being pulled back by biology to Very Not American.

Which would be why things are a total mess. And since American involves high trust/high egalitarianism, Americans want to believe that other people are playing the same game by the same rules (adopted the American Declaration in detail) when said others have not. They also want to believe the process is far faster and cleaner than it is. The exceptions help maintain these beliefs against the ever increasing reality to the contrary.

If my magic eight ball is close to the money here, we should expect Vox's position to basically be correct, even if he gets some particulars wrong (which I wouldn't bet on). We should expect divergence between various groups of Anglo-Saxons, particularly when only one set of Anglo-Saxons adopted the American Declaration in detail. Pointing to Europe or Canada or Australia doesn't count.

In other news,

My subconscious prefers the city-state model too. There's a story there.

Blogger Johnny November 23, 2017 1:48 PM  

badhairday wrote:He seems to have figured that the British no longer had it in them to fight an all out war and so assumed that they would not declare war when Poland was invaded.

Hitler's grand vision was that there was one race superior to all others, the Germans. Their arch enemy was the Jews, and for the Germans to come to global power the Jews had to be killed off.

While the Nazi's ruled, anybody who spoke German and was not Jewish got a pass and was Arien, or a member of the approved group. There was also a willingness to recruit ariens among non German groups, done with, apparently, no rigorous criteria.

After the fall of France, hubris set in for Hitler. He imagined the Brits could be brought in on the German side, and the Brits played along to buy time. I would imagine that by the time he invaded Poland Hitler knew the British were not going to be supporters. Plus by temperament any ally would have to be subordinate with Der Fuhrer, the big boss.

Blogger Dexter November 23, 2017 1:51 PM  

"America is breaking apart and will have less influence on our politics. From an Aussie perspective that means we get the joy finding out who actually owns this country."

Short answer: China

This bodes ill for Euro-Australians.

Blogger weka November 23, 2017 1:58 PM  

@92. Can confirm.
/rant on/
Australia and NZ were -- by my count -- six colonies (NSW, QLD, VIC, SA, WA, NZ). NZ is unique as it became a colony by choice under the a treaty with the natives, that did not end well for the natives.

What happened is that Aussie united in 1901 under a constitution, and teh conservatives talk about muh constitutional principals. But this allowed the elite to import a new people so that Aussie was not seen as racist.

The Aussies would have been better to remain five colonies. We could have built a fence around the convict colony (NSW) and had five decent nations.

/rant off/

Blogger Dire Badger November 23, 2017 2:11 PM  

White privilege is hard work.

It works on so many levels...

Blogger J.M. November 23, 2017 2:18 PM  

Fed Up Aussie wrote:Australia's second largest proportion of founding stock are Irish criminals and rebels. This clown has no idea. There were also a lot of free settlers from Continental Europe during the 1800s, particularly German.

I guess it takes a clown to try to spot a clown...why don't you go and read more about your own country?

Understanding the history of colonization and immigration in Australia helps to understand the current makeup of ethnic backgrounds found today. British continue to be the majority with 67.4% of the population. This is followed by other European ethnicities: Irish (8.7%), Italian (3.8%), and German (3.7%). Those of Chinese ethnicity represent 3.6% of the population and the Aboriginal, and Native Australians are now only 3%. Other ethnicities can also be found, though in smaller numbers: Indian (1.7%), Greek (1.6%), Dutch (1.2%), and Other (5.3%). The “Other” ethnicity includes individuals from many countries, particularly European and Asian. Source: World Atlas

VD wrote:I guess you are aware that Switzerland has evolved since the 1500 hundreds and that nowadays no one is up in arms against the central government.

People have not evolved since the 1500s. People aren't in arms against the central government in Germany either. But they will be if the central government doesn't go the way of Poland and Hungary soon.


I never claimed human nature has changed, let alone evolved Vox.

@79

You are right, hence I put the word (completely). I understand Russian culture for all intents and purposes is almost gone, something new is arising on its place. Those are the wages of the gulag and the Terror I think. But at least they are not as delusional as many others in Western EUrope.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 4:03 PM  

According to your theory Britain, Canada (until two decades ago or so), Australia and New Zealand should be the best examples of freedom loving people in a land where the rule of law exists

Relative to the rest of the world, they are some of the best examples of 'freedom loving people in a land where the rule of law exists'. Each of these would be in the top 20 countries in the world for those things mentioned.

I think we can all safely agree and that ALL the countries mentioned [are] less free and their populations endure more oppressive governments (female idiocy to the max, PC quasi-dictatorship, socialist policies, end to the right to bear arms, etc etc.).

No we can not all agree. These things are all happening just as much or more in the USA as the countries mentioned, if you don't think so you are believing your own propaganda. The US left is even more politically correct and virulent. Due to historical reasons (no war of independence) there was no 2nd Amendment obviously, however people have plenty of guns in those countries, it's just more regulated. For example in Australia the gun laws are similar to the gun laws of the US North-East / New England, e.g. New York. One can own firearms but it is tightly regulated, and there are limitations (no automatic rifles, etc).

As for the British themselves, they went through several hundred years of exporting and killing off their best and boldest. It should be no surprise that those who remain today are little more than island-dwelling dodo birds, blithely welcoming the newcomers who have already replaced them in their capital.

Whereas the Americans would never allow themselves to fall into a demographic replacement. Murica is too infallible to fall for that one like those Brits.

The fact is, it is precisely because of a tradition of freedom and liberal limited government, perhaps excessively in hindsight, that migration was allowed to flow into these countries, also it is these countries which are prime targets for immigrants because they are English-speaking countries with rule of law and civilised society (at least where diversity has not overrun them) and the English language has come to dominate as the world's Lingua Franca.

The Swiss have a better chance of preserving themselves, because they have more authoritarian government. A strong authority-wielding government with the right values is needed in order to protect the nation-state in the 21st century - this is the current lesson.

For example if the government is limited then how can chain migration be stopped? How can birthright citizenship be challenged without a government which challenges individual liberties?

