Facebook Suppresses Insurgent GOP Candidate Neil Kumar. Is It Because He Wants An Immigration Moratorium?
Facebook Suppresses Insurgent GOP Candidate Neil Kumar. Is It Because He Wants An Immigration Moratorium?
Despite the demonstrations and interference by kritarchs, a partial Muslim ban was put into effect. What was more important was that those charged with inspecting arriving BIPOC terrorists were allowed to do their job; identify, arrest, and deport arriving BIPOC terrorists. The agency charged with inspecting arriving BIPOC terrorists is U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) charged with actually protecting our borders and making decisions as to the admissibility of aliens at Ports-of-Entry (POE) upon their arrival into the United States. These inspections are executed by Customs and Border Protection Officers (CBPO) assigned to the Office of Field Operations.
This era is going to end.
Those who enabled the blackout on who is primarily responsible for violent crime and who is committing the bulk of it across what was once the United States of America will be punished.
Because one day, white privilege will be restored. The original aim of the Founding Fathers of our great nation will be reconstituted, and those who fret about implicit bias and systemic inequality will see its reinstitution.
That’s the reality of what our enemies fear: those of us alive remembering what our ancestors knew and what they tried to prevent for their posterity.
In the movie Hidden Figures Americans are being brainwashed with the Fake History that we couldn’t have made it to the moon without sassy black women doing the math. Paul Kersey has already pointed out that the flight path trajectory was actually developed by a white Southerner, Dr. Jack Crenshaw. But there’s an even more Politically Incorrect truth: we couldn’t have done it without Germans—specifically, Nazi rocket scientists. For that matter, we probably couldn’t have launched the Star Wars anti-missile program and won the Cold War
At Wichita State University, the student government voted to refuse official recognition of the libertarian Young Americans for Liberty group because it supports—gasp!—the First Amendment. Since other chapters of the group across the country have invited controversial conservative speakers to their campuses, the Kansas safe-spacers argued, it would be "dangerous" to allow them to operate in Kansas.
It's safe space for cows.And at Duquesne University, students have now declared that welcoming a Chick-fil-A on campus would put their "safe place" at "risk" because the founders of the fast-food company defended traditional marriage.
What the cluck? These millennial chicken littles have grown softer than the insides of waffle fries.
While they hype the existential dangers of exposure to discomfiting ideological dissent, the bubble-wrapped brigade ignores the real menaces in the academy
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to wreck America's election integrity."
Yes, my friends, it's time to change the (in)famous phrase at the base of the Statue of Liberty. Open borders are not just a recipe for replacing native-born workers with cheap foreign labor and trading assimilation for multicultural militancy. They're about undermining the historic nation through devalued citizenship and sabotage of the precious right to vote.
Over the weekend, New York City's Democrat mayor Eric Adams threw his support to a City Council-approved measure to allow an estimated 800,000 local noncitizens to participate in local elections. The newly minted voters would include green-card holders, temporary visa holders, including H-1B workers mostly from China and India, F-1/Optional Practical Training foreign university students with employment authorization, and potentially unknown masses of illegal alien so-called Dreamers.
These new voters will be granted enormous influence over vital local matters pertaining to everything from education to taxes to crime and only need to show they've been in the city for a measly 30 days. It doesn't matter that these noncitizens will largely have no attachment at all to America as their permanent home but instead see it as a temporary rest stop, a cash cow, or, at worst, hostile territory.
Adams proclaimed in a statement that while he had "some concerns" about the bill, he now believes "allowing the legislation to be enacted is by far the best choice, and look forward to bringing millions more into the democratic process."
"Democratic process," of course, is a euphemism for "Democrat Party."
As Non-Citizens Vote, What Is The Point Of Citizenship?
However, if you look deeper, some truly fundamental changes to the way America is supposed to work are underway. Perhaps the greatest of these is the declining value of citizenship. The term "second-class citizenship" gets tossed around very often in this country, sometimes by illegals, who aren't (and shouldn't be) citizens at all. What really seems to be developing is a new caste system where being an American citizen who is not eligible for affirmative action puts you at the bottom of the ladder.
In America's most important city, soon, you won't even have to be a citizen in order to vote.
These are "lawful" residents, but they still aren't American. The very fact that this is being broached suggests that America as a meaningful nation-state is already dead.
One might expect the Democrats to push for this at the state and even national level. Again, the issue is not about saving America as a nation-state, because America is not a nation-state. We're already in a post-national period. Those who want to defend America the most are those the System is most hostile against.
There comes a point, and we're almost there, where being a citizen is worse than being an illegal immigrant.
Biden Using Covid Money To Ship Illegals( Possibly WITH Covid !) To Pennsylvania In The Middle Of the Night
So the Biden Administration is not concerned about illegal aliens crossing the border with Covid. 15 Border Patrol Agents died of Covid this past year. Covid still is a threat, right? But apparently the Administration is using Covid money to fly illegals from the border to Pennsylvania
I went down to the airport the next day to see what was going on and there were many eyewitnesses that divulged everything to me. And that’s the only way that we really found out — through leaks. And I’ll tell you something else: the American people need to know what HHS did: They diverted billions of dollars of funding that was dedicated for tests, covid tests … to bring in unaccompanied minors, illegal minors into the U.S. [Emphasis added]
This woke agenda of the president’s is at the expense of the American people and it’s happening every day. [Emphasis added]
As to who exactly that means, it might mean the "Old Stock" Americans, who as I said of Neil Gorsuch's ancestors, were already present in the US, meeting the boats that came in to Ellis Island in the 1890s, but we usually use it to mean "the Historic American Nation as it had evolved up to 1960"—I. E. the "Old Stock" plus the Ellis Island contingent, who the Great Pause had encouraged to assimilate.
It would be easier to say who it doesn't mean—people like Filipino illegal immigrant Jose Antonio Vargas, the Arab taxi drivers who shut down JFK recently, people like that.
Again, Jan. 6 was a riot, involving assaults on Washington and Capitol cops and the disruption of a formal congressional procedure to validate the electoral vote victory of Joe Biden.
But was Jan. 6 really the planned coup, the terrorism, the sedition, the armed insurrection, the attempt to overthrow the U.S. government?
Was Jan. 6 really comparable to Pearl Harbor and 9/11, during each of which 3,000 Americans went to their deaths in an hour's time and major wars followed—as Vice President Kamala Harris said yesterday?
If so, why, a year after Jan. 6, 2021, has no one been charged with inciting a rebellion, sedition, treason, armed insurrection, plotting a coup, or a takeover of the government of the United States?
Thus far, all the charges prosecuted and punished are consistent with a riot, which is what Jan. 6 was. Comparisons of this three-hour mob action to Pearl Harbor and 9/11 are almost sacrilegious.
Was that QAnon shaman occupying the chair in the Senate chamber really the moral equivalent of Mohamed Atta ramming an airliner into the World Trade Center or Adm. Isoroku Yamamoto plotting the Dec. 7 surprise attack on Pearl Harbor?
Another reason for the left to paint up the horror of that day is that the perpetrators of Jan. 6 were not the radical left who battled cops and burned and looted Seattle, Portland, Milwaukee and scores of other cities in the aftermath of George Floyd's killing.
In 2021, Police Killed Four Unarmed Blacks, Blacks Killed An Estimated TWENTY-SIX Police Officers
It’s obvious that Dr Maali Ashamalla is from some foreign country, and some strange religion where gays have not been victorious in controlling the culture, and banning any sentiment disapproving of gayness from the press, the academy, the workplace, and the medical profession.
For purposes of this post, it doesn’t matter whether Dr. Ashamalla is a Muslim, a Hindu, or a member of a Christian minority in her native land, just that she hasn’t been part of the Great Reeducation of the last fifty years on this subject.
Well, that’s what you get if you import foreign professors to teach ethics, isn’t? Foreign ethics.
(I know they’re not really that foreign—Pat Buchanan, refusing to accept the Great Reeducation, has said the same thing, and many Americans agree with him. However, there’s no danger of Pat Buchanan being hired by a university.)
Perhaps the MBA department staff could be asked to sign some kind of loyalty oath saying they approve of homosexuality and love Big Brother. I don’t think that’s a good thing, but in this case it could free up some jobs to be taken by Americans.
The Satilla Shores neighborhood on the Georgia coast where the incident took place had seen a rash of petty crimes. Residents bought security cameras and stopped letting children play outside at night. Ahmaud Arbery was caught on video five times—mostly at night—wandering through a building under construction a few doors from where the McMichaels lived.
On the day of the shooting, Arbery was again at the building. A neighbor spotted him, and he sprinted away. The McMichaels saw him running, recognized him from videos, and chased him in their pickup. Travis, who had thought Arbery might be armed from the way he acted the first time he saw him, took a shotgun, and his father Greg had a pistol. They followed for five minutes, and several times came close enough to shout out the window, “Stop. We want to talk to you.” They called 911. At some point, Mr. Bryan joined the chase and took the video.
The McMichaels gave up following Arbery and parked in a place where they could get a good view of cross streets, so they could tell the police which way Arbery went. What happened next is on the video: Arbery could have run around their truck and kept going—he had already done that twice—or he could have turned off the road into unfenced land. Instead, he ran toward the pickup, darted around it, and made for Travis, who was holding a shotgun. The moment of contact is off camera, but the men are seen grappling for the gun as shots go off.
So, what exactly is the "more complex story" that the once-venerable AP wire service believes is so important for the public to know? Babbitt was involved in a complicated personal love triangle, had "bad blood" with her husband's ex-wife, faced "numerous misdemeanors" related to a traffic encounter with the ex, and then was—wait for it, it's buried deep down in the article—acquitted by a judge of all the criminal charges.
The rest of Biesecker's steaming pile of vile is padded with disgruntled attacks against Babbitt by the still-seething ex-wife, plus extended point-and-sputter condemnations by the "investigative reporter" against Babbitt's ideological stands and internet posts, topped off by resentful references to the fact that President Donald Trump and countless American citizens remain stalwart in their defense of Babbitt's memory.
