April 4, 2013

Men with Gold Chains: Rich Gypsies

Caption in the New York Times:
"A Roma man's prominent gold jewelry"
Immigration restrictionism is growing in popularity in Britain because Romanians and Bulgarians are supposed to get complete freedom to move to Britain in 2014. Brits are particularly worried about Roma Romanians: i.e., Gypsies. If you want to see what Gypsies typically live like, check out Borat's hometown in the 2006 movie. Simon Baron Cohen filmed "Borat" in an Eastern European Gypsy village. (Of course, later on in the film he portrayed stereotyping Gypsies as obviously irrational and evil.)

However, some Gypsies have gotten rich, as depicted in this fabulous pictorial in the New York Times devoted, as always, to Smashing Stereotypes:
Kings of the Roma 
By JESSE NEWMAN 
To reach a surprising place, follow Route 6 south of Bucharest as it unwinds across the Romanian countryside, past fields of wildflowers and flocks of sheep. Turn west before the Danube River and head toward a grid of neatly laid streets, set down among farms. 
This is Buzescu, where a small, prosperous group of Roma live among mansions and Mercedeses. 
Like most visitors to Europe, Karla Gachet and Ivan Kashinsky had never heard of Buzescu or met any wealthy Roma. They thought most Roma — often pejoratively called Gypsies — were poor and lived in slums on the fringes of big European cities. On a trip to Europe from their home in Ecuador in 2010, they learned about the Roma of Buzescu and set out to see the town. 
“We wanted to break the image of Gypsies in the street, begging where the cars stop, stealing whatever they can and living in total poverty,” said Mr. Kashinsky, who lived with his wife, Ms. Gachet, in Buzescu for six weeks to document daily life in the thriving community. “Here, the Roma were not the maids of Romanians, but the Romanians were the maids of the Roma. It was an amazing switch.”

So, how did they get rich? The same way a lot of people got rich after the fall of the Berlin Wall:
... The palatial homes belong to the Kalderash, a once-itinerant group of Roma who made their fortune trading metal across Eastern Europe after the collapse of Communism. 
“When Communism fell,” a Roma man told the photographers, “you had to be dumb not to make money.” 
So the Kalderash, whose name means “coppersmith” in Romani, went to work, traveling across Eastern Europe, dismantling abandoned factories and selling the scrap metal for handsome profits.

Up to a point, Lord Coppersmith. Not all those factories were abandoned, and even if they were, the value of the scrap metal belonged to the nation, not to looters.

That's also how Marc Rich, who was pardoned by Bill Clinton in January 2001, made a bundle: "dismantling [not necessarily] abandoned factories and selling the scrap metal for handome profits." So, maybe Yuri Slezkine's opening conceit about Roma being Mercurians too had some basis in reality?

The Kalderash Gypsies, however, appear to be a little more hands-on than metal-trader Marc Rich was -- one of the photographs is of the funeral of a local man who "was electrocuted while stripping copper from power lines in Spain."
... Today, the lavish mansions lining the streets of Buzescu, an otherwise modest farm town, are a testament to the wealth of a people deeply impoverished elsewhere in Europe and widely condemned as beggars and thieves. 
The Roma have faced oppression and violence since their ancestors came to Europe from India centuries ago. During the Holocaust, the Nazis exterminated Romani people by the hundreds of thousands. In 2010, France’s president at the time, Nicolas Sarkozy, deported thousands of Roma and bulldozed their encampments. His successor, François Hollande, has continued the expulsions. Roma communities face discrimination in Romania too, as evidenced by recent forced evictions across the country. 
Given their painful history, many families in Buzescu are wary of new arrivals like Ms. Gachet and Mr. Kashinsky. Even after one family offered the couple a place to stay, many of the wealthiest residents refused to let them inside their houses. 
“A lot of people were scared of us,” Ms. Gachet said. “They thought we were thieves.” 
But the couple persisted, slowly gaining trust and access. Luckily, they shared a language with the residents of Buzescu. Like Ms. Gachet, who is from Quito, Ecuador, and Mr. Kashinsky, who is from Los Angeles, many Roma speak Spanish — they have been traveling back and forth to Spain for work since Romania joined the European Union in 2007.

Spanish Gypsies, by the way, seem on average to be less Bad News than other Gypsies.
As the doors of Buzescu swung open, Ms. Gachet and Mr. Kashinsky said, they revealed fantastic abundance — winding staircases that led to vast rooms with marble floors and heavy chandeliers — but also great emptiness. 
“They build these giant houses,” Mr. Kashinsky said. “But they don’t really use them.” 
Many parents and teenagers still have to leave Buzescu to find work or conduct business elsewhere in Europe, leaving only elders and young children to live in the outsize homes. Even when families do reunite for holidays or funerals, they tend to congregate in small rooms toward the back of their houses, using outdoor kitchens and bathrooms rather than those inside.  
...“Being Roma, they can’t just go out there to the world and get a job anywhere,” Ms. Gachet said. “The lady we lived with said: ‘Karla, my kids are not going to be lawyers and doctors. You need to understand that. We need to give them tools to survive in our world, and that’s money.’ They don’t get the opportunities that everybody else gets. They’re so discriminated against in their own country.”

I wrote about Gypsies in general and the EU's immigration policies back in 2004 for VDARE.

And here is John Updike in The New Yorker reviewing a book on Gypsies:
Though her six years of living in Roussillon may have left her with “the same attraction to their intractable difference,” readers of her account, if this reviewer is an example, will be cured of any faint desire they may ever have entertained to live like a Gypsy. 
Evidently it’s a miserable life, for the shiftless, jobless, largely illiterate men, and twice as bad for the homebound women, generally married in their teens to other teens, who will bully, betray, tyrannize, and most likely beat them. As for their children, they stay up so late watching television and hanging out on the street that they are usually too sleepy to go to school; Gypsies must be the only significant ethnic group in France that actively discourages literacy and encourages truancy. Compared with them, the embattled immigrants from the Muslim world are models of aspiration to bourgeois order and enlightenment. 
One of Eberstadt’s more hallucinante chapters describes a conference on education held at Collège Jean Moulin, a junior high school for preponderantly Gypsy students. “The occasion is pretty merry,” she writes. “People who work with Gypsies tend to laugh a lot. It’s a laughter of hysterical exasperation, because if you didn’t laugh, you’d hang yourself or quit.

119 comments:

Anonymous said...

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/04/health/kerner-youth-sexual-identity/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

According to this article, you'd think 1/3 of youths are straight, 1/3 are gay, and 1/3 are 'other'. It also implies that so many young people are grappling with what they are sexually when, in fact, most of them(around 97%) know full well that they are normal, i.e. boys like girls and girls like boys.

And look at the photo to use. It's not so much a news story as a propaganda piece. You see, lesbianism is sooooo wonderful and happy.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywq6MyiiUtE

Great movie with some rich gypsies.

Anonymous said...

"Spanish Gypsies, by the way, seem to be less troublesome."

Up to a point, Lord Coppersmith.

http://ukcommentators.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/those-awful-stereotypes.html

http://barcelonasights.blogspot.co.uk/2009/07/barcelona-scams-gypsy-flower-sellers.html

Steve Sailer said...

"Up to a point, Lord Coppersmith."

!!!

Anonymous said...

My mother's family are mostly Macedonian Gypsies, and they're a tremendous amount of fun to hang out with and have been dealt a lousy hand by history, but...man, what a dysfunctional culture that is.

The whole Roma/gadje bifurcated morality code is like the Jew/goyim thing, times ten.

DCThrowback said...

I always thought the portrayal of Gypsies in Matthew Vaughn and Guy Ritchie's "Snatch" was pretty good. Of course, probably helps you have Brad Pitt as your lead gypsy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKWMoGYSm7w

Anonymous said...

You know, I've always thought that one of the most unintentionally hilarious things that Stan Lee and Jack Kirby ever did was making uber-genius supervillain Dr Doom a Gypsy.
Proof, I suppose, that they had never actually run into any actual Gypsies.

syon

Chicago said...

"Time of the Gypsies", directed by Emir Kusturica, was a pretty entertaining movie. Gypsies often come up with mysteriously large sums of money and use it garishly, such as the homes pictured in NG. They spend $30-40 thousand dollars, or more, on marble monuments for some of their deceased at one cemetery in this city, complete with engravings of the departed, sometimes including benches on the side. One dual monument engraving shows the woman with an old-style dress and headscarf and the man is shown with a pistol tucked in his waistband and a cigarette in his hand.
The money is usually gotten in less glamorous ways.

David said...

Hey, they're American heroes. They made a bundle using their wits. Are you envious of achievement or something? Give these people CEO jobs, and jobs in govt designing a new, freer economy.

Only Nazis would be opposed to this.

I call the above "the touch of the freeper." Maybe I'll take it to my hobby blog and make it a feature there.

Glossy said...

“A lot of people were scared of us,” Ms. Gachet said. “They thought we were thieves.”

