Peter Hitchens writes in The Mail on Sunday:
How I am partly to blame for Mass Immigration
When I was a Revolutionary Marxist, we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible.
It wasn't because we liked immigrants, but because we didn't like Britain. We saw immigrants - from anywhere - as allies against the staid, settled, conservative society that our country still was at the end of the Sixties.
Yes, England in the 1960s lacked diversity, so therefore it was culturally non-vibrant.
Also, we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people - usually in the poorest parts of Britain - who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly 'vibrant communities'.
If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots.
Revolutionary students didn't come from such 'vibrant' areas (we came, as far as I could tell, mostly from Surrey and the nicer parts of London).
We might live in 'vibrant' places for a few (usually squalid) years, amid unmown lawns and overflowing dustbins.
But we did so as irresponsible, childless transients - not as homeowners, or as parents of school-age children, or as old people hoping for a bit of serenity at the ends of their lives.
When we graduated and began to earn serious money, we generally headed for expensive London enclaves and became extremely choosy about where our children went to school, a choice we happily denied the urban poor, the ones we sneered at as 'racists'.
What did we know, or care, of the great silent revolution which even then was beginning to transform the lives of the British poor?
To us, it meant patriotism and tradition could always be derided as 'racist'.
And it also meant cheap servants for the rich new middle-class, for the first time since 1939, as well as cheap restaurants and - later on - cheap builders and plumbers working off the books.
It wasn't our wages that were depressed, or our work that was priced out of the market. Immigrants didn't do the sort of jobs we did.
They were no threat to us.
The only threat might have come from the aggrieved British people, but we could always stifle their protests by suggesting that they were modern-day fascists.
I have learned since what a spiteful, self-righteous, snobbish and arrogant person I was (and most of my revolutionary comrades were, too).
I have seen places that I knew and felt at home in, changed completely in a few short years.
I have imagined what it might be like to have grown old while stranded in shabby, narrow streets where my neighbours spoke a different language and I gradually found myself becoming a lonely, shaky voiced stranger in a world I once knew, but which no longer knew me.
I have felt deeply, hopelessly sorry that I did and said nothing in defence of those whose lives were turned upside down, without their ever being asked, and who were warned very clearly that, if they complained, they would be despised outcasts.
Posts
147 comments:
If there is one thing to learn from this article, it is to stop letting stupid young people vote, or get rid of voting altogether.
It is quite crazy to think that young people have the mental faculties and life experience to make governing decisions and voting, and I'm one of these inexperienced youngsters.
By the way Steve, do you have an age distribution of readers of your site?
In their prime.
"Steve Sailer said...
In their prime."
Well, thats too late. But, thanks for the complement.
age 33, non-Hispanic white, male
Glad you decided to hoist this out of the comments for its own post, Steve.
age 25, non-Hispanic white, male
"It is quite crazy to think that young people have the mental faculties and life experience to make governing decisions and voting, and I'm one of these inexperienced youngsters."
And you think Rupert Murdoch is any better? I don't think you can lay the problems of our world on those aged under 30, though people do seem to wise up once they are married and especially once they have kids.
I really don't understand what motivated people like Hitchens to embrace revolutionary Marxism. I don't think it can be blamed on youth exclusively. Maybe someone else can shed light on this subject. From where I sit, it seems that the pile of dung was obviously at the end of the rainbow from the very beginning.
It seems that the sorts of people these movements appealed to are highish IQ, lazy, irresponsible, not much desire for children of their own, usually arty or literarily inclined, sometimes criminally inclined, and generally hateful and distrusting of the staid institutions of European life (e.g. Christianity, marriage, a functioning police force, taking responsibility for one's actions, etc.), and often without much mathematical/science ability to attempt to predict the likely outcomes of what you agitate for.
All of us who read this excerpt here should forward it, with link attached, to the pro immigration columnists of our newspapers, recommending a little introspection.
Robert Hume
btw mid 30s, non-hispanic white male. Married, kids. Read every day, often comment.
Sounds like Hitchens has been reading your work, Steve. I haven't seen anyone else focus on the ridiculousness of calling people racist because they oppose immigration. Maybe it's different in England.
39, White, English speaking male.
The NYT had an article a couple days ago ( http://peekURL.com/zXJkFQW ) with this: "[Hazleton PA] presents a test case of whether the [GOP] risks leaving behind a critical part of its core constituency: white working-class voters for whom illegal immigration stirs visceral reactions."
