May 17, 2013

Reason: "Are Hispanics Too Stupid to Become Americans?"

From Reason:
Are Hispanics Too Stupid to Become Americans?
No. And here's why. 
By Ronald Bailey
... Hispanic educational achievements and incomes do lag behind those of white Americans. And certainly there is a substantial genetic component to intelligence; genes are, after all, the recipes that build bodies and brains in response to environmental cues. Yet as Unz’s analysis of Lynn and Vanhanen’s data shows, the average IQ of a population can change in a generation whereas its genetic makeup cannot.  So what else might account for relatively lower Hispanic achievement so far in the U.S.?

The University of Texas economist Stephen Trejo suggests a number of possibilities. For example, Mexican immigration has lasted longer than immigration from any other country, promoting the growth and stability of culturally comfortable ethnic enclaves and slowing the process of assimilation. 

Sounds plausible to me. And what are the implications of that for immigration policy?
Trejo also proposes that earlier generations of unskilled immigrants faced a far less steep learning curve for moving up in a modern economy. In his 2005 book Italians Then, Mexicans Now, the Bard College sociologist Joel Perlman bolsters this point: “The crucial difference between the immigrant experience a hundred years ago and today is that relatively well-paid jobs were plentiful for workers with little education a hundred years ago, while today's immigrants arrive in an increasingly unequal America.”

Sounds plausible to me. And what are the implications of that for immigration policy?
Trejo also wonders if some fairly significant proportion of Mexican-Americans have simply already melded into the white population and so are not counted in the sorts of IQ, income, and education statistics cited by Richwine and other researchers. 

I'm sure that was true to some extent several generations ago, but it has been in the self-interest of marginally Hispanic individuals to assert their Hispanic identity for over 40 years. For example, way back in 1975 my friend with the Spanish surname whose father dropped out of Yale on December 8, 1941 to enlist and whose mother is the closest living version of Katharine Hepburn was besieged by colleges recruiting the Spanish-surnamed to bestow affirmative action upon.
Perlman concludes that “Mexican economic assimilation may take more time—four or five generations rather than three or four.”

In the meantime, pay no attention whatsoever to the state of New Mexico unto the Seventh Generation of Hispanic-Americans.

Comrades! The Great Leaders' Five Generation Plan has not failed. It cannot fail! The Five Generation Plan just hasn't been tried long enough. It just needs another Five Generations (and maybe another Five Generations after that -- when it's time for your distant descendants, if any, to know how many Five Generations it will take, they will be informed through the proper channels, probably by then via a sub-quarkian cognitive implant).

But, even under this best case scenario, isn't "four or five generations" a mite long to wait to break even? What's the national ROI on this four or five generation project, anyway?

In short, we are being told to Bet the Country on hopes and fumes.
Possibly so. But ultimately, modern Hispanic immigrants seem to be no stupider than the immigrant ancestors of other Americans.

Robert Oppenheimer's immigrant father? Seriously?

How much of the media momentum to crush Jason Richwine isn't just a Pavlovian response to the felt need for a triple bankshot strategy to prevent peasants with pitchforks from finally noticing that one Ellis Island immigrant group really is higher in IQ on average?

Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money.

125 comments:

fnn said...

...the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter on average, and, that this knowledge, rather than making them want to come after the Jews with torches and crude peasant farm implements, inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money.

True-but what if all those dumb gentiles weren't clueless about why Arab terrorists attacked the US on 9/11, the story of the USS Liberty, the Jonathan Pollard spy case and his hero status in Israel and the origins of the Iraq War?

Whiskey said...

Arab Terrorists attack the US because they are ... wait for it ... MUSLIM! That's what Muslims do, attack the weak and those not feared. Djoker Tsarnaev wrote a mini-rant in that boat, saying he attacked the US for Iraq and Afghanistan. Well, we left Iraq under Obama a poorly closeted Muslim Black man, and are leaving Afghanistan as fast as we can. Why providing shelter and cash and money to Chechens ... including the Tsarnaev family. Muslims attack the weak and leave the strong alone -- Russia after a few years of Putin killing Muslims left and right.

Americans like Jews being smart, because smart lawyers equalize government power, a bureaucrat can't crush you for kicks, and a smart Jewish doctor can save your life.

Garland said...

"Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the humans of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the humans already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the humans want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the humans of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money."

Perhaps convincing Jews of this would be good for white gentiles' interests, but I'm not sure it would be *true.* I used to think so, but I've come to doubt it. Jewish smartness combined with their nepotism, hostility to gentile culture, may just lead white gentiles to band together more than they have in generations, if only to make up for their cognitive disadvantage. And that's the last thing Jews want.

Garland said...

"Americans like Jews being smart, because smart lawyers equalize government power, a bureaucrat can't crush you for kicks, and a smart Jewish doctor can save your life."

Maybe. But Jews are at least as likely to be on the offending end of the government power. And white gentiles can be good doctors too.

Orthodox said...

If the comment thread under that article is any indication, libertarianism is pretty much dead as a political movement.

Anonymous said...

"True-but what if all those dumb gentiles weren't clueless about why Arab terrorists attacked the US on 9/11, the story of the USS Liberty, the Jonathan Pollard spy case and his hero status in Israel and the origins of the Iraq War?"

I know about all of that stuff and a whole lot more. I am still opposed to pogroms. Even aside from the moral considerations, Jews aren't exactly powerless. Hitler took them on militarily and it didn't work out so well for him or Germany. *

OTOH, Hitler did not come to power in a vacuum. Arguably, Marxist Jews took on Germany prior to Hitler, and they didn't do so well out of it either. The Russian experiment also didn't work out so well for them after Stalin came to power. It was in the USA, where they monkeyed around with the country the least, that they eventually found the seat of their power. Perhaps there is a lesson in that somewhere?

There is a sizeable minority of Jews who are opposed to more immigration. Jews are definitely not monolithically encouraging of PC and immigration. And it takes time for a good opinion to become majority held. Battles of ideas are fought with writing and propaganda. There are Jews on our side there too.

Do I need to list them? That's not the intention of this comment, but perhaps what is needed is to make up a big list of Jews on our side. I can think of one - the other writer of The Bell Curve, Herrnstein gets first billing before Murray. Our host here is most likely half, and we give him money to do what he does best. (He could easily have just pulled a Hitchens). In the movies you only have to look at producers and the like for movies such as The Lord of the Rings and such. Saul Zaentz gave that the green light, and did not insist on casting people of color throughout the movie. I could go on though, perhaps we can collaboratively make a list if there is some demand. Maybe this would give encouragement to others on the fence.

As a believer in science, technology, engineering - the sort of thing that Western Civilization is renowned for - I think we will do better with Jews than without them. The world would be bereft of many inventions and discoveries if it wasn't for them. And to those who want pogroms I would point out that we have had long stretches of history with successful, symbiotic relations with Jews in our midst, as our countries have risen to prominence.

Let's look at the Frankfurt School as a regrettable error that was eventually widely embraced without a lot of thought going into it (much like Christianity). We should remember that the average Jew is not a genius, and cut them some slack. The iSteve commentariat is surely smarter than the average Jew, probably by a standard deviation or two.

* There is the Samson option to contend with as well.

Anonymous said...

Steve, I think (hope) that you are one of those gentiles who are inclined to like Jewish-Americans, but many of your commenters (and it's not your fault) aren't. They are just plain old fashioned anti-Semites who WOULD take up the farm implements if given a chance. So for you to posit triple bankshot theories that this is the Joos fault on no real evidence is just tossing red meat to the droolers.

The nature of witch hunts is that anyone may get caught up in one - Summers was Jewish himself.



Average Joe said...

Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money.

Or the "Jewish-Americans" could move to Israel if they are so fearful of living in countries with predominantly white gentile populations.

Average Joe said...

Arab Terrorists attack the US because they are ... wait for it ... MUSLIM! That's what Muslims do, attack the weak and those not feared.

How come we did not have a problem with Arab/Muslim terrorism before the creation of the state of Israel?

Average Joe said...

Americans like Jews being smart, because smart lawyers equalize government power, a bureaucrat can't crush you for kicks, and a smart Jewish doctor can save your life.

Unfortunately they want to charge gentiles an arm and a leg to do any of those things. Also they end up supporting anti-white gentile organizations such as the SPLC.

DYork said...

Whiskey said...Well, we left Iraq under Obama a poorly closeted Muslim Black man...Arab Terrorists attack the US because they are ... wait for it ... MUSLIM! That's what Muslims do...Americans like Jews being smart...

Here he comes again folks.

But how can we explain all this in relation to how much White women hate, hate, hate "beta males", meaning White omega nerds like you?

fnn said...

I know about all of that stuff and a whole lot more. I am still opposed to pogroms.

You have your finger on the problem.

Most US Jews start thinking "pogroms" as soon as those items-as well as a host of others too tedious to mention-are brought up. Israeli Jews aren't nearly as sensitive.

Ambacti said...

"Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average"

How is this beneficial for Jews? Was Hitler's knowledge of this fact not a major catalyst for the holocaust? The more intelligent group will always become institutionally dominant, leaving the less intelligent group with exclusion and violence as the only options to maintain their influence. Hitler probably understood this on some level. Periodically reading through your comments sections and those of other HBD blogs has done nothing to assuage my doubts about your thesis.

