Our Way of Life

"You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done." - Ronald Reagan

Friday, September 30, 2005


There is something of a storm growing over the bizarre statement William Bennett recently made about aborting all black babies. Lawrence Auster has an interesting take on the subject, which seems quite possible:

Here’s my theory of why he did it. On racial matters, Bennett, a member of the neocon camp, is a strict liberal, constantly invoking Martin Luther King, and also expressing withering contempt for immigration reformers as un-American. Now one thing that is true about liberals is that they ruthlessly suppress in themselves all rational thought about racial realities and race differences. Because they refuse to let the rational part of their mind deal with race, the only part of their mind that can deal with race is the irrational part. And that’s what happened here. Bennett had suppressed his true thoughts about race differences in crime, and so, unexpectedly, without their having gone through proper channels, they just popped out, in a highly offensive and foolish form.

This fits with the general idea that it is liberals who are the real racists, by which I mean people with irrational negative views about other races. By contrast, traditionalists and race realists deal with race issues with the rational part of their brain. They have assimilated and integrated these matters into their conscious thought processes and can talk intelligently and morally about them. Traditionalists are not inwardly divided between an anti-racist Superego and a racist Id, as liberals are.

Third World Immigration and Australia

I have been rather distracted these last few days, but I wanted to suggest everyone read this excellent article by Andrew Fraser.

The most revolutionary, by far, of these radical changes has been the decision to open Australia to mass Third World immigration. Since the end of World War II a strange alliance of Communists, Christian churches, ethnic lobbies and other pressure groups working through the corporate sector and within the centralised apparatus of state power has set out deliberately to flood the Anglo-Australian homeland with a polyglot mass of Third World immigrants.

Monday, September 26, 2005

Guard the Borders Blogburst

I have been falling behind in not writing about this sooner, but Euphoric Reality is hosting/promoting the Guard the Borders Blogburst, which I recommend everyone who blogs about the border join.

I can't get Blogger to allow me to post the JavaScript required to include the blogroll of GBB bloggers in this post, so for now check the full list out over at Euphoric Reality.

Fred on Looting and New Orleans

Here is an excellent article from over at Fred on Everything:

Yet it happens time and again. There was Los Angeles, burned in 1992. There have been Cincinnati, Miami, Seattle, Washington DC, Chicago, Detroit, Crown Heights, Watts, Newark, on and on and on. When the law loses its grip, the looting begins.


Writers speaking of the looting in New Orleans regularly say that poverty causes looting, and that as a society we should do something about it. But why are blacks poor, and what could society do that it has not already tried? Blacks are always poor, in Africa, in Haiti and Jamaica, in New Orleans. It is a global pattern. Would that it were not, but it is. No one knows what to do about it.

With the inevitability of gravitation, commentators attribute the incompatibility with what we think of as civilization to oppression or neglect by whites. Oh? In Washington, the mayor is usually black, along with a majority of the city council and school board. The principals are black, as are most of the teachers, almost all of the students, and their parents. The funding per student is high. Yet the schools are horrifically bad.

Washington could have any schools it wanted: It is hard to imagine anyone denying blacks better textbooks or forbidding the assignment of more homework. I conclude that they do have the schools they want. Perhaps they don’t want schools at all.


What will happen if, or when, the economy weakens under rising Asian competition, if good jobs are shipped to India and gasoline hits unheard of prices and the standard of living falls hard? Under the imposed amity of today there lurks powerful resentment on both sides. Prosperity has held things together. A flourishing nation can afford affirmative action. But when prosperity goes so will the amity. I can think of no solution other than a passport and a Euro account.

Saturday, September 24, 2005

Globalism, Reflected in a Mirror

Lawrence Auster has been doing some excellent blogging about the problems facing the UK, especially London, as it is increasingly plagued by Third-Worldization and Islamification. As he notes, this does not have to be our destiny:

The doom of Britain is not a material, determined event. It is the outcome of thoughts and choices in the mind and soul of the British. They have abandoned themselves spiritually (and by spiritual I don’t necessarily mean God, I mean a transcendent sense of their historic being as a people and a nation), and so are allowing themselves to be dispossessed materially as well. If they find themselves spiritually again, they can re-take possession of their Island and their destiny.

The great piling of foreign and Third-World peoples into Western countries has been a rather recent and modern event, directly resulting from globalism and the advances that have made it possible. Fast, safe, and cheap transportation between distant locations, easy communication, atomized communities, ideologies like multi-culturalism which promote enclaves of foreign cultures, and so many other things have enabled this great migration to take place, without which it would never have happened.

There is a duality to this however, one which liberalism does not like to mention. For the longest time, while exploiting modernity and the accent of globalism to further their goals though population relocation, liberalism has pretended that any push-back against this phenomenon would put us right back at 1939. We are to believe that either we go along with liberalism, multi-culturalism, and the slow suffocation of Western Civilization, or we will find society digging large holes in the ground and filling them up with the bodies of these newly imported individuals.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

We find ourselves in this situation largely because of the rapid advances of technology and changes in society which have been cynically manipulated by leftists before society could adjust to these changes and establish a new equilibrium. However--and this is the key point--just as changes in technology and society have made it possible to facilitate this mass migration, so too technology can reverse the problem.

Consider for example how advances in transportation and logistics make it possible for literally countless millions of individuals to fly each year, or how for a few dollars, a package can be reliably sent across the country and delivered, all in a few days.

No, the question of repatriating Britain's illegal aliens, its migrants, its false refugees, its unassimilated and unassimilatable Islamic component, is hardly a question of debating genocide. The reality is that not only is repatriation possible, but it is perfectly feasible (and obviously, desirable) to do so in an efficient, human and ethical manner. Further, given the cost of these groups to the UK, and the cost of living differences of their home countries, it is quite possible that this could be an entirely mutually beneficial transaction for both parties.

Despite what liberals might want us to believe, given even a small amount of public will, we can use today's logistics to easily return say, Radical Islamist X, his wives, children and their possessions to Pakistan or Egypt without so much as cracking the good china. Add to this a stipend consisting of essentially what UK taxpayers would have spent anyway, and not only are Britons citizens better off, but X and his families are nicely positioned to settle in, perhaps even open a McDonalds franchise. By all means, let the parting be as amiable as possible; they can be given a gift basket with a little Union Jack and everything, even be allowed to keep the hotel towels, just so long as everyone realizes that it was never meant to be. "Sorry, old chap, it just didn't work out, but better we all recognize this sooner than later."

Another aspect where modernity, specifically multi-culturalism, has made this both feasible and rather easy, is that by never really separating from their home culture, any culture shock would be minimal. Quite the opposite, the culture shock would likely be much smaller for many of these Islamists once relocated that it would if they were to remain in the UK.

I don't mean to deny that there would be significant challenges involved in repatriating Third-World or unassimilatable individuals. Certainly the public will is not yet there, though it is rather inevitable in my view. Nor would much of this be a good job for the government to do; there are plenty of companies which are much more suited to running the logistics in an efficient and cost effective manner. Obviously getting people to leave peacefully would be one of the biggest challenges, but with sufficient incentives (both positive and negative) most would see the writing on the wall. Certainly by the time radical Islamists are running around shooting at police and proclaiming their enclave as an infidel-free zone, any possibility of the public changing its mind is quite over.

There might also be the issue that some have pieces of paper or records which show they have become citizens. But once citizenship becomes a matter of what a piece of paper says, well, citizenship becomes merely another piece of paper. Certainly the concept of citizenship entirely decoupled from shared history or ancestors, nationality, ideas, values, or even a minimal shared interest, is a weak social construct, and a very unnatural one at that. The situation is best compared to that of an individual issuing his own currency. The currency may have some value as long as others agree to recognize it, but it has no intrinsic value. As soon as others cease to agree to accept it, it is valueless because it not based on anything of actual worth.

In the same way, the "citizenship" of say, a radical Islamic cleric who not only has no shared similarities with most Britons, but even more so, professes his disloyalty and hate for these same people, is only a "citizen" as long as Britons agree to this social construct, and while the government can force or coerce others to recognize this piece of paper or government record. Certainly however, from a historical perspective, the accepting of dislike individuals with different self or group interests onto your family/tribe/nation is both entirely unnatural and unstable.

The key point of this post however, is that just as modernity has made these rapid, destructive and unnatural changes to Western societies possible, so too can it make reversing the problem both feasible and humane. I don't deny that this is an issue which deserves considerable public debate before action is taken, but there should be debate and a realistic appraisal of options, which is precisely what the liberals wish us to believe do not or should not exist. Repatriating these individuals does not doom us to repeating some tribal slaughter or ethnic cleansing of the past. Instead, this is about simply undoing mistakes in a manner that is responsible toward all parties.

