Tuesday, November 21, 2017

Color trumps ideology

In the post on millennials, I overlooked perhaps the most important data set included in the primary source. It wasn't fully fleshed out in the report the GenForward released, but the complete results are there in the topline survey (thanks to commenter milan for the heads-up).

Respondents were asked to select their "top three most important" identities from a list of eight. The full results are on page 17 of the topline, but there are three of the eight I find especially remarkable. These are race/ethnicity, ideology, and American nationality.

The following graph shows the percentages of respondents, by race, who included each one among their top three from the list of eight. Keep in mind these are responses from those aged 18-34--millennials and the leading edge of zyklons:


Ben color-doesn't-matter-ideology-does Shapiro wept. And civic nationalism died.

They're not African-Americans or Asian-Americans, they're Africans in America and Asians in America.

When the boomers finally combust into oblivion, civic nationalism will flame out with them. The future will be the one the late Lee Kuan Yew described. It will then be able to burn out in the open, in all its babylonic glory:
In multiracial societies, you don't vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.
None of this had to happen. Fielding a reader's question, the Z-Man dropped four words of unadulterated profundity:
Q: If you were to travel through time to visit Madison at the convention and inform him of the result of his experiment, what advice would you offer him?

A: Pick your own cotton.
Through 1965, things were stable enough. One-tenth of the population was as well assimilated to Anglo mores and values as could reasonably be expected, and subsidization from the white supermajority appeared viable into the indefinite future.

The country's fate was truly sealed over the last five decades. The left chose to bring in foreign ringers to put them in positions of power instead of allowing the natives to pick who their leaders would be. The right decided it'd be better for The Economy to have brown peons pick their crops.

Not the racial consciousness we're after
The country is still shambling along, but the internal bleeding is so severe that collapse is a question of "when?" rather than of "if?".

Though America as a unified political entity will go extinct, heritage Americans need not do the same. Millennials are the nadir. Plenty of indicators suggest Gen Z is going to be an improvement, possibly a drastic one. Yet even among white millennials, 40% are racially conscious. That's not nothing.

On the other hand, many of those 40% could be conscious in an ethnomasochistic way, but the intention is to wrap up with something positive, so enough dwelling on that!

40 comments:

Dan said...

I beg to differ in your characterization of Ben Shapiro.

He is not a civic nationalist. He is a blood-and-soil ethno-nationalist.

https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2003/08/27/transfer-is-not-a-dirty-word-n976781


Dan said...

Here is VoxDay's translation of Ben's piece for American readers:

https://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/07/transfer-is-not-dirty-word.html

If Ben is not stupid or naive about such things, then what is he?

Similarly, New York Times columnist David Brooks is also a blood-and-soil ethno-nationalist. His son volunteered for the military -- the IDF, that is.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/09/david-brooks-son-idf-israeli-army.html

Dan said...

"Brooks discussed his son’s service in a recent Hebrew-language interview with Ha’aretz"

Really?

I am absolutely open minded and try to view things with balance. Things like that don't make it any easier.

Feryl said...

We're far beyond a stage of solidarity or civility. The Boomers have brought a substantial degradation in professionalism and good faith ever since they began making inroads into cultural relevance in the late 60's. Tweets from "professionals" that basically amount to a slightly glossy way of saying "you suck", with MSM editorials not being much different these days, say it all.

And focusing on personal lives is besides the point. Remember though, the Boomers famously said "the personal is political". The day to day morality of a given person's life really doesn't matter all that much. Besides, when elites are given to condescension, not compassion, that explains why we're at where we're at. Elites have had numerous opportunities to help out the serfs over the last 40 years, by time and time again instead of extending a hand they deliver a jab and then a kick.

BTW, people like Kristoff need to get the memo that the culture wars are over. Finished. Moralizing isn't good enough anymore. We need tangible measures of economic and security progress, not sermons. Ted Cruz's moral flamethrower ended up exploding on his back and immolated his candidacy. Why? After 30+ years of countless examples of holier than thou jerks being exposed as frauds, we don't need to hear that kind of crap anymore. Millennials buy into this stuff even less than older generations, and that's why they gravitated towards Sanders (who was never moralistic) and even Trump if they were willing to take the conservative plunge.

WRT regional behavior, the obviously horrible behavior of the dark urban underclass offsets whatever positive attributes SWPLs can claim. Remember that in the 70's and 80's, many many middle to upper class people fled urban cores out of necessity, due to how horrible the crime was. When the suburbs were built in the 50's and 60's, many whites relocated there for economic reasons. By the dawn of the 70's, most whites who could afford to get out of the city got out of the city because they didn't want to get mugged again.

Feryl said...

Oops, stuck that comment in the wrong post. Oh well, it's still generally relevant to a lot of these posts anyway.

Audacious Epigone said...

Dan,

Touche. I did hint at is much in the original post with the strikethrough on the word "Israel".

Wrt to being balanced, etc--how I wish Ashkenazis would more-or-less act like upper-end gentiles. No problems, then. I'd like to be philo-semitic in the same way I'm philo-Mormon.

Feryl,

If Cruz's failed candidacy, Trump's success, and the likelihood of Sanders' success without the DNC primary process being rigged all weren't enough, Moore's impending victory in Alabama may do the trick. Okay, I don't actually believe that it'll do the trick, but it'll be another piece of strong evidence for those who are open to it.

Sid said...