"Our host here is most likely half [Jewish]"
Is there any truth to this?

"The iSteve commentariat is surely smarter than the average Jew, probably by a standard deviation or two"
No it isn't.

Ambacti said...

"Arab Terrorists attack the US because they are ... wait for it ... MUSLIM! That's what Muslims do, attack the weak and those not feared."

"How come we did not have a problem with Arab/Muslim terrorism before the creation of the state of Israel?"


See this, this and this. If anything, Israel is diverting some proportion of Islamic energy away from the other infidels.

Anonymous said...

Whisky isn't omega he's just short. If guys would all pitch in for some subtle platform shoes you could probally be rid of him shortly.

That said he is right. Muslims didnt attack our warships prior to 1948 because our warships werent there to be attacked. Keep in mind when the English abolished the caliphate in the twenties they spent the next year putting down riots in all their Muslim territories. Out of curiosity is it the same guy always posting about the USS Liberty on paleocon sites or do all paleocons really obsess about it. I hope it's just one guy it be a shame to think the whole movement is that easily unhinged.

The USS liberty posters are always huge Putin/ Russophiles so I have trouble believing its only the attack of a American ship that angers them probally has more to do with the alleged attackers.

Anonymous said...

"How much of the media momentum to crush Jason Richwine isn't just a Pavlovian response to the felt need for a triple bankshot strategy to prevent peasants with pitchforks from finally noticing that one Ellis Island immigrant group really is higher in IQ on average?"

I don't think so...

Richwine is being pilloried because noticing IQ differences fogs up the folk public political theology that underpins the sociological principles progressive liberal democrats need to generate buy in for government action. They need equality to be the state of nature so they can lead us back there.

Anonymous said...

"You have your finger on the problem."
Thanks.

"Most US Jews start thinking "pogroms" as soon as those items-as well as a host of others too tedious to mention-are brought up. Israeli Jews aren't nearly as sensitive."

The realization that many of these things are true can induce a rage that leads to radicalization and sometimes militancy. It did with me (not the militancy part) for a year or so.

I think that is mostly because there is not much in the way of an easily accessible alternative out there that really deals with those issues and says "Look, I realize this stuff happened, it shouldn't have happened and we are working to change things. Certain things may be true but are overblown. Others are fair criticisms. PC Multicult is genocide and it is wrong. Together we will work to create a renaissance of European civilization."

Maybe what's needed is an organization, website, book or even just a FAQ that makes the same sort of argument and deals with those issues in a more candid and transparent way.

The relative absence of such a position makes it seem as if there is only the false dichotomy of "Either you are a sleeping Zionist/Jewish enabler or you must take the fight to them somehow". It has seemed historically that the only Jews who deal with these arguments tend to do so with obfuscation and lies, and usually do so anonymously if possible so as not to have their ethnicity associated with their argument. They try to take a path that these things aren't true and to imprison or destroy the careers of their opposition.

Those Gentiles who publicize those topics genuinely do not think that compromise or collaboration is possible (e.g. because they have never considered that the current path is ultimately not "Good For Jews"). Maybe they think that because of certain things written in the Talmud, Jews are effectively consigned to forever do what certain Jews have done in the 20th century, despite many other centuries when they haven't - and the Talmud has been around for a long, long time. First printed in 1342 according to wikipedia.

So those who would publicize this sort of thing have a goal of radicalization. And there is not much alternative for someone smart who goes down that path because they are after truth. If such a person finds a path other than radicalization they basically have to invent it themselves. These are usually smart people, too. If some sort of cogent argument were available, they could read and compare, probably choosing a less aggressive path if they thought it had much chance of success.

I'm honestly not sure what the best way to deal with this is. At least a list that someone can point to of Jews who have collaborated in the struggle for our civilization. Perhaps some sort of wiki would be helpful so that others could do research and add names and works.

Hunsdon said...

Anonydroid at 4:51 PM said: There are Jews on our side there too.

Hunsdon said: Professor Herr Doctor Paul Gottfried comes to mind. You listed . . . Herrnstein, and Zaentz. And you're lumping Zaentz in because there were no African-Shirish hobbits? I'd appreciate a list of Jews on our side.

Also, who mentioned pogroms?

Whiskey sez: Americans like Jews being smart because . . . .

Hunsdon continued: Because us goyim can't be good lawyers, can't be good doctors?

JeremiahJohnbalaya said...

Steve, I think (hope) that you are one of those gentiles who are inclined to like Jewish-Americans, but many of your commenters (and it's not your fault) aren't. They are just plain old fashioned anti-Semites who WOULD take up the farm implements if given a chance?

I don't think that many posters here dislike Jews for being Jewish. I think they dislike what Jews as a group are doing (saying, voting, promoting, etc).

eah said...

Better question: Is Congress too stupid to stop amnesty for millions of illegals from Mexico?

Anonymous said...

I don't want to get into an arument about whether progressivism or the Frankfort school is worse, but for the sake of argument let's just look at the Jewish role in the mess we're in.

HNU may have had it's modern start with Boas, and may owe a great deal of its spread to academics of hebrew origin, but it has metastasized. It is a self-sustaining ideology at this point. The fiercest arguments I've had over race have been with true believer White Gentiles and 7/8th European Mestizos, whether or not they were spouting the ideas of long dead European Jews.

Funny enough, I've found Mestizos with a largely Amerindian phenotype to be less hostile to my ideas than the borderline White ones. Perhaps the fact that they are less visually compatible with White America that prevents them from assimilating into contemporary American multiculturalism, but they may just be less confident than their off-white brothers and sisters.

Returning to my main point, getting more Jews on board is a great way to help spread the truth, but it won't magically fix the discourse. Disproportionate influence is not omnipotent control.

-The Judean People's Front

Daybreaker said...

"Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money."
-
Elliott Abrams wrote a good book to convince Jews they should stop being afraid of the Christians with pitchforks, be more openly Jewish and more separatist, and make better use of Christian Zionist allies instead of seeing them as bigoted monsters who need to be put down, both socially and in the "put down a sick pet" sense.

His credentials as a politically informed, strongly identified Jew advocating this course purely out of "is it good for the Jews?" thinking could not be any stronger.

He got absolutely nowhere. That perception and that approach was completely non-received in 1999, and it is completely non-received today.

The antisemitic white Christian bigots with pitchforks are out there! They are! They are! The numbers of these potential Nazis need to be reduced, they need to be outnumbered at the polls and in neighborhoods, reduced in influence, reduced in wealth, pushed out of universities and the courts, and blocked in every way from having any potential to start a new Shoah, God forbid. While there's two of them left, there's a potential threat.

Watch more Holocaust movies till you begin to internalize the threat. Preferably all of them. And visit more Holocaust memorials and museums. Read more testimony too.

Don't get complacent. You know what that leads to.

They say "if can't happen here..." And then it does!

Anonymous said...

People like Jews because they are smart and dislike them because of pretty much everything else.

If it were clear that Jews were naturally smart, then that would be obvious as the reason for the positive parts of their success.

Jewish people would not, IMO, be overly positive about this because they wish others to view that their actual other human characteristics, as people, are responsible for their success and make them high class (rather than somewhat irritating at best).

Daybreaker said...

"Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money."
-
Alas for the goyish kopfs, their simple brains are not up to such a difficult task.

Anonymous said...

Your last paragraph, Steve, comes off as really weak.

As a general rule, power does not concede without a demand. Asking for things is a sign of weakness.

And at any rate, Jewish scholastic achievement has fallen quite dramatically over the past 20-25 years.

Anonymous said...

"If the comment thread under that article is any indication, libertarianism is pretty much dead as a political movement."

Hasn't it always been so?

Yet the movement matters because it drains white elites(by their cognitive abilities).

But what sickened me reading some of the comments was how indoctrinated by cultural marxism they were.

The only thing really separating them and the left is economic issues. Basically.

What stood out to me was how how several of them were attacking the white working class(what a shocker) but of course, would they go after the black or latino working class with slurs like wetbacks(instead of 'white trash' or 'hicks')?

Of course not. Not only has whites disarmed their ethnic identity, they've even bought into the anti-white paradigm of the cultural left.

Culturally, they are self-haters. As long as they only attack their own people(which they try to forget/deny that they are part of as much as possible) but ONLY their own people, I will stand by that judgement.

It's one thing to try to pretend you're not white. It's quite another to specifically target the white working class for hatred in a way you wouldn't with any other ethnic group.

Trash is what they are.

SFG said...

"Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money."

I've been trying this for years. No luck. If things go downhill I may just convert and call it quits.

Wish I could be more optimistic said...

I wish I could be as optimistic as you are Steve about the future relations of White Gentiles and Jews.

As a White Gentile who was raised very Philo-Semetically (my father was a self-made millionaire who greatly admired the Jews) I came to me reservations about Jews rather late in life.

Less you think I am naturally prejudiced I dated Jewish girls in my younger days and was even engaged briefly to a daughter of a Rabbi (beautiful girl but we were too young I decided ).