Let's face it, someone will have to accept the costs of these Islamists and Third-Worlders. Ideally, it would fall on the heads of those liberals who promoted the mass migration, but this is not realistically possible. Instead, the question will have to be publicly asked and debated, who should bare the costs, those who came here to benefit or even to wreck havoc, or the native population? There is only one ethical answer to this question.

Friday, September 23, 2005


I posted recently about the possibility that the perfect storm is brewing, both figuratively and literally, against Bush's open-border initiative. As many may already be aware, Bush seems to be desiring to push his amnesty program this fall with the support of big business and Hispanic organizations. Katrina seems to have thrown the administration's agenda off course temporarily, and Rita looks set to do the same. At least the next week is going to be spent by the media obsessing over Rita and it's aftermath. Come October first, we can expect to see the Minuteman project out in full force, manning both the southern and portions of the northern border.

Looking at the politics of the situation, time seems to be running out for Bush and his trans-national friends. The chances to head-off the Minutemen and their press storm are running out. Certainly the Minutemen will be able to get up and running before the administration has a chance to re-focus the agenda from Rita to a "guest worker" program. The best they may be able to do is co-opt the growing furry over the border by trying to sell their "solution" as a fix rather than a big business/ethnic lobby giveaway. Since Delay seems to have made clear that enforcement must come before any "guest worker" program in the House, it is unlikely that the administration will be able to pull a fast one on us.

Another aspect where the clock is ticking is the upcoming congressional election in 2006. Party discipline may hold for a little while longer, but before long many in congress are going to be looking at this popular revolt and considering how to maximize their chances to get reelected. As I have predicted before, there is likely going to be a significant split this fall or winter as congressional Republicans realize that Bush's lifeboat is really more of a sinking cast iron bathtub. Even Bush stopped talking about his open-border initiative during the run-up to the 2004 election; does he really expect that congressmen think they will gain politically from voting for it?

My guess is that the open-border coalition which the administration built over the summer was designed to be used to counter the Minuteman Project, ideally to saturate the press with favorable "guest worker" noise right before the October campaign, and thus hopefully blunt the grassroots effort. Personally, I think that these two large Hurricanes were not in anybody's plans, and have thrown the Bush camp into a seriously weakened position. Let's hope Rove is kept pre-occupied for the foreseeable future.

Police Looting

Here is a remarkable CNN video about police looting in New Orleans. Watch the NOPD's spokesman invent bold-face lies about what some of its officers are doing. Remarkable.

Thursday, September 22, 2005

The Times they are A-Changin'

I have a rather busy week or ten days ahead, projects, traveling to another city for an interview, etc, so I may not be as active on this blog as I would like during this period. I do have plans to have a very important essay coming up for this blog however, which I hope will be a significant advancement in the discussion of political correctness, or will at least provide some new insights. There was one incident today however which I wanted to write about before I forget.

While running some errands today, I had just gotten off the elevator after an undergraduate who looked to be the anti-red-neck: well (and metro-sexually) dressed, likely upper-middle class in background, and by any guess probably the touchy-feely liberal type. I reached the office I was going to while our metro-sexual friend continued down the hall to where about 8-10 other white undergraduates were setting waiting for class. What happened next was surprising, as he greeted his fellow classmates as "my fellow minorities", which they apparently found both a funny and astute observation. They followed with some more politically incorrect joking along the same vein, which I couldn't quote make out in entirety other than when somebody cried out "I can't believe I just said that!". Nothing was especially cruel or hateful mind you, it was just the awareness that was shocking. Since when could you refer to whites in a group, as a group, among a bunch of acquaintances you probably don't know very well?

Of course, it is easy to dismiss this as nothing, and perhaps in the big scheme of things it is, but I would argue that there is much more going on here than meets the surface. I have written before on this blog about the growing awareness on campuses, especially among young white males, that political correctness is aimed primarily at us. This instance, if dissected, revels several interesting things going on. First, an implicit or explicit group identity is referred to, perhaps as a joke, but referred to none the less. Secondly, this was done rather publicly, and not only was there little or no opposition that I could detect, the other members of the group appeared to join in. Third, by referring to whites as a minority (one assumes they were waiting for a class with a large number of minorities/foreign students in it), there was clearly at least a subconscious, instinctive concern being raised about the changing demographics of our country.

None of this was especially ideologically well defined I am sure; as I have mentioned before, this growing realization or consciousness is largely ad-hoc in that there is no real theoretical or abstract thinking behind it (yet). And interestingly from my (albeit finite) experience, the phenomenon is at least as strong among nominal Democrats, suggesting that this is no red-neck conspiracy either. What to make of this in its entirety, I don't yet know. I do believe however that increasingly among the young "intellectual class" there is a growing refusal of the riches of Egypt for the hope of the Promised Land. All that I can say with any certainty is that just as when our Founding Fathers expressed the natural rights and traditions of Englishmen in terms of the ideas of the Enlightenment, so too we must re-express these eternal and ancestral rights that form a part of our heritage in the ideas of today, be that genetics, evolutionary psychology, bio-politics, or any number of new and powerful tools that await our use. We can only fail if we don't try.

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Frame It

This is an excellent chart which everyone should print out and keep as a handy reference. It will go a long ways in explaining many aspects of society. I will probably refer back to it often, but I just re-found it and wanted to share. Article here.

Playing Grown-Up

Hurricane Rita is going to be providing an interesting opportunity for comparison and contrast in the response of the state governments. At this point we still don't know much about how it will turn out of course, but so far the response of Texas has been sharply contrasting to that of Louisiana.

Although Galveston police don't plan to drag reluctant residents off the island, city officials reassured residents no one who wants to leave would be left behind. Sharon Strain, head of the Galveston Housing Authority, said anyone who can't make it to the buses would be picked up.

"We've got more bus space than people and I'm not going to send them off empty,'' said City Manager Steve LeBlanc. "We are going to hold empty buses until the bitter end."

Evacuating the frail has become a top priority. Clear Lake Regional Hospital and Mainland Medical Center began evacuating patients today, along with the Isle's only hospital, the University of Texas Medical Branch Galveston.

This morning UTMB Galveston was evacuating 450 patients by helicopter and ambulance. Plans call for adult patients to go to the Univeristy of Texas Health Center at Tyler and children to go to Children's Hospital of Austin.

This is all very strange, if we are to believe the liberals and the multi-cultural right. Louisiana was blessed with diversity in leadership, in the form of both a female governor and a young black mayor for New Orleans. Surly with the blessing that these normally repressed groups bring to our fair land, one would expect things to be exactly the opposite, with the white man's oligarchy in Texas mired hopelessly in cronyism and groupthink as the killer storm approaches.

One of the things about the disaster of Katrina that was hard to miss was the feeling that the leadership both in NO and of the state was playing grown-up. To them, this wasn't a real life or death event, instead it was like playing cop or mommy; they were living in their own little make-believe world. After all, they had watched the white man's oligarchy enough to see there was nothing to leadership. Anyway, it was there turn to run the show, so who are you to criticize them? Their make-believe world did not last long however, ultimately leaving them even more child-like as they screamed and thrashed about, blaming everyone but themselves and demanding someone come and clean up their mess.

In all of this, we can clearly see the hand of political correctness which has cut its path of destruction across our society in true hurricane-like fashion. Words like discipline, accountability, and responsibility are precisely what is required to run a tight operation in an emergency situation like Katrina or Rita, however these are not very PC. After all, the leadership in Katrina was new and improved Humanity 2.0; anything that might hurt anybody's feelings just wasn't allowed.

All this covers up much of what is behind the white man's supposed oligarchy that makes it so efficient (generally). First among the keys to success is competition; real competition, where nobody gets to make excuses and if you fail, there is always somebody else who wants your place. One of PC's favorite sins is to be harsh, to fail to be understanding; however this is precisely how the outside world, reality, is.

There are of course women and minorities that are on an equal plane in the white man's world; however the problem with political correctness is that it is so hungry for a "desirable" candidate that it looks past qualifications or merit, even to the point of denial of faults or failures. In the grown-up world however, this is a recipe for disaster.

Disloyal Party Members: To the Gulag!

From Jim Gilchrist's site:

Attendees at the state convention of the California GOP were shocked and dismayed to learn that operatives of candidate John Campbell had attempted to move a resolution that threatened with “expulsion from the California Republican Party” any member of the state GOP who “supports, advocates, or assists in any way” the campaign of Congressional candidate “Minuteman” Jim Gilchrist.