The average man is too interested in himself to pay much attention to anyone else. When we accuse others, it's almost exclusively of things we do ourselves. The sort of journos profiled by the NYT lie for a living, not steal. They're not nearly dumb enough to try hands-on stealing.

sunbeam said...

Okay, explain this to me from a genetics standpoint.

There are a lot of different stratifications of Indians from what I understand.

High class Indians are as smart as Jews.

I don't really know how the lower Indian classes (castes I guess) rate on the IQ scale.

So did some trailer trash from India decide to go West a long time ago? Or did they become this on their travels?

From what I understand it's a pretty closed genetic tree with little admixture so it shouldn't be too hard to figure out. Has anyone done any work on this?

Anonymous said...

The whole Roma/gadje bifurcated morality code is like the Jew/goyim thing, times ten.

But the Roma arent as bright and they really do look and act like outsiders - thank God.

Darwin's Sh*tlist said...

We had some Gypsies move into our neighborhood a few years ago. They were renting a property that the seller couldn't unload. The thing that struck me most was how another neighbor, an exquisitely progressive Hispanic whom I believe is on her F500 employer's Diversity Committee and all the rest of it, sounded like Archie Bunker when she talked about the Gypsies she'd known.

Anononymous said...

Do not try to shrink me, Gypsy. I serious.

Anonymous said...

"I don't really know how the lower Indian classes (castes I guess) rate on the IQ scale.

So did some trailer trash from India decide to go West a long time ago? Or did they become this on their travels?

From what I understand it's a pretty closed genetic tree with little admixture so it shouldn't be too hard to figure out. Has anyone done any work on this?"

The best information linguistically and genetically is that the Roma are the remnants of an Indian military expedition composed of Rajput warriors and camp followers that went westward to fight the invading Muslims, got cut off, and kept moving west until they hit Europe.

So the present-day Roma are largely descended from a mix of the Rajput warrior caste, lower caste metalworkers, horse trainers, etc., and the native peoples of Persia, Anatolia, and southeastern Europe.

I'd also go against the grain of all the HBDers here and say that by and large, Roma aren't actually dumb genetically. They're very clever, and when acculturated into the majority societies around them, actually do pretty well academically.

But they've got an incredibly insular, dysfunctional culture that belittles the value of education or assimilation and values surviving by your wits.

The assimilated branches of my Roma relatives all have college degrees and act like southern European white ethnics. The ones who are clinging to Roma culture...not so much.

fnn said...

Based on his writing style, I was once convinced that John Updike was a
secret writer for the magazine Instauration.

Anononymous said...

"dismantling abandoned factories and selling the scrap metal for handsome profits."

That's a metaphor, or a microcosm, or something.

pat said...

When I was the "World's Most Improbable Social Worker" I worked for the San Francisco Department of Social Services. But I wasn't allowed to my social work on any gypsies.

All the gypsies no matter what the program were handled by the Gypsie Unit. They found that the gypsies were much too devious for the average public social worker. Most social workers were well meaning and trusting young women. They knew from their social worker ideology that the poor were just victims. This attitude was convienient for the gypsies in making victims of social workers.

I, as one of the only male social workers, got my own special caseload. I got the violent guys who had brandished knives and guns at the girls.

Albertosaurus

Mr Lomez said...

"I always thought the portrayal of Gypsies in Matthew Vaughn and Guy Ritchie's "Snatch" was pretty good. Of course, probably helps you have Brad Pitt as your lead gypsy."

Pretty sure Pitt's character was Irish Traveler not Romani.

Anonymous said...

"When we accuse others, it's almost exclusively of things we do ourselves"

What rubbish. When someone picks my pocket and I yell thief, it's not because I go around picking pockets. Likewise, when my house gets burgled and I call the police, it is not because I am a burglar, it's because someone burgled my house.

Anonymous said...

http://www.wbez.org/blogs/jim-derogatis/2013-04/roger-ebert-intellectual-hero-critical-inspiration-colleague-and-friend

RIP Ebert.

Kauffmann still lives.

Anonymous said...

"I always thought the portrayal of Gypsies in Matthew Vaughn and Guy Ritchie's "Snatch" was pretty good. Of course, probably helps you have Brad Pitt as your lead gypsy."

Those were pikies, not gypsies. Pikies are related to the Irish, but gypsies (Roma?) are originally from India it appears. They do occupy a similar niche though, it seems.

elvisd said...

I'm digging the Men with Gold Chains theme.

I suspect that Steve has always gotten a secret thrill savoring the ambiente of pawn shops.

jan said...

"I don't really know how the lower Indian classes (castes I guess) rate on the IQ scale."

As I recall from reading Lynn, in India the average is 82. Indians in England average high 90s, near the white average. Indians in America are probably the most "self-selected" immigration group ever, if it is true. as some say, that their average IQ is a standard deviation above the average.
Gypsy IQ in Europe averages in the low 80s. When they do mix with Europeans though, the mixture seems very undramatic -- the offspring just look like light gypsies, or maybe just brunet (or even blond) whites; sort of like middle eastern/white mixes. Gypsies in some parts of Europe are indistinguishable from the the native population. Quite a few well known whites have had gypsy admixture.

Anonymous said...

You are right about the Spanish gypsies at least according to that Napoleonic movie with Frank Sinatra and the big cannon.

Geoff Matthews said...

There's a similar tradition of 'tinkers' or travelers in the British Isles that have the same reputation, and there's a sub-culture of the tinkers in the US. If you google "Irish Traveller", the 2nd suggestion is 'scam'.

Anonymous said...

There are no Vito Corleones in American conservatism. No one brilliant enough, devious enough, and artful enough to play the game of power.

When Fanucci in GODFATHER II demands more money from everyone in the neighborhood, everyone just goes along. Even Vito's partners--the young Sal and Clemenza--say they gotta pay more and do as Fanucci says. But Vito, he has other bigger ideas. He plays it cool with Fanucci. He shows he got balls and wins some degree of respect from Fanucci. Then, he makes his move against Fanucci when the latter least expects it. That's the kind of mind and will we need in American conservatism, but we don't have such types.

When the Fanuccis of the world say that we gotta go with amnesty, American conservatives figure they better go along.
When the Fanuccis of the world say we gotta accept 'gay marriage' as 'inevitable', conservatives just sheepishly hunker down and say they have no other choice but to go along because, well, there's nothing you can do about it. It's like Sal and Clemenza telling Vito that there is no other way but to pay more tribute to Fanucci. If Fanucci says they gotta pay more, they gotta pay more. In a way, the problem of conservatism is its emphasis on hierarchy and obedience. Thus, even though conservative may resist change, once change is said to be inevitable, they don't have the heart of radicals to fight. It's like the rightwing Japanese and Germans resisted the Allies with doggedness but once defeat loomed in the air, they turned overnight into the biggest running dogs of US and USSR. Rightwingism taught the masses to obey the powers-that-be, so if the new powers-that-be comes along, many conservatives are likely to just go along even if the new boss is of the Left.

Just think!! For 1000s of yrs there has been this moral institution called marriage filled with so much truth and meaning. It is the absolute moral core of conservatism since marriage is about the wedding of biology and morality. It's not just about customs and traditions--which can be stupid and unjust--but about biological fact and the way to devise a social/moral institution to accommodate that biological fact of how life is created and how it should be raised.
Marriage has been the bedrock of conservatism for so long.. and yet, conservatives are shaky in their knees and willing more than ever to cave in on this issue because... they don't have the wits, will, or courage to stand up to a bunch of Jews and gays whose sick agenda should have been countered from day one but was allowed to fester and spread.

If American conservatism cannot stand up to subversive Jews and decadent gays who make up less than 4% of the US population, what is it good for?

Is conservatism only about dollars and cents, taxes and market forces? Or, should it stand for some bedrock values and truths that should never cave to the demands of whatever fashions and trends that come along?

When the intimidated Clemenza and Sal were about to go along and cave into Fanucci, Vito had other ideas. He had the balls and brains to stand his ground and take the fight to Fanucci.

What do we have? Pathetic intellectuals and politicians like Murray, Huntsman, Kirk, Limbaugh, and etc. who either throw in the towel and declare defeat or, worse, join the other side and support the idiocy called 'gay marriage'.

It's pretty much over.

rec1man said...

@Sunbeam

The Roma, carry the Y-dna marker H1, which is common among low caste North Indians

Thanks to DNA, they have been traced to the Doma, living in Rajasthan desert , near Punjab aa nomadic backward caste, just slightly above the untouchables.

