I suspect things are beginning to change. The argument in favour of mass immigration from the third world has been disproven time and again. Many economic studies demonstrate the case against it. But it barely matters as every Western nation has a traditional media ruthlessly hostile to anti-immigration arguments, and especially pro-nationalist sentiment. The education sector is of course the grandfather of blank slate thinking, so they are no help and they are doing their best to inculcate these novel ideas in the young.
Alas, as with all left progressive ideas, their enemy is reality. Multiculturalism is bringing low trust, violence and the abuse of women with it. Our cities are becoming unsafe. Everything is in decline. To the horror of the media class none of it can be hidden. It is inherently visible. And it is obvious where much of the dysfunction emanates from.
I would dearly love to know what is going on in their minds. Do they believe we are all equal? Or is it pure Nietzschean ressentiment? An enduring hatred for all they see around them?
The ultimate promoters of mass immigration by non-Whites into the White West are those who benefit from low wages and the dilution of the franchise of White voters.
In other words, the ruling class.
The job of the 'cultural authorities' is to promote the interests of the ruling class. Their opinions are those that insure they paychecks.
Absolutely. Diversity is our strength being a key example. No rational analysis supports it. But its role is to remain a slogan not a statement of fact. And many among us love their slogans.
I still sense it is yet another example of poor foresight on the part of our betters. More than ever I believe white tribal consciousness is coming, something I would not have believed even a few years ago.
Nonsense. Both countries are resilient. Plus the imports are failing. It is not the paradise they were promised. It won't take much to repatriate them. It is the elites in each nation that ought to be worried.
A note to self on reading Macchiavelli considering what is merciful for a people,
"...I say that every prince ought to desire to be considered clement and not cruel. Nevertheless he ought to take care not to misuse this clemency. Cesare Borgia was considered cruel; notwithstanding, his cruelty reconciled the Romagna, unified it, and restored it to peace and loyalty. And if this be rightly considered, he will be seen to have been much more merciful than the Florentine people, who, to avoid a reputation for cruelty, permitted Pistoia to be destroyed. Therefore a prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies; for these are wont to injure the whole people, whilst those executions which originate with a prince offend the individual only."
I perceive feminism and female entitlement (and the attending pathologies - wokeness, safetyism, etc.) as the fundamental linchpin of our decline. Women and feminized organizations (mostly staffed and sometimes led by men, but feminized nonetheless) are making bad policy, ruining research and ignoring factors like social order, epistemological rigor, and productive incentives in favor of more emotional impulses. Even our news and films and research papers are hysterical and soft-headed now, in many cases. The excellent, the brave, and the independent are being systematically weeded out of institutions of power and knowing. This will be a hard thing for culture to change. It'll require courageous, discerning men, and sensible and loyal women. Do we have enough of them?
My comment wasn't precise enough: feminist impulses of pathological empathy and emotional affiliation are the main contributor to the radically leftward shift of our immigration policies and discourse. Of course, activists and nonprofits have been the stormtroopers, but the average 'liberal' just wants to feel (and appear) like a nice person. It's that simple, and that silly. Feminine sensibilities...
Absolute hard agree. We do not discuss this enough. The feminization of the West. It is not just about women, as some are indeed sensible. Perhaps we should say the emasculation of the West instead.
What the hell are we supposed to do about?? I honestly don’t think the white man cares anymore.. Fluoride and ultra processed foodies have rotted their minds. And the white women are useless. Sad situation.
And let’s not forget whites represent about 7 percent of the world’s population. Wonder where this number will be come 2030?
Almost all countries are in decline; all peoples. Modernity is demanding its price. The birthrate in China is now down to 1.1 child per woman; in South Korea it is 0.6.
It is the third world that will be hit hardest as their populations both decline and age. The technologically advanced West will do comparatively better.
Fluoride and processed foods probably are the culprit. Environmental factors of all sorts. But some resist.
There is a difference between believing all humans have inherent dignity and all cultures are equally valuable. We can look at the outcomes of a culture in terms of human flourishing and advancement and determine whether the culture is net positive or net negative.
The claim that illegal immigration (or a “guest worker” program intended to legitimize them) is necessary to provide workers for relatively low-paying jobs that citizens are unwilling to take is tantamount to a justification for an American version of apartheid.
It is not intended to convince the freethinkers. It is a mechanism to accommodate the headline skimmers and it works. Most people do not enquire beyond the headlines and the idea provides a handy way for otherwise guilt-ridden midwits to sock it to the working classes they so hate while also appearing virtuous. It is impressive in its own way how well it works despite resting on very flimsy foundations.
"people who are in places they don’t belong, acting like they’re entitled to things that don’t belong to them, and violently resisting when clear-minded people try to set things back into order."
All this can be applied to western colonizers in last five hundred years. Combine that with low birthrate, remember that there are jobs that nowadays only immigrants would do... What else was to be expected?
You didn’t get the point. White colonizers built things, built entire nations and cities, and sent men to the moon. The vast majority of 3rd world immigrants aren’t capable of building anything. They’re not even capable of maintaining what is there. They consume and work in low-skill jobs. That’s it.
William Pitt the Younger allegedly said that in the colonies, nothing more advanced than a horseshoe must be produced. By the colonies, he meant North American colonies.
Colonies were prevented from developing industry and high education. Deliberately.
We were subjected to such a treatment in Serbia too, after 1999. So I know exactly what is like to be colonized. And I remember what is like not to be.
And I'm not happy about what is going on. But I can not un-remember how Muslims from Bosnia and Kosovo were good guys, and we, white christians, were bed ones.
This is a good essay... right up to rhe point you shifted into left-vs-right-ism.
Anti-Whiteism isn't a left-vs-right matter. And you know this. Is the Cato Institute 'left'? What about the Chamber of Commerce? Are they 'progressive'? Or Catholic Social Services? How about the American Jewish Congress or HIAS?
Very well argued, what's worse is that because we're too busy babysitting people who ought to be confined to their own homes and were never meant to live amongst us we can't finance beautiful things like art, culture and proper societies.
We need them out, and we need them out now. Western Civilizations are beauty, all of them. Each country in Europe is unique. They are hardly any of them alike. It is the beautiful thing about us. But our societies were built for us, not for those who hate us.
I doubt Kneeling Nancy or the people who vote for her and her ilk have the slightest sense of guilt. These people are virtue signaling their moral superiority over the haters, bigots, sexists, homophobes, etc. The squares - it's also a class war waged by bobos (bourgeois bohemians). It's why they are so obsessed with Hitiler, a kind of satan in human form. And the fanatical obsession with sexually mutilating children. And gay marriage.
Liberals are merely playing a cat and mouse game. When it comes to their property values, their children (especially their education), and their own personal safety and health, they suddenly become very conservative. It's why a house in Upper Caucasia, NW, DC, costs twice as much as a similar one in vibrant SE quadrant, the same distance to the federal triangle.
Guilt implies being held morally accountable for some sort of crime or sin. Scandinavians never had black slaves or colonies and they're just as bad. But they do share the same Enlightenment belief in human rights. And that is the mechanism used to intimidate western European people. We have a sacred-victim, entitled parasite culture. It's the Achilles heal of western men and why they are so weak and cowardly, even towards their women.
I suppose you threw the dog over the wall into the neighbour's yard and let them take care of it. Or did you just shoot it?
Whilst your moral superiority makes you feel so superior, I want you to think what it will be like in 5-10 years time. Trump is bringing the economic destruction of the US forward by 10 - 20 years. The whole world has just given the US a big "fuck off" we don't need you. Except of course those great countries Israel and Ukraine, who continue to beg for money.
-
Because only a tiny fraction of people are really productive and not mere service people, as compared with the 1920s, the coming depression will make 1929 look like a Sunday picnic.
Your 'well' paid job has been destroyed. It has gone either overseas or to a robot.
You have no income and no fall back, everyone is in the same position.