Phil Paule, who works closely with advisors of the Campbell campaign, introduced a draft resolution to the Rules Committee against Gilchrist that would have effectually made the State Chairman of the California Republican Party a “Grand Inquisitor” of political conformity.

Also listen to Jim on the Terry Anderson Show here.

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Like Locust to the Corn

Vie American Patrol, here is a recent account from an Austin, TX parade:

Near the end of the melee, one of my Hispanic friends walked over to me and began pointing out people wearing shirts promoting the author of the Plan of San Diego. Another friend who has taken Latin-American studies pointed out another shirt directly mentioning the Plan of San Diego.

Folks, every time I think I know everything about Texas history, I learn how ignorant I am. I asked my friends what the Plan of San Diego was and they told me that it was a plan in Northern Mexico and throughout the Southwest hatched in 1915 that called for the genocide of all white males over 16.

I’ve known my friends for many years, but I couldn’t believe them. I got home and spent three hours on the Internet at the University of Texas’ historical website, at other universities’ websites in Mexico and Illinois, and on the website of the Hispanic Historical Society.

What I learned chilled me. They didn’t just write up a plan, they acted upon it, killing at least 21 white males in South Texas in cold-blooded murder. We’re talking helter-skelter, Charlie Manson-type cold-blooded murder of random white ranchers and farmers: cornering people and hacking them up.

American Patrol also reminds us of the quote by Presidential Medal of Freedom recepiant Mario Obledo who a few years ago said:

California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doen't like it should leave.

Compared to advocating genocide, that statement sounds quite mild today.

What is most frustrating about both of these instances however is just how large of lies they are. These Third World Hispanics don't want their own country or state; they already have it south of the border, and it is a veritable hell hole.

No, this is about something different. As much as white-flight may be politically incorrect to talk about, it is certainly less so than its unmentionable cousin "minority tag-along". From a previous post:

One of the results of a politically correct, multicultural (PC/MC) society is to radically reinvent society into a form of bondage or coerced association between a collection of productive individuals on one hand, and parasitic individuals or groups on the other.


For some, the thought of calling the parasitic elements of society "parasitic" may seem cruel or hard-hearted; however there is no other word which better describes the situation. It is certainly true that if some individuals take, then some productive individuals somewhere else must in turn give. In this way, there is a clear hierarchy of dependence, but it is only a one-way dependency. It should be obvious that these parasitic elements of society benefit from a system that they neither created, nor could ever create if left to their own devices. Further, it is certainly right to call this state of affairs unjust, for that is what it is.
When California becomes mired in crime and corruption, when the coders and engineers leave Silicone Valley, when the people in the city by the bay find they are surrounded by not so "gentile people" anymore, when this "New Mexico" is achieved, what then? Perhaps Colorado or Washington will become the new California or Texas to be beset upon?

Like locust to the corn, like fire to the ripe field, these raiders know no fullness or end.

Monday, September 19, 2005

Gilchrist for Congress: 15 Days Left

I have put up Jim Gilchrist's banner on the right sidebar. I strongly believe that he is a very good person to send to Congress, both on his own merits, and to send a message to our political leaders.

Please do your part. We hear a lot about patriotism, but if there was ever an opportunity where such a small price could pay such huge dividends, this is it. Consider doing one or more of the following:

  1. Donate! Jim obviously does not have the backing of big business or other deep pockets.

  2. Put one of his banners on your site. Get them here.

  3. Volunteer if you live in the area, or if you have friends in the area, encourage them to do so.

  4. Talk it up. Spread the word, post about it on your blog, tell anyone you know who is concerned about the border, etc. Encourage others to donate and spread the word too.

UPDATE: I posted this yesterday, but I may move it up again periodically for the next couple of weeks. 15 days left!

Friends of the Border Patrol versus Third World Enrichment

Here is some more news about the recent violence against the FBP which will break anyone's heart who believes in and loves America as the land of the free:

The organizer of an anti-illegal immigration group that has attempted to launch a border-watch effort over the weekend said he may take his operation underground, it was reported today.

Andy Ramirez, organizer of Friends of the Border Patrol, told the San Diego Union-Tribune that he was worried about his and participants' safety after a run-in with protestors during a training session Saturday.

"We're not scared," Ramirez told the newspaper. "If it means that we put our people out there quietly, then that's how we do it."

Ramirez says his plans to stage civilian border patrols have not been canceled despite the low turn out of only 25 participants at the training session at the Mission Valley Resort Hotel.

Some participants have told the Union-Tribune other prospective participants were scared away after a confrontation with a small crowd of protestors at the Scottish Rite center, where sign-ups were held Saturday morning.

Where did we go so wrong? As Americans, we were taught that we had certain rights, certain inaliable rights, that could not be infringed upon. What difference does it make if the government is going around attacking people who they disagree with, or if it is violent "residents"?

NRA to the Rescue

Vie Michelle Malkin, the NRA is looking into the shameful issue of gun confiscation in New Orleans.
On Monday, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, and NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox slammed New Orleans authorities for this incredible action.

“What we’ve seen in Louisiana-the breakdown of law and order in the aftermath of disaster-is exactly the kind of situation where the Second Amendment was intended to allow citizens to protect themselves, ” LaPierre said. “For state, local, or federal government to disarm these good people in their own homes using the threat of imminent deadly force, is unthinkable.”

“The NRA will not stand by while guns are confiscated from law-abiding people who’re trying to defend themselves,” Cox said. “We’re exploring every legal option available to protect the rights of lawful people in New Orleans.”


If you have personally had a gun confiscated in Louisiana since Hurricane Katrina hit, please call (888) 414-6333. Be prepared to leave only your name and immediate contact information so we can get back to you. Once again, we are seeking contact information from actual victims of gun confiscation in Louisiana only.

Also see this previous post, about the importance of practicing the Second Amendment.

Sunday, September 18, 2005

National Policy Institute

I am very happy and proud to have discovered a new think tank organization which has just opened its doors in Washington, DC. The National Policy Institute is a organization which we have been needing for some time, poised to fill a void with responsible, academic quality information and publications. They are just getting their site online, but more publications will be coming soon it looks like. Look at the organization and consider if it might be something you would like to donate to.

Some Things Never Change

I was reading this article about the envisioned potential expansion of the ability of the military to operate on US soil, and it reminded me of something that I was reading last night from Tacitus' account of the German people about two thousand years ago:

They choose their kings by birth, their generals for merit. These kings have not unlimited or arbitrary power, and the generals do more by example than by authority. If they are energetic, if they are conspicuous, if they fight in the front, they lead because they are admired.

It is interesting in several aspects. First, we see a President Bush, a President Clinton X 2, a President Bush X 2, and now many Democrats are hoping for a President Clinton. Monarchy anyone?

Secondly however, is that one of the outcomes of New Orleans is that for perhaps the first time (at least in over a century) we are looking at the military as a prime source of domestic order and authority. Certainly with the combination of increasing ethnic instability and distrusted public officials, the military (which I believe is the single most trusted institution in the country, reportedly as I recall with about 80% approval) has grown in power and sway. While still a crazy though, the idea that a military coup could take place in America, given the right circumstances, no longer seems quite as ridiculous.

I can't help but wonder if we are not moving backwards, though ironically I would worry much less about a military government than Jesse Jackson running the show "democratically".

Hey, General Franks seems like a nice guy...

Smelling Blood in the Water?

Drudge reports that Clinton is "turning" on Bush. From this article:

Former US president Bill Clinton sharply criticized George W. Bush for the Iraq War and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, and voiced alarm at the swelling US budget deficit.

Breaking with tradition under which US presidents mute criticisms of their successors, Clinton said the Bush administration had decided to invade Iraq "virtually alone and before UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction."

As I wrote in a previous post today, Bush is defiantly looking weak. He has pulled out of some tough situations before, and Clinton's duplicity may yet hurt him and the Democratic party. However it is interesting to see someone with Clinton's political instincts sensing the weakness right now, as opposed to earlier (i.e. the presidential election) or waiting till at least the congressional elections. This is no time for Bush and the Republicans to be disappointing their conservative base, or giving hand-outs to big business and the open-border lobby.

Many conservatives will be inclined at this point to complain about how it is all the fault of a negative media, and this is no doubt true to a certain degree. However many of Bush's wounds are self-inflicted. In politics, "what have you done for me lately" is always the question of the hour. Let's look at a few areas where Bush and the Republican congress could have shown some leadership and action:

Illegal immigration
Protecting the border from terrorist and WMD crossing
Radical Islam state-side
Public education
Affirmative action
Competent global diplomacy
Having public communication skills

Where has the media been on these issue? With few exceptions, the media will not even touch most of these issues, so we know that leftist media is not really to blame. Who is then?