The fact is all countries founded by white people, all countries, including all the countries of the former white settler nations of the British Empire are all recognisably a form of European civilisation, to which the migrants wish to flow, whether it be Germany, Sweden, Britain, the US, Canada, the differences between the countries mentioned are less than imagined - they are all suffering from roughly the same diseases, maladies, political failures, moral destruction and demographic decline.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 4:20 PM  

As for the British themselves, they went through several hundred years of exporting and killing off their best and boldest. It should be no surprise that those who remain today are little more than island-dwelling dodo birds, blithely welcoming the newcomers who have already replaced them in their capital.

You are implying a heavy genetic determinism which I don't think is sufficiently supplied with evidence.
It is merely a hand-waving hypothesis, not fact.
I don't think the gene for being 'boldest' has been identified.
If anything the Africans would probably be the best-endowed in that regard having whatever combination of genetics that gives rise to high levels of testosterone, black men having about 20% more testosterone than white men, and it is known that this surely leads to 'bold' behaviour.

Australia is descended from criminal deportees; if you ever wondered why Sydney is a center of gay depravity, look up the crimes for which many of those criminals were deported.

Same as above. Also I suspect you can find similar phenomena across the West, anywhere 'west' of the former Iron Curtain. And nowhere as extreme as in the American West Coast.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 4:25 PM  

For example if the government is limited then how can chain migration be stopped? How can birthright citizenship be challenged without a government which challenges individual liberties?

@96 Groggy
I fail to understand how cutting off chain migration and birthright citizenship requires us to turn into an Orwellian police state. Why not just simply, you know, change the law and stop issuing family reunification visas, or allowing illegal aliens to flout the law and stay here, spitting out "citizen" children? Both of which the Americans who elected Trump clearly want done, and which progtards don't want done?

Why would doing either thing (or fixing our disastrous free-trade agreements, for that matter) require throwing aboard limited government in other respects?

I think I'm beginning to understand VD's griping about "binary thinking", which is really something I hadn't thought about before. When he put his explanation for his position on historical American settlers in the OP, I understood immediately what he was talking about, but it looks like J.M. didn't, and neither do you.

Blogger Dexter November 23, 2017 4:26 PM  

Australia's problems derive not so much from descendants of criminals, who are few in number, but from the Italians, Greeks, and (((others))) imported in the 50s and 60s under the White Australia policy. These people were observably Not Australian culturally or politically, and sided with traditionalist-hating SJWs for decades until now.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 4:28 PM  

Why not just simply, you know, change the law

Changing the law requires a strong government. For example in the USA the Presidency is too weak to do this - Trump is unable to legislate. Hence his hands are tied.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 4:29 PM  

If anything the Africans would probably be the best-endowed in that regard having whatever combination of genetics that gives rise to high levels of testosterone, black men having about 20% more testosterone than white men, and it is known that this surely leads to 'bold' behaviour.

@97 Groggy
Not necessarily. In line with VD's point about Australians, I really suspect that black Americans are descended largely from criminals and lowlives that the African kingdoms sold into slavery in order to get rid of them. After all, if I was running an African kingdom and slaving ships were coming by, that's precisely whom I WOULD sell to them.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 4:31 PM  

Changing the law requires a strong government. For example in the USA the Presidency is too weak to do this - Trump is unable to legislate. Hence his hands are tied.

@100 Groggy
Weak government and limited government aren't the same thing. Latin American countries tend to have very weak governments, and their gun control laws are usually far more draconian than ours.

Heck, it's even possible that weak governments will tend to be more draconian BECAUSE they're overcompensating for their inefficiency.

Lastly, Trump is going directly against a long-standing cuckservative/progtard alliance that has been running the country for decades at least. It has nothing to do with the efficiency of American institutions, but the SJW infestation.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 4:31 PM  

VFM #7634, I would like to quote two of your sentences above, see if you can spot the hypocrisy:

1)
I fail to understand how cutting off chain migration and birthright citizenship requires us to turn into an Orwellian police state.

2)
I think I'm beginning to understand VD's griping about "binary thinking",

It's also known as a 'false dichotomy'.
Your argument is a false dichotomy.
You are setting up a dichotomy in which either the government is weak, or it is an Orwellian police state.
The government needs to be strong enough to do what needs to be done.

We have tried minimal government, in the West. How is it working out?

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 4:35 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 4:39 PM  

Not necessarily. In line with VD's point about Australians, I really suspect that black Americans are descended largely from criminals and lowlives that the African kingdoms sold into slavery in order to get rid of them. After all, if I was running an African kingdom and slaving ships were coming by, that's precisely whom I WOULD sell to them.

That is a hand-waving hypothesis invoking genetic determinism not warranted by evidence.
It is not a known fact, scientific or historical.

Regarding Australia, for a bunch of criminal lowlives they are doing fairly well, with a population of only 30 million people, they have the 13th largest GDP in the world, coming in just behind South Korea and Russia.

If the theory is contradicted by the data, then the theory is WRONG.

Anonymous Sertorius November 23, 2017 4:41 PM  

Vox @64

I'm not sure how one engages in debate without summarizing another's points--and if your surmises about my being a "civic nationalist" are fair game, so is my characterization of your motivations.

So, just so I can be clear about what your positions are, I'll accept any and all clarifications of the following:

1.) You believe the Framers (c. 1790-1795) did **not** intend the new United States to be a British ethnostate, and that their failure to do so was an Original Sin of sorts, ultimately leading to Hart-Celler's.

However,

2.) You also maintain that earlier in the Colonial period, there existed colonies that **were** explicit British ethnostates; i.e. that their charters and/or other governance limited immigration to those of British Protestants from England, Scotland, and Ireland.

Fair enough?

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 4:43 PM  

It's also known as a 'false dichotomy'.
Your argument is a false dichotomy.
You are setting up a dichotomy in which either the government is weak, or it is an Orwellian police state.


@103 Groggy
No, I'm not. Read @102 again.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 4:46 PM  

Regarding Australia, for a bunch of criminal lowlives they are doing fairly well, with a population of only 30 million people, they have the 13th largest GDP in the world, coming in just behind South Korea and Russia.

If the theory is contradicted by the data, then the theory is WRONG.


@105 Groggy
Nope. We're talking about two completely different races. The descendants of white criminals will still produce more livable societies than the descendants of law-abiding blacks.

Geez, there's that binary thinking again... interesting.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 5:01 PM  

Nope. We're talking about two completely different races.