The Doma do a lot of singing and dancing and take care of horses, camels and do metal work

The current hypothesis is this


The Doma were camp followers of the Rajputs, caring for horses and making swords and other metal work

In 1000 AD, Mohammed Ghazni invaded Punjab and defeated the Rajputs and captured their camp followers and sold them as slaves in Central Asia

The Ottomon turks sold them to Europeans such as Romanians

The Roma were kept in slavery until 1865 and during slavery, their women were made to work as prostitutes in Romania, where they picked up some white genes, just as Afro-Americans have 20% white genes

Their word for outsider is Ghadje which could either come from Ghazni or from Ghazi ( muslim soldier, who kills infidels )

Their insider vs outsider is simply very strong casteist behavior, which is more common among lower castes, probably amplified by discrimination from whites for centuries

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-B4aom3IaBQ

shows Indian gypsies

jaakkeli said...

"So the Kalderash, whose name means “coppersmith” in Romani, went to work, traveling across Eastern Europe, dismantling abandoned factories and selling the scrap metal for handsome profits."

This is supposed to be a story about subverting stereotypes but Eastern Europeans familiar with gypsies will certainly chuckle at the idea that a gypsy getting rich of reselling metal would be some subverted stereotype. It would only be a subverted stereotype if this gypsy guy actually bought those factories before dismantling them...

With the travel restrictions on the Eastern European countries lifted, the Western EU countries are experiencing an explosion of metal theft. It's gotten so bad that some countries are patrolling train tracks with helicopters at night just to keep the trains running. Of course all the news talks about are, of course, let's see...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6144464.stm

..."Romanian immigrants". Good thing no one can see through that or this surge in copper theft might turn into a surge in prejudice.

It is a shame that Steve cannot read any of the Eastern European languages as gypsies tend to produce some truly unique crime stories. In most populations there is next to no overlap between the entrepreneurial personalities and the criminals. Not so with gypsies so you see gypsies often specializing in crimes that are essentially what someone running a recycling business would do if the concept of property simply didn't exist and if all those train tracks and transmission wires lying around unattended were just free opportunities to make money.


Matra said...

Don't forget Britain already has its own Gypsies, many of whom are quite, uh, extravagant. Anyone interested in them might like to watch the UK series My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding on YouTube. Some of them make housing estate chavs look like David Niven. If you do watch any episodes you might also notice their rather familiar but non-English accents.

Anonymous said...

The whole Roma/gadje bifurcated morality code is like the Jew/goyim thing, times ten.

Hihon/gaijin or Hai/odar

Anonymous said...

"So did some trailer trash from India decide to go West a long time ago? Or did they become this on their travels?"

Per:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romani_society_and_culture

The Roma came from Northwestern India (likely Indo-Pak Punjab, Rajasthan, etc.) and belonged to the Dom caste. The Doms are an untouchable caste and to this day do some of the least desirable jobs (from a Hindu perspective) like cleaning bathrooms in people's homes and working the funeral pyres.

While the Aryan invasion theory of India isn't exactly correct, there's some truth to the fact that India was populated by multiple waves of invaders - who mostly came from western Asia/the Middle East. These groups had subjugated the people below them. The lower castes in India tend to have more genetic affinity towards the Indian "tribals" who tend to represent the more original settlers of the subcontinent, who were much sooner "out of Africa".

Anonymous said...

"The palatial homes belong to the Kalderash, a once-itinerant group of Roma who made their fortune trading metal across Eastern Europe after the collapse of Communism."

"Trading" metal.

The MSM is 100% lies.

Anonymous said...

"The whole Roma/gadje bifurcated morality code"

Yep, their sense of us and them i.e. racism when white people do it, and the dual morality that follows from that is ten times worse than the other way round.

Anonymous said...

I always thought the portrayal of Gypsies in Matthew Vaughn and Guy Ritchie's "Snatch" was pretty good. Of course, probably helps you have Brad Pitt as your lead gypsy.

Those are Irish Travelers, not gypsies.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

sunbeam - yes someone has done work on this. A whole lot of someones, actually. You would find it easy to look up, in fact. There are a few main theories of which areas of India they originate from and what their route was across Afghanistan and why, but they aren't that different.

Gypsies in Romania vary greatly, village to village. I have had harrowing times in Budureasa and in Oradea after dark, but never had a problem in Pietroasa or Beius. But you do have to remember that it is a culture that defines itself as alien to the others, even when friendly and cooperative.

Romanians deeply resent that other Europeans think that all of them are gypsies. As if they needed more reasons to dislike the Roma.

There have always been a few rich gypsies. I don't get why it's suddenly news in NY.

jody said...

muslims ok, gypsies not ok.

Anonymous said...

Actually Romanian and Bulgarian immigration could do Britain a lot of good. It could counter-balance all of the recent muslim/African/Pakistani immigration of the deplorable Labour party. Being Caucasians from a European background and hailing from a Christian culture they would be easily assimilated in a few generations and be an investment in the future of the white community in the United Kingdom.

Of course all of this is predicated on the understanding that the Romanians and Bulgarians are just that and not the Gypsy Roma.

Anonymous said...


Evidently it’s a miserable life, for the shiftless, jobless, largely illiterate men, and twice as bad for the homebound women, generally married in their teens to other teens, who will bully, betray, tyrannize, and most likely beat them. As for their children, they stay up so late watching television and hanging out on the street that they are usually too sleepy to go to school; Gypsies must be the only significant ethnic group in France that actively discourages literacy and encourages truancy. Compared with them, the embattled immigrants from the Muslim world are models of aspiration to bourgeois order and enlightenment.


All we need to do is give the gypsies unlimited welfare benefits and pay them for every extra illegitimate kid and they will soon rival the Scots Irish achievement!

Anonymous said...

I always thought the portrayal of Gypsies in Matthew Vaughn and Guy Ritchie's "Snatch" was pretty good. Of course, probably helps you have Brad Pitt as your lead gypsy.

Although called "gypsies" in Britain, Irish Travelers/Pikeys are not the same as the Roma. They are White and Catholic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Travellers

Anonymous said...

I read someplace that Missouri has closed clans of inbred families living in expensive and secretive subdivisions. These "domestic" gypsies travel the midwest bilking the elderly in home renovation scams. Anyone heard of these?

Reg Cæsar said...

Spanish Gypsies, by the way, seem on average to be less Bad News than other Gypsies.

And an Italian Gypsy wrote Volare, the high point of their cultural achievement.

The term "Roma" should be applied to homos, instead. Because they make Love backwards.

Anonymous said...

So Gypsies are sharp dealers and hustlers? Now that the NY Times has confirmed this stereotype which others will they inadvertently confirm?

"Gypsy Unit", priceless, see, this is why I read the comments, one learns something every time.

Dr Van Nostrand said...


The Roma came from Northwestern India (likely Indo-Pak Punjab, Rajasthan, etc.) and belonged to the Dom caste. The Doms are an untouchable caste and to this day do some of the least desirable jobs (from a Hindu perspective) like cleaning bathrooms in people's homes and working the funeral pyres."

Interestingly the genetic make up and oral lore hints at an origin from Eastern and Southern India rather than Northwest.
Although they spend a couple of centuries in the Rajasthan/Sindh area before being migrating(voluntarily or involuntarily perhaps both) to the Middle East and Central Asia.

Perhaps the Dravidian speaking Brahui group in Baluchistan is a remnant of this migration.

I dont think many non Indians realize the very considerable division between North Indians themselves. Specifically between Punjabis,Sindhis,Kashmiris,Rajasthanis(and other NW more Caucasoid lot) and the peoples of UP,Bihar,Bengal etc. The latter get along better with South Indians (whom they share blood ties with)than the former.

Back to gypsies- I am glad however that the government of India isnt shedding crocodile tears over the treatment of gypsies like I expected it to. Gypsies in India are treated with greater scorn than in Europe.

Anonymous said...

There is a reality show on the National Geographic Channel called "American Gypsies" about a wealthy gypsy family that runs several psychic parlors:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm3O9hQudrM

Apparently that's a common gypsy family business in the US. A female gypsy in the family that's identified as having "the gift" of psychic reading becomes the psychic and the business is run by the family.

In one episode, there is a conflict with another gypsy who opens a psychic parlor within 3 blocks. The gypsies talk about how this is a violation of "gypsy law" which states that a gypsy cannot set up a business within 3 blocks of another gypsy. The gypsies also mention a "gypsy court" which adjudicates these conflicts:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lECnzttk4wY

Steve Sailer said...

About five or ten years ago, there was a Gypsy-on-Gypsy murder in SoCal growing out of a turf dispute between two fortune-teller families. But, that was more the exception than the rule. in general, Gypsies aren't all that violent.

Anonymous said...

Apparently gypsies used to be hunted for sport:

http://chgs.umn.edu/histories/victims/romaSinti/gypsies2.html

"Also in the 16th century began the "gypsy hunts." Not unlike a fox hunt, the Gypsies were rounded up and hunted for sport. This savage practice was prevalent in Switzerland, in Holland up to the 18th century and reaching as far as Denmark. No crime needed to have been committed by these people in order for them to be incarcerated or hunted down like animals.

In 1589 the King of Denmark decreed that any leader of a Gypsy band was to be sentenced to death. Honors and rewards were given to those who would participate in Gypsy hunts and capture them. These hunts continued as late as the 19th century.