"Wrt to being balanced, etc--how I wish Ashkenazis would more-or-less act like upper-end gentiles. No problems, then. I'd like to be philo-semitic in the same way I'm philo-Mormon."

Every ethnic group has its flaws. Even English-Americans, who are perhaps the only indispensable ethnic group in America, are given to absurd Puritanesque witch hunts and universalisms. I see it in my own family and I wish they would wake up!

In 2016, the worst Mormons were ultracucks like Romney and deep state meddlers like Egg McMuffin. The Mormons largely blew them off and voted for Trump. As such, Mormons largely have their problems under control and I'm happy to have them on the team.

Unfortunately, there are far too many of the ((())) blue check mark Jews who bear an ethnic animus against white Gentiles, and celebrate and work towards the Great Replacement in North America and Europe. I'm sorry, but those people aren't my friends or my allies.

I wholeheartedly accept Jews who agree with our point of view, and I think Stephen Miller has been nothing but a force for good in the Trump administration. Even so, unlike the Mormons, American Jews largely succame to their worst tendencies. Again, I embrace the Jews who will join with us, but it has to be acknowledged objectively that Jewish Americans on the whole have real problems that need to be addressed.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih4RYO1te8s&t=

Yet another alt lite personality throwing in the towel regarding civic nationalism. Other alt lite thots like Faith Goldy and Brittany Pettibone have already went to the dark side. Lauren Southern is almost there. There are others I'm sure I'm missing.

It is a gigantic bitter pill to swallow, especially for boomers and millennials who base a good part of their identity on being anti-racist. The realization that these people don't want to assimilate, no matter how many times they read the constitution, requires undoing decades of mental wiring. I understand that some people will take more time than others. However, they have to understand that minorities don't want to become "Americans" in the white sense. All they want are handouts, power so they can run their personal fiefdoms, and absolution of responsibility. They have no investment in America and would rather it be burned to the ground so long as they get a welfare check every month.

However whites get there, we have to do what we can to help them connect the dots about the realities of our New Americans. Then the real progress can begin.

Gazoo said...

The country is beyond salvaging, absent a turn to authoritarianism. Social capital and trust have been destroyed, and people have turned inward. I expect the situation to deteriorate rapidly when America experiences a debt and currency crisis sometime in the next 25 years.

Corvinus said...

Sid..."are given to absurd Puritanesque witch hunts and universalisms. I see it in my own family and I wish they would wake up!"

Perhaps the outlier is yourself, and it is your family and friends who are woke.

"Even English-Americans, who are perhaps the only indispensable ethnic group in America..."

According to those English-Americans who subscribe to your own position on such matters. Listen, why don't you conduct a poll. Offer this exact question. See how many "English-Americans" respond in the affirmative.

Exactly why Vox Day's "civic nationalism" posts are rife with confirmation biases and historical errors that even "midwits" are able to bulldoze through with logic.

Preserving rights "for one's posterity" repudiated feudalistic notions. Similar wording exists in the Declaration, the Federalist Papers, and American law rooted in British traditions. To leap to the conclusion that the posterity referred to the creation of an "ethnostate" exclusive to the British ignores the construction anyone at the juncture reading the Constitution would have put on the words.

Even accepting "Our posterity," means the descendants of those citizens only at the time of ratification, given the healthy dose of non-British in the United States who were among the ratifiers, the concept simply cannot be granted to the British exclusively. Moreover, the events leading up to the war, the war itself, and the failure of the Articles of Confederation constitute our early legislative history. In none of the seven uses of the word, therein, is posterity used in any obviously restrictive fashion during this time frame. And, of course there is the naturalization clause, which assuredly had no ethnocentric provision. One could argue the slave trade clause had such had such an ethnocentric position, but it is clear it was not aimed at non-British or non-whites. And then there is the naturalization clause, which certainly had no ethnocentric provision to it. About the only such provision you can find is the slave trade clause, and that was fairly obviously not aimed at Swedes.

Now, assuming the Founding Fathers intended the Constitution to be a limitation on the power of government, as to themselves and their posterity, defined as descendants in their own personal blood-lines, by intentionally excluding those other people from the protections of the Constitution, and by failing to make a different provision for their protection from government, the Founding Fathers left them completely unprotected from government, granting the Founding Fathers even broader authority enjoyed by the British monarchy, which was restricted by the Magna Carta and the English Bill of Rights. In effect, the Founders and their blood-lines set themselves up as “nobility”, with unfettered rights, with all others designated as “peasants”, having no rights.

Corvinus said...


Posterity does NOT refer only to one's own children, but as with the synonymous "legacy" also has the broader meaning of what we leave behind. The Founding Fathers were self-consciously leaving behind other than a genetic legacy. The motto "Novus Ordo Seclorum" reflects their legacy, setting up the mechanisms of government they invented to secure liberty against tyranny. Recall Article I, Section 8, Clause 4: "The Congress shall have Power To...establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization...." By definition, naturalization extends citizenship, and all the rights and duties related to it, to an outsider, that is, someone not the posterity of a signer of the document. The Founding Fathers clearly desired "to invite foreigners of merit and republican principles among us." Indeed, the intention was whites and Europeans, but who imagined at that time non-whites and women would be able to embrace these principles? But there is no racial or gender criteria to adhering to republican ideals in the Constitution. Of course, that does not mean foreigners have the right to enter our shores, as Congress sets the standards for immigration. But the proposition remains that there are hoops for newcomers to jump through.