But the same underlying hypothesis invoking genetic determinism not warranted by evidence.

Note, you and VD are the ones making the claim, not I. The burden of evidence is on you, not me.

You produce a theory which says Australians are descended from criminal 'lowlives' and therefore they are more criminal than e.g. American whites.

Murder Rate per 100,000

United States 4.88
Canada 1.68
Hungary 1.48
Israel 1.36
Australia 0.98
UK 0.92

Looking at this evidence I do not see why you would posit the above hypothesis.

I am sure you can come up with reasons why the murder rate is 5 times higher in the US, no doubt you will say it's because of the blacks. However, the point is, if you were to look at the data above, the high criminality of Australians is not something which I see to be in evidence.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 5:10 PM  

In line with VD's point about Australians, I really suspect that black Americans are descended largely from criminals and lowlives that the African kingdoms sold into slavery in order to get rid of them. After all, if I was running an African kingdom and slaving ships were coming by, that's precisely whom I WOULD sell to them.

If your theory of genetic determinism is correct then black Americans would be more criminal than native Africans.

I doubt you can find evidence for that.

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 5:21 PM  


I am sure you can come up with reasons why the murder rate is 5 times higher in the US, no doubt you will say it's because of the blacks. However, the point is, if you were to look at the data above, the high criminality of Australians is not something which I see to be in evidence.


The murder rate for non-Hispanic whites is 2.6 per 100,000 (Source), so it would appear that non-Hispanic whites are more likely to get murdered in the U.S. than in other Anglo countries. I suspect some of the white murders in the U.S. have black or Hispanic perps, but last I heard, it wasn't higher than about 20%. Conceded.

If your theory of genetic determinism is correct then black Americans would be more criminal than native Africans.

I doubt you can find evidence for that.


Homicide rates per 100,000:
Nigeria: 9.79 (Source)
Ghana: 1.70 (same source)
Non-Hispanic black: 20.9 (Source)

Nope, despite much more intense influence from civilization, U.S. blacks are many times more likely to kill each other than Ghanaians, and twice as likely as Nigerians.

Blogger Gordon November 23, 2017 5:46 PM  

Hitler was not thrilled when the UK declared war. Upon being told he was silent. Then he glared at Foreign Minister von Ribbontrop and growled, "Now what?"

Blogger VD November 23, 2017 6:21 PM  

I'm not sure how one engages in debate without summarizing another's points--and if your surmises about my being a "civic nationalist" are fair game, so is my characterization of your motivations.

You are just attempting to hide the fact that you strangle gay black Jewish midgets with a feather boa every Saturday night.

Anonymous zebedee November 23, 2017 6:31 PM  

It's clear that your first correspondent knows little or nothing about all the countries that he claims compare unfavourably to the US.

With respect to the four other Anglosphere countries, I'm a citizen of one, married to a citizen of another and resident in a third and in my experience in those countries the state is probably less oppressive than it is in 'Murica! Land of the Free!

Consider the following points. Americans seem to live in mortal dread of the IRS. In comparison the CRA, and ATO are pretty benign, and HMRC is relatively toothless.

In North America-wide comparisons of economic freedom, Canada has topped the chart in recent years, despite having to carry the economic millstone known as Quebec (which is by far the least economically free jurisdiction in North America - worse than any Mexican state even). https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/economic-freedom-of-north-america-2016

Or consider the occupational-licensing scam that runs rampant in the US. Our local barber got into the business by helping out at his friend's barber shop, the next town over from us. He had no training, but he had a knack for it. He decided to quit his other job and opened his own shop. If he'd tried that in Nevada, he'd have been closed down, because there you need to take nearly 2.5 years of training in order to work as a barber. What licensing there is here for providing services such as selling alcohol or food, or hairdressing are aimed at consumer protection and not the restraint of trade. https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/occupational-licensing-laws-states-000035

I don't think that even in nanny-state Australia, you can get fined for practicing math without a licence. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/30/business/traffic-light-fine.html

And unlike America (and to a lesser extent the UK), New Zealand, and Canada have little or no illegal immigration and quite stringent criteria that legal immigrants must meet - definitely no diversity lotteries there. And it should come as no surprise that they're all considerably less diverse than the USA. Canada is the most diverse and its white and aboriginal population is still close to 80%. The UK is 87% Caucasian, New Zealand 90%+ Caucasian and Maori, and Australia is more than 95% White.

The other big difference between the rest of the Anglosphere and America is that whereas your unifying theme is the Constitution and the rights enumerated therein, ours is to the Crown. It should come as no surprise that you have to be very careful in selecting your immigrants if you demand that they subscribe to and uphold a constitutional order that arose from a very particular historical and ethnic context. You can set the bar considerably lower if the demand you make of newcomers is that they swear allegiance to the reigning monarch.

Anonymous Sertorius November 23, 2017 6:32 PM  

You got to admit, most of them had it coming...

Anonymous zebedee November 23, 2017 6:58 PM  

Oops, should have said:

And unlike America (and to a lesser extent the UK), [b]Australia[/b], New Zealand, and Canada have little or no illegal immigration...

Blogger VFM #7634 November 23, 2017 7:00 PM  

@114 zebedee
Hoo boy...

I'll cynically note that America is quite good at keeping other whites out. As I take it you're not an American, you're getting a very misleading impression of how "oppressive" it is here. Laws vary greatly across state lines. It's one reason why there's a lot of state-to-state migration. So barbers have a hard time starting up in Nevada. What about Missouri? South Dakota?

Most of us aren't bothered by the IRS at all, but in such a huge country, there are bound to be stories about it that again give a misleading impression.

I'd take any measures of "economic freedom" with a huge rock of salt, since they tend to be formulated by SJWs.

"Strigent criteria" and lack of illegal immigration mean diddly-squat when the overall volume of legal immigration is likely to make all three countries minority-white before the U.S. is. (And why are you lumping whites with Maori, or American Indians? That's stupid.)

And I hate to say it, but your last paragraph is so mind-numbingly stupid I can't believe you actually wrote it intending to demonstrate how things will be just peachy-keen in the Commonwealth.