If conservatives want improvement, they are going to have to express their disappointment, and even more so, withhold their support. With a year to go before the mid-term elections, now is as good a time to do it as any. Perhaps if enough bloggers and pundits give Bush and Co. the cold shoulder, they will wake up before it is too late.

UPDATE: ShrinkWrapped has another theory why Clinton is doing what he is doing, specifically, that he fears that there is going to be dirt coming out against his administration concerning perhaps the Able Danger story, and he wants to be on the offensive rather than defensive. Not a bad theory really.

Of course, you could combine the two: Clinton could have been waiting for an opportunity to attack Bush when he is weak, while working with him when he was strong. This is classic Sun Tzu:

When ten to the enemy's one, surround him.
When five times his strength attack him.
If double his strength, engage him.
If equally matched, be capable of dividing him.
If less in number, be capable of defending yourself.
And, if in all respects unfavorable, be capable of eluding him.

A Country Boy Can Survive

Steve Sailer posts this bit from the AP, which I thought was remarkably hilarious:

The Wal-Mart store in uptown New Orleans, built within the last year, survived the storm but was destroyed by looters. "They took everything -- all the electronics, the food, the bikes," said John Stonaker, a Wal-Mart security officer. "The only thing left are the country-and-western CDs."

Yes that's right people, the racist media just took pictures of black people looting and cut all the honkys out. Sure...

Ok, I am going to stop before I get myself into trouble.

UPDATE: Ok, more trouble.

Bill "pink/grey" Whittle has this to say...

Tribes. Pink. Grey. Green, red, yellow, pink. Rainbows! Rainbows...I love gay people. Rainbows everywhere. I have a dream. I see a light. Light everywhere. A thousand points of light!

A thousand points of light!

Light everywhere. A thousand points of light...

UPDATE 2: Ok, it was gray tribe, not blue. Well anyway, don't drink and blog I guess.

Katrina, Bush, and the Defeated of the Spanish Armada: Could History Repeated Itself?

I think that we are all familiar with the story of the almost miraculous defeat of the Spanish Armada, a critical junction in history and especially that of the Anglo-Saxon world. I have started to wonder however, if history might be repeating itself in some blessed way, if the wind may be turning to favor our sails and thus save America from the dark future the leftists would have in store for us.

What am I talking about? Well there are a number of events coming together which may produce the perfect storm against the open-border advocates. Chief among them is the October Minuteman Project border watch, which will once again put the issue of border control front and center in the public mind. Without the proper political environment and dynamics however, the efforts of these patriotic citizens would be seriously hampered, as leftists and multi-cultural Republicans work together to defeat the broad will of the American people once again.

We are probably all aware of the plan that the White House has been developing for this fall to combine open-border activists, Hispanic organizations, and big business donors to launch a massive campaign to sell some kind of amnesty program (sorry, "guest worker program") which Bush has made clear that he wants congress to pass this year. Yet no matter how treacherously many of our leaders and elites have behaved, a storm seem to be developing both literally and figuratively. A combination of events, from growing public awareness of the problem of illegal immigration, to Katrina and the tragedy/farce that was New Orleans, to the continued peace keeping operations in Iraq, to the London Bombings, are forcing Americans to think about where the country is headed, and about the credibility of our leadership.

Vie Real Clear Politics, the poll numbers for support of Bush and congress are falling to record lows. Bush has what I assume is the lowest approval rating of his career, at 41.9% (avg), which if falls much lower will probably be a sign of irrevocable damage among the base. Our hope is probably found more in Congress than with world-citizen Bush however, and here is where numbers really start to hurt (and motivate). As a whole, Congress has an approval rating of 33.3% (avg) which is rather low by any standard. Worse still, a generic congressional ballot poll gives the Democrats a 7.3% (avg) advantage over Republicans, which has to make incumbents in many districts quite nervous. One of the worst, yet perhaps most honest signs however, is the fact that on the "is the country headed in the right direction" question, Americans who are normally optimistic to a fault give yes 30.3% (avg), versus 64.7% (avg) for no.

The reality of the situation that is developing is that voters are going to be in no mood to hear about the latest open-border initiative; instead, they want solutions, and not solutions which are supposedly going to make the problems better sometime in the far future. The American public is increasingly in a bad mood, ready to finally quite taking the abuse and neglect of the political leadership.

As I have mentioned before, congress seems to be very bi-stable, in that they are either going in one direction or the other, but they rarely dally around in between. There is a strong herd/flock mentality, in that each wants to be the first on a new trend or popular cause (once it is clear it is actually popular of course), and the first to leave one that is growing stale. In this way, I believe that the Tancredos and Coburns can greatly amplify their principled and normally marginalized positions, as they lead the way to solving some of America's worst problems.

On of the great tragedies of the current political climate is that the American people really don't have very many options with regard to how they can vote when they get fed up with the current regime. As bad as the mainstream Republican party has become, the Democratic party is completely unsuitable for governing. However it is quite possible that many may turn to the Democratic party, third parties, or simply stay home in 2006 to express their dissatisfaction. Increasingly, any national politician which wishes to get elected to Congress on the Republican ticket is going to have some tough decisions to make.

If I were to make a prediction, I would predict that soon, probably this fall or winter at least, we are going to see a major shift in the Republican party and between Congress and the White House. The only way that many in congress are going to survive the potential nuclear winter of the mid-term congressional elections will be if they can make Bush out as the multi-cultural "conservative" of the Republican party, a veritable Hillary if you will, and define themselves against him. The message is going to have to be populist, and the core Republican platform will probably have to be re-evaluated for the sake of expediency. Free trade, border control, the environment and over-population, energy dependency and (increasing) the size of the military are just a few of the issues that likely could be hit upon. The results may not be the rise of some principled arch-conservatism of days past that some may imagine (sorry folks, times change), but instead should be aimed at building common ground with middle-class Democrats which share concerns about illegal immigration, US jobs, schools, and explicitly or implicitly anti-white practices and policies (I know a lot of Democrats which fit this category, so don't even thinking about laughing). However if we do not turn around the immigration/demographic situation in this country soon, all our conservative dreams of government are going to be permanently lost as we are suffocated by the leftist's "bread and circuses" program of resource re-allocation and vote buying.

None can tell the future, and there is certainly no reason to slack up or believe that things are going to be fine. However I have recently come to believe that we should be heartened, as I think our fate may be about to change. Once again, the Anglo-Saxon world may be saved by a set of circumstances beyond anyone's control. Let us hope.

Wisconsin Six

I have got to admit, I had heard nothing about this tragedy:

Chai Vang, the Hmong immigrant who murdered six Wisconsin hunters last November has been found guilty on six counts of murder and two counts of attempted murder. However, this verdict is not enough. All of his victims were white and his vicious behavior went much farther than simple murder.

Vang was trespassing on private land, when he came upon the group of men and women on a yearly Thanksgiving hunting trip: Robert Crotteau, 42; Joey Crotteau, 20; Al Laski, 43; Mark Roidt, 28; Jessica Willers, 27; and Denny Drew, 55. Only one person in the group actually had a gun!

There has been a growing problem with Hmong hunters trespassing on private lands in Wisconsin and Minnesota. Hmong regularly hunt game out of season, none have licenses, and many reportedly use AK-47 assault weapons.

Robert Crotteau confronted Vang and ordered him to leave as well as report him to game authorities. Vang began walking away, then turned and opened fire on the group.

Vang used a semi-automatic rifle, which held a 20-round clip. He gunned down all eight of the hunters. Five of them died in the woods, one succumbed to his wounds in the hospital, and two survived the attack.

Sawyer County Chief Deputy Tim Zeigle described the murder scene by saying: "Vang was chasing after them and killing them. He hunted them down."

Maybe this is why...

Make no mistake, had a white man been chasing down a group of unarmed Asians, picking them off one by one--the news coverage would trump that of the Natalee Holloway case. The FBI would also consider the massacre to be a 'hate crime.' However, it is never considered to be hateful nor racist when the murder victims are white.

Unarmed Volunteers Attacked and Terrorized in San Diego, US Flag Desecrated

Vie American Patrol, Andy Ramirez's FBP had a meeting yesterday, here is some of what happened:

...The Captain instructed our volunteers where to meet up and was almost immediately confronted by an angry mob. An American flag was immediately desecrated by being torn away from our volunteers, off its pole, and onto the ground where it was stomped on and kicked. This vile act was committed by an individual who had concealed his face from cameras. We do have video footage, which was released by the volunteer to the media and shown in San Diego on their television newscasts.