With no food (the farmers and distribution went out of business too) and no home (the banks took it, just like the millions of homes they took in 2008, but on steroids) no prospect of a job as no one has the money to employ you, what do you think is going to happen?
That may be the reality that those millions of migrants are facing now and you will face in the near future..
-
My mother and father grew up in the East London slums of WW1, I was born in the East London ruins just after WW2. We all moved out and up.
The first thought drilled into me when seeing those less fortunate in any respect, was "There, but for the grace of God, go I."
When I see the Americans crying I find it very hard not to think "It serves you right, you earned it." Ask Israel or Ukraine for help and see what response you get. The rest of the world will merely turn their backs on you.
You're an anti-White sadist. So, of course, you think Whites deserve punishment for the sin of being White.
We're not all the same. That's the point.
These imported racial aliens are not the solution to any problem the working class needs solved. They all must go. And if they're more important to you than White Westerner, then you should go with them.
Where's the "anti-white sadism" in PJ London's comment? You're using your entire comment in an attempt to read the mind of someone else. Taking for granted that your guesses are so flawlessly valid that every "high-IQ" reader must agree with them, because of course.
That's basically the same game that 'Chilton' is playing in this post, with bold assertions that tacitly demand the reader that them as Truisms. So no support is needed, other than running the same Highlight Reel of negativity connected with the immigrant population as if the entire US were aflame, as if that's the characteristic experience of contemporary America with its immigrant population--especially its "black and brown" immigrant population.
To make my position on illegal immigration into the US clear: 10 million between 2021 and 2025 was many too many, and an inexcusable failure of border security. As long as the nation-state game is the basis of every polity on the planet, nations have a duty to control immigrant inflows and secure borders.
But no one should confuse the position I just stated with a pledge of allegiance to Chilton's militant racist agitprop. And while I don't think I have any grounds to speak for any European nation, in the US, a Multiracial Coalition is going to be required in order to stop the slide into the complete absence of behavior standards, or insanely ordered notions that parcel out advantages on the basis of Ascribed status rather than Achieved status.
Contrary to the appeal to narcissistic self-flattery found in the Header Meme for this post, white people aren't the only human beings who know how to act. And white adults--at both "left" and "right" extremes of dysfunction--are entirely capable of whining like entitled toddlers and yearning for dependence on an authoritarian figure to run their lives, while doing nothing to improve their learning, skill set, talents, work ethic, physical health, or personal integrity.
Falling for the white supremacist approach advocated by the same old creaking accordion of embittered white racists on Substack is not a worthy answer.
The American White Nationalism that people like you and Chilton (a Canadian, like some of his fellow propagandists) proselytize so fervently for doesn't get rid of criminality. It reserves impunity, for one favored ethnicity and political ideology. A mono-ethnic political regime comprises the most corrupt form of Organized Crime, and its promises to restore some bygone mythos of top-dog status to co-ethnics is a con game. A pitch built on cheap flattery, to sell the soul for a perceived future material advantage, or by falling for the fear-mongering. It's an old scam.
The US was a multi-ethnic country from its founding, with the 1790 Census finding an 18% black population and an uncounted population of indigenous people and Hispanics (most of them in land yet to be settled by the expansionist Europeans arriving in the 17th century.)
While Substack spokesmodels like "Theophilus" Chilton are loath to get into the specific details of their Ulimate Solution, there's no way to achieve their mythic restorationist ideals of a White Nationalist US without the "ethnic cleansing" of perhaps 100 million Americans. If that agenda doesn't include Genocide with a capital G--then how else does anyone think it would be accomplished? Voluntary self-deportation?
Anyone who thinks that the United States of America has degenerated into such a hellhole that the only solution is Ethnic Cleansing of the nonwhite population is either delusional, or they're trying to manipulate that enormous Internet audience that lives most of their lives in Screen Fantasyland.
I know of no mature White Nationalist who thinks that removing non-Whites from designated White spaces is a panacea for all the problems that have plagued humanity from the dawn of history.
The point is to arrive at a political-economic-semiotic conditions where Whites are solving problems for Whites in the interest of Whites.
'Impunity' is part of any political-economy of any scope or scale. It's a question of managing it. However, if 'impunity' is a White vs White conflict, then it gets resolved differently than if non-Whites are involved.
As for 'ethnic cleansing', I love a good racial revenge fantasy as much as the next person (including darkies). However, if you think that Whites can forever have their interests *as White people* subsumed under some 'greater good' nonsense where the 'greater good' never actually gets around to benefiting Whites, then I think you're living in 'Screen Fantasyland'.
The fact that the US was 'multi-ethnic' is one of those con-games that anti-Whites like yourself like to run when you think no-one is the wiser. The 'multi-ethnic' character of North America was almost entirely White. But, more importantly, there's the quest of 'Why does it matter what the ethnic composition of North America was before the establishment of the USA?'
Why should Whites be yoked to a specific demographic arrangement that benefits non-Whites?
The fundamental problem of all 'multi-racial' arguments is that they are entirely tribal arguments.
Why does 'multi-racial' equal 'morally superior'?
Who says?
I'm not some right-winger who thinks that 'tradition' and 'history' are *justifications*. All that matters is power. If you have it, you can make things happen. If you don't, you either generate the conditions to acquire power or you suffer the consequences of powerlessness.
You think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should 'suffer the consequences'.
I think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should grow their power in every way possible until such time as it can be exercised in a productive way to achieve ends that are *productive for Whites* regardless of whether they benefit (or harm) non-Whites.
This is no different than what jews or darkies advocate for their own tribes.
And once the process of tribalization starts with Whites, I don't think it can be stopped, not peacefully, at least.
What matters for Whites is the future, not some set of guilt-inducing ideas about 'indigenous people' and 'hispanics'.
Whites need to respect their interests in preference to the interests of non-Whites.
If that takes 'impunity', then great.
If people like you yield and allow a peaceful transfer of authority and influence to Whites who care about Whites because they are White, then great.
If not, then we struggle.
And you can mock those of use involved in this struggle all you want. But the fact that you feel compelled to do so tells me that you're 'concerned' about the viability of our ideas. Your multi-racial, multi-ethnic world is untenable without the moral subjugation of Whites. White Nationalism is all its forms is the unraveling of that moral subjugation.
you just wasted more column inches on another risible attempt at mind-reading, this time my mind. With rhetorical table-pounding on the side. Including more of your Greatest Hits list of hypersensitive affronted grievances and paranoid scaremongering, to justify your Ultimate Solution Fantasy. Not that forcibly removing 100 million nonwhite people from the US—dead or alive—will be sufficient to secure your Utopia, of course. Thanks for the clarification.
I got my first multiculturalism lessons in the multiracial elementary school on-post at Fort Benning, Georgia. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 hadn’t even been passed when I started school there. The great American mosaic worked out great for me. Not exaggerating.. I know how fortunate I am to be born American. I don’t get the belligerent self-pity, the phony existential dread, the default to hostility, the loser script attitudes.
Thomas Sowell will tell you that he thought the US was the worst country in the world when he was a teenager, and then he joined the military and traveled overseas, and returned with the opinion that the US was the best country in the world. Because yeah, the US has a racist history, and riots and lynchings and revenge killings and volatile temperaments—but practically every other society has that history, too, only worse. Around the world people living in societies where they’ve been at their neighbors throats for centuries, and massacres continue to this day. But when I lived in Sacramento between 1985 and 2005, it was more diverse than anywhere, and a similar level of hostility just wasn’t happening.*
Meanwhile, Hamburger, I haven’t read anything by you that indicates that you’ve had any more sustained acquaintance with nonwhite individuals than what’s offered in the continually curated propaganda video clip selections—”Detroit Is Crap”, etc.—uploaded by white supremacists on social media platforms, for the purpose of Recruiting rookie teenagers and stoking the Fear in embittered aging racists.. And also as clickbait to draw terminally immature nihilists, only in it for the lulz. You know, Neofash High Culture. That niche market.