What caused me to reassess my attitude towards the “Scotch-Irish” was a growing awareness of their extreme paranoia about the motives and attitudes of White Gentiles … along with their active hostility toward the interests of White Gentiles evidenced by their many actions (too numerous to list but some of the commenters on this thread have mentioned a few).

The reason why I am not optimistic about future relations is because I now see Judaism as a sort of self-perpetuating death cult….. The hostility to Gentiles it exhibits breeds resentment which breeds hostility, which breeds resentment, etc……. It is a self perpetuating non-virtuous circle. The ADL and like groups and even Judaism itself can stay in business as long as there is group clannishness and a fear of Gentiles ….

There is simply no reason at this time for important members of the group to increase cooperation with White Gentiles so they won’t.

Many Jews are not even aware of the circular nature of their group behavior because not all Jews are all that smart (just like the bulk of any group).

Given the Sampson option, which another commenter has mentioned, Israel has adopted with their nuclear weapons … I am unfortunately apt to think that Voltaire was right when he prophesied that if ever the world was to end by human hands the Jews would be involved somehow.

It is a sad state of affairs that I wish was different.

I guess we can all pray for some break through in understanding and cooperation …though I am not particularly religious or hopeful.

Anonymous said...

"Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money."

Sailer's Solution to the Sub-optimal Semite Suck-up Problem is Sure to Bring Success.

Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight. The reason so many of you are anti-Jew is merely a consequence of the the paranoia that Jews have about so many gentiles being anti-Jew?

Anonymous said...

I am Jewish and have lived among fairly secular, upper-middle-class East Coast Jews all my life.

I have never heard a word against non-Jewish whites. Folks, your fears of Jewish plots are unfounded. Jews want America to thrive. We love capitalism and freedom of the press. Many of us strive to emulate WASPs with regard to preppy clothing, glossy straight hair, and ruddy athleticism. Even the Democratic Jews I know share these values, though they have yet to awaken from their fog of treating any downtrodden racial minority as a victim who must be "saved" with affirmative action and welfare.

Keep in mind: There are more white non-Jewish liberals than Jewish liberals. You cannot blame the liberal scourge entirely on my misguided kinsmen.

Anonymous said...

***Those Gentiles who publicize those topics genuinely do not think that compromise or collaboration is possible (e.g. because they have never considered that the current path is ultimately not "Good For Jews").***

Wrong. That's one of the first things most of them have considered. Bitter experience has taught them that either Jews as a group don't care about the long term consequences of their actions, or more likely that they simply can't help themselves (like the Scorpion and the Frog, they can't change their nature). Individual Jews can change, Jews as a group don't change. Moreover, it's Jews themselves who decide what is good for Jews, not us, and they have made their decision emphatically clear.

It's when you realize this and finally admit this fact to yourself that you give up on the whole "if only Jews would realize how nice we are and how our interests our compatible with theirs, all our troubles would go away" delusion. Kevin MacDonald has dealt with this issue in depth. We are not dealing with a simple issue that can be resolved with some political horse trading. It's something that is deeply irrational and cannot be appealed to with reason.

Anonymous said...

***See this, this and this. If anything, Israel is diverting some proportion of Islamic energy away from the other infidels.***

The other poster asked about terrorism, and you respond with examples of Islamic conquests from centuries prior to the period he was talking about, ie, the creation of the State of Israel.

Military conquests are the norm throughout history. Muslims tried to conquer us; we returned the favor with the Crusades. Big deal. The fact is the West so completely overpowers the Islamic world militarily, economically, scientifically, that it has been "no contest" between the West and Islam since the 19th century. Islam is not a military threat to us. Islam is a demographic threat, but only because "we" foolishly allowed them to immigrate into the West. Their terrorism would hardly effect us at all if they weren't allowed to live in our countries.

Besides, the idea that Israel is some kind of bulwark against Islamism is false. Israel has been promoting Islamic fundamentalism for the past half century, as a counter-weight to secular Arab nationalism (see for instance their early support/creation of Hamas). It's worked very well, too. The secular regimes which might have threatened Israel are crushed, replaced by chaos and a patchwork of unstable Islamist enclaves, failed states, or otherwise ineffectual regimes. A byproduct of this is increased terrorism.

Even after the state of Israel was created, it took a long time for Islamic terrorism directed at the USA to actually emerge. In fact it was so slow in coming, the Israelis had to invent it - I refer you to the Lavon Affair by way of example. With friends like Israel, who needs enemies?

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

This is what the simple-minded "counter-jihadists" don't get: the West is under attack from an inner enemy and an outer enemy, and the inner enemy is by far the deadlier.

Baloo said...

Good stuff, Steve, and good comment, Anonymous — about libertarianism and cutural marxism. I've made a blog post based on it.
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2013/05/unreasonable-reason.html

Rohan Swee said...

Are Hispanics too stupid to become Americans? Perhaps we can predict a transformation of this question in the not-too-distant future:

At present, Mexico is dumping its unwanted citizens on the U.S., putting off or obviating the next Mexican revolution. Will this just result in the unrest eventually being pushed to points north? Or will the whole mess just be rebranded and repackaged, with the noble representatives of the new Americano people (the usual Europeans plus maybe some Asians pretending they're all raza cosmica) taking to meddling in Canada, corrupting the Canadian great and good, and contriving yet again to unload their problems on the next set of gringo chumps. Earnest Canuck pundits (even more naïve and deluded than the Americans before them) may then be asking "Are Americanos too stupid to become Canadians"?

Of course, by then, Canada may well be mostly Asians, or Asian elite, and they'll just tell the Americanos to piss off. Or maybe what was the American middle-class can just decamp to the now amnesty-cleared Mexico, and enjoy a couple of generations of order and prosperity in a now majority-Euro country, before the Euro-Americanos and a few greed-bags south of the border decide it's time to start shoving populations around for fun and profit again.

pat said...

Yes Hispanics are indeed too stupid to become Americans.

That's the fact - Jack. But it isn't a simple fact. There are all sorts of subtleties and equivocations.

Hispanics - by which we mean Caucasian Amerindian hybrids - are not particularly stupid as world populations go. The West Europeans and the East Asian are quite a bit smarter but there are plenty of other peoples in the Middle East or South East Asia who have similar IQs. So it's not as if we were considering importing some fashionable group of low IQ primitives like the New Guinea natives or those poor Haitians.

A bigger concern is that we are not interested in bringing in Mexican mathematicians, architects or neurosurgeons. I would support a concerted effort for the US to engage in a "brain drain" campaign against Mexico. There are millions of "right side of the distribution" people in Mexico. But we are interested only in illiterate peasants. So all this talk about Hispanic accomplishments is bushwa. The Mexicans want to send us their worst, dumbest people and we would indeed be dumb to accept them.

The other factor unmentioned in this debate is that labor markets everywhere are changing. For at least thirty years real wages in the US haven't gone up although industrial production has.

Machines are the difference.

Machines ran the blacks out of the Michigan auto plants. As soon as you have a regimented and rationalized production system someone will invent a machine that does it better than humans. Humans are much more flexible, creative and adaptive but those are not virtues required on an assembly line.

The net result of the machine invasion is that nobody wants to hire a high school dropout anymore. Mexicans are a temporary exception because while grain fields no longer need human harvesters, row crops still do. Another area where the machines have yet to advance is in house cleaning. In Oakland the trick is to get a Hispanic maid who speaks some English. There are no white, Asian, or black maids available as far as I can tell.

But I also have a cheap floor sweeping robot. I only need a maid about half as often now as I used to. The Japanese seem to be following this path. They invent robots rather than import foreigners. We foolishly are importing people who will not be needed or employable in only a few decades.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

as Unz’s analysis of Lynn and Vanhanen’s data shows, the average IQ of a population can change in a generation


It's rather shameful that people in the HBD-sphere let Unz get away with his incredibly biased and distorted "analysis" on all sorts of subjects. His "analysis" og group IQ's ad their alleged changes ranks right down there with his attempt to argue that Hispanics don't have a higher crime rate than whites. But for some reason this guy gets treated with kid gloves.

Anonymous said...

if the humans of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the humans already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average


Steve keeps beating this drum, not noticing that it is directly contradicted by the fact the typical iSteve article consists of exposing the abject stupidity of this or that "smart" Jewish person - such as Jennifer Rubin, or Erza Klein, or Bryan Caplan, or (insert name here)...

Average Joe said...

Muslims didnt attack our warships prior to 1948 because our warships werent there to be attacked. Keep in mind when the English abolished the caliphate in the twenties they spent the next year putting down riots in all their Muslim territories.

Yes, but the Muslims weren't going to Europe and the United States to attack non-Muslims. Back then they were doing it in predominantly Muslim countries. It was only after the creation of Israel that Muslims started carrying out terrorist acts in Europe and the United States.

Out of curiosity is it the same guy always posting about the USS Liberty on paleocon sites or do all paleocons really obsess about it. I hope it's just one guy it be a shame to think the whole movement is that easily unhinged.

Why is it "unhinged" for Americans to be concerned with the attack on a U.S. ship by a so-called ally?