So when he makes such pronouncements as "Do the Jews, the Italians, the Irish, or the Scandinavians value small government today, even after more than 100 years of residence in the USA? No" and "The Mexicans, Chinese, Japanese, and various and sundry other post-1965 immigrant groups aren't going to become Americans either. Not now, and not in 10 generations", he alienates tens of millions of whites from joining the ranks of the Alt Right.

AE..."Plenty of indicators suggest Gen Z is going to be an improvement, possibly a drastic one."

Keep playing up that false narrative. Gen Z, especially whites, are racially conscious, pro-homo, pro-gay marriage, and pro-cultural war. Certainly, there attitudes about the economy are more in line with conservatives, but this group overall leans center right, not hard right. In order for this "inevitable race war" and the "break up of the U.S." to come to fruition by 2033, this group would have to go full Hulk style, with their fists of fury destroying brick by brick our institutions, along with literally murdering their "black, brown, and yellow allies", in the process.

Corvinus said...

"Fielding a reader's question, the Z-Man dropped four words of unadulterated profundity: Q: If you were to travel through time to visit Madison at the convention and inform him of the result of his experiment, what advice would you offer him? A: Pick your own cotton."

The same Z-Man who got taken to the woodshed by Vox Day for plagiarism.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/11/plagiarism-is-plagiarism.html

Regarding this "advice", the Europeans just couldn't help themselves. It's in their DNA to create and destroy, to fornicate with avarice and violence. It was easy pickin's for the European to transport the darkies to a new continent, work their plantations, make a shit ton of money, and enjoy the high life. And why on earth would Madison, Jefferson, and "northern and southern gentlemen" be commanded to "pick their own cotton" when they have the liberty to make their own financial decisions?

Anonymous said...

AE-Couldn't you make the case that this just simply reflects the times? For isntance, had you asked this question of Italian and Polish Americans 100 years ago, would the answers have been similar to what Asians and Hispancis say now and that possibly this could change with time? How much of this is due to the left's constant denunciation of the American culture and traditions?

Sid said...

Corvinus,

Perhaps the outlier is yourself, and it is your family and friends who are woke.

"Woke" sounds funny. SJWs try to use it with a straight face and thus make jokes of themselves. Alt-righters appropriated (!) the term and use it semi-sarcastically.

In contrast, the expression "waking up" when it comes to race relations in America is serious. Dead serious. It's inexcusable for whites to be given such a raw deal as we have today, but it's on whites to recognize it as it is. That's waking up.

According to those English-Americans who subscribe to your own position on such matters. Listen, why don't you conduct a poll. Offer this exact question. See how many "English-Americans" respond in the affirmative.

There really aren't all that many core, legacy white Americans who descend unmixed from a single line of European nationals, especially the farther west you go. Apparently even mafia families are having to make only partially Italian associates.

As such, most white Americans have a multiplicity of ethnic identities. It is encouraged in America for people to embrace fringe identities, and you don't get much more core than English.

Our posterity...

The discussion is interesting, but I honestly haven't researched the matter independently and thus don't have a strong opinion on it.

Now, should English Americans have barred immigration early on, stuck to it, and been extremely fertile to populate North America over the centuries? Maybe, maybe not, but that ship has long since sailed and to me it's more of a fun historical curiosity than a real policy debate.

My point is: every white ethnic group in America has its faults, and even English-Americans, the most core ethnic group in the country, has its own flaws. Mormons have their flaws but largely overcame them in the last election. In contrast, Jewish Americans largely gave in to their flaws.

In my view, Jews are white. They're part of the American family. I am glad we have Jews in the country. But being part of a family means you're accountable to other members of the family. And I can honestly say that the Jewish American community has a real problem with truly awful, insane, far-left SJWs who hate white Gentiles and openly support the Great Replacement. I don't blame all Jewish Americans, I welcome the ones like Stephen Miller who agree with us, and I have no issue with conservative and "normie" Jews. But again, there are far too many Jewish SJWs and it has to be acknowledged that Jewish Americans have that problem.

In order for this "inevitable race war" and the "break up of the U.S." to come to fruition by 2033, this group would have to go full Hulk style, with their fists of fury destroying brick by brick our institutions, along with literally murdering their "black, brown, and yellow allies", in the process.

Generation Z whites are turning out to be the most "based" generation we've had... yet. Let's implement smart policy decisions now before Generations Alpha and Beta grow up even more "based."

...the Europeans just couldn't help themselves. It's in their DNA to create and destroy, to fornicate with avarice and violence. It was easy pickin's for the European to transport the darkies to a new continent, work their plantations, make a shit ton of money, and enjoy the high life.

Let's be clear: Europeans in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries didn't enslave Africans. They simply purchased and transported Africans that other Africans had enslaved. When you keep that in perspective, it's easy to understand that while blacks were victimized, it was other blacks as well as whites who were the victimizers.

Whites who purchased slaves were the globalists of their era. Slavery was their open borders and offshoring of manufacturing. All their paeans about "Christianizing" the heathen Africans was their "Diversity."

Corvinus said...

"It's inexcusable for whites to be given such a raw deal as we have today, but it's on whites to recognize it as it is. That's waking up."

It's overstated this "raw deal".

"As such, most white Americans have a multiplicity of ethnic identities. It is encouraged in America for people to embrace fringe identities, and you don't get much more core than English."