But I just can’t get to do it. Despite realizing that it’s a no-brainer hustle. the Internet enables building an unending archive of crimes and atrocities from all over the country. Doomscrolling wasn’t possible in the Before Time. These days, Everything is presented on the Web as if it happened right next door.
*I think that it makes a difference that practically everyone in the US is from Somewhere Else. And there is no one National Ethnic Identity in the US, officially or unofficially. For the indigenous, that ship has sailed; anyway, that population was never a monolith. Really, as if. As for myself, I’m of early settler heritage, half PA German and ½ Massachusetts English, and I dig the skin I’m in, okay. But I’m not going to be all phony “ethno-nationalist” about it. The entire Mythos of America as White Ethnostate Project is a confabulation, and one I find disgusting and offensive.
But the US example does not exactly map flawlessly on to European nations with an entirely different history, and facing some pressures different than the US, including more serious challenges. The American example has limited utility. That’s for the locals to work out for themselves. Which is not to say that I don’t notice the presence of Aryan Northern-Western European White Supremacy bidding for influence in the conversations about the challenges of immigration. Opportunists. I deplore it there as I do here in the US. But I don’t just read New Evropa, I read Bruce Bawer. I can also read demographic metrics—not “future projections”, but the actual number count of newcomers on the ground. I don’t find any benefit to holding ‘luxury beliefs’ about the situation.
I guess you learned a new non-argumentative attack called ‘mind-reading’. I’m not reading your mind. I’m interpreting your words. If you find my interpretation incorrect, the proper response is to explain how I’ve misinterpreted you. What you don’t do is complain about the fact that you’re being criticized and pretend that somehow your feelings on the matter constitute an argument or evidence. They don’t.
Is ‘table-pounding’ another new phrase you used to attack the person rather than the argument? That’s not going to work.
As for removing 100 million non-Whites from White spaces, that’s entirely doable. And you know it. You just don’t like the idea.
Prior to the introduction of anti-White legislation, non-Whites access to White spaces was controlled and, consequently, limited. And that state of affairs can - and will - return. It’s only natural that Whites band together against anti-Whites. You just don’t like it.
"once the process of tribalization starts with Whites, I don't think it can be stopped, not peacefully, at least."
That's comical, the way you use the words "race" and "tribe" as synonyms, and then go on to apply them interchangeably to "Whites."
Technically, "race" is a term used in population biology, for unmixed populations. So Klamath River coho salmon and Kootenai River coho salmon are two different "races."
There are a few cases where that definition might be said to apply to human populations. Most of them lost that level of signature genomic similarity long ago.
As originally misapplied to humans, the taxonomy outlined four divisions--the small population known as Australioids, and then the big three: Mongoloid, Negroid, and Caucasian. None of them pure populations, as found when tagged by race in population biology studies. That's the original concept of "race" I learned as a schoolboy, though.
One of the weird parts since I first learned about it is that the Caucasian Race included South Asians and Arabs! Most educated Americans my age learned it that way. Only recently have Americans taken to viewing South Asians and Arabs as members of an entirely different race from Europeans. American physical anthropology textbooks and school books from the 1940s up to at least the 1970s classified subcontinental Indians as Caucasians. Darker skin, to be sure, but their inclusion in that broad category was clear. Moreover, I never knew of anyone quarreling with that inclusion, or viewing it as anything to worry about.
So the concept of "race" as a applied to humans is awfully elastic, and seldom with any relevance to the term as originally defined for the purpose of population biology taxonomy.
But the semantic confusion of that is nothing, compared to the way you manipulate the word "tribe."
"White" is not a Tribe. Neither is "Indigenous people." Mohawk is a Tribe. Mandan is a Tribe. Sammi is a Tribe. Dane is a Tribe. Tribes are a cultural distinction, not defined by Phenotypical Determinism just because you said so.
"if you think that Whites can forever have their interests *as White people* subsumed under some 'greater good' nonsense where the 'greater good' never actually gets around to benefiting Whites, then I think you're living in 'Screen Fantasyland'."
Oh-kayy. Having twisted the Anglo-American judicial ideal of equal rights under the law for all people into a Myth of Oppression of White People, you then go on to imply that only someone raised in Screen Fantasyland--presumably including myself--could imagine that the facts of history prove any other result.
I'm on firm ground in invoking Brandolini's Law there. I don't have all day.
"Is ‘table-pounding’ another new phrase you used to attack the person rather than the argument?"
Table-pounding refers to any rhetorical mode that demands assent simply on the basis that it's repeated. As with yourself, repeatedly making claims about your one-note obsession as Truisms.
"The fact that the US was 'multi-ethnic' is one of those con-games that anti-Whites like yourself like to run when you think no-one is the wiser. The 'multi-ethnic' character of North America was almost entirely White."
Brandolini's Law works for that statement, too. But I'll make a few introductory points of refutation. Check out any gallery that features an exhibit of paintings from the American colonial era. You'll find black people represented. Read American literature, authors like Herman Melville. Admit that in an era when Oratory was considered an art form and a popular live entertainment, Frederick Douglass was a top draw. Understand that minstrel shows emerged from intercultural contacts that went in both directions, ultimately more subversive of White Supremacy than reinforcing it. Know that an accurate representation of the 19th century West would need to feature a lot more black and 'mestizo' cowboys and ranch hands than are found in the era of Classic Western movies. And also Arab tamale sellers and grocers, and Jewish peddlers. Know that the two ethnic groups tasked with blasting tunnels through the Rockies with dynamite were the Irish and the Chinese. Realize that one of the biggest rodeo stars at the turn of the century was black. Know that Japanese American gardeners made the floral industry boom in Arizona and California. Recall who invented the trap drum kit; not Europeans. Know how jazz music started, by black bands playing dance tunes on riverboat tours for white and sometimes mixed audiences. Acknowledge that African American culture subsequently influenced every form of popular American music so strongly that none of them would exist without that input--not jazz, or blues, or country, or bluegrass, or rock'n'roll, or R&B.
"You think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should 'suffer the consequences'."
Ah, there it is again--White Supremacist Racism, rebranded as justice movement for Oppressed White People!
And there you are, reading my mind again, to suit your twisted framing--"...suffer the consequences"? Say what?
"I think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should grow their power in every way possible until such time as it can be exercised in a productive way to achieve ends that are *productive for Whites* regardless of whether they benefit (or harm) non-Whites."
The unstated premise is, of course, that human existence on the planet can only be considered as a Zero-Sum game. Dumbed-down Darwin for Sociopaths. The McNietzschean Mythos. Which is how you're incapable of viewing the notion of a multiracial planet as anything other than a Loss, for the White Man of your bizarre sci-fi pulp fiction fantasy.
"Why does 'multi-racial' equal 'morally superior'?"
Because the alternative requires the Eradication of every "competing tribe" on the planet, that's why. Of course, a few intermediary steps are required: the assertion of total control over the Competitors; then, the Territorial Eviction of them all from favored lands and Confinement on the remainder. Then the Eradication can begin.
Climb down on that, if you feel you must. But that's where the logic leads. Especially once the alternative position of "getting along" is ruled out as Sedition, on the order of the Champions of White Liberation. ( "It's a Justice Movement, don't you see? Anything less than a White Man calling 100% of the shots signifies Defeat! The Confederacy was just getting started!" [mouthfroth] )
It doesn't work (except for the 8 dummies who like your comment) do you believe that all "white westerners" are the same and thus "racial aliens" do not deserve what white people get?
You are seriously sick in the head.
I do not believe that 'migrants' should be allowed in any country except by invitation.
I believe that all non-legal migrants in every country should be repatriated.
My point which you clearly are incapable of reading or comprehending, was that the article portrayed the migrants as inferior (as does your comment) and that those people who may be in severe economic difficulties through no fault of their own, are morally wrong to try to better themselves.