The USS liberty posters are always huge Putin/ Russophiles so I have trouble believing its only the attack of a American ship that angers them probally has more to do with the alleged attackers.

The reason why we are so angry about the attack on an American ship is because it was an
American ship and the attack was carried out by a so-called ally.

Anonymous said...

what sickened me reading some of the comments was how indoctrinated by cultural marxism they were.

The only thing really separating them and the left is economic issues.


I don't think you can even say that. Libertarians get all their economic ideas from Marx - they simply take ideas which Marx identified/predicted but thought were bad, and announce that they are actually good. The possibility that there might exist ideas orthogonal to Marxism never seems to occur to them at all. They lives completely in Marx's world.

Darwin's Sh*tlist said...

In short, we are being told to Bet the Country on hopes and fumes.

What's more, those of us in favor of immigration restrictions aren't betting the country at all. If we were to restrict immigration and the left's parade of horrors were to come about - crops rotting in the fields, construction, food processing, and hospitality grinding to a halt, etc. - we can change our minds easily enough, let some folks in, and things work themselves out.

But if we do amnesty/open borders, and it turns out we restrictionists were right all along and we get depressed working class wages, overburdened social services, and a larger underclass - then nothing can be done about it.

Mr. Anon said...

From "Reason":

"Are Hispanics Too Stupid to Become Americans?"

Perhaps. Perhaps not. But I'll bet they are too smart to become libertarians.

Maybe we should encourage teen pregnancy among mexican immigrants - so that those five generations are squeezed into less time. I'm sure that would help in their assimilation and raise their socio-economic status generally.

Mark Caplan said...

Why aren't we counting Sephardic (Spanish) Jews among the Hispanics of great accomplishment? Just for starters you have the founder of classical economics David Ricardo, Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo, piano virtuoso Murray Perahia, and none other than the inimitable chanteuse Eydie Gorme.

Mr. Anon said...

"Whiskey said...

Americans like Jews being smart, because smart lawyers equalize government power, a bureaucrat can't crush you for kicks,....."

What about a smart jewish government official trying to crush you for kicks? Steven Miller, for example, or Diane Feinstein?

By the way, Whiskey, I noticed how you instantly leapt in to the argument and assumed a defensive stance the moment the cross of St. Andrew was insulted and the honor of your fellow Caledonians was besmirched. A true Scotsman, you are lad.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

I am still opposed to pogroms. Even aside from the moral considerations, Jews aren't exactly powerless. Hitler took them on militarily and it didn't work out so well for him or Germany."

Who said anything about pogroms? The fact that jews instantly leap to the assumption that anyone who points out jewish power and influence and its effects, is some kind of exterminationist anti-semite is one of the things that pisses off gentiles. If we can't even point out to you that you have power - when and where you actually do have power - then we can't even have a civil argument. If jews are that terrified of living amongst gentiles, then live elsewhere. I deeply resent being forced to live in the shadow of YOUR collective fears.

"* There is the Samson option to contend with as well."

Is mention of the "Samson Option" supposed to make us all philo-semites? The "Love me or I will kill you" formulation doesn't tend to engender genuine affection.

black ops said...

It's sort of cute/ironic that people here really think "Muslim terorists" operating out of the hills of Afghanistan turned two of the biggest buildings in the world to dust. Dustified them. Never done before. They invented. They're brilliant. We're the stupid ones believing it.

Anonymous said...

http://rt.com/usa/townes-detroit-employees-crack-378/

negronomics.

Mr. Anon said...

"black ops said...

It's sort of cute/ironic that people here really think "Muslim terorists" operating out of the hills of Afghanistan turned two of the biggest buildings in the world to dust. Dustified them. Never done before. They invented. They're brilliant. We're the stupid ones believing it."

.......Apropos of nothing. You 9/11 fantasists just can't resist piping up with your crackpot conspiracy theories no matter how ungermane it is the topic at hand, can you? So who was responsible for it now, genius? The Illuminati? Rosacrucians? Fu Manchu and his army of dacoits?

Anonymous said...

It's sort of cute/ironic that people here really think "Muslim terorists" operating out of the hills of Afghanistan turned two of the biggest buildings in the world to dust.


They were not operating out of "the hills of of Afghanistan" - they were in flight school in the US.

Anonymous said...

""Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money."
-
Alas for the goyish kopfs, their simple brains are not up to such a difficult task." - That was back when wealth wasn't a zero sum game in this country. Now that the unlimited growth engine is faltering, this will change.

Hunsdon said...

Anonyrdoid, 7:29 PM said: The reason so many of you are anti-Jew is merely a consequence of the the paranoia that Jews have about so many gentiles being anti-Jew?

Hunsdon begs to differ: To rephrase your sentence as little as possible, how does this strike you:

The reason so many of us are anti-Jew is merely a consequence of the the paranoia that Jews have about so many gentiles being anti-Jew, and the actions that Jews then take to change the nature of the country in which we all, Jews and Gentiles, blacks and whites, live.

JeremiahJohnbalaya said: I don't think that many posters here dislike Jews for being Jewish. I think they dislike what Jews as a group are doing (saying, voting, promoting, etc).

Hunsdon wrestles: It's kind of like Larry Auster and the "black problem." Larry, God rest his soul, had given up on blacks. He seemed (to me) to have concluded that blacks would inevitably act in a way that was not conducive to an amicable modus vivendi in modern America. "Blacks gonna black," as it were.

At some point, many people look around and see that the people who are attacking American society tend to be Jews. At what point does one, similarly, conclude "Jews gonna Jew"?

Yes, yes, I know: NAJALT. But like Jesse Jackson said, he was relieved when walking down the street at night and a couple of white dudes were walking behind him.

ben tillman said...

Why is it "unhinged" for Americans to be concerned with the attack on a U.S. ship by a so-called ally?

You missed the point. It's much worse than that.

It was an attack by an "ally", and the US government took the side of the "ally".

David said...

>The "Love me or I will kill you" formulation doesn't tend to engender genuine affection.<

It's kind of the basis of monotheism, isn't it?

Average Joe said...

The reason so many of you are anti-Jew is merely a consequence of the the paranoia that Jews have about so many gentiles being anti-Jew?

No, it has to do with the fact that Jews tend to support policies and organizations that seek to undermine white gentiles.

Average Joe said...

Sailer's Solution to the Sub-optimal Semite Suck-up Problem is Sure to Bring Success.

Steve believes that it is dumb for the GOP to pander to Hispanics but smart for white gentiles to pander to the Jews. Personally I think that pandering to the Jews will bring as much success for white gentiles as pandering to Hispanics has for the GOP. Of course, Steve will probably just say that white gentiles are not pandering enough to the Jews and will just have to increase their efforts in order to be successful.

Ambacti said...

"See this, this and this. If anything, Israel is diverting some proportion of Islamic energy away from the other infidels."

"The other poster asked about terrorism, and you respond with examples of Islamic conquests from centuries prior to the period he was talking about, ie, the creation of the State of Israel."

What is terrorism if not asymmetric warfare from a position of weakness? The distinction between Islamic terrorism today and Islamic warfare in centuries past is one of tactics not motive, both are motivated by a doctrine that emphasizes subjugation of the infidel through violence.

The current Islamic awakening arguably began in 1979 with founding of the Islamic republic of Iran, the Soviet-Afghan war and the seizure of the grand mosque at Mecca. None of these events can be pinned on the Jews.

Here is a dispatch from close-to-Judenrein Deutschland giving some insight into Islamic thinking.

Anonymous said...

I don't think that many posters here dislike Jews for being Jewish. I think they dislike what Jews as a group are doing (saying, voting, promoting, etc).

This is correct. We don't dislike Sailer for being Jewish.

Anonymous said...

I am Jewish and have lived among fairly secular, upper-middle-class East Coast Jews all my life.

I have never heard a word against non-Jewish whites.


Every word spoken by Jewish Americans in support of Israel is a word against non-Jewish whites.

Anonymous said...

hy aren't we counting Sephardic (Spanish) Jews among the Hispanics of great accomplishment? Just for starters you have the founder of classical economics David Ricardo, Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo, piano virtuoso Murray Perahia, and none other than the inimitable chanteuse Eydie Gorme.

Don't forget about Judah Benjamin.

Anonymous said...

"And at any rate, Jewish scholastic achievement has fallen quite dramatically over the past 20-25 years."

Talent always goes where it is needed. University education has been so debased in the last 25 years, scholastic achievement is not what it used to be. Go ahead and get your worthless degree, with an inflated A average. Does anyone at Harvard even have under an A average these days? Look at Israel and you will see the future. And three children on average to every Jewish mother. That is the highest in the industrialized world and no one else is even close. That is the only race that matters these days, not the Deans List at Penn for majoring in Vagina Studies.


Anonymous said...

Out of curiosity is it the same guy always posting about the USS Liberty on paleocon sites or do all paleocons really obsess about it. I hope it's just one guy it be a shame to think the whole movement is that easily unhinged.

Its a serious matter. I cant see anyone else getting away with pulling that sh*t.

BP and the British have been castigated for the recent oil disaster yet the blame is somewhat diffuse there (an American run drilling rig for example).

But directly attacking a US ship and killing members of the crew? Apparently thats just something weirdos obsess over. Nothing to see here.