Individuals on tape were also assaulting and battering a number of senior citizens. Here's something to consider. These young people assaulted our volunteers, many of whom have served our nation in the military with distinction, which includes senior citizens. To show the footage, which we'll post asap on our website, will absolutely leave you speechless, and angry. The protesters stalked our volunteers around the site, screamed in their ears, were cursed at, physically assaulted and battered, trespassed on private property, and participated in crimes of hate and acts of terrorism.

The video is supposed to be up soon, and I will link when it is. Please do your part to pass this information along. It is simply unacceptable that Americans be deprived of their rights by foreigners on our own soil.

Saturday, September 17, 2005

The Revenge of the Productive, Revisited

A few months ago, I wrote a three part series titled “Revenge of the Productive” which was essentially a thought experiment looking at what might happen if mass underclass immigration continues indefinitely. The assumption was made that the underclass would be fairly content and happy, as long as they could be subsidized by the productive class, which would ironically imply that the productive class would be the most likely to agitate for change.

Since the events in New Orleans a few weeks ago, much of what I wrote in the series, especially about the weaknesses of a multicultural, politically correct society, seems to have been clearly demonstrated. It is with that in mind that I am amending and annotating the series. Besides some spelling corrections and edits, the posts are essentially the same in content however.

Part I

Internally or externally imposed order?

One of the results of a politically correct, multicultural (PC/MC) society is to radically reinvent society into a form of bondage or coerced association between a collection of productive individuals on one hand, and parasitic individuals or groups on the other. In every society there have always been children, the elderly, handicapped, and others who could not fully support themselves. However, this new coerced association is marked by the degree to which fully capable adults and feral youths do not contribute, and by the presence of an underclass which is disproportionally costly to society or even anti-social. One of the results of a highly developed, highly educated, yet redistributive society is that even individuals who do some form of minimum-wage work may still be a net-loss to society due to the degree to which they are subsidized, directly or indirectly (consider health care, or driving without auto-insurance as examples).

For some, the thought of calling the parasitic elements of society "parasitic" may seem cruel or hard-hearted; however there is no other word which better describes the situation. It is certainly true that if some individuals take, then some productive individuals somewhere else must in turn give. In this way, there is a clear hierarchy of dependence, but it is only a one-way dependency. It should be obvious that these parasitic elements of society benefit from a system that they neither created, nor could ever create if left to their own devices. Further, it is certainly right to call this state of affairs unjust, for that is what it is. If one doubts the necessity or value of the productive elements of society, Bangladesh, Mexico, and Zimbabwe should provide sufficient examples to learn from.

While the parasitic elements have benefited from this redefinition of society, many of the leftist and elitist fetishes which have been foisted onto society in these last few decades have only been possible as long as the law-abiding citizens have keep society functioning. It would seem that the democratic process would easily solve this abuse, but there have been several major obstacles which have prevented this from happening. First, those most influential and well off often benefit from the system, or tend to be protected from its negative effects. Secondly, politicians have long since realized that redistributive government measures make it easy to buy the votes of the parasitic elements. Finally, our PC/MC society has made it very difficult to even raise the concerns and interests of the productive elements of society in a direct and honest fashion, much less to actually build enough consensuses to generate political results except in the most extreme instances of abuse, such as welfare reform in the 90's. This produces something of a conundrum for the productive middle class however, because unlike say, the riots during the civil rights period, they cannot easily engage in mass-scale civil-disobedience without collapsing the very pillars that keep society held up.

The rather obvious danger is that society will slowly sink to the level of the lowest element, or at least diverge into an overclass and underclass as is the case in many third world countries. However there is a second possibility which could emerge, especially in an Anglo-Saxon, common-law culture, specifically, that the productive citizens might turn the tables and force the rest of society to recognize their importance. It should not be forgotten that the productive elements of society also have the potential to be far more effective in their application of destructive action than others: what they create they can also destroy. Their superior social organizing ability, education, sense of order, and productivity trace back to what Victor Davis Hanson calls the Western way of war, and has long provided the West with an advantage over its adversaries.

By "destructive action", one should not take this to mean anti-government para-military action, terrorism, or any other such extremism however. The probability of any actual revolt by the productive elements of society would tend to be exponentially more likely with respect to lowering the threshold of action. This is to suggest that civil-disobedience/civil-disorder type behavior would both be the most likely result of middle class frustration, and probably the highest degree of disobedience and danger which would still draw large support. For this to be a possibility would require that these social-disobedience/civil-disorder type actions would need to be effective enough to have at least some chance of generating change. If this condition can not be established, then the chances of such instability are quite low.

Part II

Internally or externally imposed order?

Now I will state here, in case anyone who is not already familiar with this blog is unsure, that I am not suggesting, condoning, glorifying, or in any other way supporting any form of revolt. Rather, at the center of my reasons for this blog is a belief that our PC/MC society is rapidly approaching a point of becoming socially and politically unstable; my hope therefore is that we can correct the problem before it is too late and while these changes can be made peacefully and democratically. In other words, the motivation behind this post is to sound out what we might be looking at in a decade or two if we do not take action soon. [Recent events suggest that one to two decades may be far too optimistic.]

Now back to the primary topic: what actions might the productive elements of society take should their frustration reach a tipping point? Some would be rather predictable -- forming associations to promote their interests, lobbying congress, protesting, and even strikes all seem rather plausible. On the other extreme end of the spectrum, we would likely see a rise of extremist groups, especially among youths. However none of these actions seem very effective except for national strikes, but even such strikes would be difficult to actually pull off effectively.

Internally or externally imposed order?

As in any case where resources are at a minimum and efficiency has to be maximized, serious thoughts must be given the methods used. Since the aim of any such actions would be ultimately political rather than merely destructive, a careful evaluation of the political situation would need to be made. Further, all available opportunities would need to be used to exploit the weaknesses of the opponent, and to trick them into working against themselves whenever possible. This would require a careful eye for their weaknesses, fissures, contradictions, and critical nodes.

Internally or externally imposed order?

What then, is the effective weakness, or at least a prime one, of the PC/MC society compared to the Jacksonian social order? It seems that the weakness is effectively whether individuals and groups have self-imposed order, or externally-imposed order.

Internally or externally imposed order?

The disadvantage which the productive elements face is that they not only have to maintain a self-imposed order, but they are also required to provide a minimum amount of external order for the parasitic elements of society. This boundary, where order is imposed internally or externally, is a core weakness of any PC/MC society, and one which presents a weakness which is very vulnerable from attack by any enemy, be it Islamic extremist, China or other foreign powers.

In keeping with the above then, it seems that creating the conditions to separate society clearly into these two groups, and emphasize the difference would be the political objective. In order to do this, it would be necessary to remove (temporarily) the means by which to effectively impose order, thereby allowing what amounts to an exaggerated opportunity for the exercise of free will. At the same time, individuals in the productive majority would be forced to reevaluate their ideological foundations in light of a more honest and realistic picture of society, shaking off the contradictions of the the PC/MC society.

What practical implementation might this strategy take? While there are many possibilities, one is given as follows. Using tactics which are non-violent (though possibly not generally considered merely "civil-disobedience") 3000-5000 individuals would carry out vandalizing attacks on key civil infrastructure: traffic control for major intersections, blacking out of the power grid, and obstructing major highways and transportation infrastructure. At the same time, further efforts to create disorder and swamp the civil authorities might be taken, such as setting tires and refuse on fire, agitating crowds of the unproductive elements, etc. All these activities would be taken simultaneously in 30-100 major urban centers, creating a sudden and unexpected disruption of order.

It should be clear that the efforts would not be designed to be especially destructive in and of themselves. Certainly with the lack of manpower available for such action and potential as few as 30-50 "activists" per urban area, their direct effect would be fairly limited. Rather, the objective of these actions would be to spark further unrest and disorder, as the parasitic elements realize that the civil authorities can not impose order on them, for the time being.

Internally or externally imposed order?

The efforts of the initial disruption of order would be a classical guerilla maneuver, which would be aimed at exposing the opponent and forcing them to overreact and show their true hand. By removing the effective enforcement of order from these parasitic elements, much in the way of their true nature would be reviled. Not only would there be the rather traditional rioting, looting, and opportunistic behavior that characterize such events, but radicalism, be it Islamic, La Raza, or other, would also likely be revealed. As these parasitic elements revel in their new-found "freedom", they would almost doubtlessly begin to display the arrogance of the mob as they overestimate their power and misread their opponents.