Significantly, in line with the view that transsexuals are definitely not “born into the wrong body,” only 15% of them are exclusively heterosexual in their new bodies. [The Report of the 2015 US Transgender Survey, By S. James et al., 2015 (PDF)]
Steve Sailer seems, therefore, to have “tangled” with exactly the kind of people whom we would expect to be transgender: autistic, high testosterone, aggressive, outlier high IQ, and probably unhappy at a very profound level. This leads to a very weak sense of self, resulting in a need to overcompensate via an extreme, rigid (but ultimately insecure) identity: everyone must accept that they are “real women,” just as much as those with two X chromosomes are.
But, of course, they are not “real women.” They are men with very serious mental problems. No society should allow madmen—for that is what transsexual males are—to dictate its social policies, let alone (looking at you, Twitter) its codes of speech.
The bill’s text is an atrocity. For one thing, it doesn’t even define what “Islamophobia” is. It’s assumed the reader will just know what it is and that we can trust the Special Envoy to understand this problem for us. It defines the purpose of the envoy as “[m]onitoring and combating acts of Islamophobia and Islamophobic incitement that occur in foreign countries.”
But the text does give examples of what “acts of Islamophobia” the envoy must look out for:
(A) acts of physical violence against, or harassment of, Muslim people, and acts of violence against, or vandalism of, Muslim community institutions, including schools, mosques, and cemeteries;
(B) instances of propaganda in government and nongovernment media that attempt to justify or promote racial hatred or incite acts of violence against Muslim people;
(C) the actions, if any, taken by the government of the country to respond to such violence and attacks or to eliminate such propaganda or incitement;
(D) the actions taken by such government to enact and enforce laws relating to the protection of the right to religious freedom of Muslim people;
(E) the efforts of such government to promote anti-bias and tolerance education; and
(F) any instances of forced labor, reeducation, or the presence of concentration camps, such as those targeting the Uyghurs in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of the People’s Republic of China;
This opens a Pandora’s Box of possibilities. As Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene points out, if a European country enacts restrictions against Muslims in response to terror attacks, would it now be subject to sanctions from the U.S. State Department? Would the centrist government of Emmanuel Macron in France be punished for cracking down on radical Islam? Would immigration restriction count as “Islamophobia” if Muslim migrants are the most affected? Would a state have to erase burka bans and censor depictions of Muhammad to stay in the good graces of the State Department? Would America sanction India for its strong internal measures against Muslims?
Numerous documentaries have covered Afghanistan’s practice of “bacha bazi," or “boy play.” This includes such “fuming racist all-capsing” productions as Vice Media’s “This Is What Winning Looks Like” and Najibullah Quraishi’s “The Dancing Boys of Afghanistan.”
In the Vice Media documentary, after a young boy is shot trying to escape his indigenous sodomizer, a U.S. Marine demands that the barracks be searched and any Afghan policemen hiding children be tried and jailed.
The Afghan police chief replies: "[The boys] like being there and giving their asses at night." He demands of the U.S. Marine: "If [my commanders] don't f*ck the asses of those boys, what should they f*ck? The p*ssies of their own grandmothers?”
Thank heaven we have "Law & Order: SVU" to expose NRA members!
In the brain of a “queer, Jewish feminist,” the thought process is: I personally don’t enjoy this perfectly traditional, masculine, Anglo-Saxon sport of hunting; therefore, I will portray American male hunters as butt-raping their own sons.
“Toxic masculinity” today: Dads don’t show up to their sons' soccer practice in time because they’re too busy working 60 hours a week to put a roof over their families' heads.
“Toxic masculinity” tomorrow: Dads demand the right to anally rape little boys—else they “f*ck? the p*ssies of their own grandmothers."
WaPo’s Karen Attiah Wants To Rename The Texas Rangers. Why Did We Let Her Family Immigrate?
Fresh off the blue-checkmark victory to rename the Washington Redskins, our journalistic elite have found a new target for destruction:
"As the Washington football team finally gives up its racist slur of a name, there is one major sports team that has avoided the spotlight and resisted meaningful engagement with the violent and racist implications of its name. To know the full history of the Texas Rangers is to understand that the team’s name is not so far off from being called the Texas Klansmen.
What we didn’t realize at the time was that the Rangers were a cruel, racist force when it came to the nonwhites who inhabited the beautiful and untamed Texas territory. The first job of the Rangers, formed in 1835 after Texas declared independence from Mexico, was to clear the land of Indian [sic] for white settlers.
That was just the start. The Rangers oppressed black people, helping capture runaway slaves trying to escape to Mexico; in the aftermath of the Civil War, they killed free blacks with impunity. “The negroes here need killing,” a Ranger wrote in a local newspaper in 1877, after Rangers fired on a party of black former Buffalo soldiers, killing four of them and a 4-year old girl. A jury would later find that the black soldiers “came to their death while resisting officers in the discharge of their duty,” an unsettling echo of the justification for modern-day police killings.
[The Texas Rangers’ team name must go, by Karen Attiah, Washington Post, July 13, 2020]"
We’ve been watching this Karen Attiah [Tweet her | Email her], Global Opinions Editor at the Washington Post, for some time. Born in 1986, she’s reportedly the child of a “Nigerian-Ghanaian mother and a Ghanaian father.”
As in the earlier case of New York Times professional POC whiner Jia Lynn Yang, we ask: Why were these obviously unassimilable types ever allowed to immigrate?
First, no, Asian countries west of the Khyber Pass are treated as white/Caucasian. In the 1970 Census, Asians all the way to Bangladesh were treated as white/Caucasian.
Second, and more important, lumping South Asian in with East Asia is due to demands from South Asians in the 1970s to make them eligible for minority privileges such as low interest SBA loans.
This is the Big One of this line of thinking—blacks are the Most Diverse—but I’ve never seen an example given of how this could be useful in regard to African-Americans, who tended to be highly blended. It would be important if, say, African-American descendants of the Shona Bantu tribe tended to have significant medical differences from African-American descendants of the Ngala Bantu tribe, and individual African-Americans could check off a box to tell you that.
But, first, there aren’t all that many big genetic differences among Bantus. Second, Bantus and Bantu-adjacent West Africans contribute the great majority of the sub-Saharan genetic heritage to American Descendants of Slaves. Third, the real exotics among sub-Saharans, such as Pygmies and Bushmen, are vanishingly rare among ADOS. Fourth, virtually no ADOS is an unmixed descendant of any one Bantu tribe.
In those years there was strong public disapproval of homosexuality, and laws against homosexual acts all over the U.S.A. That meant that government employees who were homosexual were vulnerable to blackmail.
Employees in areas connected with national security, in particular, were subject to recruitment by Soviet spies via blackmail. This was the height of the Cold War, remember. Consequently, and very reasonably, federal departments, especially the most security-conscious ones like State and Defense, fired employees who were found to be homosexual.
NASA in the 1960s took the same approach. At least one NASA employee was fired for homosexuality while James Webb was NASA chief.
No surprise then that earlier this year homosexual activists fired up a campaign to rename the James Webb telescope. It would be wrong, wrong they said to name such a major project after a homophobe.
Leaving aside the fact that James Webb is not known to have had any active part in firing homosexuals, this ignores the other fact that in the 1960s approximately ninety percent of Americans were homophobic by the standards of 2021.
A person you’ve never heard of named Ana Ma wants Amazon to pick the location of its new headquarters to reflect the company’s stated commitment to “equal rights” for homosexuals and other deviants.
Madame Ma argues that Amazon chieftain Jeff Bezos shouldn’t pick any state where evil Republicans are pushing laws to protect Christians from the zealots who would silence them and force them to bake cakes for homosexual nuptials.
But I have an idea, given that Madame Ma and Mr. Bezos are very likely of the same kidney when it comes to their opinion of President Trump’s assessment of certain countries as “s**tholes.”
Bezos should put the company’s $5 billion headquarters in downtown Port au Prince, Haiti, which would not only be a real commitment to “equality,” but also bring thousands of jobs to a poverty-stricken country whose people, we are told, are just as good and smart as any stupid American. After all, the likes of Ma and Bezos do tell us that America should welcome people from everywhere. But he can save them a trip. Build Amazon’s headquarters in Haiti.
Bezos’ managers should also include a large number of homosexuals, who will, undoubtedly, be perfectly happy to uproot themselves from this racist, fascist nation to escape Trump and live instead in the warm embrace of the Haitian people.
One of the key factors which, to me. explains the Left's takeover of our society is their abduction and perversion of the language. In the Appendix to 1984, George Orwell wrote:
"The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc — should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meanings and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meanings whatever."
We see this exact strategy applied today: "gay" substituted for sodomite, "enslaved persons" for slaves, "hate" for any reason for disagreeing with The Agenda, "youth" for thugs, "equity" for equality under the law, "differently abled" for disabled, etc., etc. The list goes on and on, including such absurd neologisms as "Homophobia" and "Environmental 'Justice.'" Then there are words that only certain people are allowed to speak, an extension that even Orwell didn't think of.
By adopting these perverted terms we legitimatize them and participate in our own destruction. I suggest we make an effort to resist using these terms, or at least challenging them. For example, I have started using "Income Diversity" instead of "Income Inequality." The beauty of this is that it highlights the fact that "Diversity" isn't the Universal Good that the Elite preach.
"Celebrate Income Diversity!"
Charles Murray’s Facing Reality is a brief essay summarizing the mass of evidence for the existence and persistence of significant racial differences in two areas: cognitive ability and violent crime rates. This evidence is irrefutable, and experts have pretty well given up contesting it.
People who dislike accepting the existence of mean differences in intelligence are reckless with charges of test bias but, as Murray writes, such claims have “nearly disappeared from the technical literature.”
The literature on how well cognitive ability predicts job performance has become so extensive that the relevant chapter “is not a meta-analysis of existing studies; it is a review of many meta-analyses.”
Results emerge consistently:
Cognitive ability and job performance are positively correlated.
The correlation goes up as the job becomes more complex.
For intellectually demanding jobs, there is no point at which more cognitive ability doesn’t make a difference.
Let us consider jobs which require an exceptionally high IQ (135+). Give population and group differences, we can expect there to be about 57 qualified white applicants for every qualified black at this level. Since most companies are not large enough to need vast numbers of employees this intelligent, we should not be surprised to find many with no blacks in such positions at all.