Yet by most reasonable standards the British act as a US ally. What does Israel do exactly by comparison, why the special treatment?

Anonymous said...

Not quite O/T:

A BBC piece about farm automation:

Future Farming

Outside the UK you'll have to evade the BBC's blocks on foreign viewing. Proxy server maybe?

Rain And said...

Geoffrey Miller sez "that's a brilliant last paragraph."

https://twitter.com/matingmind/status/335608735919644672

Dr Van Nostrand said...


How come we did not have a problem with Arab/Muslim terrorism before the creation of the state of Israel?
"

There was no Israel when the barbary pirates attacked U.S ships.

Islamic terrorism is a recent phenomenon and has much to do with power

Most Arab terrorism before the 70s was actually secular with Christians in the PLO leading the way with Soviet support

Islamic terrorism is about settling old scores.

Osama had often wailed about losing Spain in 1492. Just a heads up-they were on the recievin end of Catholic jackboot along with Muslims back then.

U.S relations with Israel initially were blow hot and cold.U.S rightly saw Israel as a socialist state.
Eisenhower ,who thought Israel was a bad idea, actually prevented Israel from annexing the Suez canal in 1956

This is what happens when you take the perfidious Islamists at their word

Dr Van Nostrand said...

How come we did not have a problem with Arab/Muslim terrorism before the creation of the state of Israel?
"

There was no Israel when the barbary pirates attacked U.S ships.

Islamic terrorism is a recent phenomenon and has much to do with power

Most Arab terrorism before the 70s was actually secular with Christians in the PLO leading the way with Soviet support

Islamic terrorism is about settling old scores.

Osama had often wailed about losing Spain in 1492. Just a heads up-they were on the recievin end of Catholic jackboot along with Muslims back then.

U.S relations with Israel initially were blow hot and cold.U.S rightly saw Israel as a socialist state.
Eisenhower ,who thought Israel was a bad idea, actually prevented Israel from annexing the Suez canal in 1956

This is what happens when you take the perfidious Islamists at their word.
You unwittingly become their PR agent as this poster has devolved into

Dr Van Nostrand said...

Re USS Liberty

the question remains: qui bono?

Why would Israel's attack on a powerful ,though noncommital ,ally be considered a good for Israel?

It has been established that Israel did indeed bomb the Liberty.

The main bone of contention -was it deliberate or fog of war?

If deliberate -what purpose would it achieve?

Were they rogue agents or done with the blessings of the Israeli military brass? The civilian leadership?

Who did it and why? can these paleo weirdos answer these questions?


Jonathan Pollard is simple- he was a spying for a friendly country.
Its done all the time .Relax. Though yes Netanyahu et al were mistaken in wanting him released.
It could be likely that was an excuse to get out of peace talks with Palestinians.

Dr Van Nostrand said...


Every word spoken by Jewish Americans in support of Israel is a word against non-Jewish whites."

You are clearly a lunatic

Anonymous said...

What would you have us do in retaliation for the supposedly intentional attack on the USS Liberty. You guys all, rightfully in my opinion, opposed the recent intervention in Libya, but Qaddafi openly targeted Americans in the discotheque bombings. So I guess I want to understand what constitutes unconscionable attacks on the US and what is just the diplomatic equivalent of a mosquito bite.


I will also add that quite a few paleocons are very outspoken in support of Russia, a nation who let us not forget killed 278 people including a US congressman basically for the hell of it. I say we punish the Israelis for USS Liberty right after we arm the Georgians to re-take South Ostessia. It is just odd to me that every other country on earth can attack America, and the Paulites go blowback, but then one country "attacks" the US and all of a sudden its my country right or wrong.

Svigor said...

No it isn't.

I am. If you think I find the average Jew's intellect impressive, you need to lay off the sauce.

Svigor said...

Returning to my main point, getting more Jews on board is a great way to help spread the truth, but it won't magically fix the discourse. Disproportionate influence is not omnipotent control.

I for one don't see much hope in that course of action. Jews are already on board another ship. I'm trying to get White "gentiles" to stop laying about the docks, and board their own ship. Or start laying in the keel, whatever. I'd be thrilled to be wrong here, but my assessment of the situation tells me Jews will only come to the table to negotiate after White "gentiles" grow a pair and start acting according to identity politics. I.e., only after it becomes the self-interested thing to do.

It's a bit of judo. Jews have convinced everyone that they're the pinnacle of morality. So, I join their racism at the hip to that absurd reputation. I.e., if Jews can be racists, then so can everyone else. Basically, I want everyone to learn from what Jews do, not what they say (ANTI-SEMITISM!!!).

As for the question over causes, I say we run an experiment to find out who's right. That's how science works. We establish for White "gentiles" what Jews have in Israel, and see what kind of results we get. Personally, I think the question's largely answered by thinking about cui bono (i.e., Jews benefit from the status quo, while White "gentiles" are harmed), but proper experimentation would settle the matter.

Ivan said...


This business about Jewish brains is greatly exaggerated. Were Leonardo, Michaelangelo and Shakespeare Jews? Gioto, Velasquez? Newton or Leibniz or Laplace? Maxwell, Faraday, Edison and Diesel, Poincare, Prandl among literally thousands of other scientist? And this is excluding the famous explorers who revealed the world to itself as Sobran put it. In fact if you were to subtract Jewish contributions of a highly abstract and dubious nature, exaggerated greatly by their silver tongues, you'll find that their contribution does not amount to much, certainly not the star billing given by the ignorant. In the Second World War, the Germans developed the ballistic V2 missile, the jet engine (along with the British), the U21 submarine, binary weapons (which they did not use), and their radar was fully the match of whatever the Allies had. (The Americans and Russians stole all this without so much as a by-your-leave.) They did all this without the benefit of the "Semitic component" as noted by the famous wartime scientist, VFR Jones. In fact the Germans were so brilliant in all the arts of war, the technology and the organisation, that they held off the overwhelming might of the Allied powers off for years. I have no respect for the Nazis at all and despise all their works, but the this obsequiousness over Jewish brains is totally misplaced.

Svigor said...

The antisemitic white Christian bigots with pitchforks are out there! They are! They are!

This is the M.O. of the sociopath. He knows he'll eventually have people bearing torches and pitchforks after him; his behavior makes it an inevitability. So, he folds the defense mechanisms into his permanent psychology.

****

On a somewhat unrelated note, everyone still acts like the most salient thing about Jews is their intelligence. It's not. The most salient thing about Jews is their ethnocentrism (racism). Their intelligence, and every other interesting thing about them, is ultimately owed to their ethnocentrism. Their ethnocentrism preceded, and brought about, their intelligence.

So let me get this straight. The reason so many of you are anti-Jew is merely a consequence of the the paranoia that Jews have about so many gentiles being anti-Jew, which leads to Jews attacking gentiles?

FIFY.

I have never heard a word against non-Jewish whites. Folks, your fears of Jewish plots are unfounded. Jews want America to thrive. We love capitalism and freedom of the press.

Jews are the heart of the Democrat party, the party of big gov't and high taxes. Not very capitalist. If anyone's working to undermine free speech, it's Jews ("hate speech" laws). Jews are also very big gun-grabbers (I saw at least two "yep, it's us, we did that" articles in the Jewish press recently, in the wake of Sandy Hook). Jews are basically as statist as they come.

Keep in mind: There are more white non-Jewish liberals than Jewish liberals. You cannot blame the liberal scourge entirely on my misguided kinsmen.

I don't. I don't even blame it mostly on Jews. In fact, I don't much bother with the question of apportioning blame at all, since it's largely impossible to suss out and disentangle everything. I don't spend much time blaming White "gentile" libs because nobody spends any time at all defending them.

Individual Jews can change, Jews as a group don't change.

Well put.

Moreover, it's Jews themselves who decide what is good for Jews, not us, and they have made their decision emphatically clear.

Again, well said.

We are not dealing with a simple issue that can be resolved with some political horse trading. It's something that is deeply irrational and cannot be appealed to with reason.

No, I think we can force Jews to horse-trade. That will flow inevitably from attaining a position of strength for ourselves. Now, if you mean to say that we can never truly be on the same side, sure, I totally agree. Never happen. To question that is to misapprehend both Jewish and human nature.

At some point, many people look around and see that the people who are attacking American society tend to be Jews. At what point does one, similarly, conclude "Jews gonna Jew"?

Yes, yes, I know: NAJALT. But like Jesse Jackson said, he was relieved when walking down the street at night and a couple of white dudes were walking behind him.


Haha, you remind me of every time Jews are discussed at Amren. It's really a sight to behold. ALL of the leftoid arguments deployed to defend blacks that are routinely destroyed by the Amren commentariat are suddenly re-deployed in defense of Jews, by the Amren commentariat.

I have never heard a word against non-Jewish whites.

Jews are pretty good at self-deception (that's an understatement; they're astoundingly good at it). E.g., in this case, euphemisms like "conservatives," etc.

Anonymous said...