Certainly such a scenario would be a potential death-blow for the PC/MC society. With much of the media infrastructure (TV, internet, papers) temporarily disabled, there would be no way to reframe the situation or scapegoat it onto a less politically correct group; rather, individuals would be forced to make up their own minds based on the scene before the. By putting the instability of a PC/MC society on full display, there would be no room left to believe utopian schemes. Finally, the shared experience would tend to create a new sense of unity and identity among the productive class, thereby bringing the sense of "us" and "them" unmistakably out into the open.

Part III

Internally or externally imposed order?

From part II, it does seem reasonable that fairly low-threshold, non-violent action could prove to be very disruptive if targeted at the fault-lines of an unstable PC/MC society. Also, given the fairly small number of "activists" required to initiate such a situation, there would not necessarily need to be a unified productive class before-hand, but rather simply a dedicated core.

Internally or externally imposed order?

Despite the potential danger of such a situation unfolding, there is little reason to expect such a scenario would develop in the near term. First, there is still a significant lack of awareness of the problem among the productive elements of society. Further, multiculturalism has not yet reached its peak, and good economic conditions have masked over much friction between groups. Finally however, even action by a few thousand individuals in a coordinated manner would be quite unrealistic at this stage because of the difficulty of planning and recruiting members without detection by the authorities. Without an established infrastructure in which the productive elements could associate, plan, organize and built trust and relationships, executing such a plan would be essentially impossible.

However, should conditions continue to disintegrate, it is likely that organization on the part of the productive elements will increase. In a sense, the Minuteman Project is an example of the early consciousness of the collective interests of the productive class. The very existence of such an organization, combined with the publicity and the negative attacks directed against it also serves to further concentrate this group identity.

Internally or externally imposed order?

It has been mentioned by others that any violent attacks on the Minuteman Project volunteers while on the border, say by drug or human smugglers, would likely spawn a resurgence of the militia movement of the 90's (though probably not by Minutemen volunteers themselves). It is certainly true that much of the militia movement was in response to the perceived threats of the Clinton administration, and seems to have largely receded since the Bush administration. So it does seem rather plausible that continued failure by Washington to protect the border, combined with violent attacks on non-violent observers might cause the politically sensitive militia movement to reemerge.

A resurgent militia movement would be one sign not only of an increased awareness and organizing on the part of the productive class, but also potential preparation for action. However there could also be other organizing going on, with aims less radical than the militia. These organizations might center on other common interests or goals: concern over crime, collective political lobbying, or shared culture and ethnicity.

Internally or externally imposed order?

Certainly the next few years will be interesting to see how our PC/MC society develops. It is possible that efforts such as the Minuteman Project and others may gain enough momentum to start rolling back some of the excesses of our current society. It is also possible however that instability will grow as the parasitic elements mushrooms, creating a future which we will all wish we had avoided.

-I think at this point that the New Orleans situation has likely caused far more damage to the public perception of the current PC/MC society than we yet realize. There should certainly be no doubt that it had an effect on our enemies, especially China and Islam, as they realized just how volatile our social mix has become. It has become a very cute fetish for many individuals, even on the right, to talk about reforming these parasitic elements, but there is not an infinite time horizon to try these latest social engineering experiments in. The reality is that the situation at this point constitutes a grave national security threat, which makes it practically impossible that our nation with its current demographics could fight another WWII type situation without looking more like Brazil than the USA.

Friday, September 16, 2005

Help Jim Gilchrist

Katie's Dad over at American Kernel posts on a subject that I have been meaning to get around to for some time. Specifically Jim Gilchrist is running for congress in a special election, and he needs all the support he can get. If he can win, it would be profoundly exciting to say the least. Read his background on his site, and you will see how well qualified he is. Donate today if you can!


Also read though American Kernel, as it has a bunch of good stuff.

Growing Frustration in Denmark

Mikkel at Enough! has an excellent post about the growing sense of frustration and anger that people are feeling in Denmark resulting from the actions and attitudes of the many third world'ers living in their country.

...a couple of days ago in Sweden, a couple of Swedish girls were first harassed in the shop where they worked, then pelted with objects, called whores and beaten - especially when they began to resist being terrorized! One of the girls argued, when she was discharged from the hospital two days later, that "..one shouldn't be called whore just because one is Swedish and female.." - she does have a point... What she does not have however, is peace - being called whore in the ghetto of Ronna in Södertälje where this took (takes) place, is very normal for Swedish girls - and this particular girl has more ugly episodes to disperse.

Anyway, when the police arrived at the scene of the mini-ethnic-cleansing, they were attacked by the immigrants who quickly gathered into a swarm of 50 (fifty!) through their preferred means of communication through Mobile-phones. As usual, there were no respect for the police at all which were attacked, heckled, insulted, pelted with stones and so on. As the extremely right winged National Democrats reports: "The immigrants gave no impression of being a poor excluded group, to the contrary, many wore Rolex-watches, brand clothing and gold chain-necklaces in abundance".

Thursday, September 15, 2005

IQ and Living Standards

To continue with the subject of the post from yesterday about IQ and quality of government, the original blog post over at Right Economy blog also had this:

One IQ point is associated with 6.5% higher living standards, while moving up one country in the Ease rankings apparently raises livings standards by 0.6%. So (again, being cavalier about causality) you'd have to move up about 10 countries in the Ease rankings to get the same (long-run) benefit as raising national average IQ by one point.

What can this tell us about the situation that California is currently in?

First, some rough facts and assumptions. California has become about 50% hispanic. American hispanics are slightly over 10 points below whites. Hispanics from south of the border tend to have an even lower IQ, approximately 85 for Mexico, and perhaps lower still in Central America. I am also going to use the assumption that with all the tech industry in California, the mean white IQ is one point higher. Blacks and Asians won't be factored in. Also, the historical hispanic population will be assumed small enough that it can be ignored for this estimate. Illegal/first generation hispanics guessed at 20% of population.

Given the above, as a rough back-of-the-envelope estimation, I am going to estimate the mean IQ of California is about 7 points lower than in would have been without mass illegal immigration from south of the border. This then gives...

6.5% * 7 = 45.5%

In other words, this suggests that without the major population replacement we have seen in California, the standards of living would be approximately 40-50% higher than currently seen, or are likely to see in the future. (Perhaps it is somewhat misleading to suggest that living standards have changed, instead the changes may be yet to come as they probably change more slowly than the demographics.)

Obviously, there is a lot going on here that this estimation does not take into consideration. However, it is still a very interesting thought to consider.

Wednesday, September 14, 2005

Fighting Silence

As many may or (more likely) may not know, The Color of Crime has just been released, which is a factual study of race and crime. Many of the findings are remarkable by any measure, but something that the MSN is quite silent about. I strongly recommend everyone read the VDare article about it, tell their family about it, and generally do whatever possible to shame the media into at least mentioning it.

Some interesting points from the article:

The proportion of blacks and Hispanics in an area is the single best indicator of how dangerous it is. The racial mix is a much better predictor of crime rates than poverty, unemployment, and dropout rates combined.

Although Jesse Jackson and Bill Cosby wring their hands over black-on-black mayhem, blacks actually commit more violent crime against whites than blacks. A black is about 39 times more likely to do violence to a white than the other way around, and no less than 130 times more likely to rob a white.


Some years back, a group called Violence Free Duluth in Duluth, Minnesota, studied a year's worth of the city's gun crimes. They looked into type of gun used, whether liquor or drugs were involved, the relationship between shooter and victim; age, race, and sex of criminal, etc.

But when they released their report they left one thing out: race of perp.

Frank Jewell, head of the organization, explained that "we didn't include it because it might be misinterpreted."

Duluth's deputy police chief Robert Grytdahl added that race might distract whites from the real problem: "It's a comfortable place for white people to park the [gun crime] problem. It would be a huge distraction, and we wanted to focus on firearms." [Duluth Gun, Crime Study Withholds Race Data, [Pay Archive] By Larry Oakes, Minneapolis Star Tribune, April 30, 1999.]

Mr. Jewell and Mr. Grytdahl are saying, almost in so many words, that the people of Duluth can't be trusted with the truth.

Duluth is about 90 percent white. What if it turned out most of the gun crime was committed by the other 10 percent?

Someone might think Duluth has, not a gun problem, but a minority problem.

When an organization deliberately suppresses its findings like this, it is not doing research: it is putting out propaganda.


Pierre Legrand has a good post about why the 2nd Amendment is so important, and why it is so equally important to practice it:

If someone told you that a major city in the United States could descend into anarchy all of us would have probably dismissed them as a nutty survivalist that we might need to be careful around. If he went farther and declared that because of this possibility we should all make sure we not only had weapons but knew how to use them we would probably, even if we agree with the 2nd amendment, declare that a pitiful way to make the argument for owning and being trained to use firearms.