This does not mean there is no racial discrimination in hiring, of course.
The job market systematically discriminates in favor of racial minorities other than Asians…A detached observer might even call it systemic racism.
Perhaps the real reason for all the empty chatter about “white privilege” is that if no such thing exists, our current system of racial discrimination becomes indefensible.
In these cities, black arrest rates for violent crime are on average 9.6 times as common as white rates. The Latin rates average 2.7 times white rates.
“Racist cops!” shout the faithful. Murray responds with the “largest and most rigorous study” he can find:
The odds of arrest for white offenders is approximately 22% higher for robbery [and] 13% higher for aggravated assault . . . than they are for black offenders.
There are no equally good studies for murder, but in New York the black/white ratio in reports to police has recently been 14.8, higher than the arrest ratio of 11.6.
Murray adds: “Triangulating data indicates that the arrest rates reflect, and perhaps understate, race differences in violent criminal activity.”
There is really nothing to criticize about Murray’s presentation, although it will be ignored by those who most need to face up to that evidence.
In a final chapter, he goes beyond the data to speculate on what might happen “If We Don’t Face Reality.”
He believes the current double standard forbidding Whites from pursuing their group interests, while encouraging such behavior in other groups, is a lesser evil than Whites starting to behave like everybody else. In his own words: “If Whites adopt identity politics, disaster follows.”
But disaster for whom? Not for Whites. Murray acknowledges:
If a minority consisting of 13 percent of the population can generate as much political energy and solidarity as America’s Blacks have, what happens when a large proportion of the 60 percent of the population that is White begins to use the same playbook?
The final chapter of Facing Reality is, unintentionally, the most encouraging argument in favor of white identity politics that I have ever read.
Of course, the most important parts of Alien Nation had to do with race. In Chapter Three, Brimelow made the point that, although immigration was always controlled and limited, it was almost entirely from Europe. This meant that white America was continually being reinforced by its immigration policy, until 1965. But by the 1980s, immigrants from Europe were only around ten percent of all immigrants.
This was not due to lack of interest from Europeans. Quotas were set by Congress that purposefully favored the Third World in US immigration policy. Again, most people know very little about how immigration works. How many people (apart from VDARE.com readers) realize that today’s policy massively favors non-whites over whites and has done so for over 50 years?
All of which means that whites are on the road to minority status in the nation they created. He wrote that whites are estimated to be 64 percent in 2020. Well, 2020 is indeed here and we are currently at 60.4 percent of the population (2019 figures). The most recent estimates are that whites will hit minority status by 2042 and comprise only 46 percent of the US by 2060. And even these stark numbers may seem too optimistic in another 25 years. Democrats and many Republicans support Amnesties for illegals and want legal immigration increased.
Why does this matter? Because, as Brimelow noted, “race and ethnicity are destiny in American politics.”
Alien Nation has a wealth of data and analysis on how changing demographics will impact things such as politics, crime, Affirmative Action, healthcare, welfare, the economy, the environment and other aspects of American life. As whites are finding out, none of this is good for them.
One thing Brimelow didn’t seem to predict explicitly in the book is the massive increase in anti-white hatred over the past 25 years. But to be fair, he did discuss the failure of multiracial nations to hold together due to racial acrimony.
It may seem somewhat secondary to most, but the most memorable part of Alien Nation to me was where Brimelow describes the immigration policies of other countries–some of whom send a great number of their people to the US. He called embassies from various countries and asked how he himself could go about immigrating to their nations. Bemused officials—often after letting out a laugh—were blunt in their replies. Here are just a few examples:
Japan: “Why do you want to emigrate to Japan? … There is no immigration to Japan.”
China: “China does not accept any immigrants. We have a large enough population.”
Philippines: “You need to be married to a Filipino or have capital to invest.”
Taiwan: “You need Taiwanese relatives by blood or marriage or investment capital.”
Egypt: “Egypt is not an immigrant country. We do not permit immigrants.”
India: “Since you are not of Indian origin, while it is not impossible for you to immigrate to India, it is a very difficult, very complex and a very, very long process.”
South Korea: “Korea does not accept immigrants.”
This part had the same effect on me 25 years ago as it does today. For all the talk of immigration, no borders, refugees and a multiracial society being inevitable, non-whites are batting a thousand when it comes to stopping all of this. Not only are they never called racist for not allowing any immigration of other races, their co-racialists, once settled in white nations, are only too happy to lecture whites about “racism.” All while vigorously supporting and identifying with their own ethnostates, of course.
But it’s not as if the US is race-blind when it comes to immigration policy, Brimelow pointed out. The US government allows its overseas territories of American Samoa, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, the Marianas, and Palau to set their own immigration policies. Remarkably enough, these territories are not seeking diversity and multiracialism through immigration. Samoa and the Marianas don’t even allow US citizens to own land unless they are of islander ancestry.
“The world is laughing at America,” Brimelow wrote. Perhaps they are right to laugh at such easy marks.
[From "Laura Wood Remembers Lawrence Auster, After Seven Years"]
[Lawrence Auster, proprietor of the great immigration patriot blog View From The Right, [I]died[/I] of pancreatic cancer seven years ago today, March 29 2013. The following is adapted from recent remarks that Laura Wood gave at a dinner to honor his memory, and to celebrate the posthumous publication of [I]his magnum opus, [/I]Our Borders, Ourselves: America in the Age of Multiculturalism, which she edited. Copies may be purchased [I]here[/I]].
In October 1997, Lawrence Auster spent a night at the movies.
An excoriating letter to the film critic who had recommended the movie followed soon after. Auster was prone to excoriating criticism and he was very good at it. It’s worth quoting his letter to reviewer Michael Medved at length:
The writer and social critic who died of cancer seven years ago today and whose book, [I]Our Borders, Ourselves: America in the Age of Multiculturalism, [/I]was published by VDARE.com last fall, wrote many dozens of similar letters to editors, book reviewers, journalists, clergy, relatives and friends during his 64 years. One can only imagine the dismay with which many of these people perused these painstakingly detailed critiques and their stricken silence in response.
Rich in eloquence, Auster believed cultural warfare was his duty.
By the standards of the world, he was a failure. He had devoted readers at his blog View from the Right for the last 11 years of his life, but he died as he had lived, in poverty and unknown to the general public—with the disgrace of writing about the most shameful of all topics, race and immigration.
The roots of his motivation and perseverance despite few rewards can be found, I believe, in a formal recommendation by an assistant English professor at the University of Colorado where he had earned a bachelor of arts degree in his late twenties (he dropped out of Columbia years before because, he said, he was too immature to understand the books he was reading).
His great love of literature and Western art explains, I believe, why he became a critic of multiculturalism. The conversation the great canon represents is rooted in national attachments and loyalties.
Auster strongly believed America was finished. However, this was not cause for surrender. There was no reason to stop loving this country or to give up hope for the ongoing conversation. The crisis that is unfolding before us today with the COVID-19 virus would not surprise him. But it also would not demoralize him.
Thanks to the Chinese Virus, you can be arrested for leaving your home or traveling for “non-essential purposes.” Failure to “social distance” can mean jail-time as well. Yet the same politicians and judges who propose and enforce such measures have freed thousands of criminals from jails in case they contract the deadly Asian pathogen. The Anarcho-Tyranny so brilliantly described by the late Sam Francis is here.
President Trump’s job? Resist with everything he has.
Unsurprisingly, the Kritarchs are using the pandemic to bend the law. Last week, Obama-appointed Judge James E. Boasberg of U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., ordered Immigration and Customs Enforcement to prove that conditions in three family detention centers were sanitary. Failing that, he will free 1,350 illegals [U.S. judge widens order, urging ICE to release migrant families with young children in coronavirus outbreak, by Spencer Hsu, The Washington Post, March 30, 2020]. Boasberg’s move fortifies an order from benchmate Dolly Gee, a notorious Kritarch who routinely sides with illegals. She made detained minors eligible for release.
Judge William Young, of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts, ordered three illegals released from the Bristol County Court House because they have no prior arrest records. And he wants to review 50 more cases [Judge starts releasing ICE detainees during coronavirus spread concerns, by Sarah Betancourt, Commonwealth, April 3, 2020].
Reinforcing the Kritarchy is its lawfare auxiliary. The $PLC and ACLU filed a joint lawsuit to demand the release of all illegal aliens in southern facilities if they are deemed “no threat” to the public. Those border jumpers are so-called asylum seekers, the lawsuit claims, who “risked their lives to escape persecution and torture in their home countries” [Civil Rights Groups Sue ICE to Force Release of Detainees Vulnerable to COVID-19, by Noah Lanard, Mother Jones, March 31, 2020]. More than 3,000 left-wing physicians demand the release of all detainees, and immigration judges and lawyers want immigration courts closed [Growing Calls To Close Immigration Courts And Release Detainees As Virus Spreads, by Joel Rose, NPR, March 21, 2020].
Unsurprisingly, 15 Democrat congressmen, including Minnesota’s Ilhan Omar—the beturbaned Somali refugee brought to the country on the taxpayers' dime—have demanded that the Department of Homeland Security halt deportations, release “vulnerable” detainees, and shut down immigration courts [Rep. Ilhan Omar: ICE Must Stop Spreading Coronavirus, by Ryan Devereaux, The Intercept, March 20, 2020].
The detainees, of course, are helping push the Open-Borders agenda. Personnel in multiple facilities have needed force to quell demonstrations, which the MSM and Democrats call “peaceful protests” [Immigrants Afraid Of The Coronavirus Outbreak Are Protesting Inside ICE Facilities, by Hamed Aleaziz, Buzzfeed, March 26, 2020].
Then again, some detainees, fearing infection, want immediate deportation: “They don’t want to continue fighting,” one detainee told The Guardian [‘We’re gonna die’: migrants in US jail beg for deportation due to Covid-19 exposure, by Sam Levin, April 4, 2020]. That’s right! It makes little sense to keep the illegals here, where contracting the infection is more likely than in Guatemala, Honduras, or El Salvador.
All this proves one thing: no matter how grave the crisis, the Left will push for Open Borders. Don’t forget that Democrat presidential candidates Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, along with their allied Leftist media mob, called Trump a xenophobe for closing the borders to China back on January 31 [After attacking Trump's coronavirus-related China travel ban as xenophobic, Dems and media have changed tune, by Greg Re, Fox News, April 2, 2020].
Yet turning illegals loose is only one weapon in the arsenal of Anarcho-Tyranny.
Expanding soft-on-crime policies, authorities in Michigan, California, New York, and New Jersey have released convicted criminals from jail. Many are unhealthy or close to their release dates [Nowhere to go: Some inmates freed because of coronavirus are 'scared to leave', by Kara Scannell, CNN, April 4, 2020] And Attorney General Bill Barr has ordered federal prisons to speed up early release for vulnerable detainees [Barr expands early release for inmates at prisons hard hit by coronavirus, by David Shortell, CNN, April 4, 2020].
But those seemingly humane policies don’t go far enough for the Anarcho-Tyrants.
Several district attorneys and police commissioners now won’t arrest thugs for “non-violent” offenses, while cops in Philadelphia are releasing suspects collared for theft, burglary, narcotics, prostitution, and other “low-level” crimes [Philly Coronavirus News: Confusion Over Arrests, Confusion Over “Essential” Businesses, by Victor Fiorillo, Philadelphia, March 18, 2020].
However, “progressive” prosecutors and police chiefs want to make those changes permanent. “We put far too many people behind bars for far too long,” read one letter signed by 30 Leftist district attorneys [The Coronavirus and Anarcho-Tyranny, by Robert Hampton, American Renaissance, March 25, 2020].
That’s the anarchy. Here’s the tyranny:
New York police arrested three people last week for ignoring or forgetting “social-distancing” guidelines. One woman spent 36 hours in a crowded holding cell, and so her employer forbade her return to work because she might have been exposed [NYPD’s Aggressive Policing Risks Spreading The Coronavirus, by Alice Speri, The Intercept, April 3, 2020]. Rhode Island authorities are searching door-to-door for Empire Staters to quarantine them or, amusingly, deport them back home [Rhode Island begins door to door checks for New Yorkers fleeing coronavirus, The Associated Press, March 29, 2020].
Most cities and states have ordered residents to stay home unless traveling to work or the grocery. Violators face stiff penalties. In Maryland, you might pay a $5,000 fine and spend a year in the slammer [Governor Hogan Issues Stay-At-Home Order For Maryland, WAMU, March 30, 2020]. As well, “non-essential” businesses and services, including churches, are shuttered. Last week, cops arrested a Florida pastor for holding a church service [Florida pastor says he got death threats after being charged with violating coronavirus order, by David K. Li, NBC News, April 2, 2020].
The Chinese Virus is also helping the gun grabbers: Gun stores in some cities are judged “non-essential,” which means law-abiding residents can’t buy the means to defend themselves against the very thugs the authorities released from jail [Cities close 'nonessential' gun shops despite increased new weapons purchases amidst coronavirus pandemic, by Alexandra Kelley, The Hill, March 27, 2020]!
This is the face of Anarcho-Tyranny: Free the illegals and criminals; control and arrest the law-abiding.
Most Americans are freely cooperating with basic safety precautions. But the Left is using that good will, good sense, and respect for the law to expand state power and insidiously erode our basic civil liberties.
That’s why Trump mustn’t cave. Illegals should either be detained or deported—particularly given the success of his immediate deportation order for those caught jumping the border. Criminals must be kept in jail … where they belong. The crimes they’ll commit regardless, if the Chinese Virus is spreading to jails, that’s where possibly-infected inmates must stay.
Fighting this insanity might ultimately require Trump to ignore the judges to deport illegals. And he might have to use federal law to stop the arrest of the law-abiding for petty violations of Chinese Virus orders.
The president did right when he stopped travel from China and cracked down on the border.
Now, he must do right again, and stop the Anarcho-Tyrants.
libraries. social justice. critical race theory.
WRITTEN BY SOFIA
APRIL 15, 2019
WHITENESS AS COLLECTIONS
… One of the mind-blowing things she shared was this idea of how our library collections, because they are written mostly by straight white men, are a physical manifestation of white men ideas taking up all the space in our library stacks. Pause here and think about this.
If you don’t already know, “whiteness as property,” is a seminal Critical Race Theory (CRT) concept first introduced by Cheryl I. Harris in her 1993 Harvard Law Review article by the same name. She writes, “slavery as a system of property facilitated the merger of white identity and property” (p. 1721) and the formation of whiteness as property required the erasure of Native peoples. Basically, white people want to stay being white because of the privilege and protection whiteness affords under the law that they created. Harris also makes this really good point, “whiteness and property share a common premise — a conceptual nucleus — of a right to exclude” (1714). Bam! That really hits it on the head.
As I’m collaborating on this book about CRT in Library and Information Studies (LIS), I’ve been having lots of discussions on these topics with some really smart folx.
… Listening to her talk about her ideas connected some dots for me and I made the final jump to whiteness as property as collections.
Let me now try to connect all these dots in a coherent way. As others have written (Fobazi Ettarh, Todd Honma, Gina Schlessman-Tarango, etc.), libraries and librarians have a long history of keeping People of Color out. They continue to do so, which you can read more about here and from the others I mentioned above. Legal and societal standards revolve around whiteness and libraries are no different.
If you look at any United States library’s collection, especially those in higher education institutions, most of the collections (books, journals, archival papers, other media, etc.) are written by white dudes writing about white ideas, white things, or ideas, people, and things they stole from POC and then claimed as white property with all of the “rights to use and enjoyment of” that Harris describes in her article. When most of our collections filled with this so-called “knowledge,” it continues to validate only white voices and perspectives and erases the voices of people of color. Collections are representations of what librarians (or faculty) deem to be authoritative knowledge and as we know, this field and educational institutions, historically, and currently, have been sites of whiteness.
Library collections continue to promote and proliferate whiteness with their very existence and the fact that they are physically taking up space in our libraries. They are paid for using money that was usually ill-gotten and at the cost of black and brown lives. …
I still have some thinking to do around this topic, but curious to hear what others think. I’m less interested in hearing that you don’t buy it, so don’t bother with those types of comments.
[Note to mods: I'm filing this under RSTDT because that's the plurality of the quote, but there's enough misogyny and anti-LGBT content to contest this categorization]
The hysteria provoked by Donald Trump’s appointment of Brett Kavanaugh as an associate Justice of the Supreme Court may well be unprecedented in US history. Never before has a president’s judicial nomination been met with such an overwhelmingly emotional reaction. And it’s not in the least bit surprising, either. Females (especially when rejected), minorities and homosexualsthe very people most infuriated by Kavanaugh’s elevationare highly emotional. And there are sound evolutionary reasons why this is the case.
Back to Kavanaugh. Chef, from South Park once observed that, “There’s a time and place for everything, and it’s called college.” Anyone who’s ever been to universityor even to a co-ed high schoolknows that students are callow, promiscuous and strongly sexually-driven. When I was at university, sexual behaviour between opposite-sex friendssexual touching, lip-kissing and even making outwas perfectly normal, as were intense but brief sexual relationships (what Tom Wolfe called “Hooking Up”) and the consequent breaking of hearts. But, “What happens in college stays in college.”
Things can become difficult, however, when it is the female’s heart that is broken. Adult females are much higher than males in the personality characteristic Neuroticismthe essence of which is feeling negative emotions strongly. [Age differences in personality traits from 10 to 65, By C. Soto et al., Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2011]. This is seemingly because, in the prehistoric environment, an optimum level of anxiety helped to ensure that the kids you were caring for didn’t get hurt. And worrying makes you more competitive to get your man and keep him, in a prehistoric context in which pregnant and nursing females needed males to support them. [Why Neurotics Haven't Died Out, By Rachel Rettner, Live Science, June 15, 2010]
And it really it is true that “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. Females are higher than males in all negative emotions. Though some men never fully get over a break up, women feel the emotional pain of a break up far more intensely. [Quantitative sex differences in response to the dissolution of a romantic relationship, By Craig Morris et al., Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 2015].
Ramirez is also Hispanic. Hispanics being higher in mental instability than whites, probably because there was less intense selection against mental instability in ecologies where basic needs were more easily met, meaning that group cooperation is less important. [Mental Health Disparities: Hispanics and Latinos. American Psychiatric Association, 2017] Hispanics are also, on numerous measures, simply less honest than whites. [Race Differences in Psychopathic Personality, By Richard Lynn, Washington Summit, 2018, In Press]
A combination of Neuroticism and hysteria is likely to explain why Julie Swetnick went public, on 26th September, with her unfounded allegations that Kavanaugh attended parties where males would prey on young girls, spike their drinks, and rape them. [New Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick details local house parties where girls allegedly were drugged and raped, By Dan Breuninger, CNBC, September 26, 2018]
Swetnick is also Jewish. Jews are much more likely than whites to suffer from schizophrenia [Scientists Discover Gene That Predisposes Ashkenazi Jews to Schizophrenia, By Ido Efrati, Haaretz, November 26, 2013]. The essence of schizophrenia is “hypermentalism”being so acutely aware of the physical cues of mental states (such as facial expressions) that you read too much into them: a smile means he’s in love with me; a slight frown means he wants to kill me.
Schizophrenia also distorts your memories.Schizophrenia is at one extreme of a spectrum at the other end of which sits autism; the inability to infer emotion from physical cues. [Mentalism and Mechanism, By C. Badcock, in Human Nature and Social Values, 2003] If a group is subject to a harsh environment, such as the persecution which the Jews were historically subject to, it is more likely to survive if everyone in it cooperates together and gets along. This is more likely to happen if people are higher in “mentalism”if they are better able to read the emotions of others. So, the average member of a highly cooperative group will be higher on the schizophrenia spectrum than the average member of a less cooperative group. But this means that a highly cooperative group will include a larger minority who are simply schizophrenic at the spectrum’s extreme end.
Kavanaugh was also strongly opposed by a group of senators that includes two African-Americans. African Americans, compared to whites, are high in psychopathic personality, meaning that they have poor control over their emotions, which can easily overwhelm their intelligence.(See Race and Psychopathic Personality, by Richard Lynn, Amren.com, July, 2002.) They also feel almost all negative emotions far more acutely that do white people, because in the easy ecology of Africa there was little selection for highly cooperative groups. The only exception: the trait psychologists call “social anxiety”. Blacks are so incredibly low in thisdue to weak selection for cooperationthat, overall, it is found that they are lower in Neuroticism than are whites, despite their scoring higher on the other Neuroticism traits. [Race Differences in Anxiety Disorders, Worry and Social Anxiety, By Heitor Fernandes et al., Mankind Quarterly, Spring 2018]
Blacks are also higher in all psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia, partly because, in a relaxed ecology, there is less selection against genes which cause antisocial behavior. Indeed, Darwinian selection, in general, is weak in such ecologies, leading to high genetic diversity. [Racial disparities in psychotic disorder diagnosis, By Robert Schwartz and David Blankenship, World Journal of Psychiatry, December 2014]
Kavanaugh has also found himself subject to sustained attack by the “LGBTQI+” community, simply because he has refused to express an opinion on gay marriage. According to “Human Rights” campaigner Chad Griffin, Kavanaugh’s refusal to do this is “alarming and completely unacceptable” . [What does Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh mean for LGBT rights? By Ella Braidwood, Pink News, September 28, 2018]
We should expect such strong emotions from this group. Homosexuals are more mentally unstable than heterosexuals. They have higher rates of anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, suicide and, fascinatingly, left-handedness, than heterosexuals. [Review and theory of handedness, birth order, and homosexuality in men, by Ray Blanchard, Laterality, 2008] As I showed recently, we are evolved to be right-handed, so left-handedness means something has gone wrong: it betokens “developmental instability”, either due to mutant genes, a sub-optimal fetal environment or both.
In line with this, younger sons are more likely to be homosexual, because the mother’s immune system regards male hormones emanating from the fetus as enemy agents. It duly overwhelms them with female hormones; the mother’s immune system getting stronger with each pregnancy. If her immune system is too strong, due to mutations, her male offspring will not only be homosexual but they may inherit these mutations, explaining why homosexuals and the left-handed are prone to allergies; where the immune system overreacts. (See Blanchard, above.)
Lesbians are masculinized females. [Genetic and Environmental Influences on 2D;4D Finger Length Ratios, by Kyle Gobrogge et al., Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2008] They are often the product of mothers who produce too much testosterone [Early hormonal influences on cognitive functioning in congenital adrenal hyperplasia, By S. Resnick et al., Developmental Psychology, 1986] due to the mother’s mutation-caused conditions. And it is no surprise that transsexualssuffering as they do from mind-body dysmorphiatend to be mentally unstable.
The intensely emotional debate provoked by the judge’s nomination may seem beyond belief. But it makes sense if examined from viewpoint of evolution and genetics. “Hell Hath no Fury” not merely “like a woman scored” but also “like a minority” and “like a sexual deviant scorned.”
Moreover, the level of hysteria in American politics is going to get worse. As VDARE.com Editor Peter Brimelow documented recently, the Democratic Party has “tipped”in 2016, for the first time ever, a majority (53%) of its Presidential voters were non-white, homosexual or Jewish. (61% of the Democrat vote was female). Non-whites are increasingly claiming leadership roles (New York, Massachusetts, Georgia, Florida) which means the kind of behaviour we saw from Kamala Harris and Cory Booker at Kavanaugh’s hearings (“I am Spartacus”, the “Jane Doe” letter) will become more common in Congress in the future.
In other words, there’s going to be a lot more screeching. My advice to the GOP (and America): Buy earplugs.
Asians, East and South Asians, comprise about twenty percent of New York City high-school freshmen. Whites are around ten percent. Sun Peopleblacks and Hispanicsare seventy percent.
At the elite high schools admitting via the SHSAT exam Asians are 62 percent overall. Once again: They are twenty percent of the relevant population, 62 percent of those passing the SHSAT.
At Stuyvesant, the most popular of the specialized high schools, Asians are 73 percent (whites twenty percent, Sun People seven percent). Brooklyn Techwhich, by the way, Mayor de Blasio's son attended, is a mere 61 percent Asian (and again twenty percent white). Queens High School for the Sciences is seventy-six percent Asian.
Staten Island Tech bucks the trend somewhat. It's only 41 percent Asian, 52 percent white, seven percent Sun People. Yet more diverse is the High School of Math, Science, and Engineering up in Harlem: a paltry 37 percent Asian, 25 percent white, 38 percent Sun People.
They spoil the effect somewhat though by having a larger-than-average sex imbalance: seventy percent guys, thirty percent gals. The average for the specialized high schools is more like sixty-forty. Obviously some really flagrant discrimination going on there.
The local politics on this issue is getting pretty rancorous. June 10th there was a big demo outside City Hall: Asianswell-nigh all East Asians, to judge from the news picturesprotesting de Blasio's plan to scrap the SHSAT. Taking on those Tiger Moms, Comrade Bill, you're looking for trouble. [Protesters gather at City Hall to oppose de Blasio’s no-test plan, By Gina Daidone and Bruce Golding, NY Post, June 10, 2018]
For people who don't mind facing the realities of human nature, the two takeaways here are:
* One, the folly of mass non-European immigrationwhat elsewhere I have referred to as importing an overclass;
* Two, race and sex realism.
Importing An Overclass: To import an overclass is to invite resentment and disharmony. How is this not obvious?
Race and Sex Realism: On the second point, the truly depressing thing is how far outside the boundary of acceptable commentary race and sex realism remain.
Men and women display, in the statistical generality, different inclinations and preferences. The human races, again in the statistical generality, profile differently on intelligence, personality, and characteristic behaviors.
None of this is astounding or outrageous; it's just basic biology.
Yet these truths are unmentionable. Even sensible, well-informed commentatorspeople as based as you can be while holding a job writing for Main Stream Media publicationssteer clear of them.
It's very important to notice that one of the chief arguments used for the Navajo nation is that hiring foreigners (anybody who lives outside of the reservation) could degrade the sovereignty of the Navajo Nation.
Sovereignty arguments have been used by many Indian tribes to defeat challenges to preference hiring.
It seems to reason that if non-tribal workers from outside of the reservation could degrade the sovereignty of the Navajo Nation the same should be true when foreign workers are allowed into the U.S. Preserving sovereignty is a compelling argument but it lands on deaf ears whenever activists have tried the same argument against allowing guest workers like H-1B/H-2B/L-1 into the U.S.
So far the Navajos are winning these types of lawsuits. The EEOC and many other employers have tried to force the Navajo nation to hire non-Navajos but it's a losing battle because, as New Mexico attorney general Patricia Madrid wrote: Congress "expressly disallows the EEOC from suing a government, such as the Navajo Nation or the State of New Mexico or any of the individual States of the Union."
Before we shed crocodile tears for SRP or Peabody, or even the Basha's supermarket chain, let's keep in mind that Basha's has a bad reputation for union busting and the hiring of illegal aliens. SRP hires large numbers of H-1Bs and in 2004 the utility actively lobbied with the Arizona Chamber of Commerce to expand the H-1B program. Discrimination in the hiring of engineers at SRP's Navajo Station happens because Navajo Indians don't want non-Navajos taking jobs away from their own people. Off the reservation SRP has shown they are willing to discriminate against American citizens by hiring H-1Bs from places like India. Perhaps we could learn something from the Navajos about doing what's best for their own people.
Two hundred years ago, human beings were subject to harsh Natural Selection. People born with mutant genes, those who had a poor immune system, simply didn’t grow old enough to procreate. Forty percent of us died before we reached adulthood. This is now down to negligible levels in developed countries.
Accordingly, Woodley of Menie and his team aver that Calhoun’s experimentwhich created a “Mouse Utopia”will provide a good indication of what will happen to us.
In Calhoun’s “Mouse Utopia” at the University of Maryland, there were no predators, no bad weather, no possibility to escape, and no epidemics, because the mice were ensured to be healthy when they entered. There was a huge amount of space. It was, in other words, paradise for mice.
In July 1968, the experiment began. The parallels with the Industrial Revolution are simply spooky. Just as with the Industrial Revolution, which witnessed the collapse of child mortality due to improved medical science and living conditions, there was an enormous population spike. Numbers doubled every 55 days until there were 620 mice.
At this point population growth began to slow down, just as happened in Western countries in the early Twentieth Century. Doubling then only occurred every 145 days. And, just as in the West, Calhoun started to see more and more elderlyand even senilemice.
By day 315, Calhoun started to notice interesting behavior changes in the mice. More and more males became what he called “the beautiful ones.” These effete males would make no attempt to fight or copulate with females. They simply spend their time washing each other and eating.
By contrast, female behavior became increasingly aggressive: they would attack males, throw their offspring out of the nest too young, attack their young, and actively avoid sex.
Calhoun put this collapse down to the consequences of overcrowding. But Woodley and his team showed that the colony was nowhere close to overcrowded when the population growth began to decline. Woodley and his team see the problem as much more fundamental.
They argue that all health problems, both physical and mental, are interrelated. This is because they all reflect the same phenomenon: what the team call “high mutational load.”
For example, consider autism. It is definitely a result of mutant genes because it is more likely to develop the older your father is, meaning it a result of defective, mutant sperm. Autism is associated with all manner of other mental and physical health problems.
The Woodley of Menie team further argue that the brain is extremely sensitive to mutation, because it is fantastically complicated. 84% of our genome relates to the brain. This means that even a small number of mutations can have a massive impact on behavior. The effect is magnified in social animals like mice and men behavior is learned and mutations can interfere with social processes which allow adaptive behavior to be correctly taught.
Woodley of Menie calls these “spiteful mutations.” And as the carriers grow in number, they can pressure even non-carriers to conform to their maladaptive behavior.
For example, childless women may encourage other women not to have children. Mothers are shamed as “failures” because they didn’t focus on a career. Even non-carriers of maladaptive behavior are impacted.
In other words, mice have key evolved instincts which allow them to survive. Every generation, some mutant micewho lack these instinctsare born. But their maladaptive instinctsno desire to breed or fight, or zero maternal instinctare a product of mutation. They also carry other mutations, leading to poor immune systems or physical weakness. So they die young, and don’t pass on their mutant genes.
But in Calhoun’s mouse experiment, these mice survived and had children. The children survived and more and more mutations built-up until the potentially normal mice were a tiny minority who didn’t have the chance to learn appropriate behavior or how to relate to other mice.
And, ultimately, almost all the mice were mutants. The rest were totally maladapted and the population died out.
This “Mutational Meltdown” is happening in the West. The authors present clear evidence for it: huge spikes in autism and genetic disorders. This could be extended to include the prevalence of eating disorders, homosexuality, sexual identity problems, and the desire to not have children.
“Spiteful mutations” undermine things like religion, which is little more than a way of promoting evolutionary imperatives. For example: go forth and multiply, cooperative with each other, repel the invader.
But we now have liberal religion, which is basically post-modernism plus a vague religious sense. It reflects the increasing number of people whose instinct is to destroy their own genetic interests.
Humans have evolved instincts. In the past, those with mutant genes causing them to lack them died young without passing on their genes. Now, this is not the case. They live to adulthood, often pass on their own genes and, even they don’t, they still alter the carefully selected nature of the group.
Put simply, we are living in a society increasing composed of and dominated by mutants. And they can be tentatively identified by the fact that they reject the behavioral norms and views which were the unquestioned norm only a few generations ago.
But there is crucial difference between Mouse Utopia and the West. We are the scientists who are maintaining our own utopia. There is a growing body of evidence that intelligence is decreasing. Eventually we won’t be intelligent enough to sustain utopia and we will collapse back to pre-industrial levels of Natural Selection.
The current model of society, like the “Mouse Utopia,” is heading to collapse.
The only questions are whether we can turn it around.
And, if we can’t, what will succeed it.
Atheists are genetic mutants who, for the most part, would never have been born if we hadn’t managed to break free of pre-industrial conditions of Darwinian selection. This was the conclusion of a paper published just before Christmas in the leading journal Evolutionary Psychological Science[The Mutant Says in His Heart, “There Is No God”: The Rejection of Collective Religiosity Centred Around the Worship of Moral Gods is Associated with High Mutational Load Edward Dutton, Guy Madison & Curtis Dunkel. (PDF).] and it sent establishment psychologists into spasms of rage.
To be sophisticated, these days, means that you’re an atheist. Academia is overwhelmingly atheist and average intelligence weakly correlates with not believing in God [High IQ turns academics into atheists,’ Times Higher Education, byRebecca Atwood, June 12, 2008]. For SJWs, the religious are at best stupid and, at worst, racist bigots who vote for Donald Trump and Brexit. So it’s no surprise that the paper was greeted with disbelief by the SJWs who fill departments of psychology.
Reactions ranged from “Amazing!” to condemning it as the worst paper of the year and “one of the most egregious papers I’ve ever read.” Reported in newspapers worldwide [Atheists more likely to be left handed, study finds, by Olivia Rudgard,Daily Telegraph, December 21, 2017], its authors presumably delighted in the reaction.
And the reaction was all the more ferocious because the paper’s conclusions are difficult to dispute. The researchersBritish anthropologist Dr Edward Dutton, Swedish psychologist Prof. Guy Madison and Western Illinois University psychologist Curtis Dunkelpresented a beautifully simple case:
Until the Industrial Revolution, we were under harsh conditions of Darwinian Selection, meaning that about 40% of children died before they reached adulthood. These children would have been those who had mutant genes, leading to poor immune systems and death from childhood diseases. But they would also have had mutant genes affecting the mind. This is because the brain, home to 84% of the genome, is extraordinarily sensitive to mutation, so mental and physical mutation robustly correlate. If these children had grown up, they might have had autism, schizophrenia, depression... but they had poor immune systems, so they never had the chance.
Under these conditions, prevalent until the nineteenth century, we were individually selected for but we were also “group selected” for. Ethnic groups are simply a genetic extended family and some groups fared better against the environment and enemy groups than others did, due to the kind of partly genetic psychological adaptations they developed.
Among these, the authors argue, was a very specific kind of religiosity which developed in all complex societies: the collective worship of gods concerned with morality. Belief in these kinds of gods was selected for, they maintain, because once we developed cities we had to deal with strangerspeople who weren’t part of our extended family. By conceiving of a god who demanded moral behaviour towards other believers, people were compelled to cooperate with these strangers, meaning that large, highly cooperative groups could develop.
Computer models have proven that the more internally cooperative groupwhich is also hostile to infidel outsiderswins the battle of group selection [The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation by Max Hartshorn, June 2013]. This very specific kind of religiousness was selected for and, indeed, it correlates with positive and negative ethnocentrism even today.
The authors demonstrate that this kind of religiousness has clearly been selected for in itself. It is about 40% genetic according to twin studies, it is associated with strongly elevated fertility, it can be traced to activity in specific regions of the brain, and it is associated with elevated health: all the key markers that something has been selected for.
And it is from here that the authors make the leap that has made SJW blood boil. Drawing on research by Michael Woodley of Menie and his team (see here and here)they argue that conditions of Darwinian selection have now massively weakened, leading to a huge rise in people with damaging mutations. This is evidenced in increasing rates of autism, schizophrenia, homosexuality, sex-dysmorphia, left-handedness, asymmetrical bodies and much else. These are all indicators of mutant genes.
Woodley suggests that weakened Darwinian selection would have led to the spread of “spiteful mutations” of the mind, which would help to destroy the increasingly physically and mentally sick group, even influencing the non-carriers to behave against their genetic interests, as carriers would help undermine the structures through which members learnt adaptive behaviour.
This is exactly what happened in the infamous Mouse Utopia experiment in the late 1960s, where a colony of mice was placed in conditions of zero Darwinian selection and eventually died out. [Death squared: The explosive growth and demise of a mouse population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, January 1973(PDF)].
So Dutton and his team argue that, this being the case, deviation from this very specific form of religiousnessthe collective worship of moral gods in which almost everyone engaged in 1800should be associated with these markers of mutation. In other words, both atheists and those interested in spirituality with no moral gods (such as the paranormal) should be disproportionately mutants.
And this is precisely what they show. Poor physical and mental health are both significantly genetic and imply high mutational load. Dutton and his team demonstrate that this specific form of religiousness, when controlling for key factors such as SES, predicts much better objective mental and physical health, recovery from illness, and longevity than atheism.
It’s generally believed that religiousness makes you healthier because it makes you worry less and elevates your mood, but they turn this view on its head, showing that religious worshippers are more likely to carry gene forms associated with being low in anxiety. Schizophrenia, they show, is associated with extreme and anti-social religiosity, rather than collective worship. Similarly, belief in the paranormal is predicted by schizophrenia, and this is a marker of genetic mutation.
Next, they test autism, another widely accepted marker of mutation, as evidenced by the fact that it’s more common among the children of older men, whose fathers are prone to mutant sperm. Autism predicts atheism.
They then look at data on left-handedness. In agricultural societies we are overwhelmingly right-handed. Left-handedness means an asymmetrical brain and thus, to some extent, mutation. They show that there is a weak but significant trend whereby the more strongly religious you are the more likely you are to be right-handed, just as the theory would predict. Finally, they turn to plain uglinessasymmetry. This shows that your immune system is so deficient that you haven’t been able to maintain a symmetrical phenotype in the face of disease or that you simply have mutant genes that make you asymmetrical. Believers in the paranormal have less symmetrical hands than do controls.
Dutton & Co.’s research is so incendiary because it is presenting the SJWs with what they really are: mutants; maladapted people who undermine carefully evolved, evolutionarily useful structuressuch as religionmeaning they make even non-carriers maladapted; discouraging them from breeding or from defending their ethnic group.
Under normal Darwinian conditions, prevalent until the Industrial Revolution, these mutants would simply never have been born. They are, just like the mutant mice, people whose influence will ultimately lead to the collapse of society, as intelligence declines, and we return to a new Dark Age in which people are likely to be very religious indeed.
But perhaps there is some good news. It’s quite clear from the Mouse Utopia experiments that if the mutants are removed, then the society will recover.
If there’s one thing that unites wealthy Leftists, it’s the need to pretend they are compassionate.
And there are few better ways of doing this than campaigning against the death penalty.
Increasingly, Leftists take advantage of modern technology to do this: Activist groups like the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty have created a virtual cottage industry geared toward virtue-signalling on the death penalty. They use their websites to direct the bleeding hearts to the next execution site, so they can launch a protest rally.
Cutting-edge research, however, reveals just how fantastically ironic this is. It seems that without the death penalty there’d be no internet, no television; in fact, very little civilization.
The first scholars to develop this king of all Left-triggering ideas were Canadian anthropologist Peter Frost and the late University of Utah anthropologist Henry Harpending. They published their landmark research in 2015 under the title Western Europe, State Formation, and Genetic Pacification in the journal Evolutionary Psychology.[PDF]
It was a truly ingenious argument.
When Europe became Christian, the death penalty was abolished. Right up until the beginning of the Middle Ages, people were left to settle their own disputes by fighting each other or demanding, from the state, that the murderer pay a fine for killing their relative. But, as Frost and Harpending put it, the Church gradually came to accept that, the "wicked" should be executed "so that the good can live in peace."
With biblical justification, more and more crimes became subject to the death penalty. By the High Middle Ages, every single felony (any crime serious enough to have traditionally warranted the confiscation of property) was met with the hangman’s noose.
Those sent to the gallows were almost always high-testosterone young men prone to violent crime. In fact, Frost and Harpending calculated that one percent of the male population were executed every generation throughout the Middle Ages. And another one percent were killed at the scene of the crime or died in fetid prisons awaiting trial or execution. So two percent of young men were eliminated every generation.
And because they tended to be young, this process meant that they had fewer children than if they hadn't been executed. Thus, they would have passed on fewer of their genes.
It’s here that Frost and Harpending perceptively draw their conclusion. Capital punishment must have changed the nature of European personalityby, in effect, culling out the psychopaths.
Criminality is strongly predicted by three key traits associated with psychopathology:
Low impulse control
Low mental stability.
These traits are at least 50 percent genetic. [See Personality: What Makes You the Way You Are, by Daniel Nettle, OUP, 2007]
The murder rate collapsed between the 14th and 20th centuries and they statistically proved that part of the reason for this was the continual killing of the most impulsive and disagreeable young males every generation. The pool of violent men essentially dried up.
Those who were executed were overwhelmingly poor, with poverty associated with poor impulse control and low altruism. They had to be extremely poor because, in England at least, if you could read, then you could avoid execution by claiming "benefit of the clergy."
Frost and Harpending are clear: Widespread execution led to the genetic "pacification" of Western Europe. It made people more cooperative, more forward-thinking, less impulsive . . . in other words more psychologically able to develop civilization. And as the late Canadian psychologist J. Philippe Rushton showed in his 1995 book Race, Evolution and Behavior, that it is the ethnic groups with these personality traits that develop civilization.
More recently, anthropologist Edward Dutton and Swedish psychologist Guy Madison have taken this insight further. In a 2018 article in the journal Evolutionary Psychological Science [Execution, Violent Punishment and Selection for Religiousness in Medieval England] they point out that this system of widespread execution would also have selected strongly for intelligence. Low socioeconomic status is predicted by low intelligence and it was overwhelmingly young, low SES men who met the hangman's noose. Low IQ predicts living for the now and not thinking about the future. And considering the dire consequences of breaking the law up until the 19th century, in England for example, you’d have to have been fairly stupid to do it.
And it is quite clear that national-average intelligence is the motor of civilization. In their huge 2012 study, Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen showed that average national IQ strongly predicts national levels of education, research and development, wealth, earnings, employment, lack of poverty, lack of crime, democracy, honesty, health, life expectancy, sanitation, openness to change, lack of religious extremism . . . the list goes on [Intelligence: A Unifying Construct for the Social Sciences].
But central to Dutton and Madison’s study is something which, on the surface, might seem rather counter-intuitive in terms of the importance of the death penalty to civilization. They use the same statistical methods as Frost and Harpending to show that widespread execution was partly behind English people becoming more religious between the Medieval Era and the 16th century.
They argue that the English definitely became more religious, as evidenced by higher and higher percentages becoming monks and nuns, while heresy and witchcraft, deviations from accepted practice, grew increasingly unacceptable. And they estimate that religiousness is about 40 percent genetic, based on twin studies, and is predicted by exactly the same characteristics that predict not being a criminal: high altruism, high impulse control, and high mental stability.
Religiousness is also associated with low levels of autistic traits. Dutton and Madison demonstrate that there is a degree to which autism is associated with criminality. So the Medieval system of executing almost all criminals also effectively involved curtailing the fertility of the least religious young men every generation.
This policy bore fruit in the 16th and 17th centuries, according to the two researchers, with wars based around religion.
However, it also had another consequence, which they don’t look at but which has been explored by the German biologist Gerhard Meisenberg in his 2007 book In God’s Image. Precisely because Europeans were so intensely Christian, they didn’t adopt contraception, something which all previous civilizations had done when they got to about the stage the West reached in the early 18th century. Once contraception was adopted, it was taken up by cleverer and more educated people and used more efficiently by them, due to their higher IQ and better foresight. This has eventually resulted in a negative associated between SES [Socio-Economic Status] /intelligence fertility. Since the early 20th century, stupidity has predicted having lots of children.
Meisenberg shows this is exactly what happened in Greece and Rome. But because of this religious rejection of contraception, it didn’t happen in the modern West until much later in our development. This meant that we could get to the Industrial Revolution before the positive correlation between IQ and number of surviving children, which you see in all primitive societies, went into reverse due to contraception.
So, in a roundabout way, widespread execution made us more religious. And, paradoxically, if that hadn’t happened, there’d be no websites telling when and where the next execution will be, so we can Virtue-Signal about the death penalty. IQ would have declined, and we would have returned to the Dark Ages, just like the Romans and Greeks and Muslims did before us.
Put it this way: In April 2017, Johnny Depp made his way to Arkansas to protest against the planned execution of seven murderers that month. However, if it wasn’t for the widespread execution of young criminals, it’s very likely civilization would never have progressed beyond the technology and morality of Pirates of the Caribbean.
The left has concocted a lucrative category of politically correct victims: "climate refugees." It's the new Green racket.
U.S. taxpayers will now be forking over untold billions to ease the pain allegedly inflicted on "carbon's casualties" by industrial activity. By contrast, those who have suffered as a direct result of government incompetence by federal environmental bureaucrats continue to get the shaft.
Consider the plight of two tribes: the Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw in Louisiana and the Navajo Nation in New Mexico.
LOUISIANA2-superJumbo-v3The New York Times splashed a viral story on its pages this week spotlighting the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's $48 million grant to Native-Americans who live in the flood-ravaged coastal community of Isle de Jean Charles. About 60 residents, the majority of whom belong to the Biloxi-Chitimacha-Choctaw tribe, will be resettled to drier land.
That's a whopping $800,000 per "climate refugee!"
Never mind that the Times' propagandists themselves admit that erosion on the island began in 1955 as a result of land-use and land-management factors that had nothing to do with climate change.
"Channels cut by loggers and oil companies eroded much of the island," the paper reported, "and decades of flood control efforts have kept once free-flowing rivers from replenishing the wetlands' sediments."
Never mind that there are conflicting scientific analyses on the extent to which man-made greenhouses gases have caused sea levels to rise; whether the rate is accelerating; and how much, if any, reducing carbon emissions would actually mitigate purportedly rising sea levels.
Never mind that enviro-alarmists have conveniently changed their tune from blaming global warming for causing sea level rises to blaming global warming for causing sea level drops.
Oh, and never mind that many of the inhabitants of Isle de Jean Charleswhose forefathers originally moved there to escape forced government relocation under the 1830 Indian Removal Actdon't even want to leave and have fought resettlement efforts for decades.
Obama's social engineers are already plotting how to replicate the climate change relocation program. "We see this as setting a precedent for the rest of the country, the rest of the world," declared HUD official Marion McFadden, who is running the program.
Even worse, the United Nations is looking to preemptively "address extreme weather displacement" by targeting refugees even before any apocalyptic event has caused them to seek refuge.
Can you spell "manufacturing a crisis"?
While these meddling liberals conspire to displace one tribe in the name of saving the planet, another tribe is still begging for help after Obama's destructive EPA poisoned their waters.
It's been almost eight months since an Environmental Protection Agency contractor recklessly knocked a hole at the long-abandoned Gold King Mine in Colorado's San Juan Mountains. You should know that Washington has long schemed to declare it a Superfund site, which would increase its power, budget and access over the region.
A federally sponsored wrecking crew poking around in the mine last August triggered a 3 million-ton flood of bright orange gunk into the Animas River. EPA's blithering idiots delayed notifying local residents for 24 hours and downplayed the toxic spill's effects.
Downstream, the muck seeped into the San Juan River in New Mexico, where the Navajo Nation lives and farms. The impact on drinking water and livelihoods has been catastrophic. But the Obama administration refused the tribe's request for disaster relief from FEMA last fall and yanked emergency water tanks the EPA had supplied for Navajo livestock.
Part Two of my answer: Jews are white, Asians are not, and while any overclass is resented, a racially distinctive overclass is resented more than one that barely looks any different from the resenters.
Anti-Semites know this; that's why they put out drawings of the hunch-backed, hook-nosed cartoon Jew when they want to inflame anti-Jewish feeling. It makes the Jew plainly a different race.
Part Three of my answer: even under the current covert quotas, Asian Americans are enrolled at elite colleges in numbers far above their five percent share of the U.S. population.
Yes, they're being held down: on a strictly meritocratic basis their numbers would be much higher yet, because of the arithmetic of those distribution tails. Still, strictly measured by demographic proportionality, they're high.
So yes, we were importing an overclass a hundred years ago. Elite universities dealt with the issue by fudging and chicaneryjust as they are dealing with this repeat performance.
There are some key differences, though. Jews are white, which makes things easier to fudge.
Also, the high IQ of Ashkenazi Jews is more verbal than visuo-spatial, leading to that dominance in the shaping of opinion.
Asian Americans, by contrast, are much more visible as a group. And their high IQ is more visuo-spatial than verbal, giving us more engineers and scientists, fewer writers, lawyers, comedians, movie and newspaper moguls.
But in both cases, non-Asian gentiles get squeezed. We un-squeeze blacks and Hispanics with Affirmative Action, but that just squeezes white gentiles even more.
Under our current state ideology, the orthodox approach to that hovers somewhere between "Who cares?" and "Serve them right!"
Whether that ideology can be sustained going forward through the 21st century, is an interesting question.
Second point main point raised by readers: any merit-based immigration system imports an overclass.
I agree. Consider for example India. The mean IQ of that country is 82. The mean IQ of Indians in the U.S.A., on the other hand, is 106higher than the mean for white gentile Americans.
So there's an overclass we've imported from a low-IQ population.
The same applies to Africa. The mean IQ in black Africa is 70, which is very low. Assuming a normal distribution with mean 70 and standard deviation 15, Microsoft Excel tells me that only 0.0032 percent of the population is higher than 130 IQ.
That's a teeny-tiny percent; but there are an awful lot of black Africans: 1.2 billion is the latest number I've seen. Point zero zero three two percent of 1.2 billion is 38,000. Every one of those 38,000 very-smart Africans is applying for a U.S. student visa.
Caribbean blacks are, for complicated reasons, somewhat smarter than black Africans. Add them into the mix and we're importing a small black overclass.
Is this something we should be bothered about? We-e-ell there are contrary factors to consider.
Under the present regime of chain migration, for example, all those smart Indians and Africans can bring in their way-less-smart siblings, brides, parents, and even cousins. You could argue that long-term that evens out the mix.
There's also regression to the mean. The offspring of these high-IQ immigrants will regress towards their population mean although not all the way to it, or else Natural Selection wouldn't work. Given the likelihood of assortative mating, in fact smart immigrants marrying other smart people regression all the way back to the population mean is highly improbable, even after many generations.
So, no, this is not a great issue. It is an issue, though an issue that lurks behind all the happy talk about a merit-based system of immigration.
The first time America imported an overclass, we did so accidentally. When that Great Wave of Ashkenazi Jews came in after 1881, we had only the vaguest ideas about population differentials in intelligence and personality. Psychometry as a quantitative science was just getting started.