Well, some companies are by passing the large states with hispanics like California or Texas or Florida or New York for smaller ones. Utah sometimes is preferred over Texas since more of the population finishes high school or has some college. Minnesota is sometimes preferred over New York. It may be interesting that in 15 years the smaller states that are less minority particulary Hispanic compared to the larger states might win out in the job competition since they have a more educated workforce. Also, the welfare problem is going to be lower in Utah or Minnesota than California or Texas since a lot less people have kids out of wedlock. Utah is the lowest in the Country and New Hempshire is the second lowest.

Anonymous said...

U.S relations with Israel initially were blow hot and cold.U.S rightly saw Israel as a socialist state.
Eisenhower ,who thought Israel was a bad idea, actually prevented Israel from annexing the Suez canal in 1956
Actually, Israel denationalzed a lot of industries since the 1970's, its no more socialist than Western Europe and probably less so since I think the tax rates are lower than most Western Europan Countries. The American right in the states, the neo-con Jews and Evangelicals have influnece Isreal to moved to the right on economics.

David said...

>majoring in Vagina Studies<

Must. Not. Make. Joke.

Anonymous said...

"I am Jewish and have lived among fairly secular, upper-middle-class East Coast Jews all my life.

I have never heard a word against non-Jewish whites."


I have spent a lot of time with smart young Jews and Jewish students at some of the top universities and tech companies. I (professorial aged and in the past a prof) seem to be able to casually pass as Jewish. What I have heard from a good number of these bright students is constant non-Jewish denigration. To the point of caricature, where I want to take them aside and ask them if they realize how they come across, that they are no longer in a group of Jewish peers competing to top the last "how-hopeless the native-born Americans are" story or that sort of thing.

It's not that they're actively conspiring. I don't even think it's conscious. It probably acts as a tribe marker and keeps the Jewish kids in line and in the tribe and maybe adds to their stature in the Jewish community as a future group defender.

I was not exposed to any Jewish people, as far as I knew, until when I was about 20, and literally knew almost nothing about them, so this behavior really stands out.

It's also obvious that it's dangerous all around if people with such disparaging attitudes toward their countrymen wield significant power over them. One would think that universities providing direct exposure to others would break down these preconceptions, but it seems to work the opposite. Sort of like jury amplification, the modern university seems to amplify differences between groups due to the multi-cult PC ideology.

Anonymous said...

Sweet. Thanks for the love, Geoff. Keep on keeping that mind of yours open.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_B._MacDonald

Anonymous said...

“But you could also make a list of Arab Muslim scientists and intellectuals that is quite impressive as well.”

No you can’t.

The original scientific output of Muslim civilization has been greatly exaggerated. It is not true that Muslims invented the zero (Indian) or saved Greek knowledge (preserved by Byzantium and the Catholic Church).

Moreover the limited contributions of Muslim civilization was not “Arab”. They were mostly Persians, Jews or Berber. Of the 20 “Notable scientists” listed about the golden age of Islam on Wikiepdia, I can only count 4 ethnic Arabs.

If you read through the list, Muslim achievements mostly consists of summarizing or making marginal contribution to existing Greek/Roman work.

Wikipedia also reports the top 5 in Charles Murray’s quantitative ranking of intellectual accomplishment. Let’s look at Science, Mathematics, Physics and Technology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Accomplishment
Einstein (Jewish)

Newton (Anglo)
Faraday (Anglo)
Rutherford (Anglo)
Watt (Anglo)
Edison (Anglo)
Aristotle (Greek)
Archimedes (Greek)
Euclid (Greek)
Leonardo da Vinci (Italian)
Galileo (Italian)
Huygens (Dutch)
Gauss (German)
Kepler (German)
Lavoisier (French)
Fermat (French)
Euler (Swiss)

100% white men, mostly gentile.

Anonymous said...

Islamic terrorism is about settling old scores.

Osama had often wailed about losing Spain in 1492.


Osama struck back at the United States on Sept. 11, 2001 for U.S. complicity with Israel's perversity and its killing of women and children in Palestine.

So, yeah, settling of scores. But not old ones.

Anonymous said...

Steve Sailer is a Righteous Jew.

Anonymous said...

Whiskey wrote: Arab Terrorists attack the US because they are ... wait for it ... MUSLIM! That's what Muslims do, attack the weak and those not feared.

But the United States and Israel are strong and feared. So there must be another explanation.

Anonymous said...

"Arab Terrorists attack the US because they are ... wait for it ... MUSLIM! That's what Muslims do, attack the weak and those not feared."
***************************
Average Joe replied:

How come we did not have a problem with Arab/Muslim terrorism before the creation of the state of Israel?
**********************************

The United States has had problems with Muslims dating back to the time of Thomas Jefferson. Heck, we created a blue water Navy to combat the Barbary Pirates, who were essentially Muslim Privateers under the command of local Islamic potentates. Whiskey's comment stands: Muslims really only respect strength, and prey on the weak. It is simply the way of things...

Average Joe said...

Osama had often wailed about losing Spain in 1492.

Interesting that you bring up Spain. Did you know that the Jews helped finance the Islamic conquest of Iberia? Because Muslims are forbidden by their religion to charge interest on money that they lend they often had to go to non-Muslims - such as Jews - in order to secure the financing for their colonial ambitions.

Average Joe said...

Look at Israel and you will see the future. And three children on average to every Jewish mother.

Yes, but aren't most of the children being born to the ultra-Orthodox welfare recipient types? From what I understand, most highly educated Jewish women in Israel tend to have a low birth rate.

Anonymous said...

"Look at Israel and you will see the future. And three children on average to every Jewish mother."

Yes, but aren't most of the children being born to the ultra-Orthodox welfare recipient types? From what I understand, most highly educated Jewish women in Israel tend to have a low birth rate.


I think most of the ultra-Orthodox are Ashkenazi--the "the right of Jews," in the eyes of Zionists.

Anonymous said...

Newton (Anglo)
Faraday (Anglo)
Rutherford (Anglo)
Watt (Anglo)
Edison (Anglo)
Aristotle (Greek)
Archimedes (Greek)
Euclid (Greek)
Leonardo da Vinci (Italian)
Galileo (Italian)
Huygens (Dutch)
Gauss (German)
Kepler (German)
Lavoisier (French)
Fermat (French)
Euler (Swiss)


What about Leibniz (German) and Descartes (French)?

Darwin (Anglo), Watson (Anglo), and Crick (Anglo)?

Anonymous said...

If anyone's working to undermine free speech, it's Jews ("hate speech" laws). Jews are also very big gun-grabbers (I saw at least two "yep, it's us, we did that" articles in the Jewish press recently, in the wake of Sandy Hook). Jews are basically as statist as they come.

Only when they are able to influence the state.

Anonymous said...

What I have heard from a good number of these bright students is constant non-Jewish denigration. To the point of caricature, where I want to take them aside and ask them if they realize how they come across...

Can you offer us a few examples?

Anonymous said...

This business about Jewish brains is greatly exaggerated. Were Leonardo, Michaelangelo and Shakespeare Jews?

We are told that Shakespeare was the pen name of a Sephardic Jewish woman who resided in England.

fnn said...

t has been established that Israel did indeed bomb the Liberty.

The main bone of contention -was it deliberate or fog of war?

If deliberate -what purpose would it achieve?

Were they rogue agents or done with the blessings of the Israeli military brass? The civilian leadership?


It was deliberate-beyond all doubt. There is plenty of info-from establishment sources-on the net about this.

The rest of what you're asking for can't be answered because no serious investigation was ever conducted as far aw we know.


Here are a few links:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/shortstack/2009/07/liberty_authors_response.html?sid=ST2009071501841

http://www.chicagotribune.com/services/newspaper/eedition/chi-liberty_tuesoct02,0,43090.story


http://www.ussliberty.org/supporters.htm

Anonymous said...

Jonathan Pollard is simple- he was a spying for a friendly country.
Its done all the time.



Seymour Hersh on why Pollard should never be released:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/576453/posts

Mr. Anon said...

"Dr Van Nostrand said...

Jonathan Pollard is simple- he was a spying for a friendly country."

Stealing some of our deepest military secrets (and possibly selling them to third parties) is not the act of a friendly country.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

Out of curiosity is it the same guy always posting about the USS Liberty on paleocon sites or do all paleocons really obsess about it. I hope it's just one guy it be a shame to think the whole movement is that easily unhinged."

Hey, I'll forget about the USS Liberty, when they forget about the SS St. Louis.

Hunsdon said...

Anonydroid at 6:06 AM said: I will also add that quite a few paleocons are very outspoken in support of Russia, a nation who let us not forget killed 278 people including a US congressman basically for the hell of it.

Hunsdon said: A couple of minor differences there, tovarisch. KAL007 was a one shot, one kill affair. USS Liberty was more of a "pack your lunch, we'll be at this all day" type deal.

KAL007 was in Soviet (not, ahem, Russian) airspace. The USS Liberty was in international waters.

The famously anti-Semitic Wikipedia says, 'In the historical report, it was acknowledged that IDF naval headquarters knew at least three hours before the attack that the ship was "an electromagnetic audio-surveillance ship of the U.S. Navy" but concluded that this information had simply "gotten lost, never passed along to the ground controllers who directed the air attack nor to the crews of the three Israeli torpedo boats."'