There is an economic catastrophe coming to all the western countries, caused by and led by the USA.
“In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.”
— Rudiger Dornbusch
I take no satisfaction in joining the opinion of all the top economists when forecasting the demise of western economies. The rest of the world has been forced to provide their products and labour to the west, on credit all $37 trillion credit, for 200 years. Americans take great pride in throwing off the English in 1766, but then proceeded to do exactly the same to all other countries.
2025 will be remembered as the world's war of independence, and the US thrown out of world trade.
No more credit. Pay back what is already borrowed. In future no more credit,
and America sinks into oblivion as they have no products or resources that cannot be obtained more cheaply from other countries.
I'm not interested in the 'inferiority' of non-White immigrants. It's not relevant to my position. My position is that (a) White countries should stay White and (b) non-Whites should not be permitted positions of power and influence in White countries.
If non-White immigrants are so great, they can get their homelands in order. That's what Whites are trying to do now in the West, but people like you side with non-Whites rather than Whites in what can only be called 'resentment colonialism'.
You are entitled to your 'position' no matter how ridiculous.
You clearly have not been exposed to any culture or society other than 'red neck' USA.
Africa is becoming a group of societies that are developing (in fact redeveloping) their own civilization. Like China they have different values to the west, China is establishing Confucianism again after abandoning it for 200 years of 'soi' westernism. Africa is returning to tribalism and it will take another 100 years to get rid of the European false division of land and resources and let language and culture determine the boundaries of power.
Kuwait has the most pleasant society in which to live, unless you feel that eating pork and getting drunk is important to your lifestyle.
You conflate being White with some set of universal 'white' values, behaviours and abilities. You are a fool. Bulgarians are nothing like Norwegians, who are only marginally like Canadians and nothing like New Yorkers.
As I said, you are entitled to your 'position' no matter how ridiculous
'Ridiculous' is not an argument. I have no grievance with Africans in Africa or Chinese in China.
And, honestly, I don't care about Kuwait. If you want to live there, do so. If you're going to live in Europe or North America, my goal is to see to it that White interests come before your anti-White attitudes.
As for 'conflating being White with some set of universal 'white' values...etc' I'd say that's fair. Whites are different from non-Whites in ways that matter to Whites when confronted with non-Whites.
As for the differences between Bulgarians, Norwegians, etc. I never said that different White populations aren't different from each other in ways that are interesting and valuable. What I'm saying is that in order to preserve those different and value White ethnicities, Whites need pan-European White Nationalism to resist non-Whites and anti-Whites.
I am not arguing with you, merely saying that you are ignorant and wrong.
There is no universal or even acceptable "white" society or values that is shared by all whites, just as there is no universal Black set of values.
I have much more in common with Arabic and Chinese values than with American. I have much in common with African social goals and values.
I actually have lived and worked in these societies and understand the values and goals. America "Calvinist" values has infected the world with materialism and greed, fortunately that culture is dying and will soon be no more.
It is pointless continuing this thread as we will never see the world from the same view as we have completely different values.. Fortunately history has a way of deciding whether bullying and greed overcomes co-operation and conscience.
The 'white' west will decline and fall probably within the next 10 years.
BRICS+ and the Global south will gain ascendance and the standards of living will overtake the west by a large margin. Not measured in the number of Cadillacs or the size of the TV screen, but in the health and happiness of the people.
We're hardly in trouble mate. The American economy is still blowing up, but Americans are tired of supporting losers in countries like yours who surrended everything your ancestors died for and are still whining. Twice we saved your sorry asses, but never again.
1) Granada (because the three [3] policemen went fishing that afternoon and there was nobody to tell you to F off)
2) .. There is no 2.
You have lost every 'war' you ever engaged in.
WW1 (1914-1918)the US waited, selling weapons to both sides, until it was clear that Germany was defeated and had to retreat and then, in 1917 suddenly decided that Germany was bad and the US sent a few 'soldiers' the plunder what was left of France, Belgium and Germany.
Military Deaths ; British 960,000 - French 1,100,000, Russia 2,100,000, USA 53,000 [ie 0.1% of all Allied deaths] Total 6,000,000. The USA didn't do shit.
-
WW2, 1939 - 1945 The USA waited until 1943 before putting troops into the war against Germany. They supported both sides [again] until the Russians defeated Germany and forced them to retreat then only, once the war was clearly won by the 'allies' did the US send troops. In the war against Japan, more than 90% of the Japanese army was on the mainland and less than 10% on the islands. Britain [India} beat the Japanese in Burma and Thailand, and the Chinese [ primarily Mao's communist army] beat them in mainland China and Mongolia. The USA fought and took some meaningless islands except that the US air force needed them to bomb the crap out of civilians and destroy Kyoto and Tokyo.
Military deaths : Japan 2,200,000 - Germany 5,000,000 - Russia 11,000,000 - UK 380,000 - USA 250,000 Europe + 150,000 Japan/Asia
Again USA waited until the outcome was certain and then jumped in on the winning side to plunder the losers.
Every other war Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq the USA had it's ass handed to them. Yes they bombed the crap out of everything and the MIC made huge profits, but on the ground the USA is less than useless.
Hollywood shows you all as "heroes" saving the planet in fact you are cowards, bullies and bandits who only prey on the weak and join in stealing from the defeated.
-
“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”
― : D. Butler, War is a Racket: The Antiwar Classic by America's Most Decorated Soldier
-
"The American is marked, in fact, by precisely the habits of mind and act that one would look for in a man insatiably ambitious and yet incurably fearful, to wit, the habits, on the one hand, of unpleasant assertiveness, of somewhat boisterous braggardism, of incessant pushing, and, on the other hand, of conformity, caution and subservience. He is forever talking of his rights as if he stood ready to defend them with his last drop of blood, and forever yielding them up at the first demand. "
George Jean Nathan and H.L. Mencken, The American Credo, 1920
-
Good luck when you have all credit cut off and you are all starving.
White America didn't lose the war with Mexico or the war against the Indians. Sadly, Whites fought multiple wars amongst themselves in North America, but in those White America did pretty well.
There are also historical examples of why massive immigration is a bad idea. Such as:
In 372 AD, the Romans granted asylum to hundreds of thousands of refugees. They were legitimate refugees, not just "economic migrants" -- they were fleeing the westward advance of the Huns, who already had crushed the Ostrogoths, leaving widespread slaughter in their wake. The Romans allowed them to cross the Danube to seek the protection of the Roman Empire.
That group of refugees is known today as the Visigoths.
Soon after they crossed the Danube, they started to occasionally raid a Roman town. Then more and more often, till it became constant.
In 378 AD, the main body of the Goths forced the line of the Balkans, making it almost to Adrianople, where they met Emperor Valens leading a Roman army of 60,000 men. It was the worst Roman defeat since Cannae. More than 40,000 lay dead on the field, including the Emperor, The Grand Masters of the Infantry and Cavalry, the Count of the Palace, and 35 corps commanders.
17 years later, Alaric the Goth ruled the north, raiding wherever he pleased.
38 years after the refugees crossed the Danube, Alaric sacked Rome.
Of course, I’m sure today’s leftist ancestors were saying they did the right thing as they were being raped and slaughtered. It would have been inhumane to turn them away! Very intolerant!
I suspect things are beginning to change. The argument in favour of mass immigration from the third world has been disproven time and again. Many economic studies demonstrate the case against it. But it barely matters as every Western nation has a traditional media ruthlessly hostile to anti-immigration arguments, and especially pro-nationalist sentiment. The education sector is of course the grandfather of blank slate thinking, so they are no help and they are doing their best to inculcate these novel ideas in the young.
Alas, as with all left progressive ideas, their enemy is reality. Multiculturalism is bringing low trust, violence and the abuse of women with it. Our cities are becoming unsafe. Everything is in decline. To the horror of the media class none of it can be hidden. It is inherently visible. And it is obvious where much of the dysfunction emanates from.
I would dearly love to know what is going on in their minds. Do they believe we are all equal? Or is it pure Nietzschean ressentiment? An enduring hatred for all they see around them?
The ultimate promoters of mass immigration by non-Whites into the White West are those who benefit from low wages and the dilution of the franchise of White voters.
In other words, the ruling class.
The job of the 'cultural authorities' is to promote the interests of the ruling class. Their opinions are those that insure they paychecks.
Absolutely. Diversity is our strength being a key example. No rational analysis supports it. But its role is to remain a slogan not a statement of fact. And many among us love their slogans.
I still sense it is yet another example of poor foresight on the part of our betters. More than ever I believe white tribal consciousness is coming, something I would not have believed even a few years ago.
They want to produce a slave class now that their own societies have been rendered too egalitarian.
Too late for France and Britain, from what I've seen.
Nonsense. Both countries are resilient. Plus the imports are failing. It is not the paradise they were promised. It won't take much to repatriate them. It is the elites in each nation that ought to be worried.
I so hope you are correct in your assessment of this situation 👍
A country is not a territory. A country is a people.
A note to self on reading Macchiavelli considering what is merciful for a people,
"...I say that every prince ought to desire to be considered clement and not cruel. Nevertheless he ought to take care not to misuse this clemency. Cesare Borgia was considered cruel; notwithstanding, his cruelty reconciled the Romagna, unified it, and restored it to peace and loyalty. And if this be rightly considered, he will be seen to have been much more merciful than the Florentine people, who, to avoid a reputation for cruelty, permitted Pistoia to be destroyed. Therefore a prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies; for these are wont to injure the whole people, whilst those executions which originate with a prince offend the individual only."
I perceive feminism and female entitlement (and the attending pathologies - wokeness, safetyism, etc.) as the fundamental linchpin of our decline. Women and feminized organizations (mostly staffed and sometimes led by men, but feminized nonetheless) are making bad policy, ruining research and ignoring factors like social order, epistemological rigor, and productive incentives in favor of more emotional impulses. Even our news and films and research papers are hysterical and soft-headed now, in many cases. The excellent, the brave, and the independent are being systematically weeded out of institutions of power and knowing. This will be a hard thing for culture to change. It'll require courageous, discerning men, and sensible and loyal women. Do we have enough of them?
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/the-longhouse
My comment wasn't precise enough: feminist impulses of pathological empathy and emotional affiliation are the main contributor to the radically leftward shift of our immigration policies and discourse. Of course, activists and nonprofits have been the stormtroopers, but the average 'liberal' just wants to feel (and appear) like a nice person. It's that simple, and that silly. Feminine sensibilities...
Absolute hard agree. We do not discuss this enough. The feminization of the West. It is not just about women, as some are indeed sensible. Perhaps we should say the emasculation of the West instead.
Yes! They want to be seen as, and to think of themselves as, nice, so that they feel worthy of love and acceptance.
What the hell are we supposed to do about?? I honestly don’t think the white man cares anymore.. Fluoride and ultra processed foodies have rotted their minds. And the white women are useless. Sad situation.
And let’s not forget whites represent about 7 percent of the world’s population. Wonder where this number will be come 2030?
Almost all countries are in decline; all peoples. Modernity is demanding its price. The birthrate in China is now down to 1.1 child per woman; in South Korea it is 0.6.
It is the third world that will be hit hardest as their populations both decline and age. The technologically advanced West will do comparatively better.
Fluoride and processed foods probably are the culprit. Environmental factors of all sorts. But some resist.
Add to the list.
California politicians:
Can’t stop rampant crime.
Can’t stop homelessness.
Can’t stop wildfires.
Can’t build high speed rail.
And now:
Can’t stop rioting.
There is a difference between believing all humans have inherent dignity and all cultures are equally valuable. We can look at the outcomes of a culture in terms of human flourishing and advancement and determine whether the culture is net positive or net negative.
The claim that illegal immigration (or a “guest worker” program intended to legitimize them) is necessary to provide workers for relatively low-paying jobs that citizens are unwilling to take is tantamount to a justification for an American version of apartheid.
It is not intended to convince the freethinkers. It is a mechanism to accommodate the headline skimmers and it works. Most people do not enquire beyond the headlines and the idea provides a handy way for otherwise guilt-ridden midwits to sock it to the working classes they so hate while also appearing virtuous. It is impressive in its own way how well it works despite resting on very flimsy foundations.
A quote from this essay:
"people who are in places they don’t belong, acting like they’re entitled to things that don’t belong to them, and violently resisting when clear-minded people try to set things back into order."
All this can be applied to western colonizers in last five hundred years. Combine that with low birthrate, remember that there are jobs that nowadays only immigrants would do... What else was to be expected?
You didn’t get the point. White colonizers built things, built entire nations and cities, and sent men to the moon. The vast majority of 3rd world immigrants aren’t capable of building anything. They’re not even capable of maintaining what is there. They consume and work in low-skill jobs. That’s it.
William Pitt the Younger allegedly said that in the colonies, nothing more advanced than a horseshoe must be produced. By the colonies, he meant North American colonies.
Colonies were prevented from developing industry and high education. Deliberately.
We were subjected to such a treatment in Serbia too, after 1999. So I know exactly what is like to be colonized. And I remember what is like not to be.
And I'm not happy about what is going on. But I can not un-remember how Muslims from Bosnia and Kosovo were good guys, and we, white christians, were bed ones.
( A lot of mistakes, sorry for that )
This is a good essay... right up to rhe point you shifted into left-vs-right-ism.
Anti-Whiteism isn't a left-vs-right matter. And you know this. Is the Cato Institute 'left'? What about the Chamber of Commerce? Are they 'progressive'? Or Catholic Social Services? How about the American Jewish Congress or HIAS?
Hate bait always makes for guaranteed engagement.
Yet the world keeps turning.
'Hate' is a shallow word used by those with an even shallower political perspective.
🤔
Very well argued, what's worse is that because we're too busy babysitting people who ought to be confined to their own homes and were never meant to live amongst us we can't finance beautiful things like art, culture and proper societies.
We need them out, and we need them out now. Western Civilizations are beauty, all of them. Each country in Europe is unique. They are hardly any of them alike. It is the beautiful thing about us. But our societies were built for us, not for those who hate us.
I doubt Kneeling Nancy or the people who vote for her and her ilk have the slightest sense of guilt. These people are virtue signaling their moral superiority over the haters, bigots, sexists, homophobes, etc. The squares - it's also a class war waged by bobos (bourgeois bohemians). It's why they are so obsessed with Hitiler, a kind of satan in human form. And the fanatical obsession with sexually mutilating children. And gay marriage.
Liberals are merely playing a cat and mouse game. When it comes to their property values, their children (especially their education), and their own personal safety and health, they suddenly become very conservative. It's why a house in Upper Caucasia, NW, DC, costs twice as much as a similar one in vibrant SE quadrant, the same distance to the federal triangle.
I think they do have guilt. And the fact that some people don't have guilt makes them hate those people.
Guilt implies being held morally accountable for some sort of crime or sin. Scandinavians never had black slaves or colonies and they're just as bad. But they do share the same Enlightenment belief in human rights. And that is the mechanism used to intimidate western European people. We have a sacred-victim, entitled parasite culture. It's the Achilles heal of western men and why they are so weak and cowardly, even towards their women.
Sometimes the truth is harsh and ugly, but it is still the truth.
I suppose you threw the dog over the wall into the neighbour's yard and let them take care of it. Or did you just shoot it?
Whilst your moral superiority makes you feel so superior, I want you to think what it will be like in 5-10 years time. Trump is bringing the economic destruction of the US forward by 10 - 20 years. The whole world has just given the US a big "fuck off" we don't need you. Except of course those great countries Israel and Ukraine, who continue to beg for money.
-
Because only a tiny fraction of people are really productive and not mere service people, as compared with the 1920s, the coming depression will make 1929 look like a Sunday picnic.
Your 'well' paid job has been destroyed. It has gone either overseas or to a robot.
You have no income and no fall back, everyone is in the same position.
With no food (the farmers and distribution went out of business too) and no home (the banks took it, just like the millions of homes they took in 2008, but on steroids) no prospect of a job as no one has the money to employ you, what do you think is going to happen?
That may be the reality that those millions of migrants are facing now and you will face in the near future..
-
My mother and father grew up in the East London slums of WW1, I was born in the East London ruins just after WW2. We all moved out and up.
The first thought drilled into me when seeing those less fortunate in any respect, was "There, but for the grace of God, go I."
When I see the Americans crying I find it very hard not to think "It serves you right, you earned it." Ask Israel or Ukraine for help and see what response you get. The rest of the world will merely turn their backs on you.
You're an anti-White sadist. So, of course, you think Whites deserve punishment for the sin of being White.
We're not all the same. That's the point.
These imported racial aliens are not the solution to any problem the working class needs solved. They all must go. And if they're more important to you than White Westerner, then you should go with them.
Where's the "anti-white sadism" in PJ London's comment? You're using your entire comment in an attempt to read the mind of someone else. Taking for granted that your guesses are so flawlessly valid that every "high-IQ" reader must agree with them, because of course.
That's basically the same game that 'Chilton' is playing in this post, with bold assertions that tacitly demand the reader that them as Truisms. So no support is needed, other than running the same Highlight Reel of negativity connected with the immigrant population as if the entire US were aflame, as if that's the characteristic experience of contemporary America with its immigrant population--especially its "black and brown" immigrant population.
To make my position on illegal immigration into the US clear: 10 million between 2021 and 2025 was many too many, and an inexcusable failure of border security. As long as the nation-state game is the basis of every polity on the planet, nations have a duty to control immigrant inflows and secure borders.
But no one should confuse the position I just stated with a pledge of allegiance to Chilton's militant racist agitprop. And while I don't think I have any grounds to speak for any European nation, in the US, a Multiracial Coalition is going to be required in order to stop the slide into the complete absence of behavior standards, or insanely ordered notions that parcel out advantages on the basis of Ascribed status rather than Achieved status.
Contrary to the appeal to narcissistic self-flattery found in the Header Meme for this post, white people aren't the only human beings who know how to act. And white adults--at both "left" and "right" extremes of dysfunction--are entirely capable of whining like entitled toddlers and yearning for dependence on an authoritarian figure to run their lives, while doing nothing to improve their learning, skill set, talents, work ethic, physical health, or personal integrity.
Falling for the white supremacist approach advocated by the same old creaking accordion of embittered white racists on Substack is not a worthy answer.
The American White Nationalism that people like you and Chilton (a Canadian, like some of his fellow propagandists) proselytize so fervently for doesn't get rid of criminality. It reserves impunity, for one favored ethnicity and political ideology. A mono-ethnic political regime comprises the most corrupt form of Organized Crime, and its promises to restore some bygone mythos of top-dog status to co-ethnics is a con game. A pitch built on cheap flattery, to sell the soul for a perceived future material advantage, or by falling for the fear-mongering. It's an old scam.
The US was a multi-ethnic country from its founding, with the 1790 Census finding an 18% black population and an uncounted population of indigenous people and Hispanics (most of them in land yet to be settled by the expansionist Europeans arriving in the 17th century.)
While Substack spokesmodels like "Theophilus" Chilton are loath to get into the specific details of their Ulimate Solution, there's no way to achieve their mythic restorationist ideals of a White Nationalist US without the "ethnic cleansing" of perhaps 100 million Americans. If that agenda doesn't include Genocide with a capital G--then how else does anyone think it would be accomplished? Voluntary self-deportation?
Anyone who thinks that the United States of America has degenerated into such a hellhole that the only solution is Ethnic Cleansing of the nonwhite population is either delusional, or they're trying to manipulate that enormous Internet audience that lives most of their lives in Screen Fantasyland.
I know of no mature White Nationalist who thinks that removing non-Whites from designated White spaces is a panacea for all the problems that have plagued humanity from the dawn of history.
The point is to arrive at a political-economic-semiotic conditions where Whites are solving problems for Whites in the interest of Whites.
'Impunity' is part of any political-economy of any scope or scale. It's a question of managing it. However, if 'impunity' is a White vs White conflict, then it gets resolved differently than if non-Whites are involved.
As for 'ethnic cleansing', I love a good racial revenge fantasy as much as the next person (including darkies). However, if you think that Whites can forever have their interests *as White people* subsumed under some 'greater good' nonsense where the 'greater good' never actually gets around to benefiting Whites, then I think you're living in 'Screen Fantasyland'.
The fact that the US was 'multi-ethnic' is one of those con-games that anti-Whites like yourself like to run when you think no-one is the wiser. The 'multi-ethnic' character of North America was almost entirely White. But, more importantly, there's the quest of 'Why does it matter what the ethnic composition of North America was before the establishment of the USA?'
Why should Whites be yoked to a specific demographic arrangement that benefits non-Whites?
The fundamental problem of all 'multi-racial' arguments is that they are entirely tribal arguments.
Why does 'multi-racial' equal 'morally superior'?
Who says?
I'm not some right-winger who thinks that 'tradition' and 'history' are *justifications*. All that matters is power. If you have it, you can make things happen. If you don't, you either generate the conditions to acquire power or you suffer the consequences of powerlessness.
You think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should 'suffer the consequences'.
I think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should grow their power in every way possible until such time as it can be exercised in a productive way to achieve ends that are *productive for Whites* regardless of whether they benefit (or harm) non-Whites.
This is no different than what jews or darkies advocate for their own tribes.
And once the process of tribalization starts with Whites, I don't think it can be stopped, not peacefully, at least.
What matters for Whites is the future, not some set of guilt-inducing ideas about 'indigenous people' and 'hispanics'.
Whites need to respect their interests in preference to the interests of non-Whites.
If that takes 'impunity', then great.
If people like you yield and allow a peaceful transfer of authority and influence to Whites who care about Whites because they are White, then great.
If not, then we struggle.
And you can mock those of use involved in this struggle all you want. But the fact that you feel compelled to do so tells me that you're 'concerned' about the viability of our ideas. Your multi-racial, multi-ethnic world is untenable without the moral subjugation of Whites. White Nationalism is all its forms is the unraveling of that moral subjugation.
you just wasted more column inches on another risible attempt at mind-reading, this time my mind. With rhetorical table-pounding on the side. Including more of your Greatest Hits list of hypersensitive affronted grievances and paranoid scaremongering, to justify your Ultimate Solution Fantasy. Not that forcibly removing 100 million nonwhite people from the US—dead or alive—will be sufficient to secure your Utopia, of course. Thanks for the clarification.
I got my first multiculturalism lessons in the multiracial elementary school on-post at Fort Benning, Georgia. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 hadn’t even been passed when I started school there. The great American mosaic worked out great for me. Not exaggerating.. I know how fortunate I am to be born American. I don’t get the belligerent self-pity, the phony existential dread, the default to hostility, the loser script attitudes.
Thomas Sowell will tell you that he thought the US was the worst country in the world when he was a teenager, and then he joined the military and traveled overseas, and returned with the opinion that the US was the best country in the world. Because yeah, the US has a racist history, and riots and lynchings and revenge killings and volatile temperaments—but practically every other society has that history, too, only worse. Around the world people living in societies where they’ve been at their neighbors throats for centuries, and massacres continue to this day. But when I lived in Sacramento between 1985 and 2005, it was more diverse than anywhere, and a similar level of hostility just wasn’t happening.*
Meanwhile, Hamburger, I haven’t read anything by you that indicates that you’ve had any more sustained acquaintance with nonwhite individuals than what’s offered in the continually curated propaganda video clip selections—”Detroit Is Crap”, etc.—uploaded by white supremacists on social media platforms, for the purpose of Recruiting rookie teenagers and stoking the Fear in embittered aging racists.. And also as clickbait to draw terminally immature nihilists, only in it for the lulz. You know, Neofash High Culture. That niche market.
I could curate stories like those, too. Like the one I linked https://fox8.com/news/abhorrent-akron-woman-sentenced-for-raping-infant/
But I just can’t get to do it. Despite realizing that it’s a no-brainer hustle. the Internet enables building an unending archive of crimes and atrocities from all over the country. Doomscrolling wasn’t possible in the Before Time. These days, Everything is presented on the Web as if it happened right next door.
*I think that it makes a difference that practically everyone in the US is from Somewhere Else. And there is no one National Ethnic Identity in the US, officially or unofficially. For the indigenous, that ship has sailed; anyway, that population was never a monolith. Really, as if. As for myself, I’m of early settler heritage, half PA German and ½ Massachusetts English, and I dig the skin I’m in, okay. But I’m not going to be all phony “ethno-nationalist” about it. The entire Mythos of America as White Ethnostate Project is a confabulation, and one I find disgusting and offensive.
But the US example does not exactly map flawlessly on to European nations with an entirely different history, and facing some pressures different than the US, including more serious challenges. The American example has limited utility. That’s for the locals to work out for themselves. Which is not to say that I don’t notice the presence of Aryan Northern-Western European White Supremacy bidding for influence in the conversations about the challenges of immigration. Opportunists. I deplore it there as I do here in the US. But I don’t just read New Evropa, I read Bruce Bawer. I can also read demographic metrics—not “future projections”, but the actual number count of newcomers on the ground. I don’t find any benefit to holding ‘luxury beliefs’ about the situation.
I guess you learned a new non-argumentative attack called ‘mind-reading’. I’m not reading your mind. I’m interpreting your words. If you find my interpretation incorrect, the proper response is to explain how I’ve misinterpreted you. What you don’t do is complain about the fact that you’re being criticized and pretend that somehow your feelings on the matter constitute an argument or evidence. They don’t.
Is ‘table-pounding’ another new phrase you used to attack the person rather than the argument? That’s not going to work.
As for removing 100 million non-Whites from White spaces, that’s entirely doable. And you know it. You just don’t like the idea.
Prior to the introduction of anti-White legislation, non-Whites access to White spaces was controlled and, consequently, limited. And that state of affairs can - and will - return. It’s only natural that Whites band together against anti-Whites. You just don’t like it.
"once the process of tribalization starts with Whites, I don't think it can be stopped, not peacefully, at least."
That's comical, the way you use the words "race" and "tribe" as synonyms, and then go on to apply them interchangeably to "Whites."
Technically, "race" is a term used in population biology, for unmixed populations. So Klamath River coho salmon and Kootenai River coho salmon are two different "races."
There are a few cases where that definition might be said to apply to human populations. Most of them lost that level of signature genomic similarity long ago.
As originally misapplied to humans, the taxonomy outlined four divisions--the small population known as Australioids, and then the big three: Mongoloid, Negroid, and Caucasian. None of them pure populations, as found when tagged by race in population biology studies. That's the original concept of "race" I learned as a schoolboy, though.
One of the weird parts since I first learned about it is that the Caucasian Race included South Asians and Arabs! Most educated Americans my age learned it that way. Only recently have Americans taken to viewing South Asians and Arabs as members of an entirely different race from Europeans. American physical anthropology textbooks and school books from the 1940s up to at least the 1970s classified subcontinental Indians as Caucasians. Darker skin, to be sure, but their inclusion in that broad category was clear. Moreover, I never knew of anyone quarreling with that inclusion, or viewing it as anything to worry about.
So the concept of "race" as a applied to humans is awfully elastic, and seldom with any relevance to the term as originally defined for the purpose of population biology taxonomy.
But the semantic confusion of that is nothing, compared to the way you manipulate the word "tribe."
"White" is not a Tribe. Neither is "Indigenous people." Mohawk is a Tribe. Mandan is a Tribe. Sammi is a Tribe. Dane is a Tribe. Tribes are a cultural distinction, not defined by Phenotypical Determinism just because you said so.
"if you think that Whites can forever have their interests *as White people* subsumed under some 'greater good' nonsense where the 'greater good' never actually gets around to benefiting Whites, then I think you're living in 'Screen Fantasyland'."
Oh-kayy. Having twisted the Anglo-American judicial ideal of equal rights under the law for all people into a Myth of Oppression of White People, you then go on to imply that only someone raised in Screen Fantasyland--presumably including myself--could imagine that the facts of history prove any other result.
I'm on firm ground in invoking Brandolini's Law there. I don't have all day.
"Is ‘table-pounding’ another new phrase you used to attack the person rather than the argument?"
Table-pounding refers to any rhetorical mode that demands assent simply on the basis that it's repeated. As with yourself, repeatedly making claims about your one-note obsession as Truisms.
"The fact that the US was 'multi-ethnic' is one of those con-games that anti-Whites like yourself like to run when you think no-one is the wiser. The 'multi-ethnic' character of North America was almost entirely White."
Brandolini's Law works for that statement, too. But I'll make a few introductory points of refutation. Check out any gallery that features an exhibit of paintings from the American colonial era. You'll find black people represented. Read American literature, authors like Herman Melville. Admit that in an era when Oratory was considered an art form and a popular live entertainment, Frederick Douglass was a top draw. Understand that minstrel shows emerged from intercultural contacts that went in both directions, ultimately more subversive of White Supremacy than reinforcing it. Know that an accurate representation of the 19th century West would need to feature a lot more black and 'mestizo' cowboys and ranch hands than are found in the era of Classic Western movies. And also Arab tamale sellers and grocers, and Jewish peddlers. Know that the two ethnic groups tasked with blasting tunnels through the Rockies with dynamite were the Irish and the Chinese. Realize that one of the biggest rodeo stars at the turn of the century was black. Know that Japanese American gardeners made the floral industry boom in Arizona and California. Recall who invented the trap drum kit; not Europeans. Know how jazz music started, by black bands playing dance tunes on riverboat tours for white and sometimes mixed audiences. Acknowledge that African American culture subsequently influenced every form of popular American music so strongly that none of them would exist without that input--not jazz, or blues, or country, or bluegrass, or rock'n'roll, or R&B.
"You think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should 'suffer the consequences'."
Ah, there it is again--White Supremacist Racism, rebranded as justice movement for Oppressed White People!
And there you are, reading my mind again, to suit your twisted framing--"...suffer the consequences"? Say what?
"I think Whites who care about Whites because they are White should grow their power in every way possible until such time as it can be exercised in a productive way to achieve ends that are *productive for Whites* regardless of whether they benefit (or harm) non-Whites."
The unstated premise is, of course, that human existence on the planet can only be considered as a Zero-Sum game. Dumbed-down Darwin for Sociopaths. The McNietzschean Mythos. Which is how you're incapable of viewing the notion of a multiracial planet as anything other than a Loss, for the White Man of your bizarre sci-fi pulp fiction fantasy.
"Why does 'multi-racial' equal 'morally superior'?"
Because the alternative requires the Eradication of every "competing tribe" on the planet, that's why. Of course, a few intermediary steps are required: the assertion of total control over the Competitors; then, the Territorial Eviction of them all from favored lands and Confinement on the remainder. Then the Eradication can begin.
Climb down on that, if you feel you must. But that's where the logic leads. Especially once the alternative position of "getting along" is ruled out as Sedition, on the order of the Champions of White Liberation. ( "It's a Justice Movement, don't you see? Anything less than a White Man calling 100% of the shots signifies Defeat! The Confederacy was just getting started!" [mouthfroth] )
Brilliant, play the race card.