A great Gypsy hunt covering four districts of Jutland took place on November 11, 1835. The day brought in a bag of over 260 men, women and children.

A Rheinland landowning aristocrat is said to have entered in his list of game killed during a day's hunting:

Item: A Gypsy woman with leer sucking babe. (Kenrick 1972:46)"

Dr Van Nostrand said...


The best information linguistically and genetically is that the Roma are the remnants of an Indian military expedition composed of Rajput warriors and camp followers that went westward to fight the invading Muslims, got cut off, and kept moving west until they hit Europe."

Haha! Rajputs in a foreign expedition to fight Muslims? Not likely.Rajputs were an overwhelmingly defensive force(and not a very effective one at that).

Northern Indians were rather squeamish about crossing the known borders of India(then including Pakistan and southern Afghanistan), and Rajputs generally were confined to Rajasthan and Sindh.

As mentioned genetically there are more related to South Indians(go figure) and linguistically the language closest to Roma is Sinhalese(the language of the majority Sri Lankan ethnic group).

As to why a Caucasoid group from India underperforms in a European society since residing there for more than a millenium-look no further than Sowell-culture,culture,culture.
When there is ambition, will or incentive for the gypsies to improve their lot,they simply will not.

Anonymous said...

What about the Men with Gold Shirts?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2257209/Wealthy-Indian-Datta-Phuge-spends-14-000-shirt-GOLD-impress-ladies.html

Truth said...

"But they've got an incredibly insular, dysfunctional culture that belittles the value of education or assimilation and values surviving by your wits."

I guess you're new here? Let me help you out; there is no such thing as "culture", bad "culture" is simply a manifestation of stupidity; that is the company line...yes, even when you're related to them...

james wilson said...

It is impossible to improve on "King of the Gypsies" written back in 1978 by Peter Mass.

It is hard for Americans especially to understand that Roma are a separate and alien nation, with absolutely no interest in assimilation. They substitute cleverness for intelligence, which oftentimes and everywhere is the offspring of brutality.

The average Gypsy lifespan is 53 years.

Anonymous said...

They thought most Roma — often pejoratively called Gypsies — were poor and lived in slums on the fringes of big European cities.

"Gypsy" is pejorative?

Anonymous said...

In 2010, France’s president at the time, Nicolas Sarkozy, deported thousands of Roma and bulldozed their encampments. His successor, François Hollande, has continued the expulsions. Roma communities face discrimination in Romania too, as evidenced by recent forced evictions across the country.

It articles on Muslim and Arab Gentiles (and on Muslim and Arab fighters), the New York Times should insert a nutgraf like this explaining the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Palestinian Gentiles deported by the Jewish State over the past 65 years, the bulldozing of their homes and encampments that continues to this day, and the discrimination Gentiles face at the hands of Jews there.

sunbeam said...

Good, bad, evil or indifferent, there doesn't seem to be any upside to them. They aren't going to rock the world in Silicon Valley, or go to Caltech, which is honestly the only kind of thing that matters anymore.

Useless.

Anonymous said...

“Being Roma, they can’t just go out there to the world and get a job anywhere,” Ms. Gachet said. "They don’t get the opportunities that everybody else gets. They’re so discriminated against in their own country.”

The Roma are discriminated against only insofar as they discriminate against the non-Roma people they live and travel amongst. The historical narrative spun by the prestige media, by writers like Mr. Newman and the publications like the New York Times is a false history that paints the European people as evil and the Roma as innocents. If you dig a little deeper, you will often find that Roma have been encouraged by authorities to integrate with the people of the countries in which they live. They have been effectively welcomed into various nations of Europe. But in the Roma's bigotry and hatred toward Europeans, they have repeatedly rejected the European people. That has left the European people with no choice but to treat the Roma as the outsiders they insist on being.

The campaign of defamation against the European people has included the suppression in the mainstream discourse of knowledge about this true history.

(Interestingly, some digging into Jewish-Gentile tension in history reveals a similar phenomenon of Jews rejecting integration into a given community while claiming rights in that community that the community is therefore reluctant to give. I think there is even a story in the Torah about a Persian or other king literally begging Jews to integrate.)

rec1man said...

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/origin-of-european-gypsy-population-traced-to-northwestern-india/article4149082.ece

Scientists at Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology crack mystery surrounding the origin, migration of Roma population


The map showing most likely Indian origin and out-of-India migration to European Roma.
Scientists at the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology (CCMB) have said that they have cracked the mystery surrounding the origin and migration of the Roma (gypsy) population.

A team of international scientists led by CCMB’s Kumarasamy Thangaraj concluded that the aboriginal scheduled tribe and scheduled caste population of north-western India, traditionally referred as Doma and also as Dalits, are the most likely ancestral population of modern European Roma.

The development assumes significance in view of the curiosity surrounding the parental lineage of the European gypsy population.

Though linguistic and genetic studies of the European Roma have been traced to Eurasia, the exact parental population group and time of dispersal remained disputed in the absence of archaeological evidence and scanty historical documentation of the Roma.

The study found that the exile time of the Roma founders from India could be approximately put at 1,405 years ago.

The conclusion was arrived at after an exhaustive study involving screening of about 10,000 males around the world, including 7,000 hailing from 205 ethnic population of India to discern a more precise ancestral source of Romani (gypsy) population.

Single founder

Dr. Thangaraj explained that all males of a family or a population evolved from a single founder make and would possess the same Y chromosome.

Based on the genetic signature that exists on the Y chromosome, every male could be assigned to a specific group (haplogroup), enabling tracing of parental lineage using these signatures.

It was shown that the European Roma possessed the Y chromosome haplogroup Hlala. The most recent common ancestor of European Roma was not identified because of the absence of similar data from their putative homeland, India.

“We have compared the worldwide phylogeographical data for Indian Hlala haplotypes with Roma and concluded that Doma are most likely ancestral populations,” he said.

George van Driem, a linguist from University of Bern, Switzerland, who was part of the team, said the finding corroborated the similarity in the terms Roma and Doma and resolved the controversy about Gangetic Plain and Punjab in favour of north-western portion from where widespread range of Doma population diffused.

Anonymous said...

By January of next year, the entire populations of Bulgaria and Romania will have the absolute, unfetered, guranteed EU Treaty Articled right to move in on Britain with no let or hindrance whatsoever, and if the British objected they would be punished.

Such is the reality of the EU.

This is causing considerable consterntaion in the UK, and the anti-Eu, anti-immigration party, UKIP, is making hay out of the the threat right now, and possibly UKIP might create political earthquakes in the UK, busting the ancient two-party duopoly that has governed Britain for centuries.
The British well remember when the POles were granted free access, the politicoes promised 'only 13,000' would ever come. In the event well over a million came in a period of 5 years.
TV reports show that life in Bulgaria is horrific , recently mass violent protests broke out over the inability of the general populace to pay their electricity bills. There is little doubt mass exoduses from Romania and Bulgaria will quickly ensue.
Britain is a big, fat juicy target since its welfare state (which uniquely pays out to persons who have never paid in), i forbidden by the EU to distiguish between natives and immigrants from the EU.
It really is shit or bust time for the British. Either elect a UKIP government or embrace extinction.

Nick Diaz said...

Anonymous 5:30 PM

"Just think!! For 1000s of yrs there has been this moral institution called marriage filled with so much truth and meaning. It is the absolute moral core of conservatism since marriage is about the wedding of biology and morality. It's not just about customs and traditions--which can be stupid and unjust--but about biological fact and the way to devise a social/moral institution to accommodate that biological fact of how life is created and how it should be raised."

Only if you define marriage as a synonym for reproduction.

In fact, the evidence indicates that homosexuality is likely biological, meaning that gay marriage is as natural as straight marriage.

But put that aside. The issue is that marriage should not be about biology, but about love. We are not animals who come together only to mate, but rather human beings who are capable of reason and feelings. Marriage should be about love and not biology. The argument about the unnatural nature of homosexual marriage, besides not being true, is an irrelvant one. It is perfectly natural for a White shark to devour a bunch of baby seals, and yet it is disgusting notwithstanding. I hardly think that Nature is the best arbitrer of morality.

Conservatives see marriage as an institution that exists to ensure the nurture of children, and if such insitution were to change, all hell would break loose, so they believe.

But this is irrational because parents MUST ensure the care of their kids as a legal obligation marriage or not, and there is no evidence whatsoever that kids who grow up without married heterosexual parents grow up mentally unbalanced or unhappier. My parents divorced wehn I was 6, and yet I am at the 99.7% earning bracket in America, and I have never harmed another person in my life.

But even if you could demonstrate that married heterosexual parents are essentila for children to grow up gentle and civilized, this would only affect the issue of gay adoption and not gay marriage.

Gay marriage benefits gays while causing no harm to others. It must pass.