Involuntary demographic change tends to chafe, doesn't it?
To anon at 10:04:
You think the young voters targeted on social media by the 0bama campaign has thought processes any different from that of the young Hitchens and friends?
The young need only be made to feel they have power in numbers to convince them to use it. Of course, they are easily manipulated into taking positions that are in opposition to those of their elders just for the fun of it.6
This needs to be read on the floor of the House and the Senate.
"When I was a Revolutionary Marxist, we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible."
Now we are no longer Revolutionary Marxists, but we however still are in favour of as much immigration as possible.
A rather succinctly fine article. Then again, it's not the only one to have appeared and none of them have had much effect.
Few articles do.
Mid 30s white jewish single male
He ought to make more clear the call for help, but British crosswords are too difficult for my multiplicated brain. So may be he has.
Not just Britain, but lots of Europe is on a countdown to racial oblivion.
Well done, chaps!
Anon.
Isn't it wonderful how Hitchens, even while slagging his friends on the Left, feels compelled to denounce Enoch Powell, apparently for the sin of being right when the Hitch was wrong?
As an American reading about Enoch Powell, I'm always amazed that this guy was a politician. How many individuals of that caliber go into politics in the U.S.?
I can't feel any pity or sorrow for Peter Hitchens. Just contempt. And who is he apologizing to?
As for the English working class. They are far better than the British leisure class. Always have been.
They don't need to be talked down to. They probably accept the immigrants because they hate people like Peter Hitchens.
And the immigrants, they understand the English better than the English do. So bullsh*t to you Hitchens and the English.
Late 40s, non-Jewish, childless, married, longtime (from the National Review days) Steve reader. Childless, partly because my financial situation in peak breeding years might have meant family ending up in a NAM neighborhood. Day late and dollar short, Peter. Mission accomplished.
"Partly to Blame" - why "Partly"?- isn't it possible that the wound he inflicted was the fatal one?
It seems like Leftists are on a confessing streak these days.
He still doesn't give a crap.
Immigration still doesn't affect him.
You can hear it in his writing "it affects the British poor...Sorry about that"
If he was truly sorry, or truly cared he'd write the next column about mass deportations.
An interesting claim from the comment thread for this piece:
There are more Pakistanis in Britain then there are Latvians in Latvia...
Steve Sailer:"As an American reading about Enoch Powell, I'm always amazed that this guy was a politician. How many individuals of that caliber go into politics in the U.S.? "
Lord Bryce commented on the avoidance of political involvement by the better classes of people in America.It probably has something to do with the early democratization of the USA. Just compare the quality of the political class in the USA before the advent of Jacksonian democracy (John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, J.Q. Adams, Thomas Jefferson, John Jay, etc)to what has come after. Men like Theodore Roosevelt are the aberrations; vulgar mediocrities like George W. Bush are the norm.
syon
Hacienda:
"As for the English working class. They are far better than the British leisure class. Always have been."
....And one sign of their superiority is their strong desire to keep England English.
"They don't need to be talked down to. They probably accept the immigrants because they hate people like Peter Hitchens."
No, dear boy, they are less accepting of immigrants. sheltered elites like Hitchens reap the rewards of immigration (cheap labor, servants, nation-busting), while the working class have to contend with the social costs.
"And the immigrants, they understand the English better than the English do."
Well, yes. That's why they want to live in England, because England is superior to their own benighted homelands.
"So bullsh*t to you Hitchens and the English."
Ah, further evidence of the inferiority of non-Anglos.
syon
Usually when a crime is committed, the criminal is punished and restitution by the criminal is expected. What Marxists do to societies is a crime on a national scale. At the very least, they should be imprisoned, and their assets seized and given back to the public to pay in part for all the damage they have done.
age 34, Indian(dot ,not feathers) male,single
Steve said..
As an American reading about Enoch Powell, I'm always amazed that this guy was a politician. How many individuals of that caliber go into politics in the U.S.? "
The self professed American contempt for government work leads itself into a catch 22 situation in that only the otherwise unemployable charismatic rogues tend to run for office esp in the recent years eg Obama,Clinton,Bush.
The talented people if they wish to work for the government usually end up in DC and not so much the state level.