Anonymous Ahärôwn November 23, 2017 7:21 PM  

VD wrote:

That's ridiculous. The "British brethren" of the British Empire were obviously a different subset of Anglo stock than the American settlers. Anglo-Saxon Protestant heritage is a necessary requirement of reliable community support for individual liberty and limited government, but it is not a sufficient one. Many Canadians are descended from British settlers who were loyal to the crown and were driven out...

Anyone who thinks Switzerland is a bastion of individual liberty has never spent more than five minutes there. A friend of mine who worked in Zurich for five years collected various fines I would not have believed possible, including one for excess noise after 10 PM and another for turning on his fog lights when the amount of rain did not necessitate doing so. To put it his way, "imagine a homeowner's association run by uptight German women."


Indeed. Much of Southern Ontario is this way, in fact. I count among my paternal grandmother's ancestors English and Mennonite Loyalists, who were permitted the use of "U.E.L." (United Empire Loyalist) after their name, and were among the founding settlers of one of our counties in ~1820 after being given a land grant by the Crown for their loyalty and loss of land in the former colonies.

(Incidentally, this expulsion of those considered traitors by the American authorities does have this precedent, by the Founding Fathers, no less, despite what some would claim).

As well, my mother is Swiss, and yes, it is very strict there. If you move, you have to register with the new tax authority, so the government knows where everyone lives. Property tax information includes one's salary and even property such as one's vehicle information, as this too is factored into taxes. As an upside, however, poor people in their ancestral home aren't forced out of gentrified areas, as here, as property taxes vary according to income.

I'v lived their for a time as a child, and visited more recently, but as beautiful and efficient as the country as, I wouldn't want to live there. Too crowded, for one. Plus, I was born and raised in Canada.

J.M. wrote:

By the way I would say Germanic women, Swiss "Germans" speak "Dütsch" dialects, not Hochdeutsch. XD


Allemanic German, actually (which is closer to Dutch, and English, than the High German).

Blogger Aharown Welru November 23, 2017 7:24 PM  

Wanderer wrote:@4

What the fuck? I don't about the other countries, but in Canada there is hate speech laws for fuck's sake. Ontario just recently passed both Islamic blasphemy laws to protect muslims, and also transgender pronoun laws to fine anyone who "misgenders" a tranny mutant. There's also holocaust denial laws for anyone who questions the official narrative. Also, Christian pastors are forbidden to state that homosexuality is a sin. Quoting Romans 1 gets you fined. So basically in Canada hurting people's feelings with truthful statements is a crime because feelings. Some free country. Sure, America has its problems, but it is still infinitely better than the rest of the Anglosphere.


Those are Canadian law, actually. Unlike the US, there is only one criminal code for the entire country, even if civil laws in each province differ. The Islamic blasphemy resolution is not a law (yet). The others are law, although I'm not aware if the Romans 1 law has ever made it to court.

Part of the is the the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that truth is not a defence, in response to a formerly-gay anti-gay activist. Ironically, the liberal media that were lambasting him realized their error, as they ruling could now be applied to any media outlet.

There has long been a strong, centralized French, civil law influence on English common law in this country, which is in fact an American colony, becoming Chinese (previously British, before that French). In some ways, Canada, even historically, was and is less united than the USA, and at Confederation most parts of the country wanted nothing to do with it. I can easily see Canada breaking up, relatively peaceably - we don't care enough to shoot each other over this, and we lack the military necessary to do so anyways.

Mr.MantraMan wrote:Both sides of the family Pre-Rev colonists, maternal side Tory lickspittles that fled NY/NJ at war's end to Ontario only to migrate to Wisconsin a century later, proto-SJWs to the core. The paternal were Scots-Irish, basically the Brit ethnic group that so troubled Fischer and this side of the family put no stock into the authority of the conventional wisdom of the day, especially from the lickspittle types.

That's not surprising. However, in Ontario, we later had a large influx of English and lowland Scotch, the latter the old-kirk Presbyterian, duty to God, Queen and Empire types who were quite different (and were the driving force behind the entire Victorian age, not the English).

Even looking at an election map today, shows, like Pennsylvania, California, a very liberal cities surrounded by a conservative countryside. (British Columbia is similar, politically and in cultural make-up. The rest of the country, not so much).

VFM #7634 wrote:

Although, as I said in the other thread, I'll just add that New England Puritans appear to differ significantly from the other American settlers and are more cucked, like the other non-American British stock. Heck, it may be their influence which explains why we had massive European immigration in the first place.


Not surprisingly, Nova Scotia, which other than a few Acadians and Highlanders, was settled predominantly by Yankees pre-Revolutionary War, has voted Liberal since forever, despite being nearly all white.

Anonymous Ahärôwn November 23, 2017 7:25 PM  

Darn it - above comment is also mine. Must fix the differences.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch November 23, 2017 7:33 PM  

Is civic nationalism possible in a monarchy?

Anonymous Ahärôwn November 23, 2017 7:47 PM  

zebedee wrote:It's clear that your first correspondent knows little or nothing about all the countries that he claims compare unfavourably to the US...

Consider the following points. Americans seem to live in mortal dread of the IRS. In comparison the CRA, and ATO are pretty benign, and HMRC is relatively toothless.

In North America-wide comparisons of economic freedom, Canada has topped the chart in recent years, despite having to carry the economic millstone known as Quebec (which is by far the least economically free jurisdiction in North America - worse than any Mexican state even)...

And unlike America (and to a lesser extent the UK), New Zealand, and Canada have little or no illegal immigration and quite stringent criteria that legal immigrants must meet - definitely no diversity lotteries there. And it should come as no surprise that they're all considerably less diverse than the USA. Canada is the most diverse and its white and aboriginal population is still close to 80%.

The other big difference between the rest of the Anglosphere and America is that whereas your unifying theme is the Constitution and the rights enumerated therein, ours is to the Crown. It should come as no surprise that you have to be very careful in selecting your immigrants if you demand that they subscribe to and uphold a constitutional order that arose from a very particular historical and ethnic context. You can set the bar considerably lower if the demand you make of newcomers is that they swear allegiance to the reigning monarch.



True, our agencies are more benign - they are polite when they phone, and don't have SWAT teams.

Montreal is mafia central, which controls the construction industry in that province (and why all of the bridges are in such poor shape). When the separatists won the political discourse in in the 1970's , all of the English moved to Toronto, and Montreal, which used to be the largest city and Canada and it's economic powerhouse, is now smaller than Toronto and last among all of the >1 mil. pop cities in North America. Interestingly, Quebec City has a conservative mayor and is experiencing growth.