And conservatives no longer have a say in this. We have come to the conclusion that you are, for the most part, immune to reason. You want things your way no matter what. You believe you have the right to crush discent by sheer numbers and FORCE people to conform to your norms. This is not a civilized society. A civilized society respects and gives equal treatment to all it's members. "Society" cannot experince pain; only individuals can. A Society, after all, is nothing more than an amalgamation of individuals. How can you have a better Societyt if you make life miserable for even 1% of the population? Such society is not a good Society for that 1%, no matter how sweet life is for the other 99%.

Jim Walker said...

I hope Nigel Farage of UKIP reads this. He brings up unfettered expansion of UK immigration by Eastern Europe a lot. I don't think he'll laugh as hard as I did when I read of the past existence of a "Gypsy Unit" in SF. Maybe that is a joke, but it could be real, which is interesting.

Black Sea said...

Kalderash . . . Kardashian. Just wondering.

Anonymous said...

Collège Jean Moulin, ...if you didn’t laugh, you’d hang yourself or quit.

So who is more expensive, the Gypsies or the pensioned White educrates and other government workers who are paid to service the Gypsies. Those bureaucrats are part of the same scam, the bureaucrats know it and so do the Gypsies.

Tristero said...

As others have pointed out, the Irish Travelers noted in some of the comments above are separate from, but in some ways similar to, the Gypsies/Roma in terms of culture, lifestyle, etc.

One group of these that's gotten considerable publicity lives in Murphy Village, near North Augusta, South Carolina. There are evidently smaller communities as well in other states, which may be what the Missouri group asked about above referred to.

But searching for "Murphy Village" will turn up quite a few interesting items on this small community. "60 Minutes" also did a segment on them a number of years ago.

Lucille said...

Correction:

Sascha Baron-Cohen is the actor.

His cousin, Simon Baron-Cohen is a professor.

Anonymous said...

Truth:"I guess you're new here? Let me help you out; there is no such thing as "culture", bad "culture" is simply a manifestation of stupidity; that is the company line...yes, even when you're related to them..."

Another straw man argument, eh?HBD does not discount culture at all (Steve certainly does not).

jan said...

"
The Roma were kept in slavery until 1865 and during slavery, their women were made to work as prostitutes in Romania, where they picked up some white genes, just as Afro-Americans have 20% white genes.."

I don't know about all of Roma history, but by the 19th c., the slavery was only in parts of Hungary and Romania. It was described by certain British observers in distinctly crtical tones of moral outrage. This part of Europe was considered alien to the Brits, and it's not surprising Bram Stoker picked up on the vampire history and made all foggy and eerie.

Paul Mendez said...

Boy, I wish I had the self-confidence to rock my gut and man-boobs like that guy!

Anonymous said...

The comments on the Times piece are divided between those from plain-talking Europeans, and those from Americans offended about that plain talk. That's what a couple generations of being taught to tolerate Black dysfunction has done to Americans.

Anonymous said...

"As to why a Caucasoid group from India underperforms in a European society since residing there for more than a millenium-look no further than Sowell-culture,culture,culture."

Oversimplified.

Indians aren't Caucasoid, they're a stabilized blend of Australoid and Caucasoid (and in some cases Mongoloid). The percentages vary, but the vast majority of groups have some significant level of Australoid.

Both culture and genes likely contribute to gypsy dysfunction.

Baloo said...

I keep looking around for some really good books on the subject of Gypsies, but I can't find any. I wish MacDonald would write one. Anyhow, I riff on this and link here:
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2013/04/gypsies-again.html

Svigor said...

I read someplace that Missouri has closed clans of inbred families living in expensive and secretive subdivisions. These "domestic" gypsies travel the midwest bilking the elderly in home renovation scams. Anyone heard of these?

Robert Patrick played one in an episode of some TV show IIRC, can't remember which. I always assumed they were "Travelers" (i.e., Ireland's answer to the gypsies) come to America.

Apparently gypsies used to be hunted for sport

http://chgs.umn.edu/histories/victims/romaSinti/gypsies2.html


Sounds almost like an open letter of marque and reprisal.

"Gypsy" is pejorative?

What's interesting is how their name hasn't changed more often (i.e., negro/colored/afro-American/black/African-American).

If you dig a little deeper, you will often find that Roma have been encouraged by authorities to integrate with the people of the countries in which they live.

Just a gringo's perspective from half a world away, but if you can't assimilate in southeastern Europe over a thousand years, it's you. The places entire ethnic history seems to be written by outside groups settling down in the area. If I had a dollar for every tribe that settled in Romania and cut a deal with the locals to fight the Turks in exchange for land...

(Interestingly, some digging into Jewish-Gentile tension in history reveals a similar phenomenon of Jews rejecting integration into a given community while claiming rights in that community that the community is therefore reluctant to give. I think there is even a story in the Torah about a Persian or other king literally begging Jews to integrate.)

That, more or less, is Jewish history in a nutshell.

Anonymous said...

On the other hand, imagine what would have happened to the gypsies if their culture didn't have the us vs them mentality that it has.

The small original group would have been absorbed and assimilated into the larger European population and they'd have died out as a unique people.

Would as many copies of their genes be around today?

Anonymous said...

"I read someplace that Missouri has closed clans of inbred families living in expensive and secretive subdivisions. These "domestic" gypsies travel the midwest bilking the elderly in home renovation scams. Anyone heard of these? "

Yes. When I worked in a midwestern Walmart about 20 years ago you would periodically be warned that the Travelers were in town for somesuch gathering or wedding, etc. so be extra vigilant for thefts and so on.

Otis McWrong said...

Anonymous said..."I read someplace that Missouri has closed clans of inbred families living in expensive and secretive subdivisions..."

I don’t know about Missouri but there is a sizeable community in North Augusta, SC (just across the river from Augusta, GA). They're not that secretive, they just don't like outsiders. Home renovation scams, driveway sealing, etc. Part of the drill is when one or two are “negotiating” with the homeowner one or two others will burglarize the property. Being skilled in living off of crime, they avoid violence as they know it will bring down too much police wrath.

I know of an incident 20 years or so ago in Virginia where the home of an elderly woman was burglarized in such fashion but instead of just money, a Confederate cavalry officer’s sword belonging to the woman’s grandfather was stolen as well as a WW2 Distinguished Flying Cross belonging to her late husband. The police chief visited the putative head of the local gypsies and explained that while he was confident that they had nothing to do with the thefts the sword, medal, and money needed to be returned by the end of the week or the future police harassment of the gypsies would become unbearable – to include enforcing truancy laws against their children. They were returned.

Lionel said...

I don't know where the reviewer got the word "luminous" for this film. This film will make anyone want to stay away from gypsies. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097223/

Anonymous said...

Steve - Irish travellers in the UK, where the population are unarmed, are pretty violent. Ireland made trespass on land a criminal offence, at which point they moved to the UK.

As for the UK view of gypsies -

http://www.pigeonsnest.com/stuff/thieving-gypsy-bastards.html

Over the top, but not a million miles from the truth. When English people complain to the local authorities that new gypsy camps will mean increased rates of crime, they're told that their objections are racist and therefore must be disallowed. Seriously.

Anonymous said...

I have a good Czech friend, an uproarious force of nature who leaves no doubt that he's directly descended from the very people who invented Beer.

He loves to tell the story about how the Canadians had such great sympathy for the Czechs after the collapse, etc. that so warmed their collective Maple Leaf that they allowed anyone from Czech to come to Canada and stay, no problem.

The Canadians' problem with the gypsies, as my friend says, "A band of thieves, beggars, murders, and rapists so far beyond the Canadian's capacity for even imagining such things that even in my native language I cannot find the words to describe it", was so spectacularly awful that you now have to apply IN PERSON at the Canadian embassy in Prague for a full visa to so much as *visit* Canada... so that the official can eye you up and down and deny you if you even so much as LOOK like a gypsy.

He then typically howls with laughter for several minutes over how stupid the Canadians were.

Anonymous said...

to include enforcing truancy laws against their children.

And in doing so, make the lives of the other school inmates ... students ... nothing less than hell.

Anonymous said...

Both culture and genes likely contribute to gypsy dysfunction.

Obviously, the pure white Irish Travellers share the same dysfunction as true Gypsies.

Truth said...

"Another straw man argument, eh?HBD does not discount culture at all (Steve certainly does not)."

So you're saying that peoples with a collective 82IQ could thrive in the modern world if they "just tried harder?"

...OK then, shut the fuck up.

Anonymous said...

"Only if you define marriage as a synonym for reproduction."

Diaznik, Marriage is NOT synonymous with reproduction, of course, and I never said it was. If so, everyone who have kids together would have to be recognized as 'married'.
So, I didn't say marriage IS reproduction. I said it is the cultural and moral institutionalization of a biological fact, i.e. that life is created through the sexual between man and woman. What separates us from most animals is that we, as moral and responsible beings, believe that people should ideally produce children out of love and with the intention to take care of them together. That sense of mutual commitment sealed by law is the essence of 'marriage'.

