My new VDARE.com column laments the Reagan Administration decision to reclassify Indian immigrants from Caucasian to Asian so that they could qualify for low interest minority business development loans from the SBA.
It was particularly shortsighted of the Reagan Administration to declare South Asians officially nonwhite. South Asians tend (especially compared to East Asians) to be extraverted, loquacious in English, interested in politics and argument, and intellectually venturesome. There are already far more South Asian than East Asian pundits in America. Policies that incline these Indians to the left like this could turn out to be disastrous.
There are some grounds for hope. One of the main reasons for anti-white feelings among East Asian men is that white men are much more likely to marry East Asian women than East Asian men are to marry white women, leaving a lot of cranky East Asian bachelors left over. This is less of a problem for South Asian men, who keep their womenfolk on tighter leashes. Arranged marriages are still common among South Asians in America.
Because the GOP is inevitably destined to be considered the white party, it would be best to have the Indians, as Lyndon Johnson memorably said of FBI director J. Edgar Hoover, “inside the tent p-----g out than outside p-----g in.”Read the whole thing there and comment up on it below.
Posts
151 comments:
My theory of why Asians are leftists: they detest whites for their masochism.
Well, I think anthropological racial definitions and U.S. census dept. racial definitions are two different things. I don't think anyone out there really thinks Indians and Chinese are the same race, but it make sense to count them both as "Asian" for demographic reasons because both have been coming here post-1960, both have similar levels of educational achievement, incomes, etc.
I'm originally from India. I don't consider myself "Caucasian". From what I've read, Indians are Europeans are very distantly related. India hasn't much genetic inflow in tens of thousands of years. So the "Aryan Invasion", even if it happened, didn't change much the genetics of the people living in India.
I don't think Indians are particularly extroverted, and I've met a lot more Indians than you have. I would say most Indians are quiet and introverted, except maybe for Punjabis who tend to be loudmouths and are disproportionately represented in North America. Indians do like electoral politics though, especially opining about politics.
"There are already far more South Asian than East Asian pundits in America."
Doesn't the word "pundit" derive from an Indian language?
Hi Steve,
I've seen many a post from you focusing on IQ disparity between races and wanted to share something I learnt recently.
I'm a higher caste Hindu Indian based in the US and have often focused on IQ issues myself. India has a fairly overwhelming affirmative action structure in place (in the arena of education and government jobs). This has systematically polarized the castes in India (socially) while it's been a total hit politically. The offshoot is that I have often wondered if my community averages a higher IQ (our DNA is supposed to resemble white caucasians more than other native Indian communities) for several years now.
Since I'm a man of science, I did not discourage these prejudiced, but silent mental ramblings, until I took a class on Psychology and Leadership in Business school recently.
I was shocked to learn that self-fulfilling prophecies exist especially in the arena of self-confidence. For e.g., there is enough data out there that suggests that blacks are expected to perform poorly against whites in any competition where criteria are centered on IQ, mental agility, analysis, etc. This data is apparently systematically ingrained into people's psyche, so much so that they apparently start believing it as axiomatic.
You can see more on Aronson and Steele's tests at Stanford here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat
I realize psychology is not an exact science due to its inherent ambiguity, but as intelligent men, it behooves us to treat counterpoints with requisite respect.
To remark on the your current post, I completely agree that Asians do not generally deserve to benefit from affirmative action. What disappoints me is that the criteria for AA are race-based. Shouldn't they be purely economic? I'm sure poor white kids are missing out and rich black kids are sneaking in. This just insults everyone's intelligence!
But South Asians aren't White and they are as much of a problem in their own way as all the other non-Whites. Deport them all!
Anonymous said... "So the 'Aryan Invasion', even if it happened, didn't change much the genetics of the people living in India."
Genetic differences between northern Indians and southern Indians are clearly detectable, the northerners being more related to Europeans:
Reconstructing Indian population history
24 September 2009
"We analyse 25 diverse groups in India to provide strong evidence for two ancient populations, genetically divergent, that are ancestral to most Indians today. One, the 'Ancestral North Indians' (ANI), is genetically close to Middle Easterners, Central Asians, and Europeans, whereas the other, the 'Ancestral South Indians' (ASI), is as distinct from ANI and East Asians as they are from each other."
On the other hand, Asians can be a valuable ally in the fight against affirmative action. It is much easier to argue against a system that discriminates against high-performing minorities rather than take down the boosting of low-performing ones.
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/12/24103/
Asian applicants may face discrimination in the admission process at many elite universities, according to data from a recent study conducted by sociology professor Thomas Espenshade GS ’72.
According to the data, not all races are considered equal in the college admissions game. Of students applying to private colleges in 1997, African-American applicants with SAT scores of 1150 had the same chances of being accepted as white applicants with 1460s and Asian applicants with perfect 1600s.
The results of the study come three years after Jian Li, a rejected Princeton applicant, filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. He alleged in the complaint that he had been discriminated against based on his race when he was denied admission to the University.
I think that genetically Indians are an uneven mixture of three elements, only two of which are Caucasoid. The most ancient layer is Australoid, related to Australian Aborigines and Melanesians. After agriculture was invented in the Fertile Crescent 10-12 thousand years ago, lots of Middle Eastern farmers went out colonizing new lands, including in India, bringing in a second element. About 4 thousand years ago a third element arrived - Indo-European-speaking white guys from the Russian steppes.
In spite of millenia of co-existance, these three elements have not coalesced into a coherent whole in India. There's obviously been some mixture, but not enough to create a common identity. Their caste divisions seem to be at least partly based on racial ones. I once saw a genetic study that said that the higher castes had more ancient European heritage than the lower ones.
Isn't it weird that Mexico has gone further down the road towards creating a coherent ethnicity out of disparate races in 400 years than India has in 12,000 years?
Perhaps understandably, Indians are more interested in the topics of race and class than any other group I've ever been around. I think that this interest is mostly healthy - God knows it's an important topic. In real life I've had more politically incorrect conversations with Indians than with members of any other group here in NYC. I did not start any of those conversations - they did.
Funny little recent wrinkle Steve, on "Asian" identity. In the post Proposition 209 University of California system, Asians have come, unsurprisingly, to be the largest single racial group. They were roughly 40% of the student body at UC Berkeley as of a few years ago (37-40%, or thereabouts). 20% of that was Chinese or Chinese-American.
Two years ago, the Asian student groups started to lobby to have Berkeley drop the Asian category and start tracking individual Asian ethnicities separately. Apparently, the news that Berkeley was 40% Asian looked too monolithic. It also impeded "outreach efforts" (read barely-legal or sub-rosa illegal efforts at post-209 affirmative action) targeted on Asian ethnic groups less fortunate that the Chinese, usually Southeast Asians.
"Who are "Asians?""
Eh, just our replacements.
Another day in the life of the Dispossessed Majority.
I should have qualified that. Asians are the largest single group at Berkeley and UCLA.
Indians do like electoral politics though, especially opining about politics.
And therein lies the problem.
The USA [a couple of centuries ago] was founded by people who DESPISED politics.
'Doesn't the word "pundit" derive from an Indian language?'
Yes! It does. Ha. It comes from the Sanskrit "pandit", which means, basically, an especially learned, scholarly man/brahmin. In English it now means... what... a blithering loudmouth? :)
According to 2000 census, Asian men has the highest marriage percentage among all racial group across all age groups. It show that steve's thoery is nothing more than a mental jerkoff. Just check out those public records before trying to put down Asian men again. it is not that difficult to check those data, just google it.
I'm curious about something. Perhaps Indian commenters can enlighten me. Is anyone in India's government or media concerned with the fact that so many of India's best and brightest are leaving the country? I've heard that one reason they're leaving is that a lot of places in Indian universities are reserved for lower castes in an affirmative action-type manner. They feel that their kids are more likely to get a good education abroad. Are there other reasons? In comparison, Latin American elites are staying put, with Cuba being the exception that proves the rule.
Or maybe the lower classes in India are happy or indifferent to the fact that the elites are emigrating? Would the it's-good-for-my-caste argument outweigh the it's-bad-for-India argument?
Also, what do you think is the root cause of affirmative action-type stuff in India? I understand that Gandhi and the Congress party are into it. Politicians from elite backgrounds uniting with the lower orders to screw the rest of the elite and the middle - if that is really what's happening there, then there would be great parallels with the West. But IS that what's happening?
"to be extraverted, loquacious in English, interested in politics and argument, and intellectually venturesome"
I don't quite understand this observation. I've always considered Indian immigrants to be like East Asian immigrants. They stay in their own groups. They are quiet and study engineering/science subjects. To me assiduous introverts like spelling bee champions is the most represenative label for Indians.
Steve, since we both come from California, it's interesting that our perceptions are so different.
Indians did not benefit from being caucasians
Early Indian immigrants faced the same anti-asiatic laws as the east asians, esp miscegenation and could not bring over wives and had to marry mexican women
Indians just as chinese faced numerous white lynch mobs on the west coast, could not own land just like the chinese
In the Thind case, 1923, the US supreme court ruled that a sikh veteran of US army WW1, though racially a caucasian was not white
and had no access to white privilege and until the civil rights laws of 1965, never had equal rights
As late as 1984, in Virginia
an Indian couple consisting of a dark Tamil man and a light skinned Sindhi women were assaulted by blue collar whites for 'miscegenation'
These dumb crackers thought that the Tamil guy was African American and the Sindhi woman was white
The South Asians also detest each other and are not a common block
Their education and incomes vary
Per 2007 census survey
Family income, College rate
Indian = $90k, 70%
Pakistani = $55k, 54%
Bangladeshi = $40k, 40%
In UK, the Indians have socio-economics well above white level
whereas, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are at the black afro-caribbean level
http://genepath.med.harvard.edu/~reich/2009_Nature_Reich_India.pdf
has a DNA map of Indians vs whites
by Reich, published last month
Indians are the ancestral population of whites, especially the subgrouping ANI ( ancestral north Indian )
Grandmother Africa - Mother India
In the DNA tree by Reich
Euros merge very quickly with ANI and then with ASI ( ancestral south Indian ) further back and a very long way further back merge with Africans
In the Reich DNA tree, whites simply come off as a sub-set of Indian, esp ANI
Modern Indians are a blend of ANI and ASI with lower castes about 40% ANI and upper castes about 70% ANI
The Basques, the earliest Europeans have the Maternal DNA,
U2e and Punjab has U2i ( diverged about 40k years ago ), Berbers are U6, Middle east is U5
Just like the jewish cohanim Y marker, the Aryan gene marker on the paternal gene, R1A1, is found about 65% in brahmins, 30% in Iran and Afghanistan, 50% among the slavs Russian, Poles, Czechs and 20% in western europe
R1A1 is associated with Indo-european languages,
Interestingly for Nazi claims of Aryan origin, less than 20% of germans carry R1A1
The earliest R1A1 is found among the Chenchu tribals of south India
Jindal could not have risen in the republican party without conversion
The republican party has also race baited republican Indians such as Nikki Hale of South Carolina
The republican party has also religion baited Swati Dandekar and Satveer Chaudhury
The republican party is also viewed as the party of xtian missionaries
As far as inter-marriage goes
east asian women are willing to convert to xtianity and are already non-vegetarian
Hindus in the US have the diet and the religion barrier
Marrying out of religion will get a person outcasted even today in the USA
Caste is alive and well among
Hindu immigrants
except that it is somewhat loosened
you can marry a few more sub-castes
Anon wrote
--
. Is anyone in India's government or media concerned with the fact that so many of India's best and brightest are leaving the country?
--
The middle and lower level castes who actually rule have made brahmin baiting their main hobby
I come from south India
where anti-brahmin quotas are 70%
designed to deliberately drive out brahmins ( the high IQ segment )
Last week
Swaminathan Venkatraman won the Nobel for chemistry
There have been 3 Indian science Nobels
All 3 are South Indian brahmins, more specifically, all 3 are Tamil speaking, Smartha religious sect, Vadama ( marriage sub-caste )
Now the wretched non-brahmin Tamils are trying to claim reflected glory, despite driving him out in the first place
Or maybe the lower classes in India are happy or indifferent to the fact that the elites are emigrating? Would the it's-good-for-my-caste argument outweigh the it's-bad-for-India argument?
--
Absolutely correct
They are quiet and study engineering/science subjects. To me assiduous introverts like spelling bee champions is the most represenative label for Indians.
--
7 out of 8 spelling bee winners are brahmins
The politically active guys are Punjabis
Also, what do you think is the root cause of affirmative action-type stuff in India?
--
In 1921, the first affirmative action was started with british enocuragement in south India
In south India, the south Indian brahmins were winning 85% of seats on merit even though they were just 5% of the population
They were also active in the freedom movement
The british as part of divide and rule, started to prop up the
rich landlord and merchant castes of south India against the brahmins
The brahmins of south India being easily noticeable due to sanskrit dialect and 'Aryan' blood were easy to be targeted as Aryan outsiders in dravidian south India
The xtian missionaries also played up the dravidian card against the 'Aryan' brahmins in the hope that once the brahmin is driven away,
conversions will be easier
And so the backward caste quota was born
The backward castes are actually mid-level castes
After independence, every large and powerful caste got itself labeled as backward caste
The only saving grace is that in north India the supreme court has limited quotas to 49%
South India has defied the supreme court and kept quota at 69%
--
The 49% quota in north India is
22% for Untouchables and tribals
and 27% for backward castes
The 69% quota in south India is 22% for Untouchables and tribals
and 47% for backward castes
--
The 22% for Untouchables and tribals was started after independence as a temperory 10 year measure, but keeps getting extended
--
Brahmins do not oppose the 22% quota for untouchables and tribals
since they feel for political reasons it is necessary to develop a middle class in the untouchable and tribal peoples
As it is, these groups are very vulnerable to propoganda from maoists and other anti-predatory elements
--
In critical areas such as nukes
and missiles and defense labs
no quotas are used
Here they need 100% brahmin IQ
In the 1974 nuke blast, out of the 12 member team, 8 were south Indian brahmins
--
The root cause is differential IQ among caste groups leading to politically unpalatable situation of poor brahmins outcompeting rich landlord ( now labelled backward )
Asian applicants may face discrimination in the admission process at many elite universities, according to data from a recent study conducted by sociology professor Thomas Espenshade GS ’72. --AC
Espenshade! A grand old Pennsylvania Dutch name, attached to a high proportion of academics. My favorite is Abraham Howry Espenshade, who stayed home (at PSU) and wrote the classic tome Pennsylvania Place Names.
Something tells me "Asian" academics, whether East, South or West, will not be salivating to study traditional American toponymy. And I support open discrimination in favor of those who would.
After all, isn't the original purpose of a university to pass on a culture?
There's Jindal and Dinesh D'Souza. But who else? At 1% of the population compared to that extraordinary 2.5% group, I think based on achievement so far it's far fetched to say they will come anywhere close to Jews in political participation or even stand out compared to whites.
Steve - the basic fact is that sub-continental Indians might be caucasian but they are definitely NOT White.
Genetic studies tells us that sub-cons cluster in a genetic sub-group of thre own, which differs considerably from the typical European.
The real lamentable fact is the Immigration Act of 1965 that let in yet another aggressive, self-interested endongamous group into the USA to pursue its own genetic self-interest (to the detriment of White America - see Salterian theory).
America managed just fine in the centuries before their appearance.
Read this article! It perfectly sums up the contributions to society of Sihks here in Vancouver. I don't know about all these high IQ quasi-white hindus that people in the HBD-sphere sing the praises of. All I know is these aggressive brown people who either enter a life of crime or steal blue collar jobs from white people.
http://whiteamerica.us/index.php/articles/articles/the_sikhs_of_vancouver/
“You can see more on Aronson and Steele's tests at Stanford here:”
You were misled in your business school course. Read this article by Steve about stereotype threat (and follow the links to the journal article imbedded therein) to find out the truth about stereotype threat:
http://vdare.com/sailer/butterknife.htm
“What disappoints me is that the criteria for AA are race-based. Shouldn't they be purely economic? I'm sure poor white kids are missing out and rich black kids are sneaking in.”
You really misunderstand what affirmative action is all about. It’s about guaranteeing equality of results to different ethnic groups. It’s a racial spoils system. Read the Bakke case by the Supreme Court. They specifically note that when you do SES-based AA, you just get a bunch of poor white and Asian kids. In fact, the main beneficiaries of AA are well-to-do NAM kids. The poor ones are so lacking in skills that they don’t really come into competition for educational benefits. (Note that on the SAT and NAEP tests, affluent black and Hispanic students obtain lower average scores than poor whites and Asians.)
As for Indian origins, here are some recent gnxp articles:
http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/09/south_asians_as_a_hybrid_popul.php
http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/09/the_politics_of_genetic_histor.php
http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/09/the_politics_of_indian_science.php
http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/09/visualizing_caste_linguistic_d.php
Here’s another summary of a study on the background of Indian Muslims:
http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/10/the_mostly_south_asian_origins.php
To to me, there are Orientals and Hindus.
When I went to Hong Kong, it was pretty clear that they weren't the same thing.
"Asians" includes something like 50% of the world's population. Totally bogus to lump them all together.
"According to 2000 census, Asian men has the highest marriage percentage among all racial group across all age groups. It show that steve's thoery is nothing more than a mental jerkoff. Just check out those public records before trying to put down Asian men again. it is not that difficult to check those data, just google it."
A completely useless "factoid" unless it breaks down "asian men" into their constituent racial, ethnic, and national categories. Any "census" that lumps Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Tamils, Ceylonese, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese, Hmong, Filipinos, etc. into a single "asian" category is pretty worthless. Next time you want to see a mental jerkoff, I suggest that you look in the mirror.
Indians just as chinese faced numerous white lynch mobs on the west coast
Oh yeah, sure.
You poor, oppressed little buggers...
We white folks have been oh so cruel to you. And therefore your frequent murders of Christians in India are fully justified.
Did you know that the biggest massacres of Chinese on the West Coast happened on Mexican territory during the Mexican Revolution?
I have to admit that Hindus are perhaps the most insufferable, whining minority I can think of at the moment. It's a wonder we didn't send the US Army into Rajneeshpuram to rout out that Hindu pimp you people sent over here to conduct bioterrorism against Americans.
According to 2000 census, Asian men has the highest marriage percentage among all racial group across all age groups. It show that steve's thoery is nothing more than a mental jerkoff. Just check out those public records before trying to put down Asian men again. it is not that difficult to check those data, just google it.
Steve's point still seems valid to me. There might not necessarily be lots of bachelors left over, especially since the rise in Asians means Asians associate more amongst themselves, but that doesn't mean you won't notice certain patterns or be affected by them. It's not as if the moment you get married certain possessive tendencies or feelings just disappear. You still might be somewhat bitter noticing the large imbalance and feel that some other group is taking *your* women.
Steve asks "Who are "Asians"", ie not a unified, coherent group.
But then we get:
According to 2000 census, Asian men has the highest marriage percentage among all racial group across all age groups. It show that steve's thoery is nothing more than a mental jerkoff. Just check out those public records before trying to put down Asian men again.
Someone referring to Asians in the undifferentiated collective. You didnt even read the title of the post, loser.
Anon said: Indians did not benefit from being caucasians
Early Indian immigrants faced the same anti-asiatic laws as the east asians.....etc etc
etc etc.....religion will get a person outcasted even today in the USA
Caste is alive and well among
Hindu immigrants
except that it is somewhat loosened
you can marry a few more sub-castes
A more eloquent argument could not be written as to why "dumb crackers" should resist the imposition of these people upon them.
Why is Reagan considered a hero to the right? His policies that have had the most lasting impact were things like making Indians "Asian" and giving amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.
As usual, Sailer has no idea of the real foundations of either the Right OR the Left.
THe Right serves the Upper Class and those who dream of attaining Upper Class Status.
The upper class has money. In order to keep it, they have to control the govt and keep the masses from controlling the govt.
The fundamental principle of the USA as stated by the Father of the Constitution, the aristocrat James Madison, is "divide et impera." Divide and Rule. This fundamental principle was stated in a letter to Jefferson from Madison and explained more fully in the Federalist Papers, in particular, number 10.
In order to keep the masses from controlling their own govt, the upper class, Madison wrote, has to prevent masses from uniting and discovering their common interest. THe way to keep the masses from uniting, wrote madison, is to increase the number of factions in any political district, e.g., any state, any nation, any city, any town, neighborhood, and indeed, any workplace.
The more factions in any district or locale, the less able the masses are to unite and move against the upper class, such as the founding fathers, wrote madison. The goal of the founding fathers, wrote madison, would be to "protect the minority of the opulent."
Thus, madison and his fellow founding fathers created a meta government that increased the number of factions in political districts. So they installed a federal constitution and government. This new govt had enlarged political districts, such as the presidency and the senate. Previously, under the articles of confederation, the real power of govt was in the states, and in particular, in the assemblies, where the assemblymen were elected from small districts. Small districts have fewer factions and therefore the masses are more united. Essentially this was a parliamentarian form of govt, e.g., a more democratic form of govt, and one which allowed the masses debt relief and progressive taxation. The founding fathers did not like this and that is why they created the federal govt, which allowed them to defuse the power of the masses by increasing the number of factions using enlarged political districts, which made it harder for the people to unite.
The same principle is being used by the upper class today. Multiculturalism, mass immigration and affirmative action all help increase the number of factions in the nation, the state, the city, the neighborhood and the workplace. Race, nationality and culture and language--this are all very powerful factionalization tools, tools used by the upper class to destroy unity in the masses. The more heterogeneous, the more diverse a population in any nation, state, city, workplace, etc, the less able the majority is to unite and control their own government. And when the masses cannot control the govt, the upper class will.
Leftism is all about democracy. And democracy requires a certain degree of homogeneity (it's necessary but not sufficient, however).
Rightism has a goal of increasing heterogeneity because that allows the upper class to control. Rightism is anti-democracy.
-cryofan
The various posters above are correct. I had the second post from the top. Unlike - say - Middle Eastern Arabs, I'm not a white guy, I don't pretend to be a white guy, and I don't need this bone thrown to me that "hey you too can be a white man now!"
Why do so many Asians in the US gravitate to left politics? The right pushes them away, is one reason. Since Reagan the Republican party has branded itself as the party for low-IQ whites. Wear a turban to a Toby Keith concert.
@Another_anonymous:
I wonder if the finding you link to could be related to this:
Revealed: the diversity that defines a nation
...In turn, Indian Muslims are far more likely to be jobless than Sikhs or Hindus, suggesting that it is religion, rather than race, that is key.
I wonder if Muslims in India are predominantly descended from 'Ancestral South Indians', and Hindus and Sikhs predominantly from 'Ancestral North Indians'?
Note also this startling fact from my link:
One in three Muslim homes have dependent children but no working adults.
This stuff about Asians being against the Republicans is of very recent origin.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html
Exit poll data shows that in the 1992 and 1996 elections, Asians were more Republican than whites (Bush 92 won the Asian vote 55-31, Dole 48-46). It's interesting how the Republicans managed to alienate them exactly.
Having said that, the Republicans are indeed trending to be (or are already) the White Christian party (since white Jews & Atheists tend to support the Democrats). So I would venture that even if (overwhelmingly non-Christian) Indians had been classified as Whites, they would still support the Democrats.
Interesting sociological artifact:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Tf6bSi0r_A
Think out of the box: why not scrap Affirmative Action altogether?
You can't fix a system that was meant to work temporarily against the interests of the majority (until said majority ceased to be one) into a permanent and harmonious system correcting the defects of a diverse population.
AA was never about fairness, assuming
fairness could be achieved through discrimination: AA (and the 1965 inmigration reform bill for that matter) is a political weapon aimed at the jugular vein of Middle America. Don't deceive yourself.
Asians of whatever stripe can make it on their own, anyway.
If Indians were classified as white, they'd be filling up lots of high skilled jobs that could go to American whites and companies would say "Hey, what're you complaining about, we're hiring lots of white people!" But if they're Asian, they have to fight against the other Asians for a far more limited number of jobs and therefore racial quotas are their enemy. From the standpoint of white America and the Republican Party, this is a good thing. Whether Reagan was actually secretly thinking that when he set out to "do Indians a favor" I cannot imagine.
Yes, the "asian" term is meaningless when it includes East Asians and Indians. The best way to split the Indians off would be to call the one label insulting, ethnocentric, and all that good stuff. I'm not sure what the real payoff is though, except to weaken the unnatural alliance of the two groups.
I wonder if these low-interest SBA loans are one of the major catalysts behind the Dunkin' Donuts franchise explosion of the past decade? DD requires a much smaller downpayment than other franchises like McDonalds, making entry much more favorable to immigrants (and every DD I've been to is owned and run by Indian immigrants).
Stepping briskly past the dispute on how talky Indians are...
Great VDARE post, Steve. I have nothing to add to it, I just think you're right.
All that's missing is a political elite able and willing to follow your suggestion.
"But as whites lose their numeric dominance because Washington’s immigration policy, they will have to learn to play these grubby games, too."
They'll have to. But will they?
Anonymous above is poorly punctuated but is right to mention the Thind case. As with the "mixed race = black" belief that was once a detriment for such people and is now a benefit for them (e.g., Obama), the mental categories have stayed the same but the attitudes toward them have changed.
To remark on the your current post, I completely agree that Asians do not generally deserve to benefit from affirmative action. What disappoints me is that the criteria for AA are race-based. Shouldn't they be purely economic? I'm sure poor white kids are missing out and rich black kids are sneaking in. This just insults everyone's intelligence!
That would increase racial disparities because poor white kids outscore rich black ones.
And no, there shouldn't be AA based on economic position. People are responsible for their own kids, just as nature intended.
While Steve's observations about the intermarriage rate between whites and asians has always been correct, I don't know where he gets this idea that asian guys are outwardly bitter over it. I've known a few that have lamented the fact, but I've never seen any hatred towards white guys because of it. And you would think that asian guys are more likely to be single than other races, but I've never seen evidence that this is true. My theory on this is that asian families make up for the demographic disparity by having their sons marry brides from overseas.
"These dumb crackers thought that the Tamil guy was African American and the Sindhi woman was white"
Interesting range of sensitivity — "dumb crackers" and "African American" in the same sentence. Or was that just very subtle humor?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indo-Canadians#Politicians_and_activists
overwhelmingly punjabis
This reminds me of one of my pet bugaboo's: the bizarre British habit of referring to everyone east of the Mediterranean as 'Asian.' Thus, in any given British newspaper:
Lebanese = Asian
Persian = Asian
Yemeni = Asian
Pakistani = Asian
Punjabi = Asian
Brahmin = Asian
Han Chinese = Asian
Bengali = Asian
Stupid, clueless liberals, who think if we just get rid of labels, that liberal white person they are religiously sure is inside of everybody will finally come out.
http://intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2007/05/tamil-brahmins-best-second-rate-men-in.html
is an interesting essay on how brahmins are instinctively, behind the scenes operators who shy from publicity/aggressive self promotion. Perhaps generations of selective pressures at work?
But they are not the only groups. You have the traders and the extroverted political types as well (vinod khosla, bobby jindal etc)
Likewise, there should be no "hispanic". They should have to choose Caucasian or Native American, or mixed race.
In the DNA tree by Reich
Euros merge very quickly with ANI and then with ASI ( ancestral south Indian ) further back and a very long way further back merge with Africans
In the Reich DNA tree, whites simply come off as a sub-set of Indian, esp ANI
Nonsense. ANIs and Europeans have common ancestors; neither is a subset of the other. The Proto-Indo-European urheimat cannot have been in India for reasons explained by Dienekes in this post. In particular, the total absence of the ASI component outside of South Asia refutes the idea that PIE originated in India.
This scenario posted by anonymous above seems plausible enough:
I think that genetically Indians are an uneven mixture of three elements, only two of which are Caucasoid. The most ancient layer is Australoid, related to Australian Aborigines and Melanesians. After agriculture was invented in the Fertile Crescent 10-12 thousand years ago, lots of Middle Eastern farmers went out colonizing new lands, including in India, bringing in a second element. About 4 thousand years ago a third element arrived - Indo-European-speaking white guys from the Russian steppes.
Steve
It almost seems like you are saying that Asians and White Americans should be demographically classifed together and that they should form a political coalition. Another version of America as an idea nation.
If this is what you are trying to say, I don't know how you reconcile this with your race realism. Asians and White Americans are differnt races. Why should there be a natural coalition between the two racial groups?
A better idea would to shut all Asian immigtation down completetly.
Aa you are well aware, there is a growing population of White Americans who are mighty angry about being race -replaced in the workplace with Asian immigants.
Asians are of a diferent race and culture. I don't consider homogeneous Asians communities in NJ and California-and increasingly Long Island(Hicksville,Hewlett and Syosset)- to be authentic American commuities. The Asians are another hostile non-White racial group who White Americans have to compete with for the scarce resoutces of the nation.
I was just wondering:what exactly are your views on Asian immigration?
If any immigrants are to be allowed in it should be a small number of European immigrants. Low levels and European origins immigration policy.
I was shocked to learn that self-fulfilling prophecies exist especially in the arena of self-confidence. For e.g., there is enough data out there that suggests that blacks are expected to perform poorly against whites in any competition where criteria are centered on IQ, mental agility, analysis, etc. This data is apparently systematically ingrained into people's psyche, so much so that they apparently start believing it as axiomatic.
You have been hoodwinked. The presence of a "stereotype threat" may reduce scores, but its absence does not eliminate the traditional one SD black-white IQ gap.
The idea that African-Americans have poor self-esteem is one of the great myths of American racial politics. Thomas Bouchard talked about it in an interview:
One of the great dangers in the psychology of individual differences is self-censorship. For example, when I was a student, it was widely accepted that black self-esteem was much lower than white self-esteem, and that was a cause of differences in achievement between the two groups. Now that's been completely overturned—there is virtually no racial difference in self-esteem. But people had enormous amounts of data [showing this] that they didn't publish because it did not fit the prevailing belief system. How much wasted effort was generated by the flawed self-esteem work as an explanation of the black-white IQ difference?
IQ tests are equally valid for whites and blacks, i.e. they predict school and work performance and other life outcomes equally well for both groups. In fact, if African Americans and white Americans are matched for IQ, the former are likely to be making more money, which may be due to affirmative action.
Two years ago, the Asian student groups started to lobby to have Berkeley drop the Asian category and start tracking individual Asian ethnicities separately...It also impeded "outreach efforts" (read barely-legal or sub-rosa illegal efforts at post-209 affirmative action) targeted on Asian ethnic groups less fortunate that the Chinese, usually Southeast Asians.
And whites should endorse that. If Indonesians and Hmong were to be counted separately from Chinese then we'd have to start counting Scotch-Irish separately from Jews.
And if we're going to have AA - and apparently we are - why the hell shouldn't we count them separately?
Or maybe the lower classes in India are happy or indifferent to the fact that the elites are emigrating? Would the it's-good-for-my-caste argument outweigh the it's-bad-for-India argument?
Take the top fifth of Indians by IQ: 240 million people. Send 20% to America: 48 million people. Americans get swamped and it's more or less a rounding error when tallying the Indian population.
Early Indian immigrants faced the same anti-asiatic laws as the east asians, esp miscegenation and could not bring over wives and had to marry mexican women Indians just as chinese faced numerous white lynch mobs on the west coast, could not own land just like the chinese
NO nation can or should be held accountable for who it chooses to let in or not let in. That is a matter of choice, collective personal preference, and judgement, like who you allow into your home or who you marry. Judge us by how we treat our own citizens, including minorities, not who we choose to let in. India, South Korea, Japan, and Israel all have ethnocentric immigration laws. Most non-white countries which theoretically have no racial discrimination in their immigration laws are too poor, too unstable, too violent, or too intolerant to attract many whites.
And vis-a-vis immigration laws, our modern laws have turned that discrimination on its head. Immigrants now effectively have more say than the native born. They have siblings and other close relatives overseas who qualify for family reunification. They have cultures whih encourage and promote arranged marriages. Most whites in the US have neither.
I can't imagine an immigration policy dumber than one that gives the natives less say over immigration policy than it gives immigrants - and that's precisely what we have.
The republican party has also race baited republican Indians such as Nikki Hale of South Carolina. The republican party has also religion baited Swati Dandekar and Satveer Chaudhury.
No idea whether the claims regarding these three individuals are true (in the case of race and Nikki Hale I much doubt it), but the GOP does have a religion problem. Evangelicals are valuable, worthy and welcome - and I share many of their values - but their refusal to vote for Mitt Romney because of his religion, and their votes for the shyster Mike Huckabilly because of his, were pretty much proof of that. Politics is NOT religion, and evangelicals need to understand that.
Moreover, their beliefs are sometimes used against their own best interests. It was quite clear that when George W Bush stated that 'family values don't stop at the Rio Grande' that he was trying to rope in evangelical support for amnesty.
But back to the AA/Nobel discussion - Elinor Ostrom, an American, has just become the first woman to win a Nobel Prize in economics, meaning that a woman won a Nobel in every category this year except for Peace (even for that, too, in a sense).
Look back over the past decade and calculate the odds. Granted, 2009 is roughly 40-45 years after the feminist movement began, which is about right, timing-wise, for a jump in female Nobelists. But still if this holds up in future years we might be starting to see the end of the Nobel signifying any real merit, at least when it's given to women or minorities.
The leftist-socialist mentality has now thoroughly infiltrated and come to dominate every institution of our society.
The Constitution calls for only an "enumeration," not a nosy Census form asking hundreds of questions. Social engineers like the data from the complicated forms so they can manipulate society. Business likes it because it's tax-funded customer research. Stats junkies -- like a lot of us here, including me -- use the data in our arguments.
And next year, Obama likely is going to manipulate everything with "sampling."
At this point, the only real reform is to return to the Constitutional requirement: a counting of the heads of citizens -- and nothing else.
"One of the main reasons for anti-white feelings among East Asian men is that white men are much more likely to marry East Asian women than East Asian men are to marry white women, leaving a lot of cranky East Asian bachelors left over."
The marriage rate for Asian men is a bit higher than for whites overall:
http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2009/05/black-asian-men-most-least-likely-to_08.html
and
US census stats:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/marr-div/2004detailed_tables.html
The data is of course mixed in with South Asians, but my personal experience tells me that the frustrated American-born Asian bachelor is a myth. The rate is lower for Asian below 30 but catches up and passes the rate for other races by 40. Speaking as a US born AM, I got married at 31 to a women of Scot-Irish/English descent, I think because of socio-economic strata of East Asians, there's a tendency to get married later.
Also, I personally never a had a problem getting a date, ironically I never dated Asian women. It's an infinite dilution problem in red states that I grew up in and now live.
Wrong, John. We need to further break it down to include White ethnic groups.
Because the GOP is inevitably destined to be considered the white party, it would be best to have the Indians...
Brilliant! We call everybody White and declare victory! Non-White immigration will be fixed, and all the problems it creates will vanish as if by magic! Oh, and I can't wait to tell all my "people of color" friends they're White and won't need all those special social and legal privileges anymore! I'm sure they'll be overjoyed - just like I am!
"Why is Reagan considered a hero to the right?"
A combination of relief, delusion, and revisionism. The Reagan Administration were the architects of the war on drugs and in the process instituted Zero Tolerance, the criminalization of cash (must report all transactions or tavel over $10K), and No Knock Raids. These were among the most direct attacks on private property rights ever instituted. Let's not forget their appeals to Christian conservatives with the Meese Commission wasting valuable resources on investigating porn and the overall feeling that free speech and expression were under attack (they weren't but it sure felt like it).
His cabinet was loaded to the with radical statists, Military Industrial Complex goons, and Globalists akin to the same group he had correctly identified in the Carter administration while on the campaign trail. The Goldwater acolyte had become a conduit of Eastern Establishment Neo-Conservatism, not the Western Libertarian, nationalist values that got him elected.
The only thing "What Would Reagan Do" camp of NeoCons remember are tax breaks and decline of Russian Communism. They paint his entire legacy inaccurately with the same broad brush.
Steve two problems with your idea:
1. We Asians (East and South) are too smart to fall for it. (what your own iq tests say so)
2. Your own cohort is too intolerant to accept it. (as can be demonstrated by all the above posts)
So why doesn't the political right try a new strategy. Here is a wild idea...stop being bigots and stop tolerating them.
Sailer says some East Asian men may be anti-white because so many Asian women marry white males. There may indeed be some truth to this on an emotional level, but I'm not sure that it translates into Asian males becoming more liberal or Democratic. From my own experience with Asian friends, I discovered that Asian females are far more likely to be liberal or Democratic than Asian males. Since Asian females fall in love with white males, one might think they would be more pro-white, more pro-GOP. And, one might think resentful Asian males might side with angry blacks and browns against white America. But, from my own observation, this doesn't seem to be happening.
In some ways, Asian males' loss of their women to white males may make them even more conservative. After all, white male/Asian female pairing is a form of 'miscegenation' from the Asian male POV. Asian males may come to resent the whole mantra of diversity and multiculturalism since despite all the talk of 'inclusion', the fact is women favor men who are more masculine, and Asian males generally lose out in this game. So, just as white males are resentful of purty Southern white gals going with blacks, Asian males may feel the same away about Asian girls going with whites(or even with blacks). Asians may resent white males, but they may also come to resent the whole idea of diversity and may come to prefer the idea of each race 'sticking together'. This may explain why a good number of Asian men I've known have been hardline conservatives.
In contrast, the great majority of Asian girls I've known--most of whom married to or dating white males--seem very liberal. Liberalism and diversity-ism morally and socially vindicate sexual inclinations and preferences of Asian females. Though they went after white men because white men are sexually more desirable(animalistic passions), Asian women--like white women who go with black men--can use liberalism and diversity-ism to mask their 'jungle lust' with the conceit of progressive politics. Within the new sexual liberation is the new sexual repression. Liberal interracists cannot admit to the real truth of the current racial-sexual dynamic. For them, it's all about colorblind meeting of races, when in fact, a good number of Asian females go after whites and a good number of white women go after blacks precisely because they find the Other race sexually superior. This is a really a form of sexual racism which goes to show that humanity is naturally racist(observant and responsive to biological differences and factors), and we need to make peace with racism than simply define it as 'racial bigotry'.
Someone has commented that marriage rates among Asian males are higher than that of males of other races, but in our culture, that just proves Sailer's point. Asian males are not hot swinging material, so the safest thing for them to do is become dependable spouses and settle down with some 'nice girl'. Really successful sexual men aren't eager to get married, not early anyway. They want to sow their wild oates, entire acres of them. Asian males know they cannot be stud material, so they latch onto any 'nice girl' and decide to make house. But, I've noticed that a good number of geeky Asian males(born and raised in the US) bring spouses from their home countries. Since good number of the prettiest Asian girls marry white males, and Asian men only have left-over ugly Asian girls and fat uglier white girls to choose from, they often go back to their home country to bring back some purty little thing.
I'll bet the pissed off Chinaman is really pissed that Suzie Wong is now Suzie Smith.
Isn't "bigot" just a leftist code word for "white male"?
Steve
I really don't think you are asking the right question(s).
The only questions that really matter are:
1) Can White Americans prosper economically,culturally,demographically without Asians with a complete shutdown of all Asian immigration.
2)If the 1965 immigration reformm act had not been passesd, would White Americans had been better off?
3)Could the nations engineers,scientists and medical doctors have been produced from White America.
4)Would a large Asian population in America be bad for the enviroment?
Everyone knows the obvious answer to these questions-including the Asians.
The obvious answers to the four questions are of great significance for the future fate of White Americans. And it is for this reason that these questions should be raised.
Someone pointed out that not all South Asians succeed at the same level. Indians, for example, succeed far more than Pakistanis or Bangladeshis. We should keep this in mind. Even when we speak of India, certain groups(de facto castes even today)do a lot better than other groups. In some ways the differences among the various groups within India are as remarkable as the differences between Indians and Chinese.
This is the huge difference between India and China, which is why China has a much brighter future than India. China is a huge country with a lot of poor people, but most Chinese of Han Stock(95% of population)are one people. Though classes did exist in China, the Confucian ideal said even a lowly peasant or venal merchant can become a scholar-bureaucrat, the highest form of human being in the Chinese moral order. And since Chinese 'all looked alike', there wasn't any kind of caste system based on race that might prove to be divisive as in India. In China, the rulers and ruled were all one people. In India, as in Latin America(and increasingly in the US, with Jews becoming our overlord elite, which may explain why the liberal Jewish media favor India over China), the rulers were of a different 'race' than those in the middle, and those in the middle were of a different 'race' than those at the bottom. And below the bottom were the untouchables. That said, over 1000s of yrs, Hindu blood mixed across all castes. Just as purist Anglo males couldn't keep their paws off Negro women and some white women couldn't running off with black men for jungle fever roll in the hay, I guess sexual passions couldn't prevent the mixing of races. So, though one can argue that upper caste people tend to be lighter skinned in India, I've seen a lot of elite Indians who are dark skinned too. Fareed Zakaria looks like a classic Babu as far as I'm concerned.
Anyway, the oft-discussed topic is the rise of China and India, but I see the rise of China as being more broad and genuine whereas the rise of India--like that of Brazil--is proving to be much more limited and selective. Virutally all Chinese are one people and share in the same values, aspirations, and hopes. Consider that movie by Chen Kaige called TOGETHER where some poor father wants his kid to become a violinist. Rich Chinese may be snobs and look down on poor Chinese, but no rich Chinese feels a poor Chinese should always stay poor or remain in his lowly station, and no poor Chinese feels his karma is to be poor and ignorant. But, this kind of mentality did develop among lower-caste Indians and lower-class Mexicans and other indigenous peoples of Latin America.
So, when we see the success of India, it's is far more unequal than one in China--and not only because China partly has a national-socialist model of social unity. Every Chinese is potentially a Bruce Lee of business whereas not every Indian shares the values of the Brahmin caste(intellectual) or merchant caste(enterprise). There are many Asian-Indians who still think and behave like ignoramouses whose karma is to just 'stay in his or her place in the cosmic order of things.'
Also, China, for 1000s of yrs considered itself the Middle Kingdom. China put itself at the center of the universe and developed a confident, even arrogant imperial mentality. China wants to be the center of the world again.
Indian cosmology, on the other hand, considered its domain as a mere dot in the vast universe. Indians didn't see their world as the center of the universe but merely one floating speck of dust among others, which is to say, spiritually at least, Indians have been more passive than the Chinese.
But socially, Steve is right. Whatever their spirituality, many Hindus are pretty creative, fun, and humorous people. Very clever too, but I get a feeling that we in America are only seeing the creme de la crop as mostly higher caste college engineers come to the US to work. The best documentary on India is still the 6hr movie PHANTOM INDIA by Louis Malle from 1969. Truly a must-see(despite its socialist prejudices).
So why doesn't the political right try a new strategy. Here is a wild idea...stop being bigots and stop tolerating them.
The problem being all the bigots on the other side. They (and you) are allowed to pursue policies benefitting themselves and harming, yes, whites. We're supposed to pretend it isn't happening. FTS.
Here's a fact: I was never a bigot or racist and even now don't consider myself to be one. It's having my eyes opened to the real game that's being played which caused me to adopt opinions that would now be deemed "racist" by all rightly brainwashed people - immigration policies, affirmative action, set-asides for groups even richer than my own, the deliberate demographic-induced shift of the political and cultural center, etc.
It's a cancer on the nation, as it would be on any nation.
You want us to abandon the so-called bigotry? Meet us halfway by abandoning your own.
Between Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, there are well over a billion of us. Can't we have our own race box?
"2. Your own cohort is too intolerant to accept it. (as can be demonstrated by all the above posts)"
Yeah, right, China and India - those paragons of tolerance. The caste system - can a better example of man's tolerance of man be found anywhere?
And whenever I hear Chinese, Japanese and Koreans talk about each other as peoples, I instantly see visions of rainbows and peace doves. It's remarkable! And don't get me started on Malays' feelings about the Chinese. They're so inspiring!
stop being bigots and stop tolerating them.
A similar strategy would eliminate the democratic party in its entirety.
I don't tolerate people who think that non-whites are lesser Americans and a danger to the country.
says the chap who self identifies as a chinaman, albeit tongue and cheek.
If i moved to china would I be Chinese?
and, btw, chinese aptly demonstrated where their loyalties lie during the olympic torch relay. SWPL were shocked that Chinese didn't come out to sing kum by ya with them and free tibet. Shocking.
Mark,
Look as far as affirmative action is concerned, I think it should be more class based and include poor and working class folks of all races. When it comes to immigration I actually agree with ya'll but for environmental reasons and not racial or cultural ones.
That being said, I don't know how social and economic equality for non-white groups hurts whites unless you believe that whites deserve to be placed a level above non-whites in the US.
Oh and as for the demographic trends....I don't care. I really don't, and neither do most people around my age, whatever their background. You see I am Gen Y and I came of age in the "multiracial and multicultural America" that people on this board seem to despise so much. I have friends from all backgrounds and I work with people of all backgrounds. Which ethnic group will be the majority in 2050 does not concern any of us. We talk, drink, fight, hang out, date, marry, and divorce each other without regard to where our ancestors were from because we're all Americans and we just don't care.
Okay, I seem to have to write this every thread I am involved in so here goes:
Just because I am of Chinese origin does not mean I should be held responsible for the ethnic, social, or political policies of other East Asian nations that I have no national or political affilation with.
And yes, if you moved to China and were granted citizenship and adopted the culture, you would be Chinese. I do not know how Chinese citizenship works and I really do not care. Again if their policy is racist...don't lay it at my door.
Oh and incidentally I was at a Free Tibet rally a few months ago and I signed a petition demanding that Obama meet with the Dalai Lama for what it's worth.
but I don't tolerate people who think that non-whites are lesser Americans and a danger to the country.
Do you acknowledge man's right to self-determination and free association?
Harvard Hates Whites—Does America, Too?
Edmund Connelly
“The United States is well on the road to being dominated by an Asian technocratic elite and a Jewish business, professional, and media elite.”
— Kevin MacDonald
[...] Unz noted that whites Gentiles were getting heavily squeezed by mandatory enrollment goals for blacks and Hispanics on one end and high performing Jews and Asians on the other. Of course we are familiar with the way affirmative action has worked for four decades to advance blacks and Hispanics to positions not warranted by their efforts or achievements. But Unz opened up the Pandora’s Box of talking about Jewish overrepresentation.
Unz, himself Jewish, noted that at his alma mater, “Asians comprise between 2% and 3% of the U.S. population, but nearly 20% of Harvard undergraduates. Then too, between a quarter and a third of Harvard students identify themselves as Jewish, while Jews also represent just 2% to 3% of the overall population.” Not only was he so blunt about this, he took the step — rare in the mainstream media — of drawing the logical conclusion: “Thus, it appears that Jews and Asians constitute approximately half of Harvard’s student body, leaving the other half for the remaining 95% of America.”
To no one’s surprise, that bulldog of the right, Patrick Buchanan, pounced on this juicy bone and gave it a good shaking. A week after Unz’s article appeared, Buchanan had penned a response titled “The Dispossession of Christian Americans” and concluded, “Talk about underrepresentation! Now we know who really gets the shaft at Harvard — white Christians.” [...]
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Connelly-Harvard.html
JLC,
>>>
Asians are of a diferent race and culture. I don't consider homogeneous Asians communities in NJ and California-and increasingly Long Island(Hicksville,Hewlett and Syosset)- to be authentic American commuities. The Asians are another hostile non-White racial group who White Americans have to compete with for the scarce resoutces of the nation.
If any immigrants are to be allowed in it should be a small number of European immigrants. Low levels and European origins immigration policy.
>>>
Don't bullshit yourself thinking that White = On My Side. Europeans are also overhwelmingly hostile to White Americans and our culture-- even moreso than Asians. And they are at least as likely to side with NAMs in the AA/racial quota battles.
"A completely useless "factoid" unless it breaks down "asian men" into their constituent racial, ethnic, and national categories. Any "census" that lumps Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Tamils, Ceylonese, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese, Hmong, Filipinos, etc. into a single "asian" category is pretty worthless. Next time you want to see a mental jerkoff, I suggest that you look in the mirror."
The report did break down asian into different groups,the report is title "The American people: Census 2000 By Reynolds Farley, John Haaga." Do some reading before opening your mouth. Smart mouth didn't equal smart brain.
Reactionary - Im with you on the stupid clueless white liberals.
However Im not sure we Brits can be entirely blamed for the catch-all term Asian. To me thats an Americanism.
Generally, over here, Asian would be taken to mean Indian/Pakistani/Sri Lankan. Oriental would be the term to cover Chinese/Japanese/Korean.
Even now I suspect many British readers would see the word Asian used and not think of Chinese etc at all.
Between Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, there are well over a billion of us. Can't we have our own race box?
Have your own anything you want at home.
Regarding Sikhs
There are 2 types of upper caste sikhs
Jat Sikhs who are good farmers and soldiers and considered rather dumb
I doubt their IQ exceeds 95
even with nutrition
This is the type most often found in canada and I expect them to be like blue collar whites
The other type of sikh is Khatri
these are Hi IQ types and work as techies or businessmen
Vinod Khosla, Kanwal Rekhi are Khatris
Their kids often win academic awards in the US
Outlookindia.com
Brownian Notions
"Our women don't drive BMWs," the Gujarati mum told me some time back. Meaning they're supposed not to go for men who may be "Black, Muslim or White". And of the few who do slip? She thought that would be a family calamity of varying shades. Going out with a black man would bring shame, but with a white chap also some embarrassment. We like fairness in our species, not the whiteness of the other; there's such a world of difference between the two, a whole other language of being. Whiteness works best for an Indian when it informs a lighter shade of your own kind.
But he'd want for a daughter-in-law a fair Patel, not a white Brit. White in marriage is not quite a derailment, but it is off the approved track, which for a woman is to remain virgin until at 22 she marries her own sort of Indian with property, prospects and a BMW of the motoring kind.
Anyone who knows Indian IQ, knows that the less caucasoid south Indians are much higher IQ than the dumb caucasoid north Indians, at every caste level
South Indians dominate in tech companies, while caucasoid Pakistanis drive cabs
In Farwell to Alms, the author speculates that the hardships of advanced agriculture economy selected for bourgeoise personality traits in the British. Some have also speculated that the rigorousness of rice paddy farming selected for even higher levels of bourgeoisness in the Koreans, Japanese, and southeastern Chinese. Which may be why the Asians, in SOME respects, seem to do a lot better than their mean IQ (103) would predict.
India, like East Asia, also has a long tradition of rice paddy farming. It wouldn't surprise me if Indian immigrants overperformed, relative to IQ, due to agriculture-selected bourgeoisness.
I would also add that immigrating to a foreign society and succeeding is much different from building a successful society at home. East Asians, with the notable exception of the Japanese, have much better outcomes in the United States than back home. It suggests perhaps a lower mean level of intellectual/economic/creative ability among them, but a higher level of industriousness. The same could be even more true of Indians.
If you look at Indians in the UK, they arrived as factory laborers in the 1950s and now outperform whites. Indians in Singapore are largely the descendants of low caste laborers from Tamil Nadu, but perform only a little bit below the Chinese.
My general impression is that the mean IQ of most Indian castes is probably somewhere in the low 90s, but that Indians in general are highly industrious and capable of succeeding, given opportunities. Though it may be possible that some subcastes of Brahmins, who are selected for intellectual ability, are above the white mean.
Punjabi Sikhs in Vancouver are an interesting case. Most of them are low/middle caste Jats from the villages of Punjab. Despite not being all that bright (believe me, I've dealt with them a lot) and likely not that high in IQ, they seem to do pretty well economically. This is mainly due to their willigness to work long hours, thrift, strong family ties, entrapranuership, and desire to do well-paying, though very demanding, blue collar work.
Indians, like Chinese, can do just fine even when their IQs are low. However, when their IQs are moderately high, as is the case with Indian-Americans and South Indian Brahmins, they do extremely well. This is why brown Brahmin kids in America are killing at the Spelling Bees.
anon wrote
A more eloquent argument could not be written as to why "dumb crackers" should resist the imposition of these people upon them.
--
The late Shiva Subrahmanya was running star wars defense for the USA for several years
I guess if you want rocket scientists who are from a country not a security threat to the USA, you have to import brahmins
replying to eh
Indian muslims have the same genes as Indian hindus
minus 8 IQ for cousin marriages
and minus 10 IQ for the brain retardation due to islam
Hindu baiting of Swati Dandekar and Satveer Chaudhury
11/7/02 Associated Press: "Candidate Who Questioned Opponent's Ethnicity Sent Packing,"
Swati Dandekar, a Democrat, defeated Karen Balderston for the House District 36 seat by a margin of 57-43 percent, with 100 precincts reporting.
In a Sept. 29 e-mail to a conservative political action committee, Balderston questioned whether Dandekar, an immigrant from India, was ``adequately prepared to represent Midwest values and core beliefs.''
Dandekar, who has lived in Iowa for 30 years, celebrated her victory at a Marion art gallery. She said she didn't know if the e-mail controversy had influenced voters.
``I think people really looked at the issues, they liked my platform. I ran, along with my campaign committee, a good and positive campaign, based on making Iowa a better place to live,'' Dandekar said.
GOP leaders had called Balderston's remarks inappropriate, withdrew financial support for her campaign and canceled mailings on her behalf a week before Election Day.
--
Concession Email Asks Hindu Democrat To Accept Jesus As Savior
Sen. Satveer Chaudhary, a practicing Hindu, was re-elected in District 50 last week. Rather than call, his Christian opponent Rae Hart Anderson offered him an e-mail concession that he said read more like a sermon. The following is the text of that e-mail message.
---
The race of your life is more important than this one--and it is my sincere wish that you'll get to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. He died for the sins of the world, yours and mine--and especially for those who accept His forgiveness. His kingdom will come and His will be done--on earth as it is in heaven. There's more....I love belonging to the family of God. Jesus is the way, the truth and offers His life to you and each human being. Pay attention...this is very important, Satveer. Have you noticed Jesus for yourself...at some moment in time, yet??? ...
Jesus Christ lives in His earth family by His Spirit. He said He'd be back, and He said it first. You could invite Him to make the race of your life 'eternal'. God waits to be gracious to each person that knows they need to be forgiven. Do you? I think you do.
--
Hindu baiting of Nikki Haley ( a fellow republican ) in the South Carolina Republican primary
--
A WOMAN STOOD outside a polling place last Tuesday holding a Nikki Haley sign. A man who was driving away rolled down his window to shout at her, "I hope your children worship cows!" That confused the lady with the sign. The man was a good way down the road before she decided it was meant as a slur on Hinduism. Nikki Haley, by the way, is not a Hindu.
At another point during the House District 87 runoff against incumbent Rep. Larry Koon, Haley campaign manager B.J. Boling received the following e-mail: "Please remember that she is a Buddhist. One of my friends . . . verified this for me. I can only vote for a Christian, Larry Koon is a deacon and a wonderful Christrian man an does a lot for bring money into Lexington County. Please send this to your friends."
Nikki Haley isn't a Buddhist, either.
A half-page ad in the June 17 edition of the Lexington County Chronicle proclaimed that "there is only one REAL Republican in the run-off," citing as evidence the fact that Mr. Koon had voted in every Republican primary in recent years, whereas "Nimrata N. Randhawa" once voted in a Democratic primary. Below that was an asterisk with the insinuating footnote, "As the opponent's name appears on the voter registration files. A different name appears on the ballot." (Implication: She ain't from around here, and she's trying to hide it.)
Nikki Haley uses a different name now because she's married, and her husband's name is Haley.
Nikki Haley has to abandon her religion to rise in the republican party, not required in Democratic party
--
And her religion? Well, as her campaign brochure says, "Nikki was proudly raised with her Indian traditions and her husband, Michael, was brought up in the Methodist faith." She was raised as a Sikh, but was encouraged to visit other churches. She was taught that "There can't be enough God in your life." She was married in the Methodist Church. Her children are baptized Methodists. She and the kids attend both a Methodist church and the local Sikh temple.
"I believe in one God," she explains. "I believe in Jesus. I'm pro-life.
Baloo:
If there's any time to use insulting terms like "dumb crackers", it would be appropriate when talking about that sort of thuggish behavior.
"Anyone who knows Indian IQ, knows that the less caucasoid south Indians are much higher IQ than the dumb caucasoid north Indians, at every caste level."
And yet I've heard that the northern state of Gujarat is one of the wealthiest ones. I suspect that it's all actually very complicated with some very Caucasoid groups being smart and others not, some relatively less Caucasoid groups being smart and others not. The Pushtuns are pretty backward, and they look like they're 100% Caucasoid. Yes, I know, that's Afghanistan, but it's in that general area.
"and, btw, chinese aptly demonstrated where their loyalties lie during the olympic torch relay. SWPL were shocked that Chinese didn't come out to sing kum by ya with them and free tibet. Shocking."
Well, unless "Pissed off Chinaman" is actually Win Jiabao, I don't think his post was meant to represent the nation of China, only his own feelings.
Andrea the Terrible,
There's only one large group of bitter guys on this blog and they are white. I'm not saying they represent this blog but they are significant here. They are probably the majority at Half Sigma. They participate in HBD blogs with a gigantic chip on their shoulder because they are miserable losers.
"If you look at Indians in the UK, they arrived as factory laborers in the 1950s and now outperform whites."
I thought Pakistanis were recruited for factory work?
And huge numbers of Indians were pulled in for National Health Service work?
I guess if you want rocket scientists who are from a country not a security threat to the USA, you have to import brahmins.
Oh yes, how lucky we are to have clever non-whites to do that kind of work. After all its not like white people could ever come up with space technology on their own.
Guys like JLC and the various Anonymous poster(s),
If you're so angry at Asians for merely existing in the United States, then of course you're going to turn us into enemies who won't vote with you. I really don't see how I am hostile to whites or working against their interests. I generally like white people.
Incidentally when I said cohort (I meant people on this board...not all white males).
"Which ethnic group will be the majority in 2050 does not concern any of us. We talk, drink, fight, hang out, date, marry, and divorce each other without regard to where our ancestors were from because we're all Americans and we just don't care."
Ah, ain't that sweet.
This young 'un's in for a big surprise when all his Citizen of the World friends' extended family members, being regression-to-the-mean-caused dimwits who didn't get the memo how such things are no longer done by the fashionable set, decide to exercise their newfound ethnocentric muscle by beating him up, and his C.o.t.W. friends, being forced to choose, choose to side with their genetic interests and let 'em.
I think the solution that would make everyone happy would be this: Stop all immigration of Asians, legal or otherwise, but the whites have to fully accept the Asians that are already here as equals. That way we don't have to worry about non-English speakers forming their own isolated communities and hindering assimilation. 2nd generation and later Asians assimilate better than just about anyone. Add to that the fact that due to intermarriage you will have a sizeable number of White/Asian mixed people, and the bond between the two races will only grow stronger. The only people who would be opposed to this would be the small-brained types who don't like other races because they "look funny" (rather than legitimate concerns about the tendency of some races towards crime and poverty).
By the way I'm 1/2 Asian, and I have a white girlfriend. My brothers are both married to whites and have 1/4 Asian children. I find the idea that some white people might not accept those children as equals to be, quite frankly, retarded.
I can have a civil debate on immigration or affirmative action with many on the right, but I don't tolerate people who think that non-whites are lesser Americans and a danger to the country.
Chang Earl Raab, I think you've said all that needs to be said.
Anonymous said...
In comparison, Latin American elites are staying put, with Cuba being the exception that proves the rule.
Numerically, there are fewer of them, and they are so dominant in their own countries (which do not have, or have only cosmetic, affirmative action programs) that they may feel less need to emigrate. Furthermore, educated Indians speak fluent English and are educated on the British model. This gives them a leg up in North America. When the Argentine economy collapsed early in the decade, I thought there would be a flood of upper-middle-class Argentines to the US, but no. Maybe that's in part because most of them don't speak English well enough to transfer their careers here.
Also, Indians and Chinese have tended to specialize in technical fields where getting an H1B visa is fairly easy. Science and technology are neither strong nor particularly prestigious fields of study in Latin America.
Finally, there's a critical mass of affluent Asians in North America that builds on itself and makes immigration to the US more comfortable for new arrivals. That is not true for Latin Americans.
Why do so many Asians in the US gravitate to left politics? The right pushes them away, is one reason. Since Reagan the Republican party has branded itself as the party for low-IQ whites.
This is definitely a factor, especially in fields like medicine and the biological sciences, where whites tend to be liberal, too. Why would Asian immigrants be more conservative than their white peers?
Regardless of actual policies, the face the Republican Party chooses to present of late has been unwelcoming to people who are not religious Christians and who do not identify with the white working-class. This includes Asians, but it includes even more educated, affluent white people - the very group Asians are most likely to see as models.
My observation is that second-generation Asian-Americans (whether Indian or Northeast Asian) typically out-SWPL white SWPLs. If you moved to a foreign country where you had no historical ties to one faction or another, would you gravitate toward the party that seemed to represent well-educated, worldly people or the one that seemed to represent the local version of yahoos?
"Which ethnic group will be the majority in 2050 does not concern any of us. "
It's easy to be unconcerned when you have demographic momentum on your side. It's easy to be unconcerned when living off the fat of the greatest civilization to ever exist on earth.
I have heard this cavalier attitude from 'young' urbanite people before. Except that there has never been a human organization in the history of the world that did not care about the ethnic make-up of its population in the long term. It would be nice if it wasn't the case - but alas it is. Just wait until the economy gets really bad chinaman - then we'll see if our generation is the first 'special' group of people that can transcend what our bigoted ancestors could not.
In the meantime tell the blacks, hispancis, asians, jews, etc. to layoff their alphabet-soup organizations which are ever so unconcerened about deriving benefits for the people of their ethnic background. Oh wait - they are just struggling against the evil oppression of the whites. Nice setup if you can get it.
P.S. LOL at Asians lecturing whites about bigotry.
Source Pew report 2008
http://religions.pewforum.org/reports#
Comparing family values of USA Hindus vs Evangelical xtians ( republican base )
Married rate - Living in Sin - Divorced
Hindu = 79% - 0% - 5%
Evangalical xtian = 59% - 5% - 13%
--
Post Graduate Education
Hindu = 48%
Jewish = 35%
Unitarian = 29%
Evangelical xtian = 7%
Mainline Protestant = 14%
Muslim = 10%
( so dont lump all south asians together )
---
Family income over $100k
Jewish = 46%
Hindu = 43%
Unitarian = 26%
Mainline Protestant = 21%
Evangelical Protestant = 14%
Muslim = 16%
( again dont lump south asians )
"Indians, like Chinese, can do just fine even when their IQs are low. However, when their IQs are moderately high, as is the case with Indian-Americans and South Indian Brahmins, they do extremely well."
Ok fine, we keep hearing about how smart, hard working, etc. Indians are. I have one thing to add though: why don't these mega-smart Indians fix India once and for all then?! Seriously, why does India have such staggering and what can only be perceived as depressing - levels of poverty, if it's full of such hard-working and smart people? Alas, it's a mystery we will never solve. The question itself is meaningless to ask because in the end this is all about how to manipulate whitey - isn't it??
I think that Northern and Western Europeans (at least the middle- and upper-classes as opposed to chavs) are pretty hospitable to the SWPL side of white American culture. They are likely to genuinely detest the rural (NASCAR, NRA, country music) or religious aspects of white American culture though.*
Southern or Eastern Europeans are likely to think the SWPL subculture, and the rural and religious subcultures, are all a big joke. On the other hand, the religious aspect appeals to some Eastern Europeans who have rejected both Orthodoxy and secularism in favor of evangelical Protestantism (there are a lot of evangelical Russian and Ukrainian immigrants where I live.)
*I know of course that white American culture goes far beyond the stereotypes I am referring to (SWPL/rural/religious) but these are what Europeans are likely to perceive.
As for the Census, I know the Census has a separate category for Pacific Islanders now. I think if the Indian population gets big enough, they might have one category for "East and Southeast Asians" and another for "South Asians."
As for White, that category is pretty broad too- it includes Middle Easterners and North Africans,* as well as Europeans of every flavor (from Scots-Irish to Jews, Swedes to Sicilians). That could use some fine tuning if we are going to have a "race/
ethnicity" question on the census.
*Also a pretty broad category. For example, Armenians and Lebanese Christians have more in common culturally and phenotypically with Southern Europeans than with Yemenis or most Moroccans.
Anonymous said...
While Steve's observations about the intermarriage rate between whites and asians has always been correct, I don't know where he gets this idea that asian guys are outwardly bitter over it. I've known a few that have lamented the fact, but I've never seen any hatred towards white guys because of it. And you would think that asian guys are more likely to be single than other races, but I've never seen evidence that this is true. My theory on this is that asian families make up for the demographic disparity by having their sons marry brides from overseas.
I see many East and South Asian men with white women.It seems to me that there are fewer white man -Asian women couples than the opposite.
They shouldn't be allowed to import anyone.Not only are they immigrating and taking our jobs here, they are also taking our jobs via outsourcing.
Hey, Pissed Off Chinaman, you say you don't care if US becomes demographically majority non-white. If that's the case, why don't you move to South Africa, Peru, Brazil, or some other country which may be the demographic future of America? If being overwhelmed by poor Mexicans doesn't bother you, why don't you move to Mexico, which will be future of at least 50% of America.
The truth is US has been a largely stable, progressive, and functional nation because the dominant majority has been made up of skilled and relatively enlightened whites. Blacks and browns are largely into tribalism and think ONLY ABOUT THEMSELVES. If you Asians have it good in this country, it's because US is still dominated by enlightened whites with some sense of fair play and moral conscience. But, once whites are no longer the majority and when power passes to blacks and browns, you "Chinamen" are not gonna get much favor from them because they only think in terms of 'we are poor victims and rest of society owes us.'
You may think post-racial or multicultural reality is gonna be hunky dory right now because US is still stabilized by majority white population, but when that's no longer the case, your Asian ass will be sidelined by tribal and corrupt blacks and browns. Indeed, why don't you move to Detroit if it doesn't matter if it's black or white? Why don't you settle in a barrio in LA and see how well they regard your ass. How well are Asians faring in South Africa these days? How well have Mexicans and other Latinos treated Asians? What kind of social reality do Asians have to put up in nations that are racially all mixed up and non-majority white?
The reason why we white people insist on some degree of 'white nationalism' is because non-whites like blacks, browns, and even Jews have rejected color-blindness. Instead, they've gone for tribalism and ethnocentrism in the guise of multicultuarlism. There is no need for whites to pretend that everything is colorblind when, in fact, non-whites think and do everything in terms of color. There was a time when blacks and Jews called for colorblindness and content of character schitck. We fell for it and took it in good faith... only to realize it was all just a Trojan Horse to trick us.
That being said, I don't know how social and economic equality for non-white groups hurts whites unless you believe that whites deserve to be placed a level above non-whites in the US.
You're speaking of social and economic equality achieved artificially and often at great cost, rather than achieved through merit. We already do a lot of wealth transfer in this country, from poor states to rich states, for example, and government aid for poor school districts, as well as scholarships and student loans. These programs help those with ability and ambition to rise above their station.
If i moved to china would I be Chinese?
That's a good point - and why the United States is a better place than China. My concern isn't that whites don't consider Chinese or others to be American, but that too many minorities don't consider themselves to be American, or else "American with grievances." Assimilation isn't happening, or only slowly. A grievance culture - often by those who come here voluntarily, and even illegally - is too well developed. It's harming us environmentally, it's harming us economically (the mortgage meltdown and our forthcoming socialized medical system).
I'm not saying it's all, or even a majority, but it's enough to do significant harm.
Immigration needs to be slowed for the sake of the country and its stability, no matter what race you are.
This is mainly due to their willigness to work long hours, thrift, strong family ties, entrapranuership, and desire to do well-paying, though very demanding, blue collar work.
Love to see their response when the Mexicans start to arrive.
That Nikki Haley story speaks volumes as well. It is amazing that immigrants feel free to ridicule the notion that Americans might wish to govern themselves.
"The Constitution calls for only an "enumeration," not a nosy Census form asking hundreds of questions"
This is true, but every federal census since the first one in 1790 has listed the race of those counted, whether free or slave.
In 1800, the American Philosophical Society petitioned congress to use the census to gather more detailed information on such fields as industry and occupation, noting that "the decennial census offered an occasion of great value for ascertaining sundry facts highly important to society and not otherwise to be obtained." The request was not followed, though it was supported by such people as Thomas Jefferson (then the society's president) and James Madison.
It should also be noted that the U.S. Census Bureau does not have any strict definitions regarding in which race people of different national origins should be included. During my years as an interviewer for the Census Bureau, we were told repeatedly that the question asking a person's race asked what people considered themselves to be, not any kind of legal or scientific definition. The one exception to this, of course, is for Hispanics. Because the question on Hispanic origin is separate from the question on race, all Hispanics are included in the same category, regardless of what race they mark themselves as.
I experienced numerous examples of this. Many people from countries such as Pakistan or Afghanistan, for example, listed themselves as White. Others listed themselves as Asian, and others listened as the categories were read, decided that none of them fit, and listed themselves as "some other race." (Although "Asian Indian" was an example listed under the Asian category, people from Pakistan often did not think that this category applied to them). Whatever box they decided to check determined how they were counted and thus figured into the statistics that the Census Bureau releases on the racial makeup of the country's population.
Of course, how people list themselves on a census form does not have anything to do with how they might list themselves when applying for minority business development loans from the SBA.
"On the other hand, the religious aspect appeals to some Eastern Europeans who have rejected both Orthodoxy and secularism in favor of evangelical Protestantism (there are a lot of evangelical Russian and Ukrainian immigrants where I live.)"
How common is this in Eastern Europe? I wonder if the attraction of evangelical Protestantism to some people isn't the idea that it's a ticket to America. The book _Father Land_ tells the story of two German families that converted to Mormonism. One of them pretty plainly did it to get to America.
"If you're so angry at Asians for merely existing in the United States, then of course you're going to turn us into enemies who won't vote with you. I really don't see how I am hostile to whites or working against their interests. I generally like white people."
Chill out man, some of us like you too.
It is really not meant to be personal, it is just that us Honkeys, particularly us North West Euros, have ethnic and cultural concerns that we must address and protect, as ALL other groups did/does throughout human history.
Here is a good contemporary example of what I am talking about -
[...]Obama doesn’t have 43% of his appointees white Protestants, in fact I don’t think even 4% are white Protestants. So you have to ask yourself what’s going on here. How can the founding stock of the country have so completely lost control? They could reasonably regard the Obama administration as kind of an occupation government: a coalition of united minorities that succeeded in uniting the minorities and dividing the majority.[...]
http://www.vdare.com/pb/090402_judges.htm
With all due respect P.O. Chinaman, NWE Whites simply cannot be overly solicitous of getting the approval (and permission) of other races and ethnys in order to look out for their legitimate ethnic interests.
In fact my friend, it is the paradoxical opposite, Whites acting like supplicating fools who pretend they have no interests as a people, that will earn (rightfully) the everlasting scorn, contempt and disrespect of nonwhites.
Blogger Richard Hoste sums up this (Seeming) irony rather beautifully -
[...]To be a Republican in 2008 doesn’t mean the same thing that it did in 1992. Back then, voting with the conservative party said something about your economic views. Today, it’s taking a cultural stand. The most prestigious institutions in society have heaped so much mock and scorn on traditionalist whites that people of other races have gotten the hint. White America has fought for the freedom of Korea and Vietnam, to feed Somalians, bombed Serbia and Sudan, liberated Kuwait, helped bring down the Soviet Union and tried to build democracy in Haiti, Afghanistan and Iraq, but didn’t lift a finger to stop themselves from being on their way to becoming a hated minority in their own country. Who would want to be associated with these losers?[...]
http://hbdbooks.com/2009/08/the-oriental-divirsicrat/
Always good chatting with you there, P.O. Chinaman.
"The Pushtuns are pretty backward, and they look like they're 100% Caucasoid."
Pashtuns as a whole are mixed Caucasoid/Mongoloid.
What all the Asians here need to understand is NW European White people are the only indispensable group in America. Without you, or any other minority group, America is still America and still a great country. Without us, America is Brazil.
And why should we be any more accepting of you than your people are of immigrants in your countries? Immigration is not taking place on neutral ground. It's only white societies that are being transformed.
[Nikki Haley, South Carolina gubernatorial candidate] was married in the Methodist Church. Her children are baptized Methodists. She and the kids attend both a Methodist church and the local Sikh temple.
The original accusation was that Republicans were targetting Haley because of her race. Then the references are to her religion; and in fact her religion isn't quite clear. Is she Sikh, or is she Methodist? I've forgotten most of what I learned of Sikhism in my college religion class, but somehow I doubt belief in both is compatible.
So why is she still attending a Sikh temple? For the cultural connection? Is she really Sikh? Is she really Methodist? IS she really neither? Politicians are not above using religion to puch their political careers along, but this looks like pretty blatant two-faced behavior of the Bill Clinton, "Paris is worth a mass" type, though I'm not certain what Columbia is worth.
Or maybe it's the cultural connection alone she seeks with the Sikhs. In which case I have to ask, "why?" Because the people there happen to look like her? Isn't that...racist?
Racism and religion - once again, everyone is allowed to do it but (most) whites (Greeks the exception). Catholics have Spanish parishes. Chinese and Koreans have their own churches. Mormons have separate Polynesian congregations and separate Spanish-speaking congregations, but not separate WASP congregations.
So forgive us, Asian visitors, if sometimes the regulars here are a little blunt - some too blunt even for me. I don't think it's genuine hatred. I think even the most offensive of the commnters here would be about the most (genuinely) kind people you'd meet if you ever met them in the real world. I think it's exasperation at the double-standard whites are surrounded by and practically drowning in.
Oh, and by the way - those dumb crackers some here detest so much? They've done their fair share of toleratin' in the political realm. The first Jewish senator and congressman were from Florida, back in the 1850s. The first Jewish governor was not from New York or Massachusetts, but Idaho; the second was from Utah. The first Indian governor is from Louisiana - and what's a cracker state if not Louisiana?
It is amazing that immigrants feel free to ridicule the notion that Americans might wish to govern themselves.
Haley IS one of us. If elected we WILL be governing ourselves.
Probably.
I think the real point is that it's reasonable to expect immigrants or their children to demonstrate that they in fact consider themselves to be a part of us before allowing them to govern us. How they demonstrate this may vary.
To mention one more thing about Nikki Haley - a glance at her Wikipedia entry reveals the Indian obsession with their own, even when they're not in India. Most of the sources cited are Indian websites and papers: NRI Achievers ("The Platform for Global Indians"), Rediff ("India Abroad"), Asian Women's Magazine, Indian American Center for Political Awareness, and the Tribune of Chandigarh, India.
Make of that what you will.
LOL at Asians lecturing whites about bigotry.
Particularly if they are of Indian extraction.
Caste system - end of debate.
Don't bullshit yourself thinking that White = On My Side. Europeans are also overhwelmingly hostile to White Americans and our culture-- even moreso than Asians.
You are out of your mind. Europeans have ZERO hostility to white Americans.
If you're so angry at Asians for merely existing in the United States, then of course you're going to turn us into enemies who won't vote with you.
You're party-crashers. You weren't invited, you had better be on your best behavior, and you have no right to complain if you get kicked out.
The only people who would be opposed to this would be the small-brained types who don't like other races because they "look funny" (rather than legitimate concerns about the tendency of some races towards crime and poverty).
I don't like the big-brained types of other races because they "think funny", like you. They tend to act as if they're the arbiter of legitimacy and Whites exist only to take their orders.
Conclusion:
21st century USA = bigger Yugoslavia.
Liberalism is universalist, at least in theory. Conservatism is a very different beast. More like a collection of beasts. A hindu conservative is not a Spanish Catholic conservative, who is not an old stock American conservative. Why should American conservatives work to preserve alien traditions and unenlightened paganism?
Hinduism is utterly incompatible with traditional and "progressive" American values. Even proposition nation immigration advocates have to realize our propositions have no room for caste or karma.
Quite probably various stripes of "Asian conservatives" will find homes and handouts in the Democratic party. They will just hold their noses around the NAMs.
Better than divide and conquer of "Asians" would be no privelege for immigrants or children of immigrants. That wouldn't get blacks to vote Republican, but black politicians might split off to their priveleges undiluted.
I have a feeling that being "diverse" helps brown Asians whether or not they receive official AA: whiteness is not held against them.
Dear P.O. Chinaman
I am one of those who like Chinese. I am married to one. I am, however, as concerned as anyone else here about shutting off the avalanche of third-world immigration which threatens the future of my country. Because we are forbidden to notice that the Chinese make more law-abiding and productive citizens than those from Somalia or Haiti, we will have to shut them out too. Sorry about that. I hope there is a loophole that allows a limited number of them through.
This is going to be my last post on this thread because we're chasing our own tails giving the same arguments over and over again. (Also I have to churn out a legal memo that will take some time).
Frankly, I and those on this board have philosophical differences over what constitutes the American nation. I don't think WASPs in the US are a threatened race and I believe the WASP culture still predominates and will so for a long long time. I don't see individual WASP predominance/hegenomony as necessary for the United States to continue to thrive, apparently others do. Fortunately for me I think those that subscribe to such a view are an older and dwindling minority who are losing significant influence in larger society. My friends and I (red, brown, yellow, black, and white) will enjoy and thrive in a nation that is changing demographically, I only wish you guys could cast aside your prejudices and join us.
Oh and to Mark and the more "open minded" posters on this board. I don't think people are "nice" when they hope and wish for physical harm to come to me, like some on this board have done.
In any case, this was a fun and informative discussion. I'll be back for future discussions once my workload lightens.
All my best,
POC
Here in UK,
Hindus and Sikhs have good relations with Nick Griffin and the BNP
Thousands of Hindus and Sikhs donate money and vote for BNP, because BNP is the only anti-muslim party
While the BNP would like to see us go back, they really fear the muslims and afro-caribbeans and the BNP does not fear us
Replying to Mark
Sikhs and Hispanics have met each other 100 years ago in California farms
Sikhs married Hispanic women and created the Mexican Hindu
Sikhs own farms, Hispanics work on these farms
Sikhs own blue collar businesses, Hispanics work as employees in these businesses
Sikhs are more thrifty than Hispanics, can endure more than the Hispanics ( after all India is poorer than Mexico ) and Sikhs have the advantage of the caste network as a safety net
Replying regarding Jindal and Nikki Hale
American Hindus, excepting the loud mouth crude Punjabis, dislike Jindal and Nikki Hale for apostasy and will vote for a white christian over them
The Lousiana voters would never have voted for Jindal if he were still a Hindu
The conversion of Nikki Haley does sounds fishy to me, since she still visits Gurudwaras
In Sikhism, apostasy is the worst sin and will lead to automatic outcasting from family, parents, siblings and community
During her first State House run, anonymous ads questioned Nikki Randhawa Haley’s conversion from Sikh to Methodist.
Nevertheless, the Republican Party is the only party to use the religion card against Democrats and their own Republicans
http://www.midlandsbiz.com/public/files/img/Nikki_family_photo.jpg
has a picture of Nikki Hale with fat bald caucasian husband
Strange, normally Indian women dont marry outside unlike east asian women
http://www.unmc.edu/Community/ruralmeded/admissions_ratios_and_us_med.htm
has data from 2000, on Indian Americans in Med School entrants
( data now is even more skewed towards Indian Americans )
1 in 22 Indian American in High School, enters Med School
For Chinese the figure is 1 in 59
For White it is 1 in 214
For Black it is 1 in 422 with Affirmative Action
For Hispanics it is 1 in 750 with Affirmative action
Recman is now anonymous. He left out some parts in that article he posted.
http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?250318
"In home after home, the Indian in London loves to show off white friends"
And how much Indian men lust after white women.
"For the Indian male, for an overwhelming most at any rate, white is for friendship—and sex. For the Indian male, to sleep with a white woman—do it to a white woman rather, speaking of the feel of it—is a mandatory conquest without which the migration experience is never complete. This is desire that carries a political thrust. A way of coming to terms with the richer, ruling world that has looked down on us, that we think still does; the sexual act feels like a happy and relatively quick correction of that imbalance. White sex legitimises the male in the world he has feared or held in awe; it's the invisible stamp on our inner passport."
Asians post no demographic threat with their small #. With or without Asians, Hispanics will be the majority in less than 80 years.
"...I don't think WASPs in the US are a threatened race and I believe the WASP culture still predominates and will so for a long long time. ..."
__
Really?
[...] You have to wonder at this situation: white Protestants, of course, essentially invented the United States. As Phillip Roth says in one of his novels, [American Pastoral, p. 311]"Let’s face it, they are America." But they’ve completely lost control of the government.
Obama doesn’t have 43% of his appointees white Protestants, in fact I don’t think even 4% are white Protestants. So you have to ask yourself what’s going on here. How can the founding stock of the country have so completely lost control? They could reasonably regard the Obama administration as kind of an occupation government: a coalition of united minorities that succeeded in uniting the minorities and dividing the majority. [...]
http://www.vdare.com/pb/090402_judges.htm
The Hated White Race
by David Yeagley, "Bad Eagle"
[...] Whatever ‘mental’ problems the white race developed as a result of being more powerful are only fairly recent evolutions. In his day the white man has created a throne like no other in history. If it is criminal at the foundation, the challenge is chiefly from envy—always the weakest charge. Besides, what’s the point of the dark man accusing the white man of not keeping his white morals, if the dark man himself does not believe in those morals? The charge of hypocrisy is moot, made in impotence. (The white man’s self-flagellation is the only hope of the darkies.) [...]
http://www.badeagle.com/2009/06/16/the-hated-white-race/
The article concludes by interviewing writer Ramesh Rao ( A leading figure in the American Hindu community ) who asks,
One-third of the money Jindal has raised, we are told, was contributed by Indian-Americans. Should they not be wondering what made Jindal convert to Catholicism? None seemed to have bothered to ask. He tells the usual story of how Jesus came into his life: more or less the standard spiel that every Campus Christian Crusader spouts. What was missing in his Hindu faith and background that made him convert? We don’t get any insight from the simple mention of how a high school friend gave him a Bible, and how he read it, and how it changed his life.â€
Ramesh Rao goes on to explain: “I have very, very high regard for Bobby Jindal for his accomplishments, and for his ability to articulate ideas. I am very, very concerned, however, about his far right views. When Indian-American supporters assert that Jindal is “One of us”, I really donÂŽt know what is meant by that except that he is a son of Indian immigrants.   It is almost as if his Indian supporters and Indian-American newspapers want to ignore what he truly is: an ultra-conservative Christian politician.
Culturally Asians have more in common with the right than the left, and they used to vote the elephant before Clinton's Presidency. Even today, Vietnamese still overwhelmingly vote Republican. However, The rejection or the indifference from the right has steered a lot of the Asian voters to the left.
"white Protestants, of course, essentially invented the United States."
One of the great US myths, right up there with George Washington and the cherry tree.
White Protestants did not invent this country, white deists did; that's why we have a pyramid with an eye on the dollar bill and not a cross. White protestants simply worked for them, and Obama has appointed, is controlled, bankrolled and represented by a whole lot of deists, most of them white.
"What all the Asians here need to understand is NW European White people are the only indispensable group in America..."
Italians, Poles, Fins, you read it here, the next time you come accross an Anglo-Saxon, genuflect and like it!
This 'sexually superior' stuff, supposedly the domaine of certain races combined w/certain genders, is truly goofy. What would these "sexually superior" blacks have to offer if you took away all that the white man has invented? And the Asian man, for that matter, at least recently. Only people living in the comfort of a white created western society can say such a thing with a straight face. A lot of world can't afford it.
It all comes down to IQ--unless yours is so low you don't care. Couples of long duration have similar IQs.
Men who screw like wabbits are not "sexually superior" or "alpha." They are profoundly controlled, poor things, by their nether regions, and that's a bad
place for control to rest.
White guy trying to date Indian girl
--
andrew:
thanks for your responses, i did meet a an Indian girl, we went out a couple of times but it was like we were hiding. we ran into a problem. when i first started this, i didn't think i was going to have this problem. you see, after she got comfortable with me, she told me the truth. she said she really liked me but that i could not be with her because her parents will never allow a person like me into their family.
What??? - i said.. i was very angry and confused.. she continued explaining that we could not be together because of our religions. her parents would never accept our relationship because of our differences in religion. me being christian. she said that if i wanted to ever be with her or get married, i would have to leave my religion because her parents will never accept a christian man from the western world..
i was devastated when she told me that. she was so beautiful, the perfect woman. she was sweet and kind. and i could not believe her words when she said that. i felt awful.
Typical Hindu parent reaction when they find their son wants to marry a white christian girl
--
As you might know already when Anbu and I were first talking marriage his family did not approve. I don't mean they didn't approve but they pulled all kinds of stunts to stop us from marrying.
His dad grew a beard and let his hair grow as a sign of mourning. His weekend calls home were spent with his mom going emotionally crazy and threatening to kill herself. So, very stressful!
"What would these "sexually superior" blacks have to offer if you took away all that the white man has invented?
Probably the same thing they offer white women on the beaches of Kenya, Haiti and Jamaica now.
Some typical comments on Indian American forums about Jindal, Haley and the Republican party
--
The only reason Jindal and this lady have any support from Republicans is because they're indistinguishable from their white constituents in the south. "American" names and Jesus lovers. If any other brown person who had the exact same beliefs and policy ideas and intellect, but kept their given name and religion (if they're converts), tried to run, Republicans wouldn't give a damn
--
What is up with Indian American politicians ditching their religious/spiritual background?
Bobby Jindal converted to Catholicism. Nikki Randhawa-Haley's family is Methodist (as per Wikipedia).
----
The Republican Party has a thing for "born-again" desis. Indian immigration in the southern United States has tended to follow a pattern of desis filling the interstices of the black-white divide.
What we see now are the second-order effects....they are sorta like us amongst the "people of color" and they believe in jeezus and the right to bear arms. Wow!
---
However, what I don't like about Jindal is what I don't like about the GOP in general and their insistence that faith and namely their faith, which is basically their brand of theocratic right wing Christianity - be implemented in public policy (with regards to Stem Cell research, prayer in schools, evolution in the class room
---
I agree with you that Jindal's public discussion of how he became Catholic is a bit silly to me. I grew up around Italian and Irish Catholics in NY, and none discussed their faith they way Jindal does.
--
The Republican party is a mess and it's sad that the likes of Bobby Jindal is the best they can bring to the table. Also, I realize he is Indian by heritage and birth but the fact he converted to Catholicism while in college (at the age of 18 I think) shows that he knew very well that that was the only way, as an Indian-American Hindu, he could achieve his political ambitions.
--
Would have been nice if she had used her beautiful Sikh name "Nimrata Kaur Haley" and also wished that her children had been raised Sikhs. Unfortunately, to "fit in", many have adopted Christian sounding nicknames and "westernised" behaviour
---
Which part of her name tells us that she is a Sikh? It is obvious that far from being proud of being a Sikh, she actually wants to conceal the fact.
--
I wonder if low Indian outmarriage is not so much due to the threat of ostracism but lack of Western mate interest.
In my Western opinion, the Indian women that can be good looking are those who don't look Indian but could be confused for Latin Americans.
'Would have been nice if she had used her beautiful Sikh name "Nimrata Kaur Haley" and also wished that her children had been raised Sikhs. Unfortunately, to "fit in", many have adopted Christian sounding nicknames and "westernised" behaviour"
What's worse is many have abandoned Indian languages for American English. What's the point of immigration to the US if you cant hang on to hidebound customs?
Instead of worrying about and putting down asian, KKK members here should concern more about the ever fast growing latino population in US, about half of all newborn in US is latino in the last few years.
"Instead of worrying about and putting down asian, KKK members here should concern more about the ever fast growing latino population in US"
It looks like someone missed the entire point.
Indian resistance to outmarriage goes much beyond the threat of crude social ostracism
At the parental level, in every country, the no-muslims, no-blacks rule applies
Indians openly believe in HBD
Next at the community level
we have weekly sunday schools at every hindu temple
Here we teach, that they are free to marry whomever they want, provided the other person converts and becomes a vegetarian
This automatically eliminates muslims, blacks , hispanics, philipinos and other groups that are religious in non-Indian religions
Blacks are very devout christians
So only a handful of people, who are nominal christians or nominal jews who are interested in eastern religions get through
From a monotheistic tradition, it is very hard to give up meat
and blacks and hispanics do animal cruelty like dog fighting
Also becoming a polytheist with idols, sacred animals sacred trees is mentally impossible for most people
However, we have noticed a new phenomenon, some mid-income americans such as nurse or health care worker, who want an MD,
find that Indians are an untapped
resource and 'suddenly discover' the virtues of the hindu religion and vegetarian diet and convert to snag an Indian MD
Failed Republican Attempt to co-opt Indian Americans in New Jersey
--
Summary from 'Suburban Sahibs'
Pradeep Kothari, a rich Hindu businessman and a leading fundraiser for the Democratic party is disgusted by the anti-business aspects of the Democratic party and sick of being screwed by Mcgreevy ( Democratic Governor ) who simply takes Indian money and Indian votes and never takes care of concerns of Indian businessmen
He is recruited by the NJ republican party seeking to enlarge its base ( like Steve Sailer suggests )
Kothari raises several million dollars for the NJ republican party by fundraisers in the Indian American community
With the help of the NJ republican leadership, Kothari is put up as the candidate for Republican primary for Freeholdership ( a minor county level post )
The republican primary is considered a shoo-in
His opponent is a non-descript
Republican ( without any endorsements from the republican leadership and no funds )
In the primary, Kothari ( a successful businessman , supposedly the poster boy for the republicans )
loses because even in NJ, the bulk of the republican base consists of conservative christians who cant bring themselves to vote for a non-christian
"Probably the same thing they offer white women on the beaches of Kenya, Haiti and Jamaica now."
I don't think many tourists of any sex go to those countries so they can have sex with the population.
Kenya is mostly about looking at the animals or climbing Mount Kenya. Most of the interracial loving in Kenya consists of white man (or stocky Nepalese man)/black woman within the vicinity of a place called Nanyuki...
As the posts on the Indian American forum, regarding Nikki Haley shows
there is no hostility to Nikki Haley marrying a white guy or becoming a republican
The entire hostility is due to abandoning her religion
http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/17/pallone-supports-release-of-commemorative-diwali-stamp.htm
The decade-long quest by community activist Dr Shailendra Kumar of Maryland to convince the US Postal Service to issue a stamp commemorating Diwali [ Images ] as it has other religious festivals, has gotten a boost with Congressman Frank Pallone introducing legislation urging the Postal Service to do just that, particularly now that President Barack Obama [ Images ] himself lit the White House diya in observing Diwali.
Pallone, a New Jersey Democrat, and founder of the Congressional Caucus on India and Indian Americans, in introducing the bill said that the campaign calling on the USPS to issue a Diwali stamp had received widespread community support and argued that "Diwali is a truly marvelous holiday that is celebrated by Indians all over the world and it deserves this recognition."
--
American Hindus get these kind of sops from Democrats
and no national Democrat has ever done religion baiting
Republicans are comfortable with Indians only as long as they convert out and become christians
Thats the message from Jindal and Nikki Haley
Whereas Democrats are comfortable with Indian Americans as Hindus or Sikhs
Republicans dont have a racism problem with American Indians, but rather a religion problem
I have seen Pallone and other Democrats visit Hindu meetings for fund raising, whereas Republicans will visit Indian meetings, but never Hindu meetings
As opposed to Pallone and other Democrats who are friendly to American Hindus
From the American Hindu perspective
there is a big difference between someone who is a nominal christian ( Democrat )and someone who sends in missionaries targeting Hindus ( Republican )
Several Republican Congressmen are directly involved in conversion of Hindus
For American Hindus especially in NJ, the choice is clear
Pallone ( D) or Chris Smith ( R )
http://archive.deccanherald.com/Deccanherald/oct82005/national1652222005107.asp
India’s ‘hidden apartheid’ under US gaze
From L K Sharma DHNS,Washington:
An unprecedented Congressional hearing on the caste system in India gets wide publicity on the Christian news networks.
A prominent Republican Congressman explained in a House subcommittee: “we must not lose sight of” India's human rights problem.
India’s image was not left unsullied as the Congressional hearing on the caste system in India received global publicity.
The Congressional hearing also turned into a forum for defending the activities of Christian missionaries in the country and a campaign against any anti-conversion laws.
Some Hindu groups in India allege that converts are sought through inducements.
“Converts to Christianity and Christian missionaries are particularly targeted, as violence against Christians often goes unpunished,” Christopher Smith (R-NJ), the Republican chairman of the House subcommittee on Africa and Global Human Rights, said.
He said many Indian states had adopted anti-conversion laws in violation of India’s constitutional protection for religious freedom.
According to Congressional sources, Christian-based groups had lobbied Republican legislators to hold the hearing, entitled “India’s Unfinished Agenda: Equality and Justice for Victims of Caste System”. The hearing naturally made a big splash on the Christian news networks
"Anonymous said...
But South Asians aren't White and they are as much of a problem in their own way as all the other non-Whites. Deport them all!
10/11/2009"
I agree. Let us deport all Non-Native Americans, and return the land to those who got robbed in the first place.
Post a Comment