Saturday, February 11, 2017

Now let the ninth circuit enforce it

When the US discriminated against non-Jewish immigrants in the early nineties, the courts let it be because immigration is strictly the purview of the executive.

When the Clinton administration targeted Cubans for deportation (i.e. Elian Gonzalez), the courts let it be because immigration is strictly the purview of the executive.

When Arizona tried to enforce immigration laws that the Obama administration wouldn't, the courts ruled that Arizona had to stand down because immigration is strictly the purview of the executive.

Now that Trump is trying to institute a temporary immigration ban on selected countries, the courts are suddenly making up reasons why immigration is not the purview of the executive.

Writes Z-Man:
We have reached a point where it is heads they win, tails we lose. The game has been rigged to make reforming the system within the rules an impossibility. When a majority of the people favor a policy that the managerial class opposes, the policy gets hamstrung by the rules of the game. All of a sudden, the process is sacred. When the managerial class wants something for their masters, they change the rules so it either flies through or simply happens without anyone noticing. The process is not all that important.

All the blather about America being a nation of laws is just cover for the fact that ours is a lawless nation ruled by lawless men. An obvious example is the Ninth Circuit judges, who have fabricated a legal justification for throwing sand in the gears of a wildly popular executive order issued by President Trump. These are not men enforcing the law or respecting the laws. These are men who hold the law in contempt.
Who? Whom? The answers to these two questions are all you need to know to make sense of just about everything that happens in 21st century America.

The idea that the judiciary impartially rules strictly based on the legality of anything is woefully naive. These people are every bit as political as those we've elected in the other two branches of government, they're just not as accountable.

The Trump administration shouldn't defer to the ninth. Give them the Andrew Jackson treatment while flooding the field with similar executive orders. ICE is raiding in the belly of the beast, the ninth circuit be damned, and Trump is considering firing off redundant orders.

Speaking of the ninth, it includes 29 judgeships. What are the chances that at least a couple of these black robes have illegals working for them in some capacity, say as domestics or lawn care providers? Trump should have ICE stake these judges out and conduct a raid on the personal property of one of these creeps.

Parenthetically, there are eight countries on the temporary travel ban, not seven. South Sudan split from Sudan in 2011. One reason fake news isn't reporting the ban as applying to eight countries instead of seven is because then they'd have to admit that not all of the countries are Muslim--South Sudan is mostly Christian and animist, not Islamic. The other reason is that they want state fusion, not fission.


Black Death said...

I would like to see a constitutional amendment allowing any decision by any branch of the federal government to be overturned by a two-thirds vote of the state legislatures.

You're right - Washington has gotten too big and too powerful. The game is rigged.

Feryl said...

We, of the baby boomer generation, were raised to believe the America was always the good guy, riding in on the white horse to “save” the day for some unfortunate group. Ha, what a joke! Ask the Indian peoples out west how that’s worked out for them. Ask the interned Japanese in WWII. We have been sold a bill of goods a mile long and so many still believe the lies we’ve told ourselves as a culture. Ask the millions of “little brown people” who happen to live over OUR oil in some far off land. That’s a core issue for schools. It depends on one’s perspective as to what should be taught and how it should be taught. The classic line from Pontius Pilate, “What is truth?”. We can’t begin to agree on that so we shall remain deeply divided. Or Jack Nicholson’s famous, “You can’t handle the truth!”

It sucks that we're stuck with so many guilt-ridden Anglo/Celtic/French/German Boomers who don't have a clue how cutthroat and cynical other ethnics are. This especially goes for early Boomers who grew up in primarily white and comfortable Leave it to Beaver era conditions, giving them little to no experience with or images of non-white dysfunction. I'm not even sure Trump really grasps HBD that well; it's more that he's got the instinctive ability to guard against obviously destructive ideas (like vast Muslim immigration or BLM). For him it's about making America great, not about restoring traditional Western demographics that are the key (Ron Unz doesn't get it either, making frankly stupid analogies between the Catholic whites of yore and post 1965 3rd Worlders).

Late Boomers and Gen X-ers are less naive; unfortunately they wield far less power. Especially X-ers who are both small in number (particularly if we're talking the white cohort) and often fatalistic about evertyhing. What I've noticed too is that even when Boomers acknowledge how dysfunctional blacks are, for example, they typically won't go "there" as to why these things really happen. Bad culture, bad parenting, bad schools, welfare, whatever I blamed. In spite of the fact that sun people ALWAYS have the same problems in every time and place, though the exact degree may change.