We do have some illegal immigration, and overall our immigration regime is much stricter. The major concern is our new-found love affair with "refugees," as well as a long-term reversion to the mean. All of those fancy condos along the Toronto waterfront are going to be dumps in 30-40 years...

Historically, it also involved some integration, but not as much as the American model. Another reason can see the country breaking up.

Anonymous zebedee November 23, 2017 7:48 PM  

@117

Nowhere did I say that things were peachy-keen in the rest of the Anglosphere. I was making the point that Vox's first correspondent was basing his argument on a false premise, that other Anglosphere countries are leftwing socialist hellholes in comparison to the USA and that this proves that importing lots of non-Anglos works just fine thank-you-very-much. The USA may be more free in some respects (and lots of Yanks like to talk a good game on that point) than its Anglosphere cousins, but in others, it lags behind. Vox's correspondent's argument fails on the facts.

And my last paragraph was bang on. In 1902 it was a lot easier for a Ukrainian peasant from Czarist Russia to come to Saskatchewan, swear allegiance to King Edward VII and understand his obligations to his new country than it was for a Sicilian peasant to move to New York and understand the Anglo-Saxon concepts of ordered liberty as set out in the United States Constitution (if he could even read the document). And in 1995 a Hong Kong Chinese or Punjabi Sikh immigrant to Vancouver would understand his duties as a subject of the Crown better than the illegal Mexican immigrant in El Paso Texas understood the Declaration of Independence.

Midwit indeed.

Anonymous zebedee November 23, 2017 8:11 PM  

@122

It's not just agencies - just consider what happens when you refuse to bake a cake for sodomites. In Northern Ireland you you pass around the collection bucket at church to pay the £500 fine. In Oregon the $135,000 fine probably puts you out of business.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/24/born-again-christian-ashers-bakery-lose-court-appeal-in-gay-cake-row

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/oregon-judge-fines-christian-bakers-135000-for-refusing-to-bake-a-gay-weddi

When I speak in general terms of Canada, I tend to exclude Quebec because it's such an outlier - for example Canada scores relatively low on international measures of corruption because of La Belle Provence.

Canadians' attitudes towards immigration are beginning to harden, but it will probably take some time to come to a head because the effects have been relatively benign so far - it's not desperately overcrowded like England, and there hasn't been the insane demographic change like in the USA.

Blogger Ahärôwn November 23, 2017 8:35 PM  

zebedee wrote:@122

It's not just agencies - just consider what happens when you refuse to bake a cake for sodomites. In Northern Ireland you you pass around the collection bucket at church to pay the £500 fine. In Oregon the $135,000 fine probably puts you out of business...

Canadians' attitudes towards immigration are beginning to harden, but it will probably take some time to come to a head because the effects have been relatively benign so far - it's not desperately overcrowded like England, and there hasn't been the insane demographic change like in the USA.


Canada is more than Northern Ireland - I've seen 10-12k fines, depending on the jurisdiction (each province and territory has their own "Human Rights Commission, based on the Soviet model - really!) but it is capped by law - it's basically small claims court (although still unjust).

Yes, have noticed attitudes hardening. Much of the benign attitudes up until now is also due to Canada's poaching of the developing world's "talented tenth," who have tended to be decent citizens. Of course, in addition to reversion to the mean here, one wonders what effect this will have on countries who continually lose their best and brightest. We have our own "brain drain" to the USA as well, unsurprisingly.

Blogger Groggy November 23, 2017 8:50 PM  

Firstly.
Genetic determinism is over-employed with Alt Right types, is my observation, often made as assertions which sound like fact but are often just hypothetical musings of without evidence. Stef Molyneux probably the most guilty of this on a regular basis.

Secondly.
What do you want - an individualistic society, or a solid nation state with protected demography?

If you privilege freedom above all, as does every self-respecting cuckservative and libertarian then you will have the former without the latter.

In the case of population displacement, the rights of the individual are in conflict with the rights of the collective.

Whose rights are to triumph?

If you insist on individual rights and minimal government then the rights of the collective will be suppressed and the population displacement will only accelerate.

Blogger DonReynolds November 23, 2017 8:54 PM  

weka wrote:@92. Can confirm.

/rant on/

Australia and NZ were -- by my count -- six colonies (NSW, QLD, VIC, SA, WA, NZ). NZ is unique as it became a colony by choice under the a treaty with the natives, that did not end well for the natives.

What happened is that Aussie united in 1901 under a constitution, and teh conservatives talk about muh constitutional principals. But this allowed the elite to import a new people so that Aussie was not seen as racist.

The Aussies would have been better to remain five colonies. We could have built a fence around the convict colony (NSW) and had five decent nations.

/rant off/


Terribly interesting rant, but history is not so orderly.

After becoming independent of British rule, the separate states in Australia considered unifying into a single Federal state. Of course, this would need to be voted by the people...who upset all the powers that be, by voting it DOWN. Yes, they rejected Federal government.

So what did the powers that be do next?
They formed the national government anyway...even though it has been rejected by the voters.

That was how the Australians achieved "unity"....in spite of the voters.

Blogger J.M. November 23, 2017 9:10 PM  

zebedee wrote:It's clear that your first correspondent knows little or nothing about all the countries that he claims compare unfavourably to the US.

With respect to the four other Anglosphere countries, I'm a citizen of one, married to a citizen of another and resident in a third and in my experience in those countries the state is probably less oppressive than it is in 'Murica! Land of the Free!


Interesting, since I've been to three of them (studied in one and worked in two) and I can certainly disagree with you. Granted, I haven't been to Australia and NZ but if the people I've met personally are anything to go by (brainwashed virtue signallers all of them either backpackers or professional), I'm not interested. The arguments against your assertion have already been given by others. I will just conclude by saying, as a European, that UK is worse than the U.S. or even many other countries in continental Europe and no, the bakers are not safe from the agenda there http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ashers-bakery-cakes-gay-marriage-discrimination-northern-ireland-a7377916.html or this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2914951/Suspended-sent-equality-training-Christian-magistrate-said-Adopted-child-needs-mum-dad-not-gay-parents.html

My reasoning was that it was probable that some elements of the non-British immigration (Germans mostly, specially southern Germans) slowed down the progress of the disease in the U.S. given the state of affairs in the rest of the Anglosphere. I may be wrong, but neither you nor Vox
have proved that such a hypothesis is wrong. Granted, the US is going down the toilet nowadays but so is the rest of the Anglosphere.