"In fact, the evidence indicates that homosexuality is likely biological, meaning that gay marriage is as natural as straight marriage."

Yes, but 'natural' has double meaning. Since homosexuality occurs naturally, it is natural. But there is the other meaning of natural, as in naturally meaningful and naturally functional and naturally healthy. Thus, children who are born blind or deaf were indeed naturally born that way, but deafness and blindness are natural abnormalities/defect/dysfuctions rather than natural normalities. A naturally healthy child is born with eyes and ears that function. Now, since there are deaf and blind people, we should try to make life easy for them. But we should not equate deafness as equally valuable as hearingness, nor should we say blindness is equally worthy as seeing-ness. And some people are born naturally with mental disdorders, nervous disorders, autism, and proneness to alcoholism. Some are born with Mongoloidism or dwarfism. Yes, they are all natural, but that doesn't mean we have to say mongoloidians and autistic people should be recognized as mentally on the same plane as everyone else.

Anonymous said...

Now, people with defects can acquire certain advantages. Blind people can develop tremendous sense of hearing and touch and smell. Deaf people become visually more acute than others and even learn to read lips. And some autistic people can do remarkable things. And gays seem to have a thing for design and art. Okay, I say we should laud them in those areas, but let's not pretend that abnormalities are equal or equally worthy as normalities. I mean the basic core of 'gay sex' is pretty gross. The anus was naturally designed to be a defecating hole, not a sex organ. It is gross to use it an 'sexual' entrance. But if you want us to tolerate such behavior, we say OKAY. But now you say we must accept such thing as a legitimate healthy form of sexuality? What are you, nuts?

We cannot separate marriage from sexuality because the love involved in marriage is romantic/sexual than just fondness. If fondness alone is enough for marriage, why not have friend-marriage? Ridiculous. I understand gays do feels sexual longing and even love for one another. But given the weirdo nature of homosexuality, a dysfunctional and even perverse form of sexuality, it should NOT be given the same kind of recognition by society and law. It should be tolerated, not celebrated and legitimized. I'd rather have incest pride parades than gay pride parades, though I wouldn't wanna see either.

Anonymous said...

"But put that aside. The issue is that marriage should not be about biology, but about love. We are not animals who come together only to mate, but rather human beings who are capable of reason and feelings. Marriage should be about love and not biology."

Marriage is a necessary wedding of biology and love. I agree that marriage should not be about biology alone. As I said before, if marriage is only about biology, we might as well declare every people who had sex to produce kids as 'married'. We don't do that. If anything, we as a society should frown on people who have kids without moral commitment. We look down on deadbeat dads, and children who grow up without fathers are really missing something in life.
Marriage has never been just about biology. But marriage is about sexuality as the human species has survived through reproduction. And this biological necessity naturally made most men feel attracted to women, and vice versa. For 1000s of years, civilization has decided that men and women shouldn't have casual sex like animals. Instead, there should be moral and legal rules to govern proper sexual behavior so that men won't be fighting one another all times for the women, and so that women will raise the kids with the aid of the men playing the role of fathers(providers and defenders).

Anonymous said...

Look, if all kids were produced by machines and if the state raised all kids, I wouldn't much care about the meaning of marriage. If we move toward a Brave New World scenario, I wouldn't defend marriage as it would have no more central meaning. The thing is, as things stand in the present, everyone is still produced through the sexual process--even if with the aid of artificial means. For this reason, marriage can't just be about love.
Let's follow your logic to its full conclusion. If marriage should just about love, then we should be able to love and marry any number of people. Suppose Bob loves Mary. So they marry. Suppose Mary loves not only Bob but also loves Johnny. She should be able to marry Johnny as well. Suppose Johnny loves not only Mary but Harry. Then Johnny should marry Harry as well. If love and only love is the requirement for marriage, then why not marry everyone anyone? Why have any rules that restrict the number to two? Why not a series of interlocking marriages that allows us to marry everyone we love. So, if I'm a bi-sexual and if I love Johnny, Mary, Todd, and Andy, I should marry each of them, and if they love others, they should marry them too, and we could all be part of an interlocking marriage. And if indeed, life was created as in BRAVE NEW WORLD, I suppose there would be no great harm in interlocking marriage based purely on love or sexual attraction.

Anonymous said...

But because of the nature of sexuality in our world, we shouldn't see marriage as just some lifestyle choice that accommodates 'love'.
Also, not all kinds of love are of the same value or worth. I don't doubt that some gays feel very strongly for one another, but whatever their feelings, their manner of sexuality is still gross(gay) or weird(lesbians). They are silly. In a free society, I say live and let live and everyone should do their own thing, but why does society have to accept everything as being of equal value? You see, I'm not anti-gay-freedom, no more than I'm anti-creationist-freedom. I think gays should be free to be gay, and I think creationists should be free to believe that God created everything and earth is 6,000 to 10,000 yrs old. But I am anti-gay-agenda when gays try to force us to recognize homosexuality as being of equal value as real sexuality. And I am anti-creationist-agenda when creationists try to force schools to teach their nonsense science as real science.

Anonymous said...

"The argument about the unnatural nature of homosexual marriage, besides not being true, is an irrelvant one. It is perfectly natural for a White shark to devour a bunch of baby seals, and yet it is disgusting notwithstanding. I hardly think that Nature is the best arbiter of morality."

It's horrible for the seals but good for the sharks. Seals are the right kind of food for sharks. So, that is natural and good for sharks. But suppose sharks swallowed a kitchen sink or an oil can. That would not be good. So, there are natural things that are normal and healthy(like sharks eating seals) and natural things that are ridiculous and unhealthy(like sharks swallowing things they shouldn't). Yes, sharks too often naturally swallow ANYTHING, but not everything that sharks naturally do is good for the sharks. Seals are much better than kitchen sinks and oil drums. Similarly, it's better for sexual organs if the penis to meet the vagina than the anus.

Btw, we never said everything natural is good. If so, sex out of wedlock would be the best since it's most natural. Without morality and culture, humans are animals and act like animals. We don't want that. We want humans to act moral. But humans are, in their essence, biological beings that came into existence through biology and produce more life through biology. Marriage is the moralization of this process, and that is the core of conservative thought on this. Actually, it's more than conservative. It's eternalist as long as we create life through sexual reproduction. I'm willing to drop the marriage issue IF we move to the Brave New World scenario where we can ideally clone a million Ashley Greenes and a million Pierce Brosnans, but we aint there yet.

Anonymous said...

"Conservatives see marriage as an institution that exists to ensure the nurture of children, and if such insitution were to change, all hell would break loose, so they believe."

No, conservatives fear that all hell will NOT break loose. We would like it if all hell DID broke loose. That way, people will be awakened to the danger of messing with moral institutions. The problem is that some things have a way of gradually weakening and corrupting society. Putting your hand in fire will make your move it right away. But there are other forms of danger that are more insidious and works gradually. Like smoking. Smoking doesn't kill you right away, and if you tell smokers about the danger, they sneer at you and blow smoke in your face. If you tell Asians that it's wrong to eat dogs because doing so destroys the human soul--as no decent human soul can kill dogs for food(unless starving)--, they'll just scoff at you. But look at the ugly and cruel souls of Chinese and Koreans and Vietnamese. Why? They eat dogs, so the history of eating dogs have rotted their souls. And why are Americans so rotten themselves in their own ways? Because they are a bunch of pig-eaters. The fact that Americans are so impervious to the suffering of pigs who are hammurdered by the millions in the hogocaust explains why this country is so materialistic and crass. In the past, we can understand why people ate pigs; they were poor and hungry and sausage was cheap. But how can an advanced and truly moral society be allowing the hogocaust to go on? It's no wonder we are into this 'gay marriage' business. A people without true morality will obsess about trivial morality. If you care about true morality, you would be a hogofectual advocate than than a homosexual advocate. (Hogofectual meaning feeling affection for hogs as fellow creatures of the earth.)
But because you are blind to such suffering and eat bacon, you think the epitome of morality is 'gay marriage'. Ridiculous! Because I'm a hogofectual, I many times more moral than you are. I care more about the suffering of all those poor animals that are as intelligent as dogs whereas you obsess about rich gays who eat chocolate bacon.

Anonymous said...

"But this is irrational because parents MUST ensure the care of their kids as a legal obligation marriage or not, and there is no evidence whatsoever that kids who grow up without married heterosexual parents grow up mentally unbalanced or unhappier."

You gotta be kidding. Despite all the family problems we have, I think everyone values the fact that he or she had a father and mother who stuck around and served as parents. To be sure, lots of kids grow up bad under normal households, and lots of kids grow up decent under single parents or even under 'gay parents'.