Didja notice in the quote that the writer arrogantly says "we"? You know, there are some Boomers who don't buy into the blame white Westerners first self-guilt. People of other generations are never that presumptuous. It's more evidence that many Boomers inflate bubbles around their self-conception and worldviews; whatever one of them happens to believe on an issue it mysteriously takes on great strength by being driven by a mass of generation mates. In the increasingly Left-wing culture of the last 50 years, it's been memory holed that Boomers were MORE likely to support Vietnam fighting that elder generations. Then there's the Boomer folly of crediting themselves for all the great art of the 60's, when the Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, the Beatles, Elvis, and so on were born years before WW2 ended.

Audacious Epigone said...


David Brooks' column that Steve highlighted a week ago seems to encapsulate what you're talking about here. Yes, it's (((Brooks))) we're talking about but the Boomer narrative is a Jewish/WASP one anyway. American exceptionalism--and its domestic companion, Magic Dirt Theory--are Boomer beliefs. Xers and Millennials are more skeptical.

Giovanni Dannato said...

Boomers indulge in that kind of race virtue because some of them, as pointed out, are actually true believers.

Plenty of Xers and Millennials do it because it signals they can afford to send those signals. In other words they have enough wealth to segregate themselves and their families.
It's even a subtle way of flinging monkey poop at their lessers in the social hierarchy who are forced to deal with NAM dysfunction.
At root that's why SWPL condescension is especially enraging for the proletariat. Unfortunately for the SWPLs, they don't consciously understand what they're doing or the hatred and tension that is building up against them.

Audacious Epigone said...

Giovanni Dannato,

Exactly. That was especially apparent relative to other presidential elections. The racial distributions of the vote stayed consistent with other recent cycles. The big change, beyond the geographic realignment (although it's related) was that Trump gave up a chunk of six-figure whites and picked up a lot of five-figure whites.

Feryl said...

"A century of intelligence testing and other measures of educational accomplishment have shown nothing but enduring racial gaps. We’ve sunk more money into chasing the El Dorado of racial equality than any civilization has invested in any other project in the history of world. We sit back and let our blighted cities like Birmingham, Detroit, and Selma decline, depopulate and return to wilderness." From

A racial Eldorado. That's how we should describe the post WW2 mania for chasing the utopian dream of racial harmony and equity. It will always remain mythical. While other generations go with it just to get along, how many Boomers can face the fact that they fully bought into a con and subsequently insisted on jamming it down everyone's throats after they began to gain more control of academia, media, and bureaucracy in the mid-80's?

The cognitive dissonance of denying the causes of Sun People problems must be overwhelming. Boomers see the 3rd world-izing of the West and they can't process it's natural causes so they shout at everyone (including each other) about bad government, schools, parents, CEO's etc. being the source of our ills. They feel guilty about the racial seperatism of the pre 1960's, if for no other reason than how it infringed on individualism, not understanding that it was designed to make society peaceable and functional. Ya know, I think the hardcore individualism of Boomers is part of the problem. They'd like to think that every one is special, free to determine their destiny if various corrupting forces (bigotry, organized religion, big government, big business, etc.) don't stop us from seeing things through. How many realize that California public schools in the 70's were relatively safe, pleasant, and fit for earnest students? How many grasp why? It sure as hell wasn't because Cali had great politicians or teachers at the time.

Feryl said...

I'm sure we've heard too about the brain freezing in place. In their youth, 90% of white people born before 1965 lived in primarily white neighborhoods, attended primarily white schools, benefited from mostly white civil service, etc. They might hate manifestations of diversity these days (press 1 for English), but they got the luxury of experiencing America 1.0 (or perhaps America 1.5 in the 70's and 80's) for a good chunk of their lives. So it's imprinted a peace of mind and optimism that later generations can't possibly relate to.

Audacious Epigone said...


The idea of secession--which is more broadly the idea of the political dissolution of the US--is more popular among Millennials and Xers than Boomers because the racial El Dorado is imprinted on the latters minds but not ours. I recall a comment Richard Spencer made awhile back with regards to Pat Buchanan and the disconnect between alt right identitarians and paleocons like Buchanan. For Buchanan, it's always 1965 in the old America (mostly white, sizable black minority) he grew up in. His conservatism has a return to these halcyon days in mind.

Conservatism doesn't make sense to us because we've never known that. It's almost as mythical as El Dorado. There is no conceivable way to bring it back. It might be recreated on a smaller scale in a new polity, but it's never coming back as it was then.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

Self deportation is a thing. When Operation Wetback took place, millions of Hispanics opted to self deport. There are occasional stories of refugees in America fleeing to Canada because they knew they might not make it in Trump's America.

We can never recreate pre-1965 demographics but if immigration laws actually get enforced, we might see a small boost in the percentage of whites. If it went from 63% to say 66% by 2024, imagine the screeching on the left, the demographics were supposed to go the other way! Secession is still the only choice if we want to go back to pre-1965 demographics where California and a couple other states take a hike.

Feryl said...

I can't seem to find it now, but there was an article talking about how times of prosperity lead to great cultural shifts and conflicts. I believe they cited Ron Englehart, and possibly a recent thing written by Englehart where he talks about how the mounting financial problems of the West are making individualism and libertine cosmopolitanism lose their luster.

In a nutshell, a highly privileged cohort (those born from about 1930-1960) takes for granted the personal sacrifices and modesty that were necessary to create contemporary luxury and security. As such, they develop a flippant attitude towards traditions and restraint, creating a culture that's boldly exciting for themselves but gradually erodes barriers to decadence and indulgence. While they continue to peacock in their palaces, younger generations who never benefited from a toxic culture that they never asked for become cynical and restive. Once could argue that this has happened over much of the world, not just the West.

The dreaded "scapegoating" of migrants (be they cosmo. natives or total foreigners) and Left-wing modernists in Gov., media, the arts, academia etc., tends to happen when much of the population feels squeezed. Interestingly, in early 90's California there was a growth in hostility towards immigrants and welfare. How did this happen? The end of the cold war put a lot of middle class people out of work, or rather, relegated them to worse jobs. If you've got less, you don't want or need carpetbaggers and parasites in you territory. Nor do you want nerds and yuppies telling you that you're obsolete. Left-wing judges, a rising population of New Americans, and the usual pressure groups stopped white middle class friendly policies from being passed/enforced. Now Cali is a total basket case, economically, demographically, culturally, and so on.

The Left-wing is in imminent danger of losing their security credibility for generations to come by promoting cosmopolitanism that only rewards a small number of younger people. Note that banning migrants from a handful of 3rd world countries and rounding up a decent number of felon illegals inflicted more pyschic pain on modern decadents than they'd felt in decades. An institutional legacy of rootless hedonism has built up, guarded closely by Boomers who lock anti-modernity alienated and vindictive X-ers and Millennials out of the palace ball. But the cries of frustration and righteous rage grow sharper.....

Feryl said...

"We can never recreate pre-1965 demographics"

I'd settle for 1985 demographics at this point.

Keep in mind that the '65 immigration act didn't greatly affect the majority of America until the 90's. Outside of the Southwest, Florida, and NYC, America was primarily still a white and (slave-descended) black place in the 70's and 80's. Something that some alt-righters don't seem to get either is that the Western US had large populations of Asians and Latins BEFORE 1965.

Instead of secession, a better idea is accepting that some regions of the US ought to be for certain ethnic groups and we shouldn't encourage overlap. Stability is what we need. The damage done by NAMs is self-evident, but we can contain some of it by cutting off further immigration, junking multi-culturalism, and allowing local communities and businesses to establish their own association rules. If left coast whites want to live and work among Arabs, Mexicans, blacks, or whatever, go ahead. If Appalachian whites do not wish to hire or sell houses to Somalis, fine.

We all did just fine before the government created ever metastasizing civil rights bureaucracies in the mid 60's. Historically, the South developed convenient and obvious measures of what was white and black territory. Which headed off greater interaction (and thus, greater problems) between whites and blacks. A huge myth promoted by individualists and Leftists is that segregation was a top-down imposition upon blacks that none of them asked for and was a grievous insult to dignity. As a matter of fact, most people intuitively understood that these measures were necessary to prevent society from destruction. And since the northern migration and the civil rights era, that's been substantiated by the chaotic violence emanating from northern urban blacks who are rendered psychotic by too much exposure to Anglo/Germanic industrial/civic culture that blacks are terribly ill-equipped to grasp (an intelligent minority and a fair number of athletes and entertainers are propped up as achievement mascots while many never escape a life of poverty, welfare, incarceration, ignorance).

We are badly overdue for returning blacks to the Deep South, where the climate, culture, and living patterns keep them in check.

Audacious Epigone said...

Random Dude,

For every 1 forcibly deported, 7-8 left of their own volition.

To prove that the demographic ratchet can in fact move in the other direction has to be our goal. If we can make it happen, we can save this thing. It's a tall order.


Right, the boomers inherited a civilizational treasure trove that they have been squandering for decades. There's not much left in the storehouse and the Boomers' advice about how to refill it is stupid and self-evidently wrong.

How are regional separations under a political superstructure going to be maintained, though? Blacks mostly want segregation, but they also demand proximity to whites (or more precisely to the societal amenities that whites build and maintain). Even blacks move out of Detroit, East St Louis, East Cleveland, and Baltimore eventually. Something like Calexit opens up all kinds of possibilities. If it happens, there'll be a window in which just about anything becomes possible, at least for a period of time.

Feryl said...

'How are regional separations under a political superstructure going to be maintained, though? Blacks mostly want segregation,"

The laws need to follow popular will, not the other way around. 70 year old Leftists like Judge Robart are still adjudicating like it's 1968, when Silents and Boomers were demanding greater individualism and the creation of protected classes based on gender and race (thus begat an arms race in which activists strove to create more and more "victims" needing legislation). Right now, only a handful of elites are listening to normal Americans (some of whom are ostensibly opposed to Trump but actually agree with his policies RE: sell-out companies, tax cuts, government reform, keeping bad immigrants out, declaring war on criminals not on the police, and son), but that should right itself as populist platforms serve the GOP well and the Dems PC themselves into a deepening hole.

As we leave a high striving climate I expect nativism and "xenophobia" to only grow stronger, which means that people will become uncomfortable associating with the "other". Result? Sympathetic laws and ordinances tailored to community preferences passed without controversy by populist rulers. Including cracking down on AA nonsense, and asking ethnic groups to take care of their own (like it used to be before the mid-century), thereby reducing the need to have huge state/federal welfare programs. The reason why so many crappy blacks ended up in the North to begin with. Blacks sure as hell don't want to be in cold and dry climates, all else being equal. Frankly, whites don't really belong in the lowland South by the same token though for strategic/security purposes we've got to have someone competent manning the Gulf and Southern Atlantic coast. Don't ask me to do it, though (the climate's like a dog's mouth for 7-8 months a year, to quote JH Kunstler). Come to think of it, the further north in America you go the worst the blacks are. Likely because blacks have such an inherent distaste for cold weather that the only reason they ended up here is 'cuz of naive whites giving 'em welfare. Many of the better adjusted blacks have gone back to the South already.

It should go without saying that administering swift justice to blacks who can't take a hint about where they belong will pay dividends. Likewise to activist lawyers/bureaucrats who won't let communities handle things as they wish. Keep in mind that the reason the public soured on this stuff was mostly on account of two things: generational differences (beginning with the G.I.s, each generation was more sentimental about "muh racism" than the last), and commie psy-ops. Commie symp Lefties and Jews carefully crafted the various mid-century marches, sit-ins, traffic blockades, and so on in the most hard-ass areas of the South to make good ole boy law enforcement look as barbaric as possible. Plenty of cameras and reporters were on hand to breathlessly report and record the "savage" white response, never mind the fact that these noble "protesters" were deliberately creating civic disorder and antagonizing whites in order to provoke beatings tailor made for propaganda. Another psy-op was tirelessly reporting frightening incidents of violence and harrasment towards blacks, often without putting things in an honest context that would make the black person look bad. And, last but not least, Northerners (primarily WASPs and Jew do-gooders) knowingly upsetting one helluva hornet's nest (the pre-1970 South), giving even more reason for old-stock Southerners to utterly detest arrogant puritan and Semitic meddling

Feryl said...

If stubborn decadents and elites continue to suppress and ignore prole white desires, if indeed densely populated areas are a breeding ground for treason, then I suppose we will have to impose our will on them 'til progress is made. Speaking of which, Cali is asking the Fed. gov for disaster assistance. Can you say poison pill? This won't be the last time a Left-wing cesspit pleads to Trump. Eventually he might make his support conditional. About as benign a way to push reform as you can imagine. Outright trials of many or important West coast/NYC/Chicago/DC judges, lawyers, and politicians would really fray everything, probably to the point of impeachment or assassination of Trump. Until we get further into a wholesome era, I'm as worried as much about Jack Kemp charlatan cucks as I am the Left.

BTW, over/under on how many public events Trump holds on the West coast? Or even how many visits in general he makes? If nothing else, his renewed deportation efforts ought to keep the many foreign opponents away but of course so many "American" Leftists lurk about that there's gonna be some heavy stuff going down if he goes there.

TangoMan said...

but there was an article talking about how times of prosperity lead to great cultural shifts and conflicts.