As a non white, I would have to say that when I visit foreign Western countries I want to see whites and their customs. I come to England to see pole dancers, those mcintosh broads, Westminister Abbey , Tower of London,Big Ben, London Dungeon,Ghost tours(yes,yes I know) ..the works.
If I wanted to see Indian restaurants, entire neighborhoods with turbans and beards or the gargantuan mosques ,I would stay home.
I think immigration should be on a case by case INDIVIDUAL basis(who would be evaluated on ethnic origins least likely to cause trouble, skills, resources and in sync with free markets and limited governments) rather the absurd system that currently is in basis - a green card lottery(WTF?!), illegal immigrants with reconquista on their mind and Somali,Iraqi and Pakistani immigrants thanks to Invade the world ,invite the world.
I was living in England at the time Enoch Powell gave his wonderful "infamous" speech. I knew that my neighbors in a quiet, leafy Yorkshire village must have felt as I did about it, but knew that I, as a rank outsider, and a Yank at that, could not express my views in their company and they could not express their views in mine, or with each other I believe. Political correctness was in the air even then - and, I see here that even Hitchens still hasn't seen the light with respect to Powell's strong speech. More's the pity.
White, female, 75.
Veracitor: Isn't it wonderful how Hitchens, even while slagging his friends on the Left, feels compelled to denounce Enoch Powell, apparently for the sin of being right when the Hitch was wrong?
Yes, that was despicable. Hitchens must be perfectly well aware that Powell was as far as one could be from the vulgar race-baiting demagogue he paints. His arse-covering vilification is contemptible.
He's not alone, though. I've noticed this move more than once: tender the faux-humble mea culpa (because there's no longer any denying the godawful truth of the mess), but blame Powell and his allegedly ranting, spittle-flecked peroration for ruining public discourse on race for decades. If it weren't for that awful man we wouldn't have had to run around screaming "racist!" in everyone's face for the last 45 years.
Of course his speech was no such thing, but it's important to keep this mendacious version alive to console ourselves in the ruins that, in spite of everything, we're better than those Dreadful People.
Goddamn Steve, Thanks for posting this. This is balls on.
Have you seen "56 Up", the latest in Michael Apted's Up series? The final interview is with Tony, the Cockney, who has long since decamped to Spain. He walks around his old East End neighborhood, which has become a miserable multi-culti slum, and is saddened and angered by it. For this, Apted calls him a racist. The gall of the guy! Tony fights back, to his credit.
In the vignette of his family, you see a guy who is not the sharpest knife in the drawer, whose family is harried by the social decay all around him, but who is fundamentally decent - someone who is contributing to society, and could have done more if his society had tried to help him rather than spitting on him at almost every turn.
In the final "redemptive" scene, Apted and Tony return to the park where the first scenes of the children playing were filmed. Lo and behold, it is now the site of the 2012 Olympic Stadium. The filmmaker frames it as uplifting, but it was frankly so grotesque I couldn't help wondering whether it rang hollow even to him.
As usual with the Up series, it was the best cinematic experience of the year for me. Highly recommended; the hollowness of the closing scene is as fitting an end as the program could have.
Hacienda,
You're a pro-immigration, anti-white asian, so I don't think Peter Hitchens was addressing you.
62 year old Jewish female.
MWF, 46
36, non-Hispanic white man, have been reading since 2006
Steve, have you thought about a reader demographics survey? For example something like Razib does occasionally? Some readers seem to provide basic data rather eagerly already.
Here is mine: 28, Hungarian, Male.
Mid-30s white Cuban-American male
Risto / Jose Dorito
25 yo Male Indian (dot not feathers).
Reactionary traditionalism has appeal everywhere English is spoken widely, because the Commie propaganda we hear in India is actually produced in America.
To borrow a phrase from the Sage, we're all about to getit good and hard.
Silver,
That's right to an extent. I'm pro-immmigration and anti-white to the extend immigration addresses the current and historical sins of whites. And maximizes net freedom for ALL humanity. It's not exact. It sure as hell is childish. But
then Kant, Wittgenstein, Lao Tze, Descartes, Einstein, Newton are all childish.
And who cares who Hitchens is addressing. I'm addressing all the "has beens" on this blog.