Obviously the argument that may be advanced by those trying to take our weapons away will be well no other city will be hit with such a deadly hurricane. Which completely forgets the small fact that we are at war with a group of people who think it would be peachy dandy to reduce several other cities to levels below that of New Orleans. Police protection in those instances would also be nonexistent since obviously they would be dealing with the disaster itself. For a short time at least you will be on your own and standing in front of your house with your finger pointed at a looter/thug is not going to be nearly as effective in convincing him to not steal your generator, food and water as my Stainless Steel Springfield GI-45 with a 5" barrel loaded with Winchester FMJ 230 gr and High Standard 20 gauge with the 18.5 inch barrel and #4 shot. Welcome to the brave new world of self reliance...something our grandfathers knew a bit about.

IQ & Good Governance

Vie Steve Sailer, the Right Economy blog has a very interesting post about the correlation between IQ and the quality of government. While this is quite predictable, it is just one more reason why it is irrational to continue to pretend that we can design or manage social systems without inquiring what types of people they will contain.

Why would I think that higher national average IQ will lead to better governance? Well, mostly because of Linda Gottfredson. She's a sociologist who has looked at how higher intelligence helps people throughout their everyday lives. According to her, IQ tests measure a lot more than just "your skill at taking standardized tests." They measure key skills that are extremely helpful in just getting through the day (and in producing output).

Not All Cultures are Equal

From the Guardian, vie EconoPundit:

A Chinese cosmetics company is using skin harvested from the corpses of executed convicts to develop beauty products for sale in Europe, an investigation by the Guardian has discovered.

Agents for the firm have told would-be customers it is developing collagen for lip and wrinkle treatments from skin taken from prisoners after they have been shot. The agents say some of the company's products have been exported to the UK, and that the use of skin from condemned convicts is "traditional" and nothing to "make such a big fuss about".


He suggested that the use of skin and other tissues harvested from executed prisoners was not uncommon. "In China it is considered very normal and I was very shocked that western countries can make such a big fuss about this," he said. Speaking from his office in northern China, he added: "The government has put some pressure on all the medical facilities to keep this type of work in low profile."

The agent said his company exported to the west via Hong Kong."We are still in the early days of selling these products, and clients from abroad are quite surprised that China can manufacture the same human collagen for less than 5% of what it costs in the west." Skin from prisoners used to be even less expensive, he said. "Nowadays there is a certain fee that has to be paid to the court."

Tuesday, September 13, 2005

Learning from Sun Tzu

I have been doing my periodic re-reading of Sun Tzu's The Art of War, and one part really stuck out:

If the war is long delayed, the men's weapons will be blunted and their ardor will be dampened. If the army attacks cities, their strength will be exhausted. Again, if the army engages in protracted campaigns, the resources of the state will not suffice. Now, when your weapons are blunted, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted, and your treasure spent, neighboring rulers will take advantage of your distress to act. In this case, no man, however wise, is able to avert disastrous consequences that ensue.

Thus, while we have heard of stupid haste in war, we have not yet seen a clever operation that was prolonged. There has never been a case in which a prolonged war has benefited a country. Therefore, only those who understand the dangers inherent in employing troops know how to conduct war in the most profitable way.

There are a lot of things which can be drawn from the above. Certainly China is laughing at us as we try to conduct a "humane" war against barbarians.

I have increasingly come to the realization that the war against Islam has not actually started. When history looks back at 9/11, I fear that it will view what we have been doing as merely pacifying the masses, government PR, if you will. This is a shame, and perhaps I will be wrong, but increasingly, I don't think that I will.

Sunday, September 11, 2005

Remembering 9/11

On today, the anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, we have paused to remember the horrors of that day, most typified by the images of individuals jumping from the burning towers. Power Line Blog draws attention to one of the heroes of that day, Rick Rescorla:

Rescorla was a British native who moved to the United States to join the Army and fight in Vietnam. Rescorla was inspired to move to the United States in part by his friendship with Dan Hill, and their friendship is the one constant theme of the book. Hill and Rescorla had become friends in Rhodesia and self-consciously modeled themselves on the characters of Peachy and Dravot in Kipling's story "The Man Who Would Be King." They both served as officers in Vietnam, where in 1965 Rescorla saw harrowing combat in the Ia Drang Valley.


Rescorla died a hero's death saving his charges at Morgan Stanley in the south tower of the World Trade Center on 9/11. Rescorla was head of security for the company and directed the evacuation in which he had long drilled them. Using a bullhorn he shephered his charges into the tower's one usable fire escape and exhorted them that it was "a day to be proud to be an American."

UPDATE: Steve Sailer reminds us in the comments section that Rick Rescorla was depicted in the book and movie, "We Were Soldiers Once... and Young".

UPDATE 2: I think one of the truly sad, and really degenerate, aspects of our current state of affairs is our inability to really make men like Rescorla into popular heroes that we can rally around the way we could and would have in previous times such as WWII. Today people would call it "propaganda" if we took serious efforts to make Rescorla and Todd Beamer icons in a broader sense in our fight against Islam. But I think that these hero figures play a critical part in rallying and sustaining unity (and even more importantly, a sense of "us"), just as the Norse and Greek legends and sagas played in past times and cultures. Of course, I suppose that this is precisely what liberalism is so afraid of, that we might develop a taste for the blood of our murderous enemies and a sense of "us" and "them", and ultimately forsake our universalism.

Saturday, September 10, 2005

Rejecting the Embrace

Lawrence Auster neatly sums up the problem of both the "Crescent of Embrace" outrage, and more broadly, our modern society:

..seen from the point of view of our present society, it’s not an outrage, it’s simply the only way modern liberal people (and all modern people are basically liberals) can articulate any issue, which is global, open, inclusive. To assert “us” versus “them” is closed and intolerant, the very thing that must be overcome.

That’s why I say that only a principled renunciation of modern liberalism can really change things. As long as liberalism remains our dominant belief system, atrocities like this will be the norm.

A Note on Charity

I have always believed that one of the proudest qualities of Americans is our commitment to charity outside of coerced government resource reallocation programs (talk about turning the other cheek...). That said, I thought I might make a few points on charity for Katrina victims, which some people may or may not agree with.

First, it seems to me at least, that the best and most responsible charity is to either give to those you know or those who have relatives who were effected, or to volunteer in your community to work with those refugees who are arriving. It seems that there is a real danger that many of these charities have high latencies on their supply chains, so this disaster may be little more than an opportunity to "recharge" their funds. On the flip side, charities which are very good at either being early on the scene or filling key voids that the government does not, should (and ideally in a rational economic market, would) be rewarded. Sadly, many of these disasters tend to end up in a form of mass "emotional masturbation" fueled by polished ad campaigns and celebrity charity drives, so it is not clear to me that much of "big-charity" is any more efficient than government is (perhaps far worse).

That said, charity takes many forms. Responsible charity may include for example ensuring that refugees who are arriving in your neighborhood are not registered sex offenders or dangerous criminals. It is interesting to note that the Minuteman Project requires people to pay $50 to cover a background check; is it really so irrational to want to know a little bit about the people moving into your own town?

Let's be clear: the people leaving NO are largely victims of circumstances beyond their control. However, there is a sizable minority, perhaps even several hundred thousand, which absolutely no respectable, tax paying American should ever have to live by. Let there be no mistake: bad habits corrupt good, absolutely. For many cities, towns, and neighborhoods, the tragedies of New Orleans will be perpetuated again and again, as the criminal elements ripple their way across America.

Another form of responsible charity may be ensuring that you, your family and your neighbors will be safe and have some plan for disaster and/or anarchy should a similar event happen where you live. If you have a family, and you don't have a gun in your home (safely kept, of course), you really need to think long and hard about buying one before you give one cent to charity. I really mean that. Buying some basic survival kits might also be in order: water filtration, MRE's, first aid, etc. Depending on where you live and what type of element you might be evading, you might also be interested and surprised to learn how affordable bullet proof vests are.

Be sure to talk to your neighbors about such things too. You don't want them to think you are paranoid, but educating them and developing some kind of minimal plan for evacuation could make a tremendous difference in a disaster situation.

So Much for "We are all Americans"

There is a buzz in the blogsphere (see here, here, here) about the Gretna police holding people back from crossing the bridge out of NO into Gretna.

We will probably learn more about why the officers did what they did, be it just more incompetence, a sincere (and possibly correct) belief that they were containing the anarchy, racism, etc. What is interesting however is to look at this in light of NO being the anti-9/11, when everyone united and even the French wrote "We are all Americans". Instead, what we see here is almost a reversion to tribalism; if it had a motto, it might be "Even Americans are not Americans".