This is a central theme in Steve Bannon's documentary, Generation Zero, available here on Youtube.

While we're on this topic, I'm looking for a meme that circulated on alt-right blogs what addressed how hard men create civilization, pass it on to their sons, who do something, and then there is another iteration which produces something and eventually we get to disaster which forges the hard men who save the day. Can someone please link me to the text or the graphic.

TangoMan said...

There are occasional stories of refugees in America fleeing to Canada because they knew they might not make it in Trump's America.

Here's the BBC detailing the plight of two Africans who walked into Manitoba and lost their fingers and ears to frostbite.

TangoMan said...

the Western US had large populations of Asians and Latins BEFORE 1965.

How do you define large populations. Here is the historical data on demographics. Non-Hispanics Whites were 88.3% of the population in 1940, 87.5% in 1950, and 85.4% in 1960. In 1950 there were only 321,033 Asians in the US and 3,231,409 Hispanics, which probably was split between Mexicans in California, AZ, NM, etc and Puerto Ricans in NYC.

Feryl said...


What I'm getting is the fallacy sometimes promoted by Paleos/alt-righters that there was some point in the past that we should return to, in which the majority of America had the racial demos of, uh, Victorian England or something.

What is the historical or moral argument for saying that the SW ought to be primarily white? It's mostly not been a home for deeply rooted whites aside from some Spaniards who of course encouraged Latins of various ancestries to move north. It's like saying the lower South should be all white. Sorry to Dixie, but the blacks are yours. They belong in the state of Mississippi, not in northern cities bordering the Mississippi river.

The Mountain and Pacific states overwhelmingly have been hit by waves of people who tend to never feel as though it's their ancestral home and who tend to represent the people who didn't mind (or were forced into) leaving the Eastern US (or other parts of the world).

Whether we like it or not, America has had historical populations of Am. Indians, Asians and Latins in the West, blacks in the South, Catholics in the Northeast, and so on. I'm amenable to arguments about re-whitening Europe, but here in America we've got to to come to grips with having certain regions/towns belonging to an ethnic group. Now granted, every cultural region of America needs to abide by certain customs. Which brings us to the current predicament. The most rootless and Left-wing region of America (the West coast) is acting hostile towards Trump. Something has to give.

Fun fact: in 1900, Minnesota had a bigger population than California. Really. That explains a lot. How many people currently living in CA can trace their ancestors back to the West coast of 1900?

Audacious Epigone said...


The commie psy-ops were on display throughout the presidential campaign. They surround supporters at a rally and provoke, provoke, provoke and then record the responses when they get them. I experienced it firsthand.

Blacks seem to do especially bad in the upper Midwest. Steve's written about this a lot, with Wisconsin as the worst of the worst.

No visits to the West Coast save extreme natural disasters, like this dam inundating hundreds of thousands of homes. The optics worked in his favor more during the election than they do now. Maybe in the fall of 2020...

That's one hell of an interesting stat, thanks. The upper Midwest is the natural home for a quasi-ethnostate (Euros, historically Protestant) made out of the rump (or more like the torso) of the current US. California secedes, the West coast goes, the South jumps at the opportunity, New England and the upper Midwest/Midlands decide to separate.


Is this what you're looking for?

Feryl said...

What's unsettling is that televison singlehandedly changed the propaganda ball game. Whoever controls the outlets can choose to replay a provocative image over and over again to produce the desired result. Yes, there are more niche options these days but guess what? People now gravitate towards sources that emphasize things to their audience's liking (no way in hell CNN or MSNBC is going to accurately characterize a chimp-out) and all moderate to major sized news outlets (even "neo-nazi" Breitbart) aren't going to touch The Color of Crime anytime soon.

In the mid-Century, news outlets matter of factly played civil rights related videos/speeches, mostly naive about how impressionable and idealistic G.I.s, Silents, and early Boomers were about race relations. (pre 1960's ghettos were at times dangerous but they never were outright war zones). To be fair, they couldn't foresee that 50+ years of pandering and excuses would actually worsen the behavior of blacks.

As evidence has mounted (becoming the ebony elephant in the living room), pre 1960 births who dominate the terms of mainstream discourse have resorted to carefully eliding inflammatory statistics and embarrassing anecdotes from discussions of the well-being of various ethnic communities. Hair whitening stats and anecdotes related to violent crime are especially verboten. An LE veteran on CNN once stated that blacks have extremely high rates of all kinds of crime, to which a black panelist blurted: "you can't say that on TV". Note that he didn't outright deny the validity of the stats. Perhaps the least spoken of info of all is the VICAP stat related to the victim reported race of offenders, which obliterates the notion that blacks are arrested at unfair rates.

Younger births who come from much less white cohorts are going to find it even harder to buy into the white privilege school of Marxism. Under siege, why continue to let the anti-white battering rams break down your walls?

Blacks are really out of place in the frozen tundra. Maybe the cabin fever and lack of daylight literally make them crazier. If they want to have a life, why would any black want to be up here anyway?

TangoMan said...

Is this what you're looking for?

Thanks for coming through for me.

What is the historical or moral argument for saying that the SW ought to be primarily white?

What was the historical or moral argument for multiculturalism? There doesn't have to be one for Whites to want a White America. Wanting is not where the interesting game is played, it's in the doing. Do enough Whites want it badly enough to do what is necessary to achieve what they want? Not today they don't. As the pressures of totalitarianism mount, pushed by the need to create equality of outcomes, the pressure to remake America will increase. That pressure will likely build until it blows, rather than reverse the process of what got us into this mess. We got here because Whites took the path of least resistance, they fled from diversity. Once there is nowhere to flee, then life and ideology and desires take on a whole new level of meaning.

Audacious Epigone said...


When whites start caring about white interests and stop caring about universal principles, it becomes possible. We're not there yet, but it's inarguable that's the direction we're moving in.

Feryl said...

Where does this monolithic white bloc come from? If not on the basis of social class (as is the case right now), then certainly on the basis of region and ethnic origin whites everywhere (America included) will never be fully united.

We shouldn't get hung up on utopian ambition. Lebensraum for white Americans ain't gonna work. White Americas have over the centuries divided themselves along north to south and east to west lines. The demarcation has persisted, though post 1965 immigration and the last several decades of domestic carpet baggers have blurred the lines.

As for whites being cowardly, well, that's what happens when you cross your fingers for 50 years that one of these days, we'll all just get along. Whites have basically been punting the ball of accepting failure to solve Nam dysfunction for ages at this point. Hubris. Several generations have sought but failed to find the racial Eldorado.

Overall, convincing some random group of conservative minded whites to keep the American SW white is never gonna work. It's not like they've all had ancestors there for well over 100 years. Besides, none of America technically is "supposed" to be all white anyway. But convincing Ulster Scots descended whites that Kentucky belongs to them, or Nordic whites that Wisconsin belongs to them, or Italians that Staten Island is theirs, is going to be much easier than convincing any group of whites that Los Angeles belongs to them.

Thing is, every ethnic group needs breathing room. We need to stop stepping on each others toes. In a better era, we're still going to have to accept that (hopefully small) number of transients, decadents, addicts, weirdo artists, gays, and so on get their space in urban areas. But overall, society will not concern itself with saving, let alone promoting, degenerates. We'll get more territorial and vigilant, shaming people into remaining among their own kind and minding their behavior.

As for what's ramping up pressure, the West coast doesn't have enough smaller town normies to off-set the masses of hard-core Leftists and transients. There's very little enforcement of wholesome norms. To make matters worse, even in the best of times the West has always had an alienated/disaffected streak. Also giving us huge problems is accursed D.C./corporate culture that via bureaucrat bloat, AA, cheap labor visas, welfare, and set-asides has turned a massive swath of the NE into striverville. From Eastern PA in the west, to Mass. and Connecticut in the north, to Maryland, NYC and NJ in the East, to NorVirginia and NE N Carolina in the South. We've got to kill the globalist beast. NJ used to be a white and slightly black and fairly conservative place.

I once read on a message board a post written by a Boomer or early X-er who said that back in the 80's, he lived in or near a part of the Northeast that white bikers patrolled, intimidating blacks or Puerto Ricans/Mexicans who looked sketchy. Also relevant is the famous vigilante beat downs delivered by mostly Italian kids in 1980's NYC, in which nerdy Jew Bernie Goetz also went on a famous vigilante spree. Folks, don't lose hope. In a more wholesome era, we'll get our balls back. It'll be easier when our elites aren't doing so much to feed, employ, and house complete foreigners.

random observer said...


I'm more open to your view on this than I expected, but how many of the Spanish speakers of the SW or California can point to roots greater than your 100-year deep marker, or even half that?

The original Spanish populations of Texas and California were not huge, and the intervening areas even less. Unless one has an ancestor among these early settler groups or among SW Indian nations, we're talking Hispanic peoples whose ancestors, including Indian ancestors, were all from farther south.