But the bigger point is this. Life should not be created in the first place UNLESS those involved wanna make a commitment to take care of the life they create. A human child needs lot of support and love, so adults should never just have a kid for the hell of it. Marriage reminds us that there is a morality and responsibility to the creation and raising of life.
Also, the fact that people who grew up without proper parents don't feel a sense of loss IS proof that something is wrong with them. Sure, they may be nice people, feel fine, and have roles in society. But they don't know what they've missed and don't feel bad about it, and THAT is the problem. In the film THE OFFICIAL STORY, a child is taken from murdered leftist parents and raised in the home of a rightwing general. The kid is perfectly happy and doesn't know and doesn't miss her real parents. So, we might say, what's the big deal? But the fact that the kid doesn't know the real parents and don't miss them IS sad in its own right. Or take TEN COMMANDMENTS. Moses was perfectly happy as a rich Egyptian. But when he discovered his true tribal origin, he felt pain and agony, but he felt greater meaning than ever in his life. He chose the true life of a suffering Jew than a privileged life of an Egyptian prince. It pained him to find his real mother, but he was finally liberated only through such truth.

Anonymous said...

Sure, ignorance is bliss. If my parents had been killed in a car accident when I was a baby and if I was raised by some gay guy who was a nice guy, I might have turned out to be functional member of society and thought myself utterly content--especially if the gay guy was rich and sent me to good schools. Even so, the reason I would be happy would be because I don't know what I really missed out in life with my real parents. And in a way, that is not okay. Should we see humans like dogs in a puppy farm? Parents don't matter as long as those who raise us shower us with goodies and money?

"My parents divorced when I was 6, and yet I am at the 99.7% earning bracket in America, and I have never harmed another person in my life."

I'm not a materialist who judges everything by money. George W. Bush is many times richer than I am but I think he's a moron. Larry Flynt is much richer than I am, so what does that prove? Hollywood guys are superrich but I don't think much of the 'art' they make. Why should money determine what is right or wrong? The father and son at the end of BICYCLE THIEVES are dirt poor, but they stay together and there's beauty in that.
I know lots of gays are rich, but that doesn't convince me about morality. The Roman elites were rich too, but were they better than everyone else? My morality is essentially 1950s humanist films.

Anonymous said...

"And conservatives no longer have a say in this. We have come to the conclusion that you are, for the most part, immune to reason. You want things your way no matter what. You believe you have the right to crush discent by sheer numbers and FORCE people to conform to your norms."

I know conservatives no longer have a say in this, especially as conservatives don't exist anymore. Look at all the 'conservatives' who are going with the big money/power and coming out for 'gay marriage' OR remaining mum and refusing to fight the good fight.

I also know that 'reason' is determined by the powers that be. So, we've been told that Stephen J. Gould is Mr. Reason while race realists are all a bunch of hooey. Why? Cuz the powers-that-be in the media and academia said so. Money rules. Look at Sierra Club after some guy have them lots of millions. In politics, the only 'reason' is 'be reasonable and go along with the powers-that-be cuz otherwise you will be destroyed'.

And no, I don't believe in crushing dissent by sheer force of numbers. If you noticed anything by now, the HBD IS the dissent in America. Even mainstream conservatives sneer and mock HDB people. We are in the minority. If I really believed in majority rule, I would just side with the majority. Since new polls show that majority of Americans are now for 'gay marriage', I should be joining that side. Yet, I refuse to budge because I believe in certain values and principles. Even if 99% of Americans supported 'gay marriage', I wouldn't because
truth is more important than going along.
The 'gay marriage' crowd is the new majority, and they have lots of cash to promote gay pride parades, facebook ads, install the president in the white house, and etc. They are the ones who are using force and bullying to silence those who oppose 'gay marriage'. Recently, Jeremy Irons made some comments about 'gay marriage' in a very nice quiet manner, but the media's been treating him as if he suffers from leprosy.

Anonymous said...

"This is not a civilized society. A civilized society respects and gives equal treatment to all it's members."

A civilized society tolerates differences and understands that not all people are or can be alike. But civilization means to have principles, hierarchies of values, core morality, and the understanding that there are fundamental/essential truths and trivial/frivolous variations. A society that recognizes homosexuality as of equal biological or moral value as real sexuality is one that has lost its moorings. It's one that's willing to sell its soul to the highest bidder. Since Jews and gays are the elites of the US, they feel they have the right to dictate to us what is marriage by fiat--and all those cowardly conservatives just cave in and go along.

Same thing with illegal aliens. Some might say a civilized society must accept illegals as equals of legals, but civilization that has no principles in its definition of borders and citizenship cannot long survive... and Brits are finding out the hard way.

Matra said...

I have a good Czech friend, an uproarious force of nature who leaves no doubt that he's directly descended from the very people who invented Beer.

OT but when I visited the Pilsner Urquell brewery the history lesson suggested that it was ethnic Germans who came up with the original drink, though that wouldn't rule out some Czechs come up with a non-pilsner beer long before then. Also the original Budweiser (Budvar) that so many Czechs brag about comes from a city - Ceske Budejovice - which was something like 80% German in the mid-19th century so that beer was probably German too.

He then typically howls with laughter for several minutes over how stupid the Canadians were.

Yes, some parts of Canada now have a Gypsy problem. If you go to the CBC (Canadian broadcasting Corp.) website you might still find a documentary about the "musical" Hungarian Gypsies and how if Canada shuts the door to them they will all be killed by Hungarian and Czech nationalists.

Daniel said...

>>Good, bad, evil or indifferent, there doesn't seem to be any upside to them. They aren't going to rock the world in Silicon Valley, or go to Caltech, which is honestly the only kind of thing that matters anymore.

Yes, but the Roma aren't using their economic windfall to manipulate the media/government complex and open the doors of either Romania or Britain to millions of their like.

To paraphrase, I would rather have 1000 randomly selected Roma make our laws than the appointed of Wall Street and Silicon Valley.

David said...

>We have come to the conclusion that you are, for the most part, immune to reason. You want things your way no matter what. You believe you have the right to crush discent by sheer numbers and FORCE people to conform to your norms.<

Who is "we"? The Red Guard of The Festival of Reason?

Reason...force...I detect a young Libertarian who reads rather a lot of "Ayn Rand."

It's spelled dissent, btw.

ATBOTL said...

"(Interestingly, some digging into Jewish-Gentile tension in history reveals a similar phenomenon of Jews rejecting integration into a given community while claiming rights in that community that the community is therefore reluctant to give."

Many people from the near East settled in Europe during the late Roman Empire, including many early Christian missionaries. Jews choose to remain separate.

Anonymous said...

Many people from the near East settled in Europe during the late Roman Empire, including many early Christian missionaries. Jews choose to remain separate.

Why did Jews choose to remain separate?

Anonymous said...

To my knowledge Gypsies are the only people with a culture that considers stealing a virtue. Recall their story about the crucifixion and stealing a nail.

Anonymous said...

"Why did Jews choose to remain separate?"

Because at the very core of Judaism, is the belief that Jews are god's "chosen" people.

In other words, they believe they are better then us Goyim shmucks.

But of course, that's not "racist"......

Anonymous said...

To my knowledge Gypsies are the only people with a culture that considers stealing a virtue. Recall their story about the crucifixion and stealing a nail.

Don't some anti-Semites claim that similar values are found in Judaism? (For example, if transgressions against Jews versus against Gentiles have different moral status.)

Wouldn't any particularistic moral outlook be expected, in effect, to consider stealing a virtue?

Svigor said...

"Another straw man argument, eh?HBD does not discount culture at all (Steve certainly does not)."

So you're saying that peoples with a collective 82IQ could thrive in the modern world if they "just tried harder?"

...OK then, shut the fuck up.


Well, no, probably not, but that doesn't mean their IQ is necessarily their only problem...

On the other hand, imagine what would have happened to the gypsies if their culture didn't have the us vs them mentality that it has.

The small original group would have been absorbed and assimilated into the larger European population and they'd have died out as a unique people.

Would as many copies of their genes be around today?


Absolutely true. People seem to assume that I object to the whole situation when I point out the facts. Not so. I'm simply pointing out that ethnocentrism of a level sufficient to prevent assimilation in the long run (a pretty rare thing, I think) seems to carry certain inevitable consequences. It's the failure to acknowledge both sides of the street that gets my dander up.

If they didn't want to experience discrimination, then they should assimilate and STFU. If they don't want to assimilate, then they should endure the discrimination and STFU (especially since discrimination is precisely how they resist assimilation).

"In fact, the evidence indicates that homosexuality is likely biological, meaning that gay marriage is as natural as straight marriage."

Cancer is certainly biological, meaning that dying from it is as natural as homosexuality.


Don't some anti-Semites claim that similar values are found in Judaism? (For example, if transgressions against Jews versus against Gentiles have different moral status.)

Wouldn't any particularistic moral outlook be expected, in effect, to consider stealing a virtue?


In traditional Judaism, yes, but only if you don't get caught; otherwise, it would be overridden by the injunction against bringing down the wrath of the "gentiles" on the Jews.

As far as I know, neo-Judaism (reform, etc.) is different.