Maybe the IDF just has really shitty command and control, I don't know.

Average Joe said...

The United States has had problems with Muslims dating back to the time of Thomas Jefferson. Heck, we created a blue water Navy to combat the Barbary Pirates, who were essentially Muslim Privateers under the command of local Islamic potentates.

Yes, but the Barbary Pirates were engaged in slavery in order to make money, not spread Islam. This isn't what most people would consider to be Islamic terrorism. Islamic terrorism, as we understand it today, largely came into existence after the creation of the modern state of Israel.

Average Joe said...

Jonathan Pollard is simple- he was a spying for a friendly country.

No, he wasn't. He was spying for Israel.

Dr Van Nostrand said...


Osama had often wailed about losing Spain in 1492.

Interesting that you bring up Spain. Did you know that the Jews helped finance the Islamic conquest of Iberia? Because Muslims are forbidden by their religion to charge interest on money that they lend they often had to go to non-Muslims - such as Jews - in order to secure the financing for their colonial ambitions."


Even more interesting is how you ignore my undermining your point about Arab terrorism before Israel. And you go off on a bizarre tangent about Jooooish moneylenders and their financing of wars against Christians!!! You neglect to mention that a Vandal king invited the Muslims to help depose one of his rivals.

Average Joe, sadly you are quite below average in IQ and world history

Id sooner have that dog in your profile participate in the comments board than yourself. Its less likely to be susceptible to pavlovian conditioning...

Dr Van Nostrand said...


Osama struck back at the United States on Sept. 11, 2001 for U.S. complicity with Israel's perversity and its killing of women and children in Palestine.

So, yeah, settling of scores. But not old ones."


Are you even aware of Osama's motivations?
His main beef was U.S troops of Saudi Arabia which he saw as sacred land(King Fahd of Saudi Arabia declared the whole country as a mosque). KSA to him was much more important than Palestine.

Palestine was a bone of contention for him but it was not much higher than the loss Andalusia.

That coupled with Spains support for the Iraq war was one of the reasons Al Qaeda attacked Madrid in 2004.

To some extant he lived in a fantasy world. Ayman Al Zawahiri was the hard headed guy who got things done.He and KSM
Getting KSM was a real blow to Al Qaeda.And finishing Ayman would just seal.
Osama was just the icing on the cake.

Anonymous said...

Svigor Said: I for one don't see much hope in that course of action. Jews are already on board another ship. I'm trying to get White "gentiles" to stop laying about the docks, and board their own ship. Or start laying in the keel, whatever. I'd be thrilled to be wrong here, but my assessment of the situation tells me Jews will only come to the table to negotiate after White "gentiles" grow a pair and start acting according to identity politics. I.e., only after it becomes the self-interested thing to do.

I agree that the current incentive structure doesn't do much to encourage elite or aspiring elite Jews to be pro-White. I would welcome a more robust form of group based politics for Euro Americans, and hope that such a development would discourage anti-White behavior.

To be honest, mild anti-semitism would bother me far less than the lunacy forced upon us all these days. It might even be a source of useful, corrective feedback for the Jewish community, so long as it was realistic criticism rather than hateful venom. A little shame goes a long way in keeping people on their best behavior!!!

While group animosities are very real and at times irrational, I think that they are exaggerated by the screwy feedback loops and perverse incentives currently in place.

-The Judean People's Front

Conatus said...

Jewish people test higher but what about the Bigger Bell Curve idea? Is that associated with the wrong people?

For the sake of argument, let’s assume 200 million White Americans (IQ 100), 6 million Jewish Americans (IQ 115), Normal distribution at the tail ends of the distribution, standard deviations for both populations of 15. That would give us roughly 32 million White Americans with IQ 115 or higher vs 3 million Jewish Americans with IQ 115 or higher. For IQ 130 or higher it is 4.6 million vs 950,000. For IQ 145 it is 270,000 vs 137,000. For IQ 160 it is 6,340 vs 8,100. If it is only 105, IQ 160 would be 6,340 vs 1,400.”

Dr Van Nostrand said...


Yes, but aren't most of the children being born to the ultra-Orthodox welfare recipient types? From what I understand, most highly educated Jewish women in Israel tend to have a low birth rate."

Sorry to disappoint you but secular Jewish women have a birth rate of 2.4 , above the replacement rate.
While Palestinian fertility rates are plumetting.

Rather than dreaming about the impending demographic collapse of Israel, perhaps your time would be better spent in persuading gentile women into breeding more.

NOTA said...

Nitpick:

The US had relatively little trouble with Muslims relative to our problem with Christians (and a spot of trouble with some Budhist and Shinto types) during most of our history, since Muslims were mostly really far away and past their prime as powers. If we face a serious rival in the next 30 years, it will not be primarily Muslim, it will be atheistic China or post-Christian Europe. Muslims can occasionally kill some Americans, but we could actually lose to China or some kind of united Europe. (Though political cohesion in Europe ain't looking so promising just now.). Brazil is a bigger threat to challenge us than any Muslim country.

NOTA said...

Average Joe:

I think the Jewish bankers lent to both Muslim and Christian kings as needed. And the whole thing did not turn out especially well for them in Spain, in the end.

Svigor said...

This business about Jewish brains is greatly exaggerated.

Of course it is. This is because ethnocentrism is the most salient Jewish quality, not intelligence; Jews are more ethnocentric than they are intelligent. Thus, their self-regard exceeds their ability, and they have a perverse inferiority complex.

The fact is White "gentiles" have contributed infinitely more to Jewish civilization than the other way around.

regular joe said...

Steve, your assertion that Jews should have no fears to justify the Triple Bankshot would be a bit more convincing if your own Comments weren't so often clogged with anti-Semitic stuff.

Svigor said...

I agree that the current incentive structure doesn't do much to encourage elite or aspiring elite Jews to be pro-White. I would welcome a more robust form of group based politics for Euro Americans, and hope that such a development would discourage anti-White behavior.

To be honest, mild anti-semitism would bother me far less than the lunacy forced upon us all these days. It might even be a source of useful, corrective feedback for the Jewish community, so long as it was realistic criticism rather than hateful venom. A little shame goes a long way in keeping people on their best behavior!!!


Agreed. Putting on my "is it good for the Jews?" hat for a sec, I'd rather see "ANTI-SEMITISM!!!" released from the pressure cooker than kept bottled up inside until it explodes. As time goes on I become more convinced that Weimar America is an accurate label; we should try to avoid repeating Weimar Germany's outcomes, I think.

fnn said...

Are you even aware of Osama's motivations?

USG says Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks.

Purpose of the 9/11 Attacks

Anonymous said...



"but we could actually lose to China or some kind of united Europe. (Though political cohesion in Europe ain't looking so promising just now.)"


you can say that again.

Dave Pinsen said...

"Perhaps the single most beneficial contribution to improving the quality of intellectual discourse in the United States would be if the gentiles of America could somehow convince Jewish-Americans that the gentiles already know that Jews are smarter than they are on average; moreover, that this knowledge -- rather than making the gentiles want to come after the Jews with their torches and crude farm implements -- inclines the gentiles of America to like Jewish-Americans for being smart and witty and good with money."

I'm not sure Jewish fear of pitchforks is primarily what's behind the current taboo. For one thing, most of the writers piling on Richwine seem to be gentiles. Is Ronald Bailey Jewish? John Horgan? Garance Franke-Ruta? Conor Friedersdorf? Brink Lindsey? "W.W." at the Economist? Maybe one or two are, and someone here will investigate. In any case, reading this comment thread would probably have the opposite effect you hope for on most Jewish readers. Let's hope Mickey Kaus, David Frum, and other Jews who have been doing yeoman's work opposing the Gang of Eight's bill don't read it and lose their zeal.

Spector said...

Ten years ago, the NSA released previously secret communications proving that the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was a mistake and not intentional.

Daybreaker said...

Jews really are clever and funny and good with money. More, they are warm (at least within the tribe), generally capable, great family people, strongly inclined to take care of their own, and generally lovable.

It's just that when it comes to the collective level - and with Jews it always comes to the collective level - such feelings are not mutual. And it's action on the collective level that decides who gets to live and be part of the future.

It is absolutely beyond the power of European-descended non-Jewish whites to persuade Jews on this.

Maybe if we were a race of super-genius courtiers or something, like Motie Communicators. Then perhaps we could let Jews be the Motie Leaders, and possibly all would be well.

But we're nothing like that and can't come anywhere near to making ourselves collectively acceptable.

This historic crisis, of whether white people get to have a future, won't end with some successful act of appeasement on our part. That's not possible.

black ops said...

".......Apropos of nothing. You 9/11 fantasists just can't resist piping up with your crackpot conspiracy theories no matter how ungermane it is the topic at hand, can you? So who was responsible for it now, genius? The Illuminati? Rosacrucians? Fu Manchu and his army of dacoits?"

I've long since ceased to care about name-calling. The fact that someone on this thread, of all places, is so ready to believe the government-approved conspiracy theories, tells me there are trolls here. I don't expect everyone to agree on 9/11, but anyone who believes the Official Story is either uninformed or is being paid.
btw, how WERE those two humongous buildings dustified? By two planes running into them? Really?
And LHO was the lone gunman. Magic bullets and now magic planes. What next?

honestly said...

I once traveled with a lady who was half-Jewish (hadn't learned that till adulthood and was quite proud of it); a fellow traveler was a guy (white, I am pretty sur gentile and probably Polish background from Chicago) who told us he & his wife had hesitated marrying because they would be producing more white children. Now even in this SWPL type group, that sounded extreme. Although this early 80s, my brain screamed "brainwashed pod-person!" My half-Jewish friend was alo bemused--like "what's wrong with having white children?" She was basically scornful of that attitude and thought it absurd. She was pretty much a race realist, having worked as a chiropractor among all and sundry. I have encountered race-realism in quite a few Jews. It's pretty common, more than you think. In my opinion, honest airing of opinions would work wonders, with white gentiles just saying out loud that Jewish interests are not always theirs, and they have a right to watch out for themselves and their progeny. End of argument about "anti-semitism."

Luke Lea said...

@ Garland Jewish smartness combined with their nepotism, hostility to gentile culture

That nepotism and hostility (and paranoia) should be declining with intermarriage. In which case it may only be a matter of time before they finally realize American whites are the biggest friends American Jews and Israel ever had. Latin Americans not so much. Surely they don't imagine Asians are going to have a sentimental soft spot for Israel the way Protestants do.

Anonymous said...

That nepotism and hostility (and paranoia) should be declining with intermarriage.

If anything, American Jews seem to be becoming even more obsessively and vocally anti-White. Their relentless gloating about political and demographic demise of White America, their glee at the Islamification of Europe, and their relentlessly blaming every global problem on “White privilege” has reached a crescendo over the past decade.

Anonymous said...

Well, take the Brookings study, giving expensive Irvine number one for poverty growth. The city is expensive and its cliams 10,000 more poor people but the city grew about 70,000 in a decde. Unlike most of OC, its most likely that Asians that couldn't afford the place moved there not Hisapnics since the town is only 9 percent. Irvine and Anahiem which is bigger than Santa Ana should not be included on a study of Suburbs since their popoulations are too big to be considered a regular suburb, large Suburb in Irvine's case and Anaheim one of the urban cities. Still Brooking doesn't mention that only 12 percent of Irvine kids are on the free and reduce lunch programs whle La and Santa Ana and poor parts of Long Beach have about 80 percent of the kids on free and reduce. Some liberals in the OC, that complain about the overcrowding probably give the wrong impression, poverty problems because its expensive but still a lot less than the Hispanic areas of La and OC. So, Irvine housing is not cheap and few get section 8 vouchers or work in service jobs unless they own a business, but Brookings is not mentioning that Irvine is not similar to an old suburb that is cheaper or has more welfare people or lots of service jobs like South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa or Disneyland in Anahiem.

fnn said...

Spector said...
Ten years ago, the NSA released previously secret communications proving that the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty was a mistake and not intentional.


We all know that govts lie and fabricate evidence all the time. Anyone tempted to believe the above should read the lengthy 2007 Chicago Tribune article on the incident.

Luke Lea said...

"It's just that when it comes to the collective level - and with Jews it always comes to the collective level - such feelings are not mutual. And it's action on the collective level that decides who gets to live and be part of the futur

I would say that it is primarily the presidents of the major American Jewish organizations who need to be turned (if that is the right phrase). Certain of these organizations were instrumental in shaping the 1965 immigration reform. Not sure if they are pushing the current legislation but there is no evidence that they are opposing it either. If these Jewish leaders were to be persuaded that the current proposals won't be good for American Jews or American popular support for the state of Israel over the long-term, then that would be significant.

With the exception of Paul Samuelson rarely have individual Jews acting by themselves had much impact on American policies which adversely effect the welfare of the American population as a whole (in this case trade not immigration). He is an important exception, however, not because he bore any special animus against working- and middle-class Americans, I don't think, but simply because he wasn't thinking of their interests. Few if any of his upper-middle-class relatives would be adversely effected after all. In fact they would materially benefit, as would just about everybody he knew both inside and outside academia. (I examine his disgraceful behavior in detail here: http://facingzionwards.blogspot.com/2012/04/publication-information-article-title.html)

Bottom line: the heads of the major Jewish Organizations both here and abroad need to re-examine and re-assess their traditional stands on American trade and immigration policies. That's where the change needs to begin.

Mr. Anon said...

"Black ops said...

I don't expect everyone to agree on 9/11, but anyone who believes the Official Story is either uninformed or is being paid."

Official Story? It's what all of saw in real time as it was happening. But don't worry - I don't think that you are a paid agent of the government, as you seem to think I am. I just think that you are stupid.

"btw, how WERE those two humongous buildings dustified? By two planes running into them? Really?"

Yeah, as it is well known that crashing a fully fueled jet-liner into a building at 500 mph is good for the structure, and is normally recommended as a part of regular maintenance.

What caused the towers to fall? Magic, genius. Evil black magic, straight out of a magican's bag of tricks. That's what you might as well believe - it makes as much sense as any of the other assorted nonsense that fools like you subscribe to.

Svigor said...

I'm not sure Jewish fear of pitchforks is primarily what's behind the current taboo. For one thing, most of the writers piling on Richwine seem to be gentiles. Is Ronald Bailey Jewish? John Horgan? Garance Franke-Ruta? Conor Friedersdorf? Brink Lindsey? "W.W." at the Economist? Maybe one or two are, and someone here will investigate. In any case, reading this comment thread would probably have the opposite effect you hope for on most Jewish readers. Let's hope Mickey Kaus, David Frum, and other Jews who have been doing yeoman's work opposing the Gang of Eight's bill don't read it and lose their zeal.

Touche. On the other hand, Gould, Diamond, Lewontin, Boas, Horkheimer...

Anonymous said...

Svigor said: Agreed. Putting on my "is it good for the Jews?" hat for a sec, I'd rather see "ANTI-SEMITISM!!!" released from the pressure cooker than kept bottled up inside until it explodes. As time goes on I become more convinced that Weimar America is an accurate label; we should try to avoid repeating Weimar Germany's outcomes, I think.

I was putting on my "is it good period" hat. It would be a lie to say that I am totally unconcerned about the fate of the Jewish community, but I am much more concerned about the fate of civilization as a whole, and am especially worried about the prospects for civilized life in the Anglosphere.

Even if Weimar America never blows up I still wouldn't like it. A dysfunctional, ugly culture makes it harder to live a decent, fully human life. It doesn't take an impending catastrophe to make me realize that warped incentives create a warped society full of warped human beings.

-The Judean People's Front

Dave Pinsen said...

"With the exception of Paul Samuelson rarely have individual Jews acting by themselves had much impact on American policies which adversely effect the welfare of the American population as a whole"

America didn't embrace free trade because any economist suggested it; as Ian Fletcher has noted, we embraced free trade after WWII for geopolitical reasons, not economic reasons. And to Sameulson's credit, he had second thoughts about free trade late in life.

Dave Pinsen said...

"Touche. On the other hand, Gould, Diamond, Lewontin, Boas, Horkheimer..."

On the other other hand, Stanley Kurtz, Mark Levin, David Horowitz, Paul Mirengoff, Joyce Kaufman...

Luke Lea said...

@ Dave Pinson - America didn't embrace free trade because any economist suggested it; as Ian Fletcher has noted, we embraced free trade after WWII for geopolitical reasons, not economic reasons. And to Sameulson's credit, he had second thoughts about free trade late in life.

I was referring to the great 1993 debate on Nafta and Gatt, which were about this country trading with large, underdeveloped countries like Mexico and China whose prevailing wages were a small fraction of those in the US.

As described in my article, on the eve of the big vote in Congress Samuelson got up in the East Room of the White House and told the nation that "protectionism had never caused wages to rise, the clear implication being that removing trade barriers would not cause wages to fall. So his statement was disingenuous and misleading, and he knew it. How do I know he knew it? Because he co-authored a famous paper, Protection and Real Wages, which predicted as much. He also coined a fancy phrase for the process, "factor price equalization."

Now it is true that Samuelson had second thoughts after the fact -- or, more accurately, he thought better of the role he had played in getting the two treaties passed. You could say the same about Paul Krugman, who was also influential. But by then the flood gates had been opened and there was no going back owing to the enormous fortunes being made by powerful men.

According to Harvard labor economist George Borjas, mass immigration reduces the wages of American citizens by $400 billion annually, while it increases the income of those interests that support the Gang of 8 by almost $440 billion annually. The difference -- $40 billion -- is the net gain to the non-immigrant population. I haven't seen comparable figures for trade but there is no question the story is much the same: the gains of trade are swamped many times over by the redistribution of income from labor to capital.

Don't get me wrong. Immigration and trade are not the only major factors hammering American wages. Labor saving technologies are in the same ball park, as is our out-of-control employer-based healthcare system which is eating us alive. (Employer supplied healthcare expenses come out of wages.)

But the real bottom line is that nobody is looking out for the little guys. The big guys can take care of themselves but the little guys need help.





Anonymous said...

[source] adderall extended release weight loss - adderall heart rate