In other words, this is but a small glimpse of what a balkanized, chaotic, "post-American" America might look like.

Another point which is hard to miss is the irony of enforcing a city "border" from American crossers while we are allowing millions of people to cross the national border illegally each year.

Friday, September 09, 2005

More Belated Blogging

I have been a bit busy these last few days, and somewhat under the weather to boot, so blogging has been slow. I just wanted to note this interesting article on VDare for anyone who might have missed it though. It relates the story of a student at a Catholic university, and the bizarre political correctness training that was involved in becoming a student counselor.

I was told to place myself on something called the Riddle Homophobia Scale. I chose the "acceptance" level. As it turned out, "tolerance" and "acceptance" are still considered "homophobic" ("implies there is something to accept"). Ultimately, I was told, I should aim to find myself nurturing GLBTQA, wherein I will realize that "gay/lesbian people are indispensable to our society", and will view GLBTQAs with "genuine affection and delight," manifested by an eagerness to be an ally and advocate for their community.


The encouraging thing about Kevin Carter’s report was the backlash he observed post-brainwashing. No such phenomena took place after my experience. The few of us RAs that have banded together—all female, the men say nothing, perhaps because many are themselves gay—quietly whisper "hypocrisy" in back corners of basement apartments. But any more than that threatens our employment.

And, for a broke college student, free room and board plus a stipend makes it impractical not to sell out our values.

Someone should really tell these college professors and administrator that repression breeds anger and resentment. One of these days things are going to go ka-boom.

Thursday, September 08, 2005

"It's like Baghdad on a bad day"

ParaPundit calls attention to an article in the Washington Post which gives an on the ground look at what the National Guard in New Orleans are doing and saying. I recommend reading the whole article; other than that I really don't know what to say. It might seem cute to joke about the need to "bring democracy to America", or some such thing, but it is no longer funny at this point. Mostly, it is just profoundly disturbing to look at where our leaders have brought us.

Indeed, today we might remind ourselves once more that "we are the world", and realize that the world is a very messed up place.

"It's just so much like Iraq, it's not funny," said Atkinson, of Woodlawn, Ark., "except for all the water, and they speak English."

For a year ending this spring, Atkinson's infantry company of the Arkansas National Guard patrolled Baghdad's deadly Haifa Street, and scores of its members were awarded Purple Heart medals after fighting insurgents. Those war-zone images and instincts came flooding back Friday when Atkinson and 300 other Arkansas guardsmen, wearing helmets and full body armor, rolled into the chaos of central New Orleans.

"It's like Baghdad on a bad day," said Spec. Brian McKay, 19, of Mount Ida, Ark.


Much work remains for U.S. soldiers in this gutted no man's land, where looting, drive-by shootings and other crime are rampant. Much as in Iraqi cities, the troops are moving by the hundreds into makeshift bases in schools and other public buildings, setting up checkpoints and 24-hour patrols. The guardsmen have been authorized to seize weapons and detain people.

"We're having some pretty intense gun battles breaking out around the city," said Capt. Jeff Winn of the New Orleans police SWAT team. "Armed gangs of from eight to 15 young men are riding around in pickup trucks, looting and raping," he said. Residents fearful of looters often shout to passing Humvees to alert the soldiers to crimes in progress.


About an hour later, as dusk fell, Atkinson and Neugebauer were driving down Jefferson Street when the owner of a mini-storage business yelled at them from behind his fence. "Hey, get back here! Those guys just broke into that store!" Across the street, the guardsmen saw two men in their twenties outside a car stereo store with the front window broken in.

Atkinson again swung the Humvee around, and within minutes, the guardsmen had two of the four suspects facedown on the Jefferson Street median. The guardsmen then waved down a passing sheriff's vehicle.

"When I charged a round in the chamber, he got down real fast," Atkinson said later of a suspect.

The guardsmen voiced little hesitation at using deadly force -- a skill honed in Iraq -- on the streets of New Orleans. "If we're out on the streets, we'll fight back and shoot until we kill them. That's too bad but that's what has got to happen," said Spec. Jake Perry, 20, of Camden, Ark. "I didn't spend a year in Iraq to come to Louisiana and get killed."

Indeed, just the smell and feel of a war zone in the city put the soldiers on edge.

"The worst feeling was putting that body armor on," said Spec. Richard Dunlop, 36, also of Camden, who with his comrades has vivid memories of the dozens of Arkansas soldiers who perished in Iraq. "I find myself checking the rooftops. I worry about stepping on something in case it is an IED," he said, referring to an improvised explosive device or roadside bomb.

"I was waiting on a gunfight," he said. "It's weird."

Many of the guardsmen were shocked and angered by the violence and looting. One described 70-year-old women in new Nike high-tops, and stores along the riverfront that looked bombed out.

"The fear in the eyes of the people, the uncertainty . . . people shooting and killing over little bitty things . . . it surprised me. I didn't think it would be that bad in my own country," said McKay, a history student at the University of Arkansas.


"When I came down here, it was just like I was in Iraq. It was unreal," said Spec. Keithean Heath, 20, of Crossett, Ark., shirtless in the heat. "This doesn't happen in your own back yard."

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

The Deafening Sound of Silence

Jared over at the Scoopster News blog has been blogging away about the horrible experiences of the British, Irish and Australian tourists and whites who were stuck in the Superdome and convention center (see here and here, and here and here for related). There has been wide reporting on this in the UK and Australia, but apparently the US media does not want to touch the issue.

What is worse however is that even many "conservative" blogs which love to congratulate themselves about scooping the MSN are missing in action on this story.

Let's be perfectly frank: if this had happened to any (other) minority group, there would have been wide condemnation all around, and rightly so. So what are people so afraid of? When did merely reporting the news become such a dangerous thing?

In times like these, it is difficult to not help but wonder if we are living in a one ideology state.

Illegal Alien News

The Lone Wacko blog has a great roundup of news regarding illegal aliens which I recommend reading. You will learn about Hispanic gangs in mid-western farm towns, a DMV worker in Oregon who was fired for trying to prevent ID fraud, the Mexican-"American" alternative to Al Sharpton, and much more.

Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Does NO Portend More Redistribution?

There has been some concern that one of the political consequences of the hurricane will be new government anti-poverty programs to redistribute wealth between people. Sadly, this seems to be both likely and about the only kind of response we can expect from our morally timid leaders. At a time with massive third world immigration (illegal or otherwise), how can we expect productive members of society to pay for this? The answer is of course that we probably can't, at least not while remaining America as we know it today.

There was an excellent article in the Guardian from some time ago which I can't seem to find, but it spoke of the "progressive's paradox", which is that diversity and the welfare state are in diametric contradiction.

Essentially, people consent to pay high taxes for welfare services as long as they believe that most people receiving them will be similar to them, have similar values, and not do things they wouldn't. In other words, the type of people who they could see themselves becoming if they were down on their luck.

On the other hand, very diverse societies have low social cohesion, and thus very low tolerance for redistribution between groups. This has been shown empirically by the strong correlation between how redistributive different US states are, and how diverse they are.

It will be interesting to see how the political system responds. For example, the illegal alien hungry business interests don't have any moral objections to tax payers subsidizing their labor costs, but they are likely to realize that a larger welfare state will result in lower tolerance for importing likely welfare recipients.

USA Beat Mexico at Soccer

I don't really follow soccer, but I am going to have to make an exception for this match, reported on the VDare blog:

You may have missed the sweet soccer victory on Saturday where the United States thumped the arrogant Mexican team 2-0, in a game played in Columbus, Ohio, a site deep in the heartland chosen to provide a majority-American crowd. The win qualifies America for the World Cup next year, a fine thing in itself.

The match was a welcome payback for a 2-1 loss in March which took place in Mexico City. Mexicans followed that game with a session of American-flag trampling in front of the US embassy, with chants of “Osama!”

So kicker Landon Donovan of Redlands, California, has had a few words of his own to share before and after Saturday’s game. (In 2002, he smacked home a decisive goal against Mexico to reach a 2002 World Cup quarterfinal, and is therefore not much liked in sombrero-land.) He laid down a take-no-prisoners line in the sand:

“I want (today) to be a miserable day for them,” Donovan said of the Mexican players. “The best way to make them miserable is to beat their national team.” […]

“They are jealous of us, the Mexican players, because we’ve got a life and they have nothing,” Donovan said. “Because of that they despise us.”

Donovan apparently doesn’t care much for Mexicans. Maybe he thought the death threat trash talk by a Mexican player against his mother was over the line. He didn’t let up in victory either:

“They suck,” he said. “I’m so happy. After we got that first goal they were never in the game. Hopefully that will shut them up for the next three or four years.”