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 4/5/13 9:31 PM -

That's a fairly un-nuanced view. "Chosenness" to the Orthodox means that they are obligated to follow the 613 commandments, including food limitations and a whole lot of other life-altering, expense-inducing stuff. Since Judaism has always been fuzzy about the afterlife, it's not entirely clear what the reward for this observance is supposed to be. Perhaps it's better not to be chosen.

Anonymous said...

A people without true morality will obsess about trivial morality.

Just ask the Religious Right and their crusades against modern medicine (but NOT psychiatry), Harry Potter, heavy metal, some drugs, shamanism, etc. The RR even damns black, as in the colour black! Not black people of course (that would be racist) but black cars, black clothing, black buildings, etc.

Anonymous said...

If you go to the CBC (Canadian broadcasting Corp.) website you might still find a documentary about the "musical" Hungarian Gypsies and how if Canada shuts the door to them they will all be killed by Hungarian and Czech nationalists.

I'm too lazy to check it out, but I wouldn't be surprised if these documentaries make Hungarian and Czech nationalists to be Nazis and Horthyists; and what more the same dangerous anarchists that upset the social order in 1956 and 1968 by revolting against "progressive" Soviet imperialism.

David said...

>"When we accuse others, it's almost exclusively of things we do ourselves."

What rubbish. When someone picks my pocket and I yell thief, it's not because I go around picking pockets. Likewise, when my house gets burgled and I call the police, it is not because I am a burglar, it's because someone burgled my house.<


Hear, hear.

Be prepared, however, to hear the accusation "You're irrational!" emanating from the nearest bathhouse.

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 4/5/13 9:31 PM -

That's a fairly un-nuanced view. "Chosenness" to the Orthodox means that they are obligated to follow the 613 commandments, including food limitations and a whole lot of other life-altering, expense-inducing stuff.

The aim of these rules and activities is to segregate adherents from other people and to give them advantage over other people. This is actually evidence in favor of the view you describe as "fairly un-nuanced."

Since Judaism has always been fuzzy about the afterlife, it's not entirely clear what the reward for this observance is supposed to be.

Fuzziness on an afterlife calls into question the propriety of classifying Judaism as a religion--rather than as a political ideology.

Anonymous said...

"Wouldn't any particularistic moral outlook be expected, in effect, to consider stealing a virtue?"

In traditional Judaism, yes, but only if you don't get caught.


Oh, that qualification puts me so much more at ease.

Anonymous said...

Back on the topic of Gypsies, think about how the communists handled them. In a word, apartheid. The commies left (and forced) the gypsies to live in their own environment, often For Their Own Good. That solution worked, by keeping the gypsy and gadge populations separate. They paid off the gypsy leaders and gave them jobs with high-sounding titles, prompting the leaders to praise communism to high heaven while raking up the black market. Solved the unemployment problem by drafting gypsies into poorly-paying factory work which they hated. And of course the commies controlled the media in the workers' paradise, and focused their racism microscopes onto Harlem, South Africa, Israel, and the Korean community in Japan.

Anonymous said...

Back on the topic of Gypsies, think about how the communists handled them. In a word, apartheid. The commies left (and forced) the gypsies to live in their own environment, often For Their Own Good. That solution worked, by keeping the gypsy and gadge populations separate. They paid off the gypsy leaders and gave them jobs with high-sounding titles, prompting the leaders to praise communism to high heaven while raking up the black market.

Right. We just need to "think about it"--as if Gypsy relations in the Soviet Union were common knowledge to any of us here. What, by the way, is your source of knowledge?

Anonymous said...

In a word, apartheid. The commies left (and forced) the gypsies to live in their own environment, often For Their Own Good. That solution worked, by keeping the gypsy and gadge populations separate. They paid off the gypsy leaders and gave them jobs with high-sounding titles, prompting the leaders to praise communism to high heaven while raking up the black market. Solved the unemployment problem by drafting gypsies into poorly-paying factory work which they hated. And of course the commies controlled the media in the workers' paradise, and focused their racism microscopes onto Harlem, South Africa, Israel, and the Korean community in Japan.

Speaking of Israel (funny you should mention it), some of these measures bear some superficial resemblance to methods applied by the Jewish state against Gentiles--except the communists were far more humane.

--Forced to live in their own "environment." Check.

--Pay off Gentile leaders and give them jobs with high-sounding titles, prompting leaders to praise (in the case of Western Gentiles) or to speak peacably of (in the case of Gentiles under Israeli occupation) Israel. Check.

--Control of media and focus of racism spotlight away from themselves. Check.

--Solve unemployment problem. Key distinction between the two. The Jewish strategy is the reverse: to choke off the Gentiles economically so they are either forced to emigrate or die.

"Back on the topic of Gypsies," indeed. Are you Scots Irish perchance?

Truth said...

"Well, no, probably not, but that doesn't mean their IQ is necessarily their only problem..."

Do I need to explain your own viewpoint to you? HBD suggests that IQ is their only problem, because ALL of their other "problems" stem from low IQ.

Hey, it's your viewpoint, not mine.

Anonymous said...

"Why did Jews choose to remain separate?"

Group competitive advantage.

.
"If they didn't want to experience discrimination, then they should assimilate and STFU. If they don't want to assimilate, then they should endure the discrimination and STFU (especially since discrimination is precisely how they resist assimilation)."

Quite.

.
"HBD suggests that IQ is their only problem, because ALL of their other "problems" stem from low IQ."

HBD is much more interesting than that.

For example a population living in an environment where women can feed their children themselves won't select males on the basis of provider traits but display (braggin' n boastin') and/or violence traits instead.

So someone from a lower average IQ group not only needs to be in the high IQ end of the spectrum but also in the low end of the display and violence spectrums - unless they're in areas where dispaly and / or aggression are useful like entertainment and sports.

So proppa HBD might lead you to expect to see 1/3 fewer higher IQ men from that group than you would if you based your expectations on beginner HBD.

Lot's more to HBD than just IQ.

Anonymous said...

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/apr/25/national-digital-public-library-launched/

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/apr/25/scientology-story/

Svigor said...

Now T-Dog, I've mentioned how blacks perform best under authoritarianism/"white supremacy"/whatever enough times here for even you to have noticed...

Svigor said...

Oh, that qualification puts me so much more at ease.

You can put yourself at ease; online I'm pretty much never motivated to put anyone at ease.

That's a fairly un-nuanced view. "Chosenness" to the Orthodox means that they are obligated to follow the 613 commandments, including food limitations and a whole lot of other life-altering, expense-inducing stuff. Since Judaism has always been fuzzy about the afterlife, it's not entirely clear what the reward for this observance is supposed to be. Perhaps it's better not to be chosen.

I love that "We're Chosen - to suffer!" defense. Really, not even kidding. It's so silly and brazen, just dripping with chutzpah. Yahweh annihilated Amalek to spare him the suffering.

Since Judaism has always been fuzzy about the afterlife, it's not entirely clear what the reward for this observance is supposed to be.

Judaism is materialist. Eternal life is through la raza (stars without number).

Anonymous said...

Judaism is materialist.

So is capitalism, socialism, national socialism, liberalism, libertarianism, Democrat Party politics, Republican Party politics, etc. Judaism is just another political ideology.

Truth said...

"For example a population living in an environment where women can feed their children themselves won't select males on the basis of provider traits but display (braggin' n boastin') and/or violence traits instead."

Great, so there must be a lot of braggin' boastin' guys getting laid in Sausalito..

"Now T-Dog, I've mentioned how blacks perform best under authoritarianism/"white supremacy"/whatever enough times here for even you to have noticed..."

Blacks are under authoritarianism/ white supremacy now, and always have been.

Anonymous said...

I remember 4 years ago some Bulgarians were arrested by police in Coastal Kenya for using a device to steal from ATMs.

Is it likely that these guys are Bulgarians or gypsies?

Anyways Coastal Kenya is interesting because there are so many white criminals causing chaos. (Mass emigration of southern Italians.)

Svigor said...

I love that "We're Chosen - to suffer!" defense. Really, not even kidding. It's so silly and brazen, just dripping with chutzpah. Yahweh annihilated Amalek to spare him the suffering.

I'm still lauging. I mean, just look at it from a religious POV. Taking the view that G-d chose the Jews to suffer, and after viewing contemporary America through that lens, the inescapable conclusion is that G-d is the biggest fuckup in the Universe.

Blacks are under authoritarianism/ white supremacy now, and always have been.

Haha, so what were they under in 1920? You know word games aren't going to work with me.

Ion said...

@ Reg Cæsar

'The term "Roma" should be applied to homos, instead. Because they make Love backwards.'

I LOLed.

Punditarian said...

The Gypsies or Roma are the remnants of an army that was raised to defend India from the jihad in Rajasthan in the 11th century. Trapped behind enemy lines, they made their way into the Middle East and Europe, breaking up into smaller bands, and preserving what of their language and culture they could.

If we fail to defeat the jihad today, this is what will become of us. Or worse.