Encouraged by whom? Regarding our "core", originally it was the English, Welsh, Scots-Irish, Dutch, Flemish, and Germans who founded our nation. Indeed, the English were predominant, but one must take into account the contributions of these other groups as they assisted in shaping our government and society.

"My point is: every white ethnic group in America has its faults, and even English-Americans, the most core ethnic group in the country..."

You said previously that the English were the "who are perhaps the only indispensable ethnic group in America". Now you say they are the "most core ethnic group in the country". Did you shift the goal posts, or acknowledged that your previous statement was a wild generalization?

"In contrast, Jewish Americans largely gave in to their flaws."

Yes, so I am told repeatedly. Poll the average American about Jews and their alleged "defects". It would be an interesting read.

"And I can honestly say that the Jewish American community has a real problem with truly awful, insane, far-left SJWs who hate white Gentiles and openly support the Great Replacement."

The Alt Right assumes that Jewish SJW's and their globalist henchmen had internal meetings and developed a course of action to promote their agenda of diversity and Cultural Marxism. I am highly skeptical that they are purposely engaged in such machinations. Rather, Americans from different racial and ethnic groups--tens of millions of men and women--since the Civil Rights Movement have made their own decisions regarding race and culture. As a result, there has been a backlash by conservatives, in particular a group called the Alt Right, who insist that the exercising of this liberty warrants a labeling of "race traitor", "cuck", or "promoter of white genocide". I find such designations disturbingly laughable. Now, of course, we have the extremists on the left, the SJWs, who promote their own insane agenda. Both groups ultimately are destructive, and am I hopeful that the normies, led by Generation Z, will put both the Coalition of the Left Fringe and the Coalition of the Right Fringe groups in their proper place.

Corvinus said...



"Generation Z whites are turning out to be the most "based" generation we've had... yet."

What do you mean here? Please elaborate.

"Let's be clear: Europeans in the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries didn't enslave Africans. They simply purchased and transported Africans that other Africans had enslaved. When you keep that in perspective, it's easy to understand that while blacks were victimized, it was other blacks as well as whites who were the victimizers."

Absolutely the Europeans clearly enslaved Africans by purchasing and transporting them to a foreign land and denying them of their fundamental liberties. You truly need to rethink your assertion. The Europeans took advantage of the situation for their own economic well-being. Indeed, Africans put chains on their brethren, but you do realize that African slavery is noticeable different than European/American slavery, right?

"Whites who purchased slaves were the globalists of their era."

You mean European nations who were colonizing and procuring resources were the globalists. They were the original "invade the world, invite the world" civilizers.

"Slavery was their open borders and offshoring of manufacturing."

That would be triangle trade and the Columbian exchange. And remember, colonies were prohibited from large-scale manufacturing. They were to simply give raw materials to the mother country and buy from it finished goods.

"All their paeans about "Christianizing" the heathen Africans was their "Diversity.""

Diversity as far as saving souls and doing God's work.

Audacious Epigone said...

Random Dude,

Tara McCarthy is another one who was pretty much there from the beginning. It's great for normalizing identitarianism.

Gazoo,

Basically agree if there isn't a moratorium on immigration soon. But a rump of the country can still be salvaged.

Corvinus,

Linked to the Vox post because of the cartoon. Appreciate your reading through it. On this side of the Atlantic, pan-Europeanism makes a lot more sense. There aren't many people who are close to fully English by descent among millennials and zyklons. My dad's grandparents are both English, my maternal grandfather Irish and my maternal grandmother German. If I have to ID as one, it's English because that's close to preponderance, but I'm a European mongrel as most Americans are. We have to proceed from where we are.

tl;dr -- I agree with you on this.

Wrt to zyklons, the racial consciousness is the only thing that really matters. The left-right spectrum is antiquated a la Lee Kuan Yew.

Wrt to the scuffle with Z-Man (and Vox is already back to sharing his posts), all Z did was take an argument in the comments and share it verbatim instead of putting it in his own words. He's not a professional academic so who really cares? It wasn't even in the body of his post.

I spent several hours talking to Z in person this summer. The idea that he is some kind of charlatan is risible. He does his podcasts extemporaneously and that is exactly how he is in conversation. It's all up there in the attic and he pulls it out effortlessly.

Anon,

Rush Limbaugh was doing civic nationalism 25 years ago, before we called it civic nationalism. It didn't appeal to non-whites then and it's not going to now.

Sid,

Let the record show that I typed the above before reading your comment (since it looks like I'm parroting you!).

Mormons *are* English, largely.

Sid said...

Corvinus,

It's overstated this "raw deal".

Whites subsidize NAMs with social spending, give out their jobs and slash their wages (Affirmative Action, immigration, outsourcing), are told their countries and cultures will soon be replaced with others, and are called racists if they protest. Sorry, but how is that not a raw deal?

Encouraged by whom? Regarding our "core", originally it was the English, Welsh, Scots-Irish, Dutch, Flemish, and Germans who founded our nation. Indeed, the English were predominant...

I used the term "ethnic group," so that denotes culture as well as race. We're writing in English. The Founding Fathers spoke English and drew on the English philosophical literature to justify the War of Independence and to establish new laws and modes of governance. Granted, many of them also read Latin and Greek and spoke French, but that was all common among English speaking elites in England.

Race and blood matter, but so does language, and the Founding Fathers were fully part of the Anglophone world.

If we Americans spoke another language, our cultural history would've been entirely different. That's why the English were core and indispensable to America.

"The Alt Right assumes that Jewish SJW's and their globalist henchmen had internal meetings and developed a course of action to promote their agenda of diversity and Cultural Marxism."

I agree on this count. I don't think Jews make up a huge, coordinated monolith. Jews, like everyone else in the world, have massive divisions within themselves. Agnostic awhile ago had a great post about how Jewish Wall Street donors to the Democratic Party don't care all that much about Israel, hence it's absurd for alt-righters to assume that Jewish SJWs and the Likud Party in Israel are on a similar wavelength.

There are good and disagreeable parts of the alt-right. I disagree absolutely with alt-righters who unironically believe Hitler and Nazism were anything but banes on mankind. I think playing around "ironically" with Nazi and KKK imagery is a bad idea too.

Nevertheless, the alt-right makes up a big network, and my online comments largely fall within it.

I don't hate Jewish SJWs because they're Jewish; I hate them because they're SJWs. Granted, white people in general have an SJW problem, but it has to be acknowledged that it's especially bad among Jewish Americans.

Sid said...

What do you mean here? Please elaborate.

You said it was a pipedream that Generation Z whites would move from being just ethnocentric to violent against non-whites. I hope you're right, but the children of Millennials (Alpha) and Zyklons (Beta) may turn white identitarianism to virulent ethnic violence. As such, we ought to improve America's demographic profile before we get even more violently Balkanized!

Absolutely the Europeans clearly enslaved Africans by purchasing and transporting them to a foreign land and denying them of their fundamental liberties. You truly need to rethink your assertion.

What you described was the European role in the slave trade. I will readily grant that the European role was morally inexcusable. That said, it has to be acknowledged that slavery was a worldwide phenomenon, and it's tiresome that only white Europeans get chastised for their doing it. Just read your DNA comment.

Indeed, Africans put chains on their brethren, but you do realize that African slavery is noticeable different than European/American slavery, right?

Yes, slavery was only harsh in North America. When the Africans, Muslims, ancient civilizations, Indians, Turks, Mongols, Chinese, and Aztecs did it, they did so with care and compassion.

Diversity as far as saving souls and doing God's work.

Diversity in the sense that it was a patina put over the racket.

Anyway...

AE,

Right, in a way the Mormons are super English-American: super nice and police, super successful in large, formal organizations, super judgmental, super given to hopeless causes and self-policing, super naive.

Laconic Oak said...

20 yeas ago already, Strauss and Howe said Boomers were the cause of the next Fourth Turning Crisis, and Millenials would be the Heroes to take us through it. I can see why Bannon is such a big fan of the book.

http://laconicoak.blogspot.com/2017/11/the-fourth-turning-is-identity-war.html

Corvinus said...

You said it was a pipedream that Generation Z whites would move from being just ethnocentric to violent against non-whites. I hope you're right, but the children of Millennials (Alpha) and Zyklons (Beta) may turn white identitarianism to virulent ethnic violence. As such, we ought to improve America's demographic profile before we get even more violently Balkanized!

"What you described was the European role in the slave trade."

Their role in enslaving Africans. They assisted in moving slaves from the interior to the coast, they created holding pens, and they helped tribes friendly with them to wipe out their rivals. Just admit that you are dead wrong in how you are describing the situation.

"That said, it has to be acknowledged that slavery was a worldwide phenomenon, and it's tiresome that only white Europeans get chastised for their doing it. Just read your DNA comment."

And it is a bore when some people make reference that Europeans "didn't enslave Africans". Moreover, my "DNA comment" is simply an extension of "race realism" and Sailor's HbD theory.

"Yes, slavery was only harsh in North America. When the Africans, Muslims, ancient civilizations, Indians, Turks, Mongols, Chinese, and Aztecs did it, they did so with care and compassion."

Of course slavery was harsh everywhere and by everyone who engaged in this action. But there are folks on the Alt Right who significantly downplay the European role in procuring slaves, who keep insisting that whites take credit for everything and anything that was invented in the world, and who make reference to "good whites" compared to "bad whites". That group needs to be reminded that their thought process has significant holes in reasoning and logic.

"I used the term "ethnic group," so that denotes culture as well as race."

Ethnic group and race are separate things.

"don't hate Jewish SJWs because they're Jewish; I hate them because they're SJWs."

Really, Jews are SJW's? N-----, please.

"I hope you're right, but the children of Millennials (Alpha) and Zyklons (Beta) may turn white identitarianism to virulent ethnic violence."

You are giving your own personal designation and assuming it to be a fact. And, exactly, "may turn", but since when in our nation's history has an entire (white) generation gone "full Hulk" over the presence of non-whites? Talk about a pipe dream.

Feryl said...

It's weird how we keep pedastalizing a group of young people with the hope that they will change things, and then turn on them when the world still sucks 20 years later. We did it with Boomers in the 50's and 60's, Millennials in the 90's and 2000's, and now we're doing it with Z-ers. X-ers though were attacked from the moment they came into the world, being blamed for damn near every problem of the 80's and 90's.

We just need to reach the point at which 50+% of elites declare the striver wars to be over. When that happens, the emotional and psychological benefit of uplifting all lower class natives (as opposed to extending one's sympathy to ever more obscure pet groups, like LGBT Somalian refugees) will outweigh the material gains reaped from cheap labor policies glossed over with sentimental pablum about muh humanitarian values. Besides, as the likes of George Soros are now finding out, there may eventually be a price to be paid for so transparently undermining the basic dignity of a nation's people, and obviously taking advantage of sentiment and naive leaders. Elites may change their tune based not so much on sincere concern for prole natives, but more from a sense of being threatened by angry mobs. Of course, as we saw in 2015 and '16 it's abundantly clear that elite Leftists and cuck rightists wish to mobilize their pet groups into mobs designed to intimidate and suppress the nationalist equivalent. One thing I found encouraging was the campaigns by Cernovich etc. to shine light on the lack of apparent concern among cuck inc. for Leftist mob violence and racial unrest. If even the nominal Right is unwilling to lay down the law, well, as I like to say that's why were at where were at.

Sid said...

Corvinus,

I try to be charitable when I debate online, but it's frustrating to spend so much time trying to make my arguments clear and inoffensive, only for you to miss the point.

1. The European role in the slave trade was morally inexcusable. That said, a lot of people don't acknowledge that Africans enslaved and sold each other. This demonstrates the Europeans weren't uniquely greedy. A lot of people also don't acknowledge that almost all other human civilizations have engaged in slavery.

I don't think there's any evidence that Europeans are uniquely greedy. They're just uniquely talented at establishing large, well organized institutions which enables them to satisfy their greed more easily.

2. To reiterate, not all Jews are SJWs. I have no issue with Jews as an ethnicity, believe their contributions have been indispensable, and enjoy them as some of my best friends. That said, there's a disproportionately high number of especially virulent Jewish SJWs. I believe Jewish Americans can and should tone it down and become more responsible citizens in doing so, just the way Mormons on the whole resisted calls to sabotage Trump.

3. We're entering a new era. If the Trump presidency is a failure, America will become a white plurality or even white minority country. If this happens and the SJW agitation doesn't deescalate, then yes, I can imagine future generations of whites organizing to violently oppose other racial groups, which I consider a dreadful scenario. I earnestly wish that will not happen and I think now is the time to prevent that from happening.

Feryl said...

" If the Trump presidency is a failure, America will become a white plurality or even white minority country"

At or below the 35th latitude parallel, it's pretty much a given that Teutonic and Celtic whites will be a minority in large portions of this region for many generations to come. If you took the geezers out of SoCal, Arizona, and Florida (many of whom are comfortably moneyed Silents/early Boomers, or snowbird retirees), huge chunks of these regions would cease to have almost any resemblance to a society established and maintained by NW Eropeans. Arizona and Florida have been historically lightly populated states that saw tremendous growth from air conditioning and G.I.s/Silents eager to get the hell away from the ice and entrenched urban/ethnic politics of the Northeast and Midwest (moveing within America has declined since the mid-80's, probably because the Sunbelt began to develop serious problems by this point that matched or exceeded the perceived flaws of the older regions of America).

Some white ID people and "civic nationalists" are delusional about ignoring regional differences in demography, development, and livability. After all, why do you suppose the low-land South got so many blacks? America and China are really the only two countries in the world with such vast differences in climate within a country, and the Han Chinese are too provincial to ever import dark-skins to work the swampy and hot regions of China. Furthermore, whites (esp. Teutons and Celts) are even less resistant to skin cancer than Asians. Having a large part of America be sub-Tropical to virtually tropical has always been a huge mistake. California is much drier, and moreover, lies further to the North than does much of the Southeast, so California is more doable and worth keeping; but trust me, even if we completely halted immigration how do you suppose that we ever boost the white population back up in CA? It's the most diverse place in human history, most of the remaining whites are horrifically liberal, AFF in the state is a nightmare and likely always will be unless civ. collapses, and interracial marriage appears to be much more common on the West Coast (back East, blacks serve to ward off many whites from passivity towards miscegenation).

It's worth keeping in mind that the Civil War ended but in the subsequent years it's obvious that the very factors that gave us the civil war have never totally faded. Slavery may have ended, but that doesn't change the fact that white people are not interested in laboring in hot, humid, and rainy regions.

Sid said...

wrt race vs ethnicity:

Race and ethnicity are distinct but often overlapping concepts. Race is biological, ethnic is cultural, but biology and culture are intertwined in human beings.

How biologically different are Swedes from Finns? Without discounting anything out of hand, I would be surprised if there were all that much of a gap or distinction between them on a biological level. For all intents and purposes, a Swede is a Finn who speaks a particular Germanic language. In both America and Europe, there are numerous stories about Finns and Lapplanders who became Swedes and Norwegians in an assimilation process.

But... Do I think Africans who grow up speaking fluent Swedish are ethnic Swedes? No, of course not. The racial divide is too vast.

There are many intermediate cases. Nigel Farage would count as English to most everyone, but he descends from French Huguenots. No big deal, but it still shows ethnicity as a concept is, necessarily, vague.

dc.sunsets said...

I don't know why anyone responds to the comments by Corvinus. She clearly just wants to troll. Let her waste others' time.

dc.sunsets said...

A 90% white America with relatively low debt could delude itself that Affirmative Action et. al., could be put on the National Mastercard. That was 50 years ago.

When rates inevitably rise and borrowing is cut off, and tens of millions of formerly comfortable SWPLs face ruin & those still employed are scared stiff, the gibsmedats to which Africans, Asians and Mestizos are addicted will stop on a dime.

The formerly prosperous will have zero tolerance for complaints at that time, and those who insist on pushing what worked these last 50 years will be road kill, their flattened corpses nothing but distasteful reminders of the normal side effects of jaywalking when people have more important considerations top of mind.

We fast approach a trend change of epic consequence.

Feryl said...

"Nigel Farage would count as English to most everyone, but he descends from French Huguenots."

Teutons are by many measures the most "successful" (but at what cost?) ethnic group in the history of the world, but if we forfeit "our" countries to invaders, then the championship belt can go to the Han Chinese and the demographically sound Slavic regions will have a shot at overtaking the once-proud countries run by Norsemen. Most (but not all....)Teutons are culturally Protestant (even though in practice many are not very devoted to organized religion).

We've been barraged over the last 15-25 years with diversity sermons and globalist non-sense; the generations who drew up these NWO plans felt ashamed of the excellence of Teutonic countries. Flash forward to just about 25 years into the globalist fantasy, and most countries still don't even want to upset their native ethnics; 1st World Western countries import all kinds of junky people and products from the turd world, while the East and the global South don't give a fuck about Hitler supposedly discrediting Right wing traditionalist policies. The funny thing is that non-white countries that are openly racially chauvinistic are seldom totally called out for such attitudes, suggesting that many NWO-ers aren't really motivated by a desire to spread liberal values far and wide; rather they're motivated by a vindictive disdain for the remaining whites who hold to time-honored concepts of tribe and nationhood. Part of this is cowardice also; whites for 70 years have often bristled at accusations of racism, whereas other ethnic groups shrug their shoulders and go on like it's BAU. So it's much easier for the PC bullies to hone in on whites; it becomes addictive, as the bullies keep going back to the white pinata to bash out more prizes. I've always believed, and still do believe, that the biggest enemy is cuck whites. You don't blame other ethnic groups for doing whatever they can to stay aloft; it's to be expected. What makes us so uniquely screwed up is how many of our co-ethnics try and undermine each other, instead of closing ranks and focusing our ire outward.

Feryl said...

"A 90% white America with relatively low debt could delude itself that Affirmative Action et. al., could be put on the National Mastercard. That was 50 years ago."

My 1960 born mom still talks up high-ed. We've been terribly reckless for the last 30-40 years, on a financial level. Many whites now openly admit to feeling like strangers and even victims in the very countries which as late as the early 70's generally acted in a manner conducive to long-term financial and demographic security (with admitted mistakes from time to time, but is there a precedent in Western or even human history for elites being so glibly antipathetic towards their nation's founding stock?). Most Western elites have been earnestly socialized to think of themselves of pan-national and cosmopolitan winners who earn and deserve what they get. Why care about some shmuck from Wisconsin who couldn't scrape his ass off the couch to try and make it big?

Audacious Epigone said...

Sid,

That's a concise recapitulation of the sentiments expressed multiple times in the preceding thread. Your patience is admirable.

It's a little odd how the fact that it only took Europeans in the US a couple of generations to really start interbreeding is put forward as evidence that all groups will eventually mix together. Blacks have been here for centuries. There was a lot of interbreeding early on, then very little for over a century. It's on the slow uptick now, but still nowhere near interethnic interbreeding among those of European descent.

Feryl,

Zyklons will be the first American generation where whites only make up half the population, and there's a good chance they'll be in their 20s and 30s when the political dissolution of the US begins to happen. In previous generations, non-whites were mostly the pawns in the culture wars between whites. The non-white numbers are simply too large for that to continue to be the case.

dc.sunsets,

We hold out hope for a turn from trolling to arguments in good faith. Naively, I'm afraid.

Sid said...

Feryl,

Stratfor had a great treatise awhile ago which argued North America (Great Lakes and Missippi River), Europe (Rhine and Danube Rivers), Russia (Volga River), and China (Yellow and Yangtze Rivers) have the geographic means to host world powers in the modern world. From a HBD perspective, this checks out.

It's fun to discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses of the USA, EU, Russia, and China, but all of their core populations (white Americans, Europeans, Russians, and Han Chinese) currently suffer from a weak demographic profile. I think we'll all have fun with geopolitical games over the next 30-40 years, but by the second half of the 21st century, we'll all have precious few young core men left to squander in potential conventional wars. The job will be keeping the demographic waves at bay.

AE,

Right. At the end of the day, the genetic differences between different European nationalities exist but aren't enough to really hinder interbreeding once everyone is speaking English.

In contrast, the gap between whites and blacks is vast. People can chat all they want about whether the Irish were white or not, but it's a lot less of stretch for an English and Irish couple to marry than a white and black one.

People of different races will interbreed easily when they have fewer marriage options, but in general once they have enough of their own kind, they'll stick with them. If 95% of humanity died off from a virus, we'd probably be less hardcore about 1488, but until then...

Feryl said...

"Stratfor had a great treatise awhile ago which argued North America (Great Lakes and Missippi River),"

To this day, isolation and lack of enduring settlement in much of the American West accounts for a lot. The Mountain West (esp. the colder and less populated portion) and the Pacific (esp. the northern stretch) consistently are plagued by rootless and poorly socialized people. I heard one of the white death researchers say that the inter-mountain West has long had quite high suicide rates, probably due to how isolated residents often are from their families. WRT the NW coast, 3 out of 4 singers from the major grunge acts are now dead, all of whom grew up in the Pac NW struggled with obvious personality disorders and life-long drug problems (still living Eddie Vedder grew up in Illinois as a child and then lived in CA as a teenager).

Going by sexual experimentation questions on the GSS, it is indeed the Northeast, Midwest, and Southeast that rate the most wholesome. There's already slippage in the "West South Central" states (mainly from the "outlaw" culture of Oklahoma and Texas) which intensifies as you head further West. This is in keeping with the idea that whites were quickest and most successful at developing civilization on and near major Eastern water ways and their tributaries, and points further West were basically an afterthought with California and Texas being tackled first and the remaining Western states have come even later, with Montana/Idaho/Wyoming to this day basically being a wilderness.

Feryl said...

BTW, it ought to go without saying that different ethnic groups fought over access to such valuable regions, so to say that the geography makes the people doesn't necessarily add up; they had to fight hard to gain, develop, and defend those regions. Cultural Marxism has it that these successful and strong (at least in the past.....) ethnic groups ought to always apologize to and subsidize the loser tribes.

Feryl said...

"Zyklons will be the first American generation where whites only make up half the population, and there's a good chance they'll be in their 20s and 30s when the political dissolution of the US begins to happen. In previous generations, non-whites were mostly the pawns in the culture wars between whites. The non-white numbers are simply too large for that to continue to be the case"

Yeah, the most demographically and financially stable cohorts (those born in the 30's and 40's) were usually the most strident culture warriors, often focusing on battles of the mind, heart, and soul at the expense of, ya know, economic and national security issues. Later generations got little to none of the middle class paradise action, so ultimately the big cultural warriors of these generations typically spent most or all of their life in relative privilege; but there just aren't that many of them.

But you're right about the pawn thing; if you go back and watch campus footage from even the 1990's, student bodies were still overwhelmingly white with token representation of blacks; Asians, Arabs, and even Mestizos were generally absent from most campuses esp. outside the Southwest. Prior to the 2000's, Silents, Boomers, and even early-mid Gen X-ers generally engaged in white on white combat simply due to the homogenous demographics of these eras. So many non-whites have entered America or had kids in America over the last 30 years that we've reached the point at which these ethnic groups can band together and no longer do they need white sponsors or chaperones. And when whites were well over 70% of the population in most parts of the country, well into the 1990's, arguments were more centered on abstract and moralistic ideology; with whites dwindling politics are only going to get more tribalistic, and talk of "values" or "principles" will be a thing of the past. As I said above, economic and foreign policy issues eventually will outstrip moral issues no matter the demographics, but the injection of a multi-racial population will only accelerate the death of the culture war.

Audacious Epigone said...

the death of the culture war

Or its escalation into something far more serious.

dc.sunsets said...

AE, yep, the culture war still looks to me to be an English Civil War redux, and all I await is its going hot.

Sid said...

Feryl,

This is in keeping with the idea that whites were quickest and most successful at developing civilization on and near major Eastern water ways and their tributaries, and points further West were basically an afterthought with California and Texas being tackled first and the remaining Western states have come even later, with Montana/Idaho/Wyoming to this day basically being a wilderness.

If North America lacked the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River, the history and development of the continent would have been similar to Australia's: we would've had a number of cities along the coast, and a massive, incorrigibly undeveloped interior.

(Of course, this is no slight against Australians and their culture. If anything I admire their egalitarian ethic, but they lacked the waterways to turn their country into a continental powerhouse the way the US, Russia, and China have in their histories, and Napoleon/the EU could have done for Europe.)

It makes sense to me that Midwesterners are more wholesome than West Coasters and Rocky Mountains types because they developed agricultural communities on the land. Once you reach the Rockys and the Southwestern deserts, though, it's easier to be a vagrant who at best lets his livestock graze on the land, or have the boom-and-bust economy of oil, mining, and lumber towns, or be involved in lumpenproletariat activity like thieving and whoring.

Corvinus said...

AE--"It's a little odd how the fact that it only took Europeans in the US a couple of generations to really start interbreeding is put forward as evidence that all groups will eventually mix together. Blacks have been here for centuries."

Except you are conveniently leaving out how there were 250 years of legislation and social shaming that prohibited white-black intermarriage from taking place and grabbing a strong foothold.

Feryl--"As I said above, economic and foreign policy issues eventually will outstrip moral issues no matter the demographics, but the injection of a multi-racial population will only accelerate the death of the culture war."

Generation Z is in it for the long-haul regarding the cultural war, as evident by having most positive outlook toward the nation’s growing diversity of any previous generation, and tend to be liberal-moderate with social issues, like support for marriage equality and civil rights.

Anonymous said...

No matter how you slice it, beneath all the socially-induced, socially-friendly layers, each human is a self-serving entity, and liking others is a manifestation of self-liking.

In other words, humans like others to like themselves = like those who they perceive as same as/closer to themselves.
Hence, colour and race.
(Ideology works the same way.)

It's all, only, ego. That's why it must be put differently and disguised all the time.
"Solidarity", "community", "values". Oh yeah. Tell me another one, erected strands of DNA.
(And yes, telling it contrary to what it is helps it be as it is — that's its function. Perfect selfishness can be achieved only through perfect shows of unselfishness and "community concern", lol. As time passes, this art is perfected.)

Anonymous said...

"In previous generations, non-whites were mostly the pawns in the culture wars between whites. The non-white numbers are simply too large for that to continue to be the case""

Lol

As if it were about numbers... and not brains.
Even whites are close to being pawns... :)
Nature's laws are not amended.
Putting different groups together is like pouring into the same can liquids varying in density.
Even whites are now pawns...