It doesn't work (except for the 8 dummies who like your comment) do you believe that all "white westerners" are the same and thus "racial aliens" do not deserve what white people get?
You are seriously sick in the head.
I do not believe that 'migrants' should be allowed in any country except by invitation.
I believe that all non-legal migrants in every country should be repatriated.
My point which you clearly are incapable of reading or comprehending, was that the article portrayed the migrants as inferior (as does your comment) and that those people who may be in severe economic difficulties through no fault of their own, are morally wrong to try to better themselves.
There is an economic catastrophe coming to all the western countries, caused by and led by the USA.
“In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.”
— Rudiger Dornbusch
I take no satisfaction in joining the opinion of all the top economists when forecasting the demise of western economies. The rest of the world has been forced to provide their products and labour to the west, on credit all $37 trillion credit, for 200 years. Americans take great pride in throwing off the English in 1766, but then proceeded to do exactly the same to all other countries.
2025 will be remembered as the world's war of independence, and the US thrown out of world trade.
No more credit. Pay back what is already borrowed. In future no more credit,
and America sinks into oblivion as they have no products or resources that cannot be obtained more cheaply from other countries.
Enjoy your penury.
I'm not interested in the 'inferiority' of non-White immigrants. It's not relevant to my position. My position is that (a) White countries should stay White and (b) non-Whites should not be permitted positions of power and influence in White countries.
If non-White immigrants are so great, they can get their homelands in order. That's what Whites are trying to do now in the West, but people like you side with non-Whites rather than Whites in what can only be called 'resentment colonialism'.
You are entitled to your 'position' no matter how ridiculous.
You clearly have not been exposed to any culture or society other than 'red neck' USA.
Africa is becoming a group of societies that are developing (in fact redeveloping) their own civilization. Like China they have different values to the west, China is establishing Confucianism again after abandoning it for 200 years of 'soi' westernism. Africa is returning to tribalism and it will take another 100 years to get rid of the European false division of land and resources and let language and culture determine the boundaries of power.
Kuwait has the most pleasant society in which to live, unless you feel that eating pork and getting drunk is important to your lifestyle.
You conflate being White with some set of universal 'white' values, behaviours and abilities. You are a fool. Bulgarians are nothing like Norwegians, who are only marginally like Canadians and nothing like New Yorkers.
As I said, you are entitled to your 'position' no matter how ridiculous
'Ridiculous' is not an argument. I have no grievance with Africans in Africa or Chinese in China.
And, honestly, I don't care about Kuwait. If you want to live there, do so. If you're going to live in Europe or North America, my goal is to see to it that White interests come before your anti-White attitudes.
As for 'conflating being White with some set of universal 'white' values...etc' I'd say that's fair. Whites are different from non-Whites in ways that matter to Whites when confronted with non-Whites.
As for the differences between Bulgarians, Norwegians, etc. I never said that different White populations aren't different from each other in ways that are interesting and valuable. What I'm saying is that in order to preserve those different and value White ethnicities, Whites need pan-European White Nationalism to resist non-Whites and anti-Whites.
I am not arguing with you, merely saying that you are ignorant and wrong.
There is no universal or even acceptable "white" society or values that is shared by all whites, just as there is no universal Black set of values.
I have much more in common with Arabic and Chinese values than with American. I have much in common with African social goals and values.
I actually have lived and worked in these societies and understand the values and goals. America "Calvinist" values has infected the world with materialism and greed, fortunately that culture is dying and will soon be no more.
It is pointless continuing this thread as we will never see the world from the same view as we have completely different values.. Fortunately history has a way of deciding whether bullying and greed overcomes co-operation and conscience.
The 'white' west will decline and fall probably within the next 10 years.
BRICS+ and the Global south will gain ascendance and the standards of living will overtake the west by a large margin. Not measured in the number of Cadillacs or the size of the TV screen, but in the health and happiness of the people.
We're hardly in trouble mate. The American economy is still blowing up, but Americans are tired of supporting losers in countries like yours who surrended everything your ancestors died for and are still whining. Twice we saved your sorry asses, but never again.
Great American victories
1) Granada (because the three [3] policemen went fishing that afternoon and there was nobody to tell you to F off)
2) .. There is no 2.
You have lost every 'war' you ever engaged in.
WW1 (1914-1918)the US waited, selling weapons to both sides, until it was clear that Germany was defeated and had to retreat and then, in 1917 suddenly decided that Germany was bad and the US sent a few 'soldiers' the plunder what was left of France, Belgium and Germany.
Military Deaths ; British 960,000 - French 1,100,000, Russia 2,100,000, USA 53,000 [ie 0.1% of all Allied deaths] Total 6,000,000. The USA didn't do shit.
-
WW2, 1939 - 1945 The USA waited until 1943 before putting troops into the war against Germany. They supported both sides [again] until the Russians defeated Germany and forced them to retreat then only, once the war was clearly won by the 'allies' did the US send troops. In the war against Japan, more than 90% of the Japanese army was on the mainland and less than 10% on the islands. Britain [India} beat the Japanese in Burma and Thailand, and the Chinese [ primarily Mao's communist army] beat them in mainland China and Mongolia. The USA fought and took some meaningless islands except that the US air force needed them to bomb the crap out of civilians and destroy Kyoto and Tokyo.
Military deaths : Japan 2,200,000 - Germany 5,000,000 - Russia 11,000,000 - UK 380,000 - USA 250,000 Europe + 150,000 Japan/Asia
Again USA waited until the outcome was certain and then jumped in on the winning side to plunder the losers.
Every other war Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq the USA had it's ass handed to them. Yes they bombed the crap out of everything and the MIC made huge profits, but on the ground the USA is less than useless.
Hollywood shows you all as "heroes" saving the planet in fact you are cowards, bullies and bandits who only prey on the weak and join in stealing from the defeated.
-
“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”
― : D. Butler, War is a Racket: The Antiwar Classic by America's Most Decorated Soldier
-
"The American is marked, in fact, by precisely the habits of mind and act that one would look for in a man insatiably ambitious and yet incurably fearful, to wit, the habits, on the one hand, of unpleasant assertiveness, of somewhat boisterous braggardism, of incessant pushing, and, on the other hand, of conformity, caution and subservience. He is forever talking of his rights as if he stood ready to defend them with his last drop of blood, and forever yielding them up at the first demand. "
George Jean Nathan and H.L. Mencken, The American Credo, 1920
-
Good luck when you have all credit cut off and you are all starving.
White America didn't lose the war with Mexico or the war against the Indians. Sadly, Whites fought multiple wars amongst themselves in North America, but in those White America did pretty well.
There are also historical examples of why massive immigration is a bad idea. Such as:
In 372 AD, the Romans granted asylum to hundreds of thousands of refugees. They were legitimate refugees, not just "economic migrants" -- they were fleeing the westward advance of the Huns, who already had crushed the Ostrogoths, leaving widespread slaughter in their wake. The Romans allowed them to cross the Danube to seek the protection of the Roman Empire.
That group of refugees is known today as the Visigoths.
Soon after they crossed the Danube, they started to occasionally raid a Roman town. Then more and more often, till it became constant.
In 378 AD, the main body of the Goths forced the line of the Balkans, making it almost to Adrianople, where they met Emperor Valens leading a Roman army of 60,000 men. It was the worst Roman defeat since Cannae. More than 40,000 lay dead on the field, including the Emperor, The Grand Masters of the Infantry and Cavalry, the Count of the Palace, and 35 corps commanders.
17 years later, Alaric the Goth ruled the north, raiding wherever he pleased.
38 years after the refugees crossed the Danube, Alaric sacked Rome.
Of course, I’m sure today’s leftist ancestors were saying they did the right thing as they were being raped and slaughtered. It would have been inhumane to turn them away! Very intolerant!
Diversity + Proximity = War. Never forget that.