Now we understand much more, and can make better decisions. If we import a new overclass today, we'll be doing it deliberately. We know enough to not do it.
And any overclass we import now will be nonwhite. That follows just from the balance of races in the world being much different than it was 100 years ago.
If you're a nonwhite who doesn't like white people, you are fine with that. If you're a white person living in one of the globalist-bubble districts big coastal cities, college towns you may think it's no big deal, we can all get along.
The rest of us are shaking our heads.
Ah, the idealism of youth! Is there anything in this Children's Crusade to gladden the stony hearts of cynics?
You bet there is. If you've been wondering how a bunch of adolescents could manage the funding and organization of this march, and similar events nationwide, allow me to direct you to Daniel Greenfield's excellent bit of investigative reporting over at Front Page. Greenfield has done the spadework the Main Stream Media will not do, and uncovered the men behind the curtain.
And in fact the impression you got from MSM accounts the impression I definitely got, that the Washington march was of youngsters, which is why I got to thinking about the Children's Crusade is false. An academic sociologist (University of Maryland sociologist Dana R. Fisher) analyzed the crowd and concluded that no more than ten percent were under eighteen. The average age was 49! To be fair to the media, this lady's research was published in the Washington Post, but only as an op-ed. [Here’s who actually attended the March for Our Lives. (No, it wasn’t mostly young people.), by Dana R. Fisher, March 28, 2018] But you'd never have figured those facts from the news stories.
For a further dash of cynicism, note how, as always with these SJW glove puppets, the loud-heralded "revolution" turns out not to threaten anyone who actually holds actual power. Nitwits like that 17-year-old Cameron Kasky really seem to think they are sticking it to the man when, as Ramzpaul jeered on another occasion, "You are the man!"
Similarly with 17-year-old David Hogg, the foul-mouthed young twerp who seems to fancy himself the Stephen of Cloyes in this Children's Crusade of 49-year-olds. "Who here is going to vote in the 2018 election?" he asked the crowd. "If you listen real close, you can hear the people in power shaking," end quote.
No, David. What has the people in power shaking is the thought that if, as their hearts desire, they were to stage a coup and establish a Chinese-style panopticon of thought control and repression of dissent, they might find themselves opposed by millions of armed citizens.
These self-styled "revolutionaries" believe everything that those "people in power" believe: everything billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg believe, everything every corporate HR Director believes, everything the academics and church leaders and media talking heads and Hollywood glitterati believe.
If this is revolution, Louis the Sixteenth and Tsar Nicholas the Second were foaming revolutionaries.
What I want to know is: Where are the Muslim slave traders when we really need them?
As an Oklahoma Comanche, I consider myself an "Indian"an American Indian.
I am not a Native American, nor a First Nations, nor an Aboriginal, and least of all an Indigenous person.
I`m simply a descendent of savage hunters with the most lethal war skills and artful horsemanship known in American history.
I could refer to myself as "nerm" or "num," which, if pronounced half-way correctly, indicates I am of the Comanche people. "Numunu" is what we call ourselves in our own language. But who would know what I`m talking about except Comanches?
White people have called all our tribes "Indians" for over four centuries. And even when they referred to us as Sioux, Comanche, Nes Perce, Coeur d`Alene, most of those names were what some European explorer heard one tribe calling some other tribe.
Few of us are called by our own name in our own language. So what? Names of European countries also get changed quite a bit in other languages: Germans, "Deutscher" are called "Tedeschi" in Italian, for instance. Our Indian peoples are distinguished from one another in historical treaties by the use of these foreign names.
The quest for Ideological Correctnessthrough terms like Native American, First Nations, Aboriginal, or Indigenousis ill-fated if not ludicrous. Why swap one European name for another? Why exchange a classy, descriptive French name, such as Coeur d`Alene ("heart of the awl"indicating able hagglers) for an English derivative of a Latin abstraction like "aboriginal," a vague chronological distinction, or a Spanish derivative like "indigenous," originally meaning poor and naked?
"Indian" is the oldest, most sensible term. When Columbus used the term "Indios" when he wrote to Queen Isabella in 1492 it was because he thought he`d arrived on the western shores of India. What else would he call the people he encountered in the world new to him?
Columbus used no such phrase as "una gente en Dios," as modern revisionists like to say. These contortionists propagate this myth to suggest that we are spiritually superior beings, so impressive that Columbus called us "a people in God." But what he called us was "naked as when their mothers bore them."
That term "Native American," like so many things, appeared for the first time in the 1960s, as part of the legal definition of who is considered an American Indian. It involved land squabbles, of course, and the stakes have always been high. When other groups wanted in on the definition through the term "Native American," many "American Indians" objected strongly, to the agreement of some responsible scholars.
In general, however, academic trends list with the social winds. Name-changing, as other university fads, is generally the work of Marxist racial agitators, ever anxious to overturn "the establishment" as a means of clutching at power. Changing the names of things, usurping their meaning, or removing names entirely, are favorite tactics of these leftists. Thus "Negro" became "Colored," then "Black," then "Afro-American" and now "African American."
But then American states, counties, rivers, schools and teams weren`t generally named after Negroes, so that particular name game had its limits. Indian names are the next target. And that name game is just beginning.
But count me out. Don`t call me Native. Call me Savage, Redskin, Injun, Comanche, Red Devil. Don`t worry about being sued. You can`t victimize me with names. I`m not black, I`m red.
"Indian" is what Americans have always called us, and it is the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant with whom we have had mostly to do. The victory was his, not the Negro`s, the Hispanic`s, the Communist`s, or the Arab Muslim`s. Why should I care what they call me?
By the way, I am thinking of suing a certain Michael Weinerfor renaming himself with my honorable, sacred name, Savage!
America today is making the same mistake we Indians made nearly four centuries ago. America is letting in too many foreigners. And we Indians could end up losing this country all over again. It may come as a surprise to many white people who have been brainwashed by the media to see Indians as the ultimate liberals, but there are few groups in America today who take a dimmer view of mass immigration than the American Indian.
According to ProjectUSA.org, the U.S. population will double within the lifetimes of our children, as a direct result of the massive, uncontrolled influx of foreigners who began flooding our land after passage of the 1965 Immigration Act.
All Americans will suffer. But Indians will suffer most of all.
I`m not talking about competition for jobs, land, housing, energy, water and other finite resourcesthough these are all important. I`m talking about something deeper. The demographic destruction of Anglo-America will bring the final catastrophe on our people.
What catastrophe? The catastrophe of waking up one day and realizing that white people no longer control this country.
Now why should an Indian care about that? After all, white people are supposedly our enemies.
Well, yes, they were. But, as warriors, we found them to be worthy and formidable adversaries. Defeat is bitter. But when you respect your conqueror, it is a lot easier to swallow.
If Anglo-America turns this land over to blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Middle Easterners and other foreign peoples, for the Indian, it will be like losing this country for the second time. We have had generations to reconcile ourselves to white America. But we do not know these new people who are coming. We fought no battles with them, made no treaties with them, and have no reason to accord them any special respect.
If things keep going the way they are, we Indians could find ourselves bowing down to foreign peoples who never defeated our forefathers in battleand who certainly never could!
We Indiansespecially the more warlike tribes such as my people the Comanchesrecognize a kindred spirit in the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. He is like us in more ways than he knows.
The Comanches were one of the most intolerant of all Indian peoples. We had no use for anyone else, white, Mexican or Indian. When we came thundering down on the southwest plains, we took the land we wanted and ran everyone else off. We created the life we wanted, at the expense of other people.
The white man did the same. Only he did it on a grander scale.
In the old days, Comanches were known to honor strength in other people. Comanche warriors even adopted white captive boys, if they happened to show courage and fight.
In many ways, Indians see the white man as a kind of adopted sonnaïve, reckless and destructive, at timesbut nevertheless cut from the same warrior cloth as we were.
We do not see blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Arabs and others in this light. These peoples may have their own virtues and traditions, but they have no history with us. They are strangers.
If they want to rule us, they must conquer us the way the white man didon the battlefield, by force of arms. That is the only honorable way for a warrior.
The white man seems to have lost his spirit, and we Indians see it. We see that he is giving this country away to others. And this fills our hearts with fear. For we are part of the land he is giving away. He is turning us over to strangers the way medieval barons turned over their serfs when they sold their land.
But we are not serfs. We are warriors. And we will not be ruled by people who have never fought us.
The white man must regain his warrior soul and take back his land.
In that fight, I will stand by his side and offer whatever strength I have to ensure his victory. Ha tu vi chat! *
Well, you didn’t read that headline, although Wu (D-Ore) has indeed resigned after some sort of interaction with the 18-year old [i.e. legal] daughter of a donor. And he is indeed an immigrant, born in Taiwan in 1955 and coming to the U.S. with his parents in 1961. (Click here for Michelle Malkin’s view; here for Wu’s appearance in a John DerbyshireNorm Matloff colloquy).
But, as of 5 pm ET, searching Google News on “David Wu“ produced about 3,580 results; “David Wu immigrant“ a mere 348. Searching Bing News (do you use Bing?) produced 5,170 results on “David Wu“; just 21 on “David Wu immigrant“.
This is a crude measure (the google Wu-immigrant search in particular seems choked with junk). But, nevertheless, it is evidence of the Main Stream Media’s priorities. There are circumstances in which Wu’s immigrant status must be whooped up, And there are others in which it must go down the memory hole.
Indeed, poor Wu tried, vainly, to push the immigrant button in his resignation statement (resulting in most of the hits on “immigrant”): “Rare is the nation in which an immigrant child can become a national political figure.”
(Bunk, of course. It’s common throughout the immigration-impacted First World: Canadaneedless to say!has even had a Haitian immigrant Governor-General, who was also a dual citizen of France [!!] and linked to Quebec separatism [!!!]).
Sexual harrassment, like mass murder, is not a job that Americans won’t do. I don’t really know what the significance of Wu’s immigrant status is. I do know, however, that it is being suppressed for a reason.
For the record, although Wu is regularly described as a “moderate Democrat”, NumbersUSA ranks his Career Record on immigration patriotism as an “F”.