Multiculturalism is about class, not culture. The other stuff is a footnote.
http://us.macmillan.com/thetroublewithdiversity/WalterMichaels
The English had no compunctions about creating an empire and slaughtering natives through engineered famines, fomented revolts or cold blooded killing (as in Amritsar, where the pusillanimous British Prime Minister recently issued an "apology", but now cannot stand the fact that the empire said, "Hey, this is a nice place, don't mind if I do". Ha ha, I say.
The general decline of Britain will take care of the immigration problem. Britain's per capita GDP is now 10K per annum below the US's and is about to be overtaken by South Korea.
The silence of decently behaving blacks in America is as despicable as the early screaming of Hitchens and his pals.
Peter Hitchens is taking a lot of deserved criticism in this thread, but in this tyrannically diversity-worshipping climate it's good to see anyone with any kind of a public voice saying SOMETHING. It may be too late to save the west... but maybe we can still save a part of it. I for one am no longer abashed in public about my views. The price is too high to keep hiding and reinforce the notion that there is something inherently horrible with opposing immigration and valuing historical Western civilization.
34, white atheist (raised Catholic) male who has seen his quiet suburban small city morph into a sad, poor, fractured, Very Vibrant and Diverse place filled with people whose lives are primarily funded by the government.
Bunch of young punks. Redneck, 66, cartoonist, retired bureaucrat. When I was 18, I had a couple of clues, but not nearly enough. I supported LBJ and bought the lies about Goldwater. A little later, I had acquired enough sense to vote for Wallace. Point isn't that over-30's are especially wise, but that a great many people _become_ considerably wiser between 18 and 30. Members of the armed forces should be able to vote, whatever their age. Anybody still in school — high school, college, post-grad — should be prohibited from voting whatever their age. BTW, I've been having the same problem with spam at my blog, most of it from Poland.
John Cleese from 2011: London is no longer English city
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2032956/John-Cleese-London-longer-English-city-thats-got-2012-Olympics.html
White, male...24.
This surprised me. I've been reading magazines such as The Spectator since the '80's, and somehow I thought Peter Hitchens and his brother came out of the womb as opposites. 56, from NorCal.
32, Eastern European (is that white?), no kids.
I'm also an immigrant fighting deportation ... Came legally knowing I would overstay if I couldn't adjust my status (i.e. get a green card), which is what happened. Working, paying taxes, got a BA, an MBA, and started a PhD.
Would I do it all again - no. Wish there was a way to get renewable temporary residence for people like myself - this way talented people can come and go depending on economy, need, clean criminal record and tax payment etc.
Going for an amnesty whereby illegals get citizenship makes no sense - we just want to work and travel - not vote, work for the government or have our kids be automatic citizens.
"As an American reading about Enoch Powell, I'm always amazed that this guy was a politician. How many individuals of that caliber go into politics in the U.S.?"
Herbert Hoover. Nobody since.
Hitchens' book "The Abolition of Britain" is the best one-volume guide to the great disaster.
> someone who is contributing to society, and could have done more if his society had tried to help him rather than spitting on him at almost every turn.<
"There is no such thing as society" - Margaret Thatcher
Get a job!
(Thought I'd inject some freeperism into the discussion. After all, who can get enough freeperism, really?)
Is there a word to describe those who conspired to turn the English into a minority in their own country?
Because "traitors" doesn't do them justice.
The same word can be used to describe those who gave the Golden State away, and now are attempting the same feat with the USA as a whole.
When a plot is ripe it can no longer be concealed. I think much of the recent hand wringing and reflection by the left on the impact of mass immigration into England foreshadows the fact that as the electorate is turning right on this issue and that if the left does not get out in front of this now, they will be hung by this for the next 50 to 100 years the same way Hitler hung the right in Europe for 70 years. The wind is changing.
White, female, 24- live in the Southeast, atheist. I've been sporadically commenting for a few years now. This is one of the few websites I visit everyday.
"f there is one thing to learn from this article, it is to stop letting stupid young people vote, or get rid of voting altogether.
It is quite crazy to think that young people have the mental faculties and life experience to make governing decisions and voting, and I'm one of these inexperienced youngsters.
By the way Steve, do you have an age distribution of readers of your site?"
i'm in my mid 20s. my impression is that age differences in political attitudes aren't due to people's opinions changing as people get older (i don't really think they do, at least not much). rather, new generations are just becoming more liberal.
that gives me an idea though. steve, why not run some sort of informal iSteve census where you ask commenters questions about their nationality, age bracket, ethnicity, politics, income, education etc? then we could maybe even make some pretty graphs. it would be interesting to see where we're all from and where we stand on different things.
Indeed, given the personality and character of guys like Tim Wise, Frank Rich, and others, why should we think they'd be disturbed by stories of whites being robbed or raped by blacks?
No, you can't assume they care at all.
Here is self-styled "race-realist communist" (in reality simply a fanatical equalitarian kook) on what should be done about IQ differences:
"Further, if White success is due to their genes, then they have not earned or deserved even 1% of it. And Black failure is not their fault either. Since White wealth is unearned and undeserved, we have the right to confiscate a lot of it to give it to Blacks to compensate for their unearned failure. And I advocate that we do just that."
This what we're up against. These people are sick. Sick, sick, sick. They have to be fought and vanquished, no quarter asked, none given.
44, white nationalist, middle class, off-and-on reader, married, kids. Long past time to radicalize folks.
White, female, divorced, 55 -- I've been reading and commenting for over five years.
I think people like Peter Hitchens liked immigration when it first started, because, as others have mentioned, it gave him the chance to eat affordable ethnic meals and have cheap nannies and cleaning services. The rotten neighborhoods and schools that resulted from the foreigners had little or no effect on his life, because people of his class use private schools and live in expensive neighborhoods that few immigrants can afford.
But as the years have gone by, and the numbers have increased, he begins to realize that his golden years will be blighted by the immigrant horde, and that his children and grandchildren will either have to fight a civil war to get rid of the foreigners, or else live in poverty under sharia law, etc.
Problems of diversity are universal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0ZVLVYL1Hw
84 South African living in New Zealand.
23 year old white male, Washington State. I've been reading since 2008 or so. As many of the commenters are more eloquent and incisive than I, I rarely feel the need to comment.
Age 40, Anglo-Scots-Irish (the real Scots-Irish!) white male. Married, one child.
I think it was the disaster of the Iraq War that destroyed my childhood faith in Whig-Liberalism and got me into reading the Paleosphere, inc Steve Sailer.
Sorry to tell y'all but when Enoch "rivers of blood" Powell was in office as the minister for health he brought in the first waves of immigrants to work the bottom rung or the British health care system during the early 1960s. Once Britain went down that road Britain was addicted and could not stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enoch_Powell#Minister_of_Health
I can assure you absolutely nobody paid any attention to Lefty Peter Hitchens in the 1960s. The decision to bring in immigrants was made by the upper management of the Conservative party.
"You think the young voters targeted on social media by the 0bama campaign has thought processes any different from that of the young Hitchens and friends?"
Young people submitting to the dominant culture they're taught by the media and schools is the exact opposite of Hitchen's generation who were rejecting what was the dominant culture of the time.
.
"I really don't understand what motivated people like Hitchens to embrace revolutionary Marxism. I don't think it can be blamed on youth exclusively."
They were a small minority of the young at the time so it can't be just youth.
36, white, male Californian. WASP/white-ethnic mix. Ivy League PhD.
I read Steve to escape the Bizarro World of academia that I live in normally.
I've always felt that an under-appreciated facet of Steve's blog (no, not the golf/track and field statistics) is his cultural literacy. Just this week, Betjeman, Shakespeare... then there's Waugh, Wodehouse, the Clash, the encyclopedic knowledge of film history...
At least in my personal experience, the typical path for the sensitive (heterosexual) male who likes poetry and music involves immersion and indoctrination in the SWPL school of Cultural Marxism. Think Brooklyn.
I'm curious whether Steve, in acquiring his cultural knowledge, experienced programming by tenured radicals, and needed deprogramming, or whether he simply read people like Paul Johnson, Denis Dutton, and Tom Wolfe on his own time, and managed to avoid the worst of university leftist indoctrination.
Pim Fortuyn the Dutch MP who opposed anti-Dutch immigrants being allowed in was one such revolutionary marxist in his early lecturing days.
Age 35- Black, child of Ghanaian immigrants
49 year-old white female.
Your blog has helped to clarify several issues for me, and I appreciate greatly all you do here.
The British working class are way more fiercely anti-immigrant than our American working class. Though their anti-immigrant sentiment (and violence) is much more directed to British Muslims/Pakistanis.
Unlike the U.S., where whites tend to be regarded as pretty wimpy in general, British whites are ferocious when riled up. See: EDL.
In Britain, the flash mobs consist of white guys.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/06/edl-gang-jailed-after-east-lancashire-mob-protest/
http://www.vice.com/read/ill-have-a-petrol-bomb-and-chips-please
"I think much of the recent hand wringing and reflection by the left on the impact of mass immigration"
Their vote is based on three segments: the people working government jobs, the immigrants themselves and their white working class voters who work non-government jobs but things have got to the point where they can only keep 2 out of 3 happy.
Eventually - as in the US - the immigrant population will grow large enough for them to abandon the wwc vote completely but for the time being they need to try and win back those voters.
If the Conservative party - as in the US - wasn't really, really, really trying to put those voters off then the left party would have no chance.
Age 49, white British male. But reading iSteve for a long time, since before it was a blogger site, before there were comments.
"I can assure you absolutely nobody paid any attention to Lefty Peter Hitchens in the 1960s. The decision to bring in immigrants was made by the upper management of the Conservative party."
There was no government decision.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Empire_Windrush
"In 1948, the Windrush was en route from Australia to England via the Atlantic, docking in Kingston, Jamaica. An advert had appeared in a Jamaican newspaper offering cheap transport on the ship for anybody who wanted to come and work in the UK. At that time, there were no immigration restrictions for citizens of one part of the British Empire moving to another part. The arrival of the boat immediately prompted complaints from some Members of Parliament, but legislation controlling immigration was not passed until 1962."
*After* the fact, the fuss over the Windrush led to the gradual outlawing of opposition to mass immigration being imposed by the left, particularly within the BBC.
Although elements of the right always want unlimited amounts of cheap labor they couldn't have done it without the left imposing a high personal cost on opposing mass immigration.
If you offer a proper census please make sure to get around some of the stumbling blocks that so many other censii stumble on when calculating demographics. For example, asking people their race won't really do as you'll have plenty of quadroons checking the "black" box, AND you'll have plenty of Jewish Atheists checking the "white" box. If you want to know how many "full blacks" (or feathered Indians) you have, as well as what percentage of your readership are ethnic Jews (or ethnic dotted Indians) it might be best to find a way for people to respond to the questions:
My father's father would be considered (white, feathered indian, dotted indian, oriental, arab, hispanic, jewish, mormon, black)
My father's mother would be considered
My mother's father...
My mother's mother...
Also, it would be interesting to know what percentage of your readership always realized that the elites were full of shit (about black crime/intelligence and, by extension, many things) and what percentage are Born Agains.
Personally I find the born agains both baffling and frightening (you once believed that blacks and Jews are born with the same innate mathematical abilities?? Who knows what you'll believe tomorrow!) so I'm hoping to find that a goodly percentage of your readership is composed of those who never bought into the hype. All we ever hear from here are people professing their conversions to "HBDism" so I'm hoping there's at least a large silent minority out there who never thought the myths about racial similarity were anything but humorous fairy tales. I assume many of them would be WNs (and all 4 of my grandparents would be considered Jews) but I'm cool with that.
"I think it was the disaster of the Iraq War that destroyed my childhood faith in Whig-Liberalism and got me into reading the Paleosphere, inc Steve Sailer."
I'm comment "4/2/13, 10:06 PM". Ironically it was originally September 11th that got me reading up on Islam which in turn got me realizing that not all other cultures and races are our friends. But IIRC, it was originally through Glenn Reynolds (Instapundit) I clicked on a link to gnxp, and from there it was on to Sailer.
I am frankly amazed at how far attitudes have changed from a decade ago. You couldn't even say the word "deport" without your comment being censored (I think this was even at isteve). And now you have MSM outlets like the dailymail where not only are similar comments not censored, they are rated as highly popular!
It used to be that even tangentially mentioning race real issues, especially IRL, would get people looking askance at you and questioning your sanity or your intelligence. Now this is not the case. The KKK/Nazi/racist epithet is not used as much either, and it doesn't seem to have much effect, because if you say something, other people are thinking it.
And I thought that TPTB would effectively clamp down on freedom of expression of the internet, but this hasn't been the case. They either haven't been able to, have chosen not to, or have not realized the impact that the blogosphere has had in allowing a true diversity (lol) of opinion.
It now seems that my early adopting of race real/WNish views was just being ahead of the curve (and if I was a decade ahead of the curve, how much ahead was Sailer, or Enoch Powell for that matter?).*
I notice that Steve himself has shifted further to the right as well. I think this is genuine, and perhaps a function of reading the output of his commentariat. Or maybe it's just a reflection of the changing zeitgeist generally.
*I keep finding myself early adopting a lot of things that later catch on in a big way. I suspect that a lot of readers of this blog must do the same thing. I've really got to start investing in some of them, where possible.
1) His "apology" is way too little, way too late.
2) Note how he says he is "partly responsible". Lets make that wholly responsible.
3) The cruelest thing of all is how so many decent English people who opposed their own colonization had their names smeared by being called "racists".
4) I resent the term "non-hispanic white". Note how i am not even a white person, just a non-hispanic one! Do black Americans call themselves "non-hispanic blacks"?
I can't believe that Komment Kontrol censored my post.
ARGH!!!!!
hacienda:"That's right to an extent. I'm pro-immmigration and anti-white to the extend immigration addresses the current and historical sins of whites."
In other words, its all about ethnic resentment....Try to be concise, dear boy.
"And maximizes net freedom for ALL humanity."
Which, of course, makes no sense, as multicultural societies are actually less free, but please, go on...
"It's not exact. It sure as hell is childish. But
then Kant, Wittgenstein, Lao Tze, Descartes, Einstein, Newton are all childish."
MMMM, the only childish chap in that list is the lone non-White fellow, Mr Lao Tze.
"And who cares who Hitchens is addressing. I'm addressing all the "has beens" on this blog."
Better a "has been" than a "never was," dear boy.
Oh, and since we are all listing ethnicity for some odd reason (if Steve really cared, he would do a Razib style poll):
Age: 32
Race: White/Caucasoid/West Eurasian (whichever seems more scientific to you).
Ethnicity: Jewish mother (Ashkenazi), English-Scottish father.
Religion: Agnostic/Atheist (depending on mood)
Politics: Burkean conservative.
syon
"I can assure you absolutely nobody paid any attention to Lefty Peter Hitchens in the 1960s. The decision to bring in immigrants was made by the upper management of the Conservative party."
Doesn't surprise me at all, The"marxists" never really ran England or the US unless you consider both US parties Marxist.
From wiki:
From the 1950s into the 1960s there was a mass migration of workers from all over the English-speaking Caribbean, particularly Jamaica, who settled in Britain. These immigrants were invited to fill labour requirements in London’s hospitals, transportation venues and railway development. They are widely viewed as having been a major contributing factor to the rebuilding of the post-war urban London economy.
The conservatives were in charge then.
It was done by both liberals and conservatives.
The US is still much worse off than Britain demographically. Remember we have our native blacks.
Hitchens née Levin.
Yes sirree bob.
"I can't believe that Komment Kontrol censored my post.
ARGH!!!!!"
It's whim, and it stops all illegal comments at the border.
"I can assure you absolutely nobody paid any attention to Lefty Peter Hitchens in the 1960s. The decision to bring in immigrants was made by the upper management of the Conservative party.;
Chomsky has called big business vulgar marxists.
Business doesn't care about countries or people. Businesses will destroy anything and everything to make a profit.
immigration is a form of class war.
Chomsky:
"You know, UAW was getting smashed for something or other, I forget for what, he came out saying, you know, I never realized this before, but you, management, you're fighting a class war. And sure, they're always fighting a class war. They're vulgar Marxists, basically. But everyone else is supposed to think it's classless. Harmony. Americanism"
"Personally I find the born agains both baffling and frightening (you once believed that blacks and Jews are born with the same innate mathematical abilities?? Who knows what you'll believe tomorrow!) so I'm hoping to find that a goodly percentage of your readership is composed of those who never bought into the hype."
If you were born into a whitopia and your only contact with NAMs was with Morgan Freeman via the TV, maybe you'd be less baffled.
>or whether [Steve] simply read people like Paul Johnson, Denis Dutton, and Tom Wolfe on his own time<
I bet that way. Aren't a number of good minds rather autodidactic?
It would be cool if he yanked our chains by denying it. "I was under Harvard tutelage until age 28.... When I emerged from the Skinner Box, my mission was clear. Stock up on oranges if you know what's good for you. Ha ha ha!"
Agree that