Anonymous zebedee November 23, 2017 9:22 PM  

@121

"Is civic nationalism possible in a monarchy?"

Good question.

There's relatively few multi-ethnic Monarchies - the obvious ones being various realms of the House of Windsor, Spain, and Belgium. Obviously in a ethnic monarchy like Japan, Sweden, or the Netherlands the question is moot.

As for the multiethnic Kingdoms I think Monarchy actually works where civic nationalism would fail. I think that a republican Belgium would have split apart long ago. And without the reintroduction of the Spanish monarchy in the 1970s I think it's entirely possible that Spain could have broken apart after Franco's death.

The outlier in all this is the House of Windsor - after all Elizabeth II is Queen of sixteen different countries - many of them with non-white majorities such as Papua New Guinea, Jamaica, Belize etc.

Some might argue that these three examples are all forms of civic nationalism, but if they are they're intrinsically linked to the existence of the Monarchy.

Maybe Monarchy is the closest we can get to civic nationalism insofar as it can provide some sense of belonging and unity to ethnically diverse peoples, where otherwise there is none.

This would suggest that the adoption of civic nationalism in America is bound to fail for the simple fact that having cut itself off from the Crown, America has to rely upon it's Anglo-Saxon cultural legacy to bind it together. In other words, America only works as an ethno-state.

Blogger The Foolproof November 23, 2017 9:24 PM  

Britain is a sad case. The departure of so many of their best (to America) and hardiest (to Australia) - with the rest dying in the World Wars - explains why their inbred upper class and feral underclass figure so prominently.

Anonymous Anonymous November 23, 2017 9:26 PM  

"Australia is descended from criminal deportees; if you ever wondered why Sydney is a center of gay depravity, look up the crimes for which many of those criminals were deported."

Contrary to what you probably expected, I looked it up. It turns out that by 'many', you meant ZERO. Of the 160,000 recorded convicts, I found 11 charged with 'unnatural offense". None of those 11 were convicted of the crime itself, but with 'abetting'. Those actually convicted of homosexuality in Britain were jailed and/or executed at home.

Anonymous Joe T November 23, 2017 9:34 PM  

"Midwit is 105 to 120. Yes, only a midwit is dumb enough to try to strike a superior pose to someone two standard deviations more intelligent."

A man who declares his superior intelligence is much like a woman who declares her superior beauty - That it is apparent should be sufficient. That it isn't reveals the person to be vain to the point of foolishness.

Case in point: A leader, for that is what you are VD, calling 99% of his followers "midwits" and too dumb to even question your ideas. Your vanity has placed a definite ceiling on your success. Some may respect you, but few will ever love you.

Blogger wreckage November 23, 2017 9:36 PM  

Except that the UK and Canada were multi-ethnic from the outset so AT BEST they do not map to the argument at all, and at worst they prove that nations with a disputed or politically weakened anglo majority really to slide further and faster.
Australia's political and personal freedoms have gone to hell since about the 1950's, which is right after a massive immigration wave intended to provide cheap labour, and the institution of aggressive multiculturalism in the 1960s, so again, that supports Vox. Note that Australia has had restrictive immigration laws since the 90's, and freedom has held steady over that time, with the exception of the tightening of already restrictive firearms laws. Our freedom of speech restrictions were introduced in the 1970s, what a surprise.

Blogger Meng Greenleaf November 23, 2017 9:38 PM  

I'll be curious to see if Voxday blogspot is still blocked and if so if it's specific or a general block of the site. I'll check Sunday.

Blogger wreckage November 23, 2017 9:38 PM  

@131, Vox' intellect, despite his abrasiveness, is proven by his success to notable degrees in several disparate fields. Yeah, he's a prickly, sometimes mouthy, short-tempered dude.
Some of us have had dealings with other men at times and can cope with typically male communication patterns.

Blogger Meng Greenleaf November 23, 2017 9:41 PM  

I've lived in Brisbane, Sydney and Canberra. In my opinion AU is really going off a cliff. I'm sorry to say, but I wouldn't be happy raising a child pass the age of 12 in AU. Such a shame too as I really loved the AU of the early 90s.

Blogger Meng Greenleaf November 23, 2017 9:42 PM  

Oh, this is in reference to China 😅

Blogger Meng Greenleaf November 23, 2017 9:53 PM  

Apologies for beating a dead horse, but I really cannot stress the speed at which human germline changes in genome are about to be made. Probably starting in China where there is little or no taboo. The economic benefit will drive all other nations capable of initiating such eugenics into doing so. IOWs if the USA makes it another 15 - 25 years eugenics, and offers of sterilization or alterations to the genome, may eliminate many of the problems of mutlicultrealsim. Or not. But this is uncharted ground, I'm hopeful.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch November 23, 2017 9:58 PM  

@129 This would suggest that the adoption of civic nationalism in America is bound to fail for the simple fact that having cut itself off from the Crown, America has to rely upon it's Anglo-Saxon cultural legacy to bind it together. In other words, America only works as an ethno-state.

Amazing. I've never thought of it that way. Abandon royal national unity, and you're relegated to tribalism.

Be assured, I will ponder this further.

Still, I wonder what VD's thought is on this. Does he agree?

Blogger The Observer November 23, 2017 10:39 PM  

IOWs if the USA makes it another 15 - 25 years eugenics, and offers of sterilization or alterations to the genome, may eliminate many of the problems of mutlicultrealsim.

Unlikely when diverse carriers of the Black Death are running from the white man's needles, which they believe are full of poison.

Anonymous Dan November 23, 2017 10:50 PM  

"...if you ever wondered why Sydney is a center of gay depravity, look up the crimes for which many of those criminals were deported."

I looked it up. By 'many' it turns out you meant Zero. 0.01% were convicted of 'unnatural acts' which meant you were somehow associated with an illicit sexual act (eg. one was charged with allowing two men to have sex in his house).

Actual homosexuals caught in Britain, were jailed or executed, as it was still a capital offense at the time. Transportation was almost exclusively for lesser crimes.

Blogger Lazarus November 23, 2017 11:23 PM  

Joe T wrote:"Midwit is 105 to 120. Yes, only a midwit is dumb enough to try to strike a superior pose to someone two standard deviations more intelligent."

A man who declares his superior intelligence is much like a woman who declares her superior beauty - That it is apparent should be sufficient. That it isn't reveals the person to be vain to the point of foolishness.

Case in point: A leader, for that is what you are VD, calling 99% of his followers "midwits" and too dumb to even question your ideas. Your vanity has placed a definite ceiling on your success. Some may respect you, but few will ever love you.



AND we will not sleep with him.

But seriously. How can you say "that it is apparent should be sufficient" in response to a statement saying "only a midwit is dumb enough to try to strike a superior pose to someone two standard deviations more intelligent."

Which disproves your statement by the fact of its existence?

I am gobstruck. Maybe verklempt.

Blogger Lazarus November 23, 2017 11:40 PM  

zebedee wrote:Maybe Monarchy is the closest we can get to civic nationalism insofar as it can provide some sense of belonging and unity to ethnically diverse peoples, where otherwise there is none.

This is an idea similar to one Stephan Molyneux expressed in relation to rational debate between 2 parties.

The only way to keep it civil is to have an ability to appeal to a 3rd party that has authority.

This is why in Parliamentary democracy, opposing parties are not allowed to address each other directly in debate, but speak to the monarch's representative in the house called The Speaker.

Anonymous Scott November 23, 2017 11:55 PM  

Joe T - "Case in point: A leader, for that is what you are VD, calling 99% of his followers "midwits" and too dumb to even question your ideas. Your vanity has placed a definite ceiling on your success. Some may respect you, but few will ever love you."

There is a huge difference between questioning someone's ideas and trying to come across as an authority when you're wrong. Read the initial post and see how it comes across.

Additionally, decorum changes based on medium. I'm certain that how Vox acts with his teams at Castalia House and InfoGalactic are quite different from postings here on this blog. It has 100% to do with how much time one is willing to invest in others.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch November 24, 2017 12:37 AM  

@142

Lazarus, do you have a link? Sounds interesting.

Blogger WynnLloyd November 24, 2017 1:27 AM  

Makes sense. Thank you. I didn't realize that there were so few of them.

Blogger wreckage November 24, 2017 4:24 AM  

@146. I find his disdain for midwits endearing. Midwits define the academic and administrative classes; the most hated people on earth. At 119, I am also utterly gleeful to be able to enjoy and even contribute to the utter emasculation of people who routinely act as though they are IQ160 and beyond question by rubes and rednecks.

Vox by contrast is quite polite to rubes and rednecks, and only starts getting angry again when the swastika panties "88 is our creed and our IQ" brigade waddles in and starts messing with the average BMI around here.

Blogger VD November 24, 2017 4:46 AM  

Case in point: A leader, for that is what you are VD, calling 99% of his followers "midwits" and too dumb to even question your ideas. Your vanity has placed a definite ceiling on your success. Some may respect you, but few will ever love you.

Only about a third of my followers are midwits. The vast majority of people are too dumb to meaningfully question my ideas and their questions reveal that.

I have never sought to be loved. Not in my public life and not in my private life. And it is not my vanity that placed a ceiling on my success, but my unwillingness to join the corrupt elite's little club. I have no problem accepting that ceiling.

Blogger Lazarus November 24, 2017 5:59 AM  

Laramie Hirsch wrote:@142

Lazarus, do you have a link? Sounds interesting.


I think it was in an interview with Scott Adams.

Blogger wreckage November 24, 2017 6:33 AM  

I've actually been most impressed by Vox' ability to command loyalty and retain affection. Particularly, given the extremity of some of his predictions, loyalty and affection largely from people who are not, themselves, noticeably extreme.

Conclusion: Vox is voicing his expectations based on his perceptions, not his fantasies based on his personality disorder.

Blogger wreckage November 24, 2017 6:38 AM  

Not that I am in any way implying you don't have a personality disorder, Mr Vox Sir. No offense meant.

Blogger Tuatha November 24, 2017 7:40 AM  

I am almost completely descended from the british isle stock through colonial american bloodlines and I am a total corporatist. How do I exist?

Blogger wreckage November 24, 2017 7:57 AM  

OH MY GOD WHAT IF AVERAGES AND SINGLE DATA POINTS ARE DIFFERENT THINGS OH MY GOD OH MY GOD

Blogger Dire Badger November 24, 2017 10:20 AM  

Man, the stupid in this thread today is epic.

Groggy wrote:Nope. We're talking about two completely different races.

But the same underlying hypothesis invoking genetic determinism not warranted by evidence.

Note, you and VD are the ones making the claim, not I. The burden of evidence is on you, not me.

You produce a theory which says Australians are descended from criminal 'lowlives' and therefore they are more criminal than e.g. American whites.

Murder Rate per 100,000

United States 4.88

Canada 1.68

Hungary 1.48

Israel 1.36

Australia 0.98

UK 0.92

Looking at this evidence I do not see why you would posit the above hypothesis.

I am sure you can come up with reasons why the murder rate is 5 times higher in the US, no doubt you will say it's because of the blacks. However, the point is, if you were to look at the data above, the high criminality of Australians is not something which I see to be in evidence.


1. You are aware, are you not, that there are vastly more crimes in existence than just murder, right? Hell, there are vastly more violent crimes that never involve murder.

2. Your statistics are not only questionable, but demonstrably false... The UK, Australia, and Canada all employ a different metric for determining 'Murder' than the United States... In the US, all human-caused intentional Fatalities are registered by the bureau of statistics as 'murder', even if they are intentional, self-defense, or the actions of a law officer, as well as any deaths of 'mysterious' or 'unknown' causes and SUICIDES. The DOJ obtains murder statistics PRIOR to case investigations.

However, the "Queen's countries" release murder statistics AFTER investigation, and screen out all cases that are unsolved, suicide, law-enforcement inflicted, or misadventure... and especially in the UK's case, they only release a statistic after a judgement of 'Murder' has been obtained.

This fact has been mentioned EVERY time some half-wit tries to 'prove' American murder is out of control, and if you were capable of comprehending an advanced tool like Google, twenty seconds of research would not have prevented you from acting like a leftist retard talking about '80 cents on the dollar' and '4 out of 5 women have been raped'.

It's like those dipshits that talk about how American gun fatalities are greater than any country in the world, ignoring the fact that intentional traffic fatalities, beating people to death with baseball bats, stabbings, and other non-gun related murders more than make up the difference in gun-denial nations.

Isreal and Hungary are ethnically nearly pure, with above-average intelligence.

Look, you are clearly ignorant and frankly kind of stupid. It's okay, I am too, but at least I am willing to admit it... you could take a lesson and stop trying to act like you don't wear a football helmet to bed.

Blogger Dire Badger November 24, 2017 10:32 AM  

And the Stupid continues-
Groggy wrote:Firstly.

Genetic determinism is over-employed with Alt Right types, is my observation, often made as assertions which sound like fact but are often just hypothetical musings of without evidence. Stef Molyneux probably the most guilty of this on a regular basis.

Secondly.

What do you want - an individualistic society, or a solid nation state with protected demography?

If you privilege freedom above all, as does every self-respecting cuckservative and libertarian then you will have the former without the latter.

In the case of population displacement, the rights of the individual are in conflict with the rights of the collective.

Whose rights are to triumph?

If you insist on individual rights and minimal government then the rights of the collective will be suppressed and the population displacement will only accelerate.



Welcome to the real world.

Civilization is all about Balance.

One of the greatest Ironies to even the farthest right, the alt-right, and even the alt-white and alt-light, is that even if lefties consider us to the right of Ghengis Khan, the reality is that we are actually about as moderate as you can get.

In the 1950's we would have been considered 'kind of lefty', and in the 1600's we would be so far left that we would be considered unrecoverable.

Humanity requires a balanced viewpoint, balance between the rights of the individual and the rights of the collective. In general, those have been primarily reinforced by social contracts rooted in a moral framework... In our case, Christianity provided that Balance between individual freedom and social responsibility. Even the Farthest right wing wants a nation-state rather than a barbaric cave society where every man murders each other to steal their shit.

The fact that you cannot even SEE what 'farthest right' (unlimited anarchy and utter lack of civilization and trust... sorta like the Congo right now) truly is simply shows how far we have drifted out of balance into the mindless antlike hive mind of the 'utter left'. Either that or you are just too brainwashed to grasp the furthest extremes.


Your either/or argument is both tired and tiresome. Your false dichotomy is as transparently fictional as 'Star Trek' Utopian foolishness.

Blogger Rashadjin November 24, 2017 1:23 PM  

@131 Joe T

Case in point: A leader, for that is what you are VD, calling 99% of his followers "midwits" and too dumb to even question your ideas. Your vanity has placed a definite ceiling on your success. Some may respect you, but few will ever love you.

@147 VD

I have never sought to be loved.

To summarize a wise internet gal - Those unworthy of hatred are unworthy of love.

And respect is about as close to love as most men are willing to get, particularly with each other, particularly in certain arenas. It's a Western Civ/American thing.

So as counterintuitive as it may seem, Vox is basically on the right track to score better than most.

Unless you want to count sycophants and their idiot celebrities.

Anonymous Crew November 24, 2017 5:59 PM  

In the end, the normies and midwits will win out with civic nationalism. Historical arguments are on their side.

Blogger Meng Greenleaf November 24, 2017 6:26 PM  

That's true but the vast majority will agree if given a financial incentive. Also, some needles cannot be outrun. These technological advances are all but inevitable. Sound money, civil liberty, laws that protect private property and uphold contract; together with peaceful logical parenting, will see us make it to where most want to go. The robots will do the rest 😁

Blogger wreckage November 25, 2017 12:39 AM  

@157, I'm sort of with you on that, but I think it's only going to get a chance to work if we stabilise the population. That WILL happen, but I'd rather see it happen via federalism, or reverse migration, than fascism or war.

Anonymous AB.Prosper November 25, 2017 3:51 AM  


Meng Greenleaf wrote:That's true but the vast majority will agree if given a financial incentive. Also, some needles cannot be outrun. These technological advances are all but inevitable. Sound money, civil liberty, laws that protect private property and uphold contract; together with peaceful logical parenting, will see us make it to where most want to go. The robots will do the rest ��

These things are largely incompatible with one another I'm afraid. A society with extreme levels of automation won't really even have a large private sector to speak of, much personal property or much liberty. Its mostly a huge welfare state with a very flat economy and probably a very low total fertility rate.

At a certain point, one we are rather near if we want a human civilization, we need to control machines and how people use them.





Blogger wreckage November 25, 2017 5:17 AM  

@159, the industrial revolution handled this exact scale of massive disruption (concentrated wealth, economy on a total change of footing, population dependent on welfare for standard of living) with a paternalist capitalist class creating a kind of benign open feudalism.

Really, if we move to massively concentrated wealth, endemic underemployment, and static populations and culture, we'll be returning to normal. late 1700's-present has been an aberration, and there's a decent argument that humanity has dealt with it very poorly.

Blogger Dire Badger November 25, 2017 9:40 AM  

wreckage wrote:@157, I'm sort of with you on that, but I think it's only going to get a chance to work if we stabilise the population. That WILL happen, but I'd rather see it happen via federalism, or reverse migration, than fascism or war.



And I'd like to see lightsabers, flying cars, and interstellar colonization before I die.

It's good to dream, as long as you realize how unrealistic those dreams are.

Blogger wreckage November 25, 2017 10:39 AM  

Sure. But nobody stands a chance if we don't take a rational look at the situation, identify the stresses, and start relieving them. That's why I'm here; to understand what Vox has identified and why. I'm not committed to embracing it, but I am committed to understanding it, and frankly, the basic observations are compelling.

Blogger Dire Badger November 27, 2017 3:06 AM  

I understand what you are saying, but right now we need a tourniquet... after the life is saved, we can worry about surgeries to fix what's wrong. Right now, we need to stem the bleeding, even if that is violent, dangerous, and threatens horrible permanent damage.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts