May 26, 2014

Who is on the Wrong Side of History now?

From the New York Times:
Established Parties Rocked by Anti-Europe Vote 
By ALAN COWELL and JAMES KANTER  MAY 26, 2014

LONDON — Members of the European political elite expressed alarm on Monday over the strong showing in European Parliament elections by nationalist and anti-immigrant parties skeptical about European integration, a development described by the French prime minister as an “earthquake.” 
In France, Britain and elsewhere, anti-immigrant parties opposed to the influence of the European Union emerged in the lead. In France, the National Front won 26 percent of the vote to defeat both the governing Socialists and the Union for a Popular Movement, the center-right party of former President Nicolas Sarkozy.  
In Britain, the triumph of the U.K. Independence Party, or UKIP, which won 28 percent of the vote, represented the first time since 1910 that a nationwide vote had not been won by either the Conservatives or Labour.  
“The people’s army of UKIP have spoken tonight and delivered just about the most extraordinary result that has been seen in British politics for 100 years,” said Nigel Farage, UKIP’s leader. ... 
Official results released overnight showed that populist parties strongly opposed to the European Union also trounced establishment forces in Denmark and Greece and did well in Austria and Sweden. The results, a stark challenge to champions of greater European integration, left mainstream political leaders stunned. ... 
With the political landscape redrawn across Europe, some politicians, notably Nick Clegg, the British deputy prime minister and leader of the Liberal Democrats, the junior coalition partner, faced calls from their own party members to quit. The Liberal Democrats finished fifth in Britain and lost nearly all their seats at the European Parliament. ... 
In Paris, the victory by the National Front, led by Marine Le Pen, prompted Manuel Valls, the French prime minister, to acknowledge: “It’s an earthquake.” 
“We are in a crisis of confidence,” Mr. Valls added. “Our country has for a long time been in an identity crisis, a crisis about France’s place in Europe, Europe’s place in our country.” 
President François Hollande of France called an emergency meeting of senior ministers after his Socialist Party finished a remote third. ...
European Parliament ballots often do not reflect voting patterns in national elections, which favor traditional parties. But in Britain, Mr. Farage, the U.K. Independence Party leader, depicted his triumph on Sunday as the harbinger of greater prominence in next year’s national elections, saying that his followers could hold the balance of power if neither the Conservatives nor Labour win an outright majority. 
“We will go on next year to a general election with a targeting strategy and I promise you this: You haven’t heard the last of us,” he said. 

Here's a detailed Inside Cricket analysis in The Telegraph of what the rise of the UKIP portends in the next General Election in the UK.
Ukip have torn up the map 
After their success in the local elections, Ukip are poised to wreak havoc in 2015. Robert Ford and Ian Warren explain where and how the battle will be fought.  
Nigel Farage scored a spectacular triumph in the early hours of Monday morning, leading Ukip to the first nationwide victory for a new political party in almost a century. Coming on top of Ukip’s success in the local elections, it was hailed as heralding the age of “four-party politics” in England. Mr Farage had shattered the mould of British democracy, and thrown next year’s general election – already set to be the closest and most unpredictable for a generation – into turmoil. 
These claims may seem exaggerated. But the more you look at the data – the further you drill down into how people actually voted on Thursday – the more you can see that predictions that Ukip will fade away are a case of wishful thinking. It is now crystal clear that the party really does have the potential to cause chaos in 2015, affecting all three parties in unforeseen and unpredictable ways. 
To see why, it helps to understand what matters most about these results, at least in terms of the general election. For, while Ukip’s European triumph has stolen the headlines, their less dramatic advances at local level will ultimately be more important. 
The real currency of elections, after all, is not votes, but seats. Before their breakthrough last year, Ukip had won only a handful of local council places in their 20-year history. They now have more than 300 councillors, enough to make them a significant presence in town halls up and down the country. 
Why does this matter? Because Britain’s first-past-the-post system poses a huge challenge to any new party, whose support is usually spread evenly over the country. As the Liberal Democrats have learnt, national popularity counts for nothing at Westminster unless you can win locally. So parties like Ukip must try to convince sceptical voters that they are a viable option in constituencies where they have no track record of success.

Thursday’s results were a powerful response to this challenge. In many seats, Ukip activists can now argue on the doorstep that they are the dominant force in local elections, and a strong presence on the council. That will help convince voters that returning a Ukip MP is a logical progression, not a leap into the unknown. 

Here in the U.S., the bipartisan establishment and the dominant media have largely succeeded in stifling debate over immigration, but that shows how America is becoming less of a democracy. In most of the rest of the world, patriotic parties are ascendant, as is only natural following the Globalists' disaster of 2008.
   

97 comments:

Anonymous said...

HooRAY! HooRAY! HooRAY!

This kind of thing is even better than the Super Bowl, cause it actually counted!

In a sense, the UKIP is similar to what the US'S Reform party of the 90s could have been (at least in theory): A pro-national, white working class, immigration on hold a la Brimelow's Alien Nation, and if not pro-tarrif at least not excessively free trade. Oh, and English first, cause well, you know....it is America.

HooRay, HooRay.

Now.

If US could only get a third party a la UKIP or rather like the Reform party.

This is awesome. Like, totally.

NOW, the UK politicos cant ignore or dismiss out of hand UKIParty. Now they're respectable.

You go 'KIP! Show us how its done so maybe the Reform party could rise again!

HooRay,HooRay, and so say all of us!

Anonymous said...

Why should I care? This means nothing in terms of immigration policy in America. The American elites (labor unions, The Catholic Church, Hollywood, Agri-business, etc) will never allow any serious reduction in immigration to America. In the USA, the only permissible opinions on immigration are:

1. Massive immigration.

2. Open Borders

Nothing else is permitted.

Anonymous said...

Finally people are trying to fight back, but I don't hold much hope that things will work out. Not in such a simple way, at least.

Anonymous said...


Genomes matter.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous:"HooRAY! HooRAY! HooRAY!

This kind of thing is even better than the Super Bowl, cause it actually counted!"

Except not in the USA. This is meaningless for Americans. There has been no movement in the elite consensus on immigration here. So, cheer if you want, but don't delude yourself into thinking that it means anything.

Prof. Woland said...

One reason the Pro-Immigration forces are making such a push now is that they can feel the winds of change better than anyone and realize that in a few years it could be a completely different political landscape. The ability to not only control our borders but conduct highly effective interior enforcement including employment verification and secure ID is something that is well within our grasp now. Once we do it, there will be no going back and they know it.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure if we get more economists to say unfettered immigration is bad all of our problems will be solved though.

anony-mouse said...

Not so simple.

UKIP will take away votes from the Tories, leaving Labour with a huge majority which it will use to massively let in everyone with a pulse (not that the Tories would have been that much better) who will vote Labour, which over time will reduce the Tories and UKIP to smithereens.

Anonymous said...

UKIP Immigration Policy:flood England with South Asian Legal Immigrants full speed ahead..this comes from Nigel Farage's mouth. And this is what you get excited about? It would be like the Republican Party saying Asian legal Immigration full speed ahead..we need those Asian brains!!! and 0 European Legal Immigration into the US. Well, this is exactly the UKIP position on legal immigration...and the Republican Party's position on legal immigration

Specically, Nigel Farage said open the floodgates to South Asian legal immigration and 0 European immigration speaking in the English Parliment very recently. Nigel Farage like all good parasitic Libertarians doesn't believe in investing in and developing Native English Youth for careers in Engineering and Medicine even though England is the Land of Newton,Faraday, and Maxwell.

Bill Blizzard and his Men

Cotswolds Lad said...

Labour will benefit.

Also watch what Farage says and not what his support does.

He is slippery on race and religion. You can't take it to the bank that he'll kick out Slavs and welcome in blacks and Pakistanis.

Count on it.

Cotswolds Lad said...

The Tory's really will have to become populist and pro-white if they can ever hope to survive the tsunami.

They will drop the populist nationalism once in office again though.

2Degrees said...

Actually, UKIP did even better than the polls suggest.

1). The Electoral Commission allowed a spoiler party with a similar name to UKIP's onto the ballot paper. It got 1.5% of the votes. Ballot papers were folded so that UKIP, which is at the bottom alphabetically was the only party invisible unless you smoothed out the whole ballot paper.

2). The one part of the country where UKIP did not do well is London. This was for two reasons. A). London is full of foreigners imported by Bliar to vote Labour. B). Massive electoral fraud in many of those parts of London that have been "enriched" especially the Islamic Republic of Tower Hamlets. Labour's victory in the capital is stating to look a little questionable.

Electoral fraud is also rampant in Birmingham and other islamified areas in the Northwest. Normally this only affects the actual ward or constituency where the fraud takes place, but euro-elections use a modified system of proportional representation. Malpractice in regional cities may have skewed the vote against UKIP in the West Midlands and the Northwest.

Without the spoiler party, UKIP would have another MEP.

Anonymous said...

>>anony-mouse said...
""""""Not so simple."""""""""

So, duh, make it simpler. Simplify it.




"""""UKIP will take away votes from the Tories, leaving Labour with a huge majority which it will use to massively let in everyone with a pulse""""""""


Uh, UKIP combined with Conservative = just over 50% of electorate. Add in the Tories and that's well around 55%, which is a majority indeed.

Remember, trends in UK hit the US in about a decade's time. If all these pro-nationalist parties are starting to do well in actual national elections it bodes well.

It means that they've learned how to crawl first and are now starting to walk to some victories of significance. The US could learn from that, as in: Stop betting the farm on dark horses a la Perot, and actually try to win at the local and state levels first. THEN go toward the US level.

Gotta crawl before you can walk, and in UKIP'S case, they're no longer crawling but walking.

If only Reform party had started with baby steps in the 90s, it would be on its way to governorships and actually have a few US seats in congress by now.

Lessons to be learned: First you crawl, then you walk.

Cotswolds Lad said...

All the way back to 1066 the government of England has been contrived to prevent the English from running their own affairs. Farage will change absolutely nothing. He's got the slippery visage of a Norman baron or a Simon de Montfort.

gubrope said...

Unless the 'right' can cash in on this and do something drastic, this will be bad as the side that's 'in power' gets all the blame for all that goes wrong.

Remember how the dubya presidency turned out. It would have better if gore had won in 2000 or if Kerry had won in 2004.

Hollande was bad for the 'left' because he could do little while taking all the blame for everything that went wrong.

My guess the 'right' in Europe will be bought off and become like the GOP Congress that came to power in 1994. Mostly useless.

Anonymous said...

"Why should I care? This means nothing in terms of immigration policy in America."

Blacks are the main destroyers of civilization.

I would prefer a white future for America. But America has too many blacks having too many kids.

Since no one's gonna do anything about blacks, the browning is still preferable to blackening.

Anonymous said...

At the national level, the US is no longer a democracy. We're more of oligarchy now.

Anonymous said...

Farage will change absolutely nothing. He's got the slippery visage of a Norman baron or a Simon de Montfort.

He's of Huguenot descent and was some sort of City stockjobber. Of course he's slippery.

Anonymous said...

Many elites in the UK who may have backed the UKIP are disillusioned with the EU bureaucracy machine; but they still love globalism and want to strengthen ties with BRIC nations.....

Our elites are sitting pretty smug. For now. one wonders if underemployed Ivy League grads could form a nucleus of discontentment, or maybe when SWPls see themselves waiting in line/sharing healthcare with Mextizo peasants

Anonymous said...

Wake me when Some billionaire decides to buck the elite consensus in the USA and fund, in a serious way, an anti-immigration movement.

Bobbala said...

I predicta similar result as in the US. The politicians elected to stop Obamacare understood their voter mandate to adopt it and fund it with "fixes".

Europe will respond by increasing 3rd world colonization, lest someone call them racists. It worked on the Tea Party and GOP.

Anonymous said...

anony-mouse - UKIP will take away votes from the Tories, leaving Labour with a huge majority which it will use to massively let in everyone with a pulse (not that the Tories would have been that much better) who will vote Labour, which over time will reduce the Tories and UKIP to smithereens.

Well...up to a point. While many votes have been taken from the Tories all the main parties have taken a hit. There have been defectors from all three.

Apparently UKIP polled more votes in Doncaster, Labour leaderEd Miliband's constituency, than Labour.

Anecdotally - I voted UKIP. I was always a Labour voter - til I woke up a while ago (thanks Steve, Majorityrights et al). Thus I'm not a disaffected Tory.

Anonymous said...

UKIP will take away votes from the Tories, leaving Labour with a huge majority which it will use to massively let in everyone with a pulse (not that the Tories would have been that much better) who will vote Labour, which over time will reduce the Tories and UKIP to smithereens.

They may win, but they won't dare try that strategy now, not the way they did under Blair. That was in the days when no party would risk accusations of racism etc. Now that immigration is truly on the agenda, the backlash would be massive and would sweep Labour into the dustbin at the next election.

You can't change the demographics that quickly, and under first-past-the-post, concentrated voting blocs, like immigrants in certain cities, do poorly in comparison to more evenly dispersed groups, like the native English.

(That's when you're dealing with 30%+ of the vote. With lower numbers, the concentrated groups tend, paradoxically, to do better than the dispersed. There's a tipping point.)

Anonymous said...

I remember seeing this a few years back. Lucky to survive. Not sure if he is good for England, yes England.

http://youtu.be/-vbXyofQFA4

David said...

Americans first have to figure a way they can chisel money out of nationalism and feel morally superior to each other while doing so.

Anonymous said...

http://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2014/05/jim-rogers-says-buy-russia.html

Anonymous said...

Has anyone seen an age breakdown of the European voters who are now supporting these new nationalist parties? Any support is good, but I'd be particularly pleased if it wasn't just the middle aged and older. It would mean that many people who have been force-fed cultural Marxist propaganda since birth can actually still think for themselves.

Luke Lea said...

Lou Dobbs was an effective spokesman for the Nigel Farage point of view until he disappeared from CNN. Too bad he hasn't run for office. Who else is there?

Ed said...

Anonymous said...
Why should I care? This means nothing in terms of immigration policy in America. The American elites (labor unions, The Catholic Church, Hollywood, Agri-business, etc) will never allow any serious reduction in immigration to America.


The same forces at play in America are at play in Europe. The difference is that a significant group of Europeans can pull themselves away from the circus & bread distractions, notice the decay around them and do something about it.

We like to make fun of the French for being weak but when the Socialists rammed through gay marriage 500K French people showed up in the streets. You couldn't get 500 people in Alabama to protest gay marriage. In America a billionaire is being forced to sell a team because of comments he made in private and virtually no one of import is saying maybe this isn't a good idea. In France some Black guy comes up with some inverse Nazi salute, protests are levied but he goes on.

Who knows what will happen next but at least the Europoeans are keeping the elites honest, that's a lot more than can be said for America.

Luke Lea said...

By the way, did Voltaire really say, "To Learn Who Rules You, Find Out Who You Can't Criticize?"

Anonymous said...

what's the over/under on how long
until farage meets with an unfortunate accident?

Anonymous said...

OT: Google really went all out with its Memorial Day Google Doodle.

Anonymous said...

Europe will respond by increasing 3rd world colonization, lest someone call them racists. It worked on the Tea Party and GOP.

I think we may just have crossed that event horizon in the UK. Amongst urban, liberal elite types, stand up comedians et all its fun to call UKIP 'racist'. It hasnt worked. It didnt stop them getting votes and now the cat is out of the bag, you can be called racist and not turn into a puff of smoke. The magic word is losing its power.

I think also this is where finally the internet, the online discourse, is starting to have an effect too. Go to a UKIP stronghold like the Daily Telegraph and read the comments. You can see hundreds, if not thousands, of comments deriding the 'racist' accusation from all directions. In effect the liberal/left have been driven from the battle completely, only commenting in a troll-like manner pretending to be Tories while singing the praises of the EU and immigration.

I think this has a psychological, emboldening effect on people. You maybe anonymous but laughing off the accusation over and over again while an appreciative audience applauds you - its having an effect.

Anonymous said...

Unless the 'right' can cash in on this and do something drastic, this will be bad as the side that's 'in power' gets all the blame for all that goes wrong.

Remember how the dubya presidency turned out. It would have better if gore had won in 2000 or if Kerry had won in 2004.


The bi-factional ruling elite does not actually care about the rest of us.

Ulick McGee said...

"He's got the slippery visage of a Norman baron or a Simon de Montfort."

I agree he looks slippery but then again, if he wasn't extremely cunning, could he have achieved such success given the powerful forces arrayed against him?

Neither Obama nor Bush look slippery. Slick Willy was so slippery he was constantly slipping inside interns. However, he comes across as sincere. They are selected and groomed for success based on several factors, one of which is their physical appearance. You can tell that Farage has come from outside the system based on his face.

Still, the advantage of buying off both sides is that you always win. If UKIP splits the Tory vote, Labour wins, business as usual for the international bankers.

If UKIP won a general election, they would try to buy Farage off and if he didn't take his 40 pieces of silver, they would back a rival inside the UKIP and work to evict him.

Whether or not Farage changes anything depends on the English who are an extremely resourceful people. It is hard to scam them once they have their guard up. This election results shows that they are waking up.

24AheadDotCom said...

Viewed from afar, I'd be nearly as skeptical of UKIP as I am of the Teapartiers. UKIP are libertarians and seem to be more in the Colonel Blimp mold than something like a less thuggish/racist BNP.

Regarding those "patriotic parties", little in the U.S. meets that standard: not the Dems, not the GOP, not the Teapartiers. In the midst of a recession, the TPers turned their backs on millions of Americans and called them moochers. The TPers hate most Americans. As a group, they concentrate on less important issues like spending and mostly ignore far more important issues like immigration. And, their strings are pulled by loose borders globalists.

Marine Le Pen has little in common with the TPers; she's more like Buchanan on immigration/trade/sovereignty and Liz Warren on financial issues. The FN's successes have nothing to do with TP obsessions like reducing the size of government.

Anonymous said...

Euro media lies and exaggerates when it calls Farage, Le Pen, etc. nativist extremists. And US media lies and exaggerates when it calls GOP pols the same thing. Steve takes the distorted portrait of people like Farage that the Euro media has painted for internal Euro purposes and taunts US liberals with it. "See, liberals, extreme right-wingers are winning elections in your beloved liberal Europe." They're not.

The reverse trick wouldn't work though. Since Euro liberals do not look up to America, Euro right-wingers can't taunt them with US-liberal caricatures of Bush II, Romney, etc.

Nick Diaz said...

@Steve Sailer

"In most of the rest of the world, patriotic parties are ascendant, as is only natural following the Globalists' disaster of 2008."

How exactly is this to blame on "globalists"? The last time I checked, the 2008 crisis was caused by mortgages default. It had nothing to do with having free markets, with free transit of goods and industry.

Blamming immgrants is stupid because it was the ensured loans from the federal government that allowed them to even buy all those houses. Blame politicians for allowing people to buy houses when they cant afford them. There were also plenty of native born Americans who defaulted on their home loans, too.

The U.S always had millions of poor immigrants who couldn't afford houses, but only recently has a crisis like this happen. Why? Because those millions of poor people did not buy houses because they couldn't afford them, and there was no government to ensure bansks that their loans would be payed. It is the socialist government that ensures loans that cannot be re-payed the problem, not immigrants.

Blame socialism, and not globalism. When you say "globalism", you mean capitalism and free trade on a global scale. Globalists actually favor no handouts and small government. They favor free movement of goods, industry and people and an end to national borders, but they do NOT support governments ensuring loans.

It is extremely cynical and disengenuous on your part to blame this on "globalists", Sailer.



Anonymous said...

Why should I care? This means nothing in terms of immigration policy in America. The American elites (labor unions, The Catholic Church, Hollywood, Agri-business, etc) will never allow any serious reduction in immigration to America. In the USA, the only permissible opinions on immigration are:
The funny thing is Los Angeles County has about 1 million but how many farm jobs about 1,000 if lucky. Most illegals are in the top 10 largest counties in the us were farm work is 5,000 or less.

Anonymous said...

"The FN's successes have nothing to do with TP obsessions like reducing the size of government."

In America "reducing the size of government" means "quit taking from working whites and giving to idle blacks." In Europe before mass immigration government was not associated with anything like that. Well, maybe a little in Italy. Since the size of government wasn't an ethnic issue, it wasn't really an issue. When Euro nativists talk about socialism, they imagine a future like the past, i.e. without third-world immigrants. And yes, in that kind of a setup socialism really can work. And did.

Anonymous said...

The different also is the USA has a left Party Democrats and a right Party republicans. I bet this Party in the UK would not be all left or right by US standards.

Steve Sailer said...

The U.S. and France have different histories, heroes, legends, and cultures, so conservatives in the two countries have somewhat different things they want to conserve. That's what diversity is good for -- letting different people act on different desires.

Anonymous said...

Viewed from afar, I'd be nearly as skeptical of UKIP as I am of the Teapartiers. UKIP are libertarians and seem to be more in the Colonel Blimp mold than something like a less thuggish/racist BNP.

Regarding those "patriotic parties", little in the U.S. meets that standard: not the Dems, not the GOP, not the Teapartiers. In the midst of a recession, the TPers turned their backs on millions of Americans and called them moochers. The TPers hate most Americans. As a group, they concentrate on less important issues like spending and mostly ignore far more important issues like immigration. And, their strings are pulled by loose borders globalists.
I agree with you 24 Ahead if they are libertarian they are not that serious since Libertarians support people not paying taxes and avoiding regulations which leads to illegal immigration. I also agree with you on the Tea Party what turn me off is they are very pro-Texas which has the second largest illegal immigrant population i the US but Tea party folks will complain about illegals in California or New York but praise how well the Texas economy is doing.

Anonymous said...

Marine Le Pen has little in common with the TPers; she's more like Buchanan on immigration/trade/sovereignty and Liz Warren on financial issues. The FN's successes have nothing to do with TP obsessions like reducing the size of government.

True, I think that this obession in Orange County and San Diego help to increase the illegal population since it was cool to avoid paying taxes and avoid regulation by hiring illegal immigrants, Santa Ana was known as a hub for low skilled manufacturing about 30 years ago and companies in the Midwest that were a union moved plants to Santa Ana to start assembly work at minimum wage with little benefits since Santa Ana had a big surplus of immigrant Hispanic women.

Oswald Spengler said...

"When Euro nativists talk about socialism, they imagine a future like the past, i.e. without third-world immigrants. And yes, in that kind of a setup socialism really can work. And did."

------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was also fortuitous for the nations of Western Europe that they had a magnanimous superpower like the U.S. to help them recover from World War II, and furthermore function as a surrogate military for almost fifty years afterwards. It's much easier to fund a generous welfare sate when someone else ponies up the money, manpower, and materiel your nation's protection.

Emanuel Todd said...

This is faulty analysis.

It's true to a point. However the threat was by and large the Chimera of the Soviet Union. Not spear chucking Somalis.

I call the USSR a Chimera because I now subscribe to the idea that the Cold War was a shell game played by Bankers in the West and their ethnic counterparts in the USSR. The socialism that we see in Sweden occurred when labour from the East was entirely cut off from exploitation by capitalists in the West. In theory the American expenditure on arms was paid for by a careful exchange of dollar bond reserves and trade imbalances. The net was spent on arms and soldiers wages.

The trade that the West simply lost because of the Iron Curtian just about cancels out American colonization.

What we have now is the disappearing western genome. And the people see it.

Anonymous said...

Blamming immgrants is stupid because it was the ensured loans from the federal government that allowed them to even buy all those houses.

Illegal immigrant labor also helped make those houses "affordable".

Anonymous said...

By the way, did Voltaire really say, "To Learn Who Rules You, Find Out Who You Can't Criticize?"

Someone famous said something to that effect. Does anyone know what Foucault said on the matter?

Anonymous said...

"The U.S. and France have different histories, heroes, legends, and cultures, so conservatives in the two countries have somewhat different things they want to conserve."

The French Right used to be badass.

dfordoom said...

"I agree he looks slippery but then again, if he wasn't extremely cunning, could he have achieved such success given the powerful forces arrayed against him?"

Precisely. Plenty of sincere ethno-nationalists have tried playing the game of politics and lost. Farage understands the necessity of cleverness. You can't actually come out and say you're against Third World immigration - you'd be instantly marginalised, which is what happened to the British Nationalist Party. So he doesn't say that. He talks about immigration in vague terms. But at least he has put immigration on the political agenda, which would have seemed impossible a decade ago.

It's also important to understand that ditching the EU has to be the first step. As long as Britain is in the EU there's nothing they can effectively do to close their borders. Ditching the EU has to come first. And he's put that issue on the political agenda with a vengeance.

Farage understands that politics is the art of the possible. And by doing that he has gone close to achieving the impossible - breaking into the closed shop of British politics.

Anonymous said...

"I now subscribe to the idea that the Cold War was a shell game played by Bankers in the West and their ethnic counterparts in the USSR."

Not true. The USSR was run by the ethnic counterparts of Western bankers before WWII. But not after. The West fought the Cold War in order to bring the ethnic counterparts of Western bankers back into power in Russia. And this goal was achieved in the 1990s when Russia succumbed to the oligarchs. Then after 2000 Putin started taking power away from these oligarchs. So a second Cold War began, with the same goal as the first.

Anonymous said...

Yes, this is a very good sign.

.

"How exactly is this to blame on "globalists"? The last time I checked, the 2008 crisis was caused by mortgages default."

The banking mafia came up with an idea that bundling prime and sub-prime loans together could reduce the combined risk of the resulting bundle.

This (in theory but not in practise) made sub-prime loans less risky.

This created the pressure to make more sub-prime loans.

This led to the political pressure to repeal the rules against making sub-prime loans which led to the minority loans propaganda.

The whole disaster was banking mafia created.

Anonymous said...

'Specically, Nigel Farage said open the floodgates to South Asian legal immigration and 0 European immigration speaking in the English Parliment very recently.'

Yeah, as a European I don't see why I should be pleased about UKIP. Farage hates and fears me but has absolutely no problems with non-white people as long as they originate from within the, former, empire. UKIP are not racists, they are xenophobes. Of the old English kind.

ben tillman said...

By the way, did Voltaire really say, "To Learn Who Rules You, Find Out Who You Can't Criticize?"

He said it in French, without the grammatical error.

Anonymous said...

I can assure you that in the UK, the political class, big business and the media did their damndest to create a globalist, no-borders state in the UK - and very nearly succeeded, with the New Labour government. Lest we forget immigration to the UK runs at a rate three times per capita of the USA, despite mass unemployment persisiting in the UK. Despite all the ballyhoo, the UK is ertain to become majority non-white by 2050.

No, what we have seen in the UK is a genuine, mass, popular backlash, a 'peasants' revolt', if you will, with people who just simply taken enough. New Labour overplayed their hand, and were conceited and arrogant about it.
UKIP are misunderstood by the punditry. In reality they are a mass, popular anti-immigration movement with an anti-EU label and a political party attached. Hardly anyone knows or cares what the the rest of their policies are. The British people were the roar, UKIP merely the mouthpiece.
None of these would have been possible without Nigel Farage, a charismatic, determined and fearless leader of the type that only ever emerges once in a century, if that.
Unlike the abortive Powellite backlash against immigration back in '68, this backlash ultimately had somewhere to. The old pro immigration liblabcon stitch up that relied on monopoly political power no longer holds. Things will never be the same again.
This is the ultimate legacy of New Labour, to racialize, probably permanently, UK politics.
In the future the bifurcation in UK politics will be between Labour, fighting for immigrants, and UKIP, standing up for the English. The Conservatives are likely to wither away.

Anonymous said...

Actually, UKIP are promising a 5 year moratorium on *all* immigration. The meme that they want to keep out whites and let in subcons is something that the BNP, for obvious reasons, I trying very hard to push.
Around 10 years ago, UKIP were just another no-hope lunatic fring party. Their genius was to tack on a hardline anti-imigration message - which really grabbed the public's attention - onto their core anti-EU platform. This was at a time in which the pro-immigration big boy stitch-up operated, and the English people were effectively disenfranchised. UK are th backlash against this arrogance.
Another stroke of genius, which draws opprobrium from the BNP, and one or two posters here is to be anti-immigration without being anti-immigrant. NOT being extremist made political immigration control possible a lesson the BNP could not learn in a million years and thus were rendered impotent.

5371 said...

Immigration from the EU to the UK is often of non-whites.

ben tillman said...

I also agree with you on the Tea Party what turn me off is they are very pro-Texas which has the second largest illegal immigrant population i the US but Tea party folks will complain about illegals in California or New York but praise how well the Texas economy is doing.

Texas is full of illegals because (1) Texas is next to Mexico and (2) it is illegal to treat "illegal" aliens differently from US citizens. Where have you been for the last 32 years?

The Texas economy does well despite, not because of, illegals.


DW Budd said...

I am not sure how this story is playing out in the US - in France, the elections held this weekend are being seen as cataclysmic in the local press. The word "seisme" (earthquake) is being used with regularity, and there are calls for leaders of both mainstream parties (the UMP and PS) to resign. Attempts to demonise Le Pen, right up until the final days when a comment her father (the founder and former head of the FN) about ebola was one of the top stories in the papers and on the news.

It didn't work.

One of the things that is being missed in all the sturm und drang is that the reaction is not "extreme right," as it is being reported. The UKIP are (I think) pretty traditionally that way, but the Front National are an odd blend of populism - espousing trade barriers, unionism, and other things not particularly right wing. And in Greece (and Spain) the Eurosceptics who took the vote were actually pretty traditionally left wing.

The French Le Figaro analysis reported the outcome as a "claque" (slap) for both Hollande and Cope.

I am not sure such a thing is possible in the US, however. First, because of the way the state exists in France, minority parties have a chance to win seats, and with that, a chance to demand to be part of coalition governments. Le Pen almost surely will never be sufficiently scrubbed that her FN will be brought into a coalition, but the UKIP are another story. There are grumblings that the Tories should look to make a deal with them.

On the other hand, Francois Hollande is unbelievably unpopular here. He is polling at less than 20% right now - has a US president (Nixon included) ever been that poor? And Hollande has been in the high teens for months; this is not a one-shot deal. He tried to re-shuffle the government, canning the prior prime minister and bringing in political chameleon Manuel Valls, who does have some popularity.

That hasn't worked, and there are now loud calls for Valls to go after only a bit more than a month in office,

Nick Diaz said...

@Anonymous 10:05 PM

"
The banking mafia came up with an idea that bundling prime and sub-prime loans together could reduce the combined risk of the resulting bundle.

This (in theory but not in practise) made sub-prime loans less risky.

This created the pressure to make more sub-prime loans.

This led to the political pressure to repeal the rules against making sub-prime loans which led to the minority loans propaganda.

The whole disaster was banking mafia created."

But that is called crony capitalism, and has nothing to do with globalism.

Globalism is the belief that the free transit of goods, industry and people on a global scale disregarding national borders creates more economic efficiency and increases overall wealth.

This implies the free marker, where people thrive or fail by their own abilities.

Globalists are in favor of free transit of people through national borders, but they are NOT in favor of government giving handouts to anyone. That is called socialism and not globalism.

Nick Diaz said...

@Anonymous 9:11 PM

That is obviously false, since in that case all the people who purchased all those houses would have been able to repay their loans. This is a matter of simple logic.

Farang said...

DW Budd wrote : Attempts to demonise Le Pen, right up until the final days when a comment her father (the founder and former head of the FN) about ebola was one of the top stories in the papers and on the news.

It seems that there's a new narrative now: I read yesterday an interesting article in Le Point, a very mainstream weekly in which Bernard-Henri Lévy writes op-eds. The author said that many people voted for the Front National not although it was demonized, but actually because it was demonized: when the socialists and the conservatives have become two wings of the same party, how do you express your anger? By voting for the most demonized party. The FN vote means "See how angry I am! You put me down for decades, but now you are frightened by what I'm doing when I'm angry, eh?"

The author concluded that the best way to diminish the influence of the Front National was to similarly demonize other parties, in order to split the angry vote.

He presumably meant demonizing the most extreme part of the far-left.

The very demonized Alain Soral and his sidekick Dieudonné (who invented the "quenelle") didn't take part in the campaign. Alain Soral, who is a smart fellow, said that he didn't want to weaken the FN.

I noticed, though, that the author of the article considered it off-limits to identify the reasons why the voters are angry, and deal with the causes of their anger.

Londoner said...

I don't believe Farage wants any immigration from India or Africa. He's simply saying this as a way to deflect accusations of 'racism' (i.e. discriminating against non-whites).

UKIP are libertarians and as such I don't trust them particularly. Something like France's FN would be preferable. But in the circumstances I'm happy - the ashen faces of Cameron, Miliband and Clegg over the past two daya have been a delight to behold.

Ending the immigration tsunami is now not only on the political agenda - it is a core policy of a party that has just WON a national election. There is a long way to go yet, obviously, but a few years ago I never thought i'd be in a position to type the sentence before this one. Change is possible; defeat is not certain.

dearieme said...

Re all the "Farage is a racist xenophobe" crap: his wife is German and they've brought up the children to be bilingual.

It's the EU that he finds hateful, not people from the Continent.

Nick Diaz said...

Who exactly are these "globalists" who were responsible for the 2008 mortgage crisis according to Sailer? The banks that were ensured on their loans by the U.S Government? That is called crony capitalism or socialism, and has nothing to do with globalism.

"Globalism" is the economic doctrine that dictates that the free movement of goods, industry and people on a global scale without the interference from national regulations produces a higher level of economic efficiency and greater overall wealth.

Globalism espouses the belief in the free market, and does NOT support governments giving handouts.

What caused the mortgage crisis in 2008 was that the government ensured loans for purchasing homes for minorities. Because the loans were ensured, the banks lended the money irresponsibly. Blaming it on immigration is foolish because the crisis would never have happened without the governmment ensuring those loans. Without the government ensuring the loans, the banks would not have lended the money. Ergo, no crisis. It was socialism and not globalism that was to blame for the mortagage default.

Globalists favor immigration, yes, but they believe in equal rules for everyone and personal responsability.

You could say that liberals in the U.S are "globalist" in the sense that they believe that people from anywhere on Earth should have the right to emigrate to America, but the reason why they are in favor of this is different from that of true globalists. They believe in absolute equality between everyone, male, female and of any ethnic background, and they want to use government to enforce this equality. This is COMPLETELY different from the libertarian equality proposed by true globalists, which is simply equality of rights and opportunity.

The whole issue here, as usual, is one of semantics. Sailer is very imprecise with his terminology, and ends uo accusing some economic/political groups of being something entirely different just because they share some similiarities with the groups Sailer accuses them to be.

anony-mouse said...

'Uh UKIP + Tories= 50%+ of the electorate'

Sorry its you who don't understand 'First-past-the-post'.

Say in a riding or district:

Lab-35%
UKIP-34%
Tories-31%

Labour wins that riding and its 1 seat.

Repeat.

Anonymous said...

Re all the "Farage is a racist xenophobe" crap: his wife is German...

Lou Dobbs was forced from CNN for being a "racist xenophobe." His wife is Mexican.

Rookwood said...

I think the vast majority of British and even of English people are pro-European; what they are not is pro-EU. Conflating the two is one of the elite's Jedi mind tricks, not unlike conflating criticism of Israeli government policy with Jew-hatred. Real nationalists tend to like and respect other nations, not to hate them and want to wipe them out, as the media and controlled political classes constantly insinuate.

Anonymous said...

There are many here that say that Farage is not the right man because of XYZ, but surely not many can doubt he is the step in the right direction. He says things straight, he is not like one of those plastic ken dolls like Cameron or Milliband that have no principles other than to look respectable for the mainstream media outlets.

Anonymous said...

One of the most fascinating aspects of the UK Euro election is the Labour surge inside London and the UKIP surge everywhere but London. Of course this is not unconnected with there beinh hardly any Englishmen left in London. Also labour party policy of importing a new electorate reaps rich dividends.

Anonymous said...

"In effect the liberal/left have been driven from the battle completely, only commenting in a troll-like manner pretending to be Tories while singing the praises of the EU and immigration."

I need to correct this a bit and say that the Tories are really a liberal/left outfit, and I am not trying to use hyperbole here, they embrace homosexual marriage, the equalities act, the EU, third world immigration, big government and other such lefty ideals. They call their leftward swing "modernisation", those pro Tory commentors are not trolls they sincerely believe that they are conservative Tories while advocating every Fabian socialist ideal.

ATBOTL said...

"Has anyone seen an age breakdown of the European voters who are now supporting these new nationalist parties? Any support is good, but I'd be particularly pleased if it wasn't just the middle aged and older. It would mean that many people who have been force-fed cultural Marxist propaganda since birth can actually still think for themselves."

Nationalist voters in Europe skew towards the young. UKIP might be an exception.

Rohan Swee said...

DW Budd: I am not sure how this story is playing out in the US...

From what I've seen, it's mostly stupid (the FN is like the Tea Party, right?), or stupid and hysterical (ZOMG Europe is going nazi again!). The WSJ went full neocon-retard this morning with John Vinocur's "Vladimir Putin's Woman in Paris". ("But on Sunday France embraced ignominy"!!!)

Anonymous said...

I need to correct this a bit and say that the Tories are really a liberal/left outfit, and I am not trying to use hyperbole here, they embrace homosexual marriage, the equalities act, the EU, third world immigration, big government and other such lefty ideals. They call their leftward swing "modernisation", those pro Tory commentors are not trolls they sincerely believe that they are conservative Tories while advocating every Fabian socialist ideal.
Forget the American Right thinking it has done nothing against illegal immigration as I remain people here Texas under both Bush and Perry grew from a low of only 400,000 illegal immigrants to 1.8 million. In fact Bush being against gay marriage and abortion is why the right voted for the worst person on immigration he wanted guest workers to come here from all countries to drive down wages.

Farang said...

ATBOTL wrote: Nationalist voters in Europe skew towards the young.

According to opinion polls, a quarter of all French youths vote for the FN, and 40% of the young whites, according to nationalist journalist Emmanuel Ratier.

That's understandable: the young are more bothered by NAMs than the older guys. They have to compete with them for jobs, girls, housing, etc, while being specifically targeted for "white guilt" and "white privilege".

Old fogies like me can laugh off the BS about white guilt, white privilege, diversity, etc, but the young have to endure it all the time, at school, at the workplace, in the media, etc, and it's often specifically targeted at them. They are more often victims of NAM violence (young males target other young males, who are competitors for sex and territory; old guys are not competitors for the same stuff).

Anonymous said...

When you say "globalism", you mean capitalism and free trade on a global scale. Globalists actually favor no handouts and small government.

Ha Ha! LOL Good one.

Anonymous said...

May I suggest a visit to The Guardian's Comment is Free section.

Its simply delicious to read the comments of butthurt left/liberals as they do anything but face the facts. Every face saving meme we've heard over the last few days is being wheeled out for inspection and furiously up-voted.

Funniest of all are the spluttering "UKIP are racist!" accusations. They don't seem to get the point that sort of attack was meant to put voters off before the election.

It didn't work.

It's certainly not going to work now the votes are in. Is some voters out there are suddenly going to slap their heads and exclaim "Racist? I had no idea, what have I done?!"

These left/libs don't seem to be able to take on board that most people who voted UKIP don't care about that anymore. Because in the privacy of the voting booth they've popped their racist cherry.

Anonymous said...

He is polling at less than 20% right now - has a US president (Nixon included) ever been that poor?

I think Nixon was polling around 15% when he resigned, but he was facing impeachment and (unlike Clinton) expulsion from office. What's Hollande done? He looks like an ineffectual time-server, but surely people knew that when they elected him.

David said...

>Globalists actually favor no handouts and small government.<

They favor both when it comes to their interests. I concede that they are against "handouts" in the form of wages and "government" in the form of honest government, though.

>They favor free movement of goods, industry and people and an end to national borders<

Precisely. These locusts want an end to national borders - a position which Europe's far-right and anti-EU political parties reject. Thus Steve is correct in saying that the recent electoral victories of these parties are a blow to globalism.

David said...

Well, they're farming the taxpayers.

Matra said...

You can't take it to the bank that he'll kick out Slavs and welcome in blacks and Pakistanis.

Welcoming blacks and Pakistanis would be bad though I see no evidence he would do so. Kicking out Slavs would be good as they vote for their own ethnic interests (ie the Left) when they are in other people's countries. Even during the Cold War Polish immigrants to Canada were loyal Liberal Party voters despite having the most lukewarm NATO leader in Pierre Trudeau for most of those years.

The WSJ went full neocon-retard this morning with John Vinocur's "Vladimir Putin's Woman in Paris". ("But on Sunday France embraced ignominy"!!!)

I saw the headline. Vinocur has become an hysterical old fogie. His American image of Europe is being destroyed before his eyes. LOL

In the now discredited Daily Torygraph today Tom Rogan says the US supports greater UK integration into Europe. That's nothing new. I think it was Nick Clegg who said if the UK left the EU the Americans wouldn't like it. It is clear that the 'Special Relationship' is disastrous for Britain.

Anonymous said...

What's Hollande done?

Banged the wrong birds. Dropped Segelone Royal for Valerie Trierweiler then inexplicably dropped her for some plain jane actress called Gayet.

Who did he think he was Donald Sterling?

David said...

To libertarians the ideal worker is a slave. That's why they support globalism and no (or bought) government. The perpetual pole-to-pole quest for lower-and-lower-wage workers. Hey, it's just the Almighty Market working, as it did pre-1865.

Of course, libertarians without any real scratch can't go on that quest. They have to bring the helots here, instead, which is why they're vociferous in condemning national boundaries as "racist," "anti-freedom," "fascist," "socialist," "anti-American," or whatever.

David said...

People aren't terms in an economic equation. There is quite a bit of "stickiness" in your model of rootless cosmopolitans roaming the earth like locusts. As you will discover.

David said...

>This is COMPLETELY different from the libertarian equality proposed by true globalists<

Right. Third-world peons will certainly not be treated equally after exercising their equal right to swamp our nation. It's the back of the hand to them and to native labor: the lowest possible wages (else where is the efficiency? ), no rights, no country. Of course the pauperized can then consider themselves citizens of the globe, so that's something, but I don't think they'll be doing much world-traveling after they've been fitted to the milking machine.

In any case, thanks for the confirmation that both cultural Marxism and extreme capitalism agree - equally - on ethnic replacement.

Art Deco said...

I call the USSR a Chimera because I now subscribe to the idea that the Cold War was a shell game played by Bankers in the West and their ethnic counterparts in the USSR.

Gary Allen and the John Birch Society beat you to a variant of this over 40 years ago. It was rubbish then, too.

ogunsiron said...

Farang said...

.... Le Point, a very mainstream weekly in which Bernard-Henri Lévy writes op-eds ....
I noticed, though, that the author of the article considered it off-limits to identify the reasons why the voters are angry, and deal with the causes of their anger.
------
Le Point is pretty much a Bernard-Henry Lévy rag so it's not surprising that whoever that author was, they weren't interested in exploring the deep causes of the electoral upset.

------
David said...

To libertarians the ideal worker is a slave. That's why they support globalism and no (or bought) government...
-----
To Bryan Caplan the ideal worker is a Haitian who voluntarily sells himself into slavery in a USA full of extremely low wage earners while Bryan proudly lives in his bubble, unabashedly oblivious to the plight of his fellow americans.

Anonymous said...

The French Right was ready to parachute the FFL into Paris to arrest Degalle.

Can you imagine Boner trying to convince the 82nd ABN to do something like that? Hah!

Anonymous said...

Silicon Beach LA. Now, they surfed a lot more than Huuntington Beach does. In fact its the rebirth of some of white culture and expanision of some Asians into LA. There was a time if you had a tech company you planted it in Austin Texas about 5 years ago after the California Bay Area it seems that whites and some Asians like the Expensive beach area of LA. LA has lots of problems too many Hispanics mainly Mexicans in the kids population. Expensive housing unless you buy a house in a former black area or Mexicans area. I also see these jobs in Hipster Portland Oregon as well.

Anonymous said...

"Globalists favor immigration, yes, but they believe in equal rules for everyone and personal responsability."

ROFL. That's why people pressing £1 coins in a garage workshop are criminals and the Governor of the Bank of England printing £375bn is a responsible public servant.

Biff Tannen said...

24 years later gives the perspective one needs.

I was pretty mystified by the whole mess in the 80s. The demographic destruction of the Russians in the 90s in retrospect now tends to conform the analysis.

reiner Tor said...

Why should I care?

Because Europeans are your racial kin and because you are not a psychopath who cares nothing for his relatives. Am I correct?

Anonymous said...

In Finland, the immigration restrictionist Finns party (formerly known as True Finns) gained another seat with 12.9 % of the votes (an increase of 3.1 percentage points from the last European Parliament elections). The result was still kind of disappointing, as the Finns party got almost 19 percent of the votes in the Finnish parliament elections in 2011.

One of those newly elected is Jussi Halla-aho, who is actually kind of like the Finnish equivalent of our beloved Steve Sailer. He rose to national fame (or infamy, many would say) through his blog, where he criticises immigration and multiculturalism. He was the 2nd most popular candidate in the whole country in these elections. He's kind of an odd duck for a politician. The guy is a linguist with a PhD and got into politics quite recently. He's a somewhat nerdy guy, much unlike Geert Wilders of Netherlands or Nigel Farage of the British UKIP in demeanor. But he can debate really well and he's a very good writer. Very much hated by the pro-immigration liberals.

Unfortunately, the most popular candidate was Alexander Stubb, who is a slimy pro-multiculturalism, pro-immigration, pro-EU federalism douchebag. Not surprisingly, he's also a member of the Swedish minority, who are almost fanatically pro-immigration and pro-multiculturalism.

Also check this out: http://yle.fi/uutiset/big-headed_finns_use_outsize_baby_growth_charts/7266267

I thought race was all about skin color..?

Anonymous said...

>> In the midst of a recession, the TPers turned their backs on millions of Americans and called them moochers. The TPers hate most Americans


...and how much did YOU donate to help anyone keep their home?

Talk is cheap when your hot idea is to spend Steve's money, not your own.

Anonymous said...

I had a look at the article of Finn head size and then followed a link to another article :

Sounds of African diaspora heat up April fests

It reminded me of when I saw the news about the rapper in Greece who was murdered

- in other words we have swapped musical diversity all across Europe for mono-African rhythm

It's the biggest shame to hit human evolution ever.

Rather than going over old ground on race, a word that will never be accepted again, why not stick with ethnicity labels and focus on demographics - the future population of Africa etc. It is clear Europe is being lined up as a housing estate for surplus Africans. Some diversity!

Frost's work on Diversity of phenotype should also be widely publicised.

I don't think Europeans have woken up; they are in a fretful sleep, tossing and turning, they think they are having a bad dream.

Europeans need to learn to live as a diaspora now with good support networks across the globe.

Anonymous said...

The liberatarian idea that liberal lending to students, immigrants and single mothers wouldn't happen if big business was pulling the strings is farcical.

If big business opposed liberal lending then it simply wouldn't have happened. Big business wants people to be in debt so they will work longer hours and financiers can make more money out of them. Since the lenders will be bailed out even if the borrowers default, the banks can't lose.

How often do US elites criticise student loan policy on the grounds that students aren't getting degree level jobs? almost never. They actually support the mantra that more and more people should go to college.

Same goes for mortgage borrowing to minorities and single mothers.

In fact, it's questionable if left libearalism per se would be a significant political movement if it didn't get significant big business funding from the likes of Soros and the Rockefellors.

If the Alternative Right received the same kind of funding Steve would have a large mansion in Santa Barbara.

The Truth Will Out said...

“Heinrich HIMMLER,” said Himself, “was a foul, Jew-exterminating, Nazi fiend whom your grandmother’s parents and their whole generation fought a world war to defeat in order that she could sit here 70 years later and be called racist by her sanctimonious and ungrateful grandchildren. Anyone for crumble?”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10860492/Are-we-all-racist-now.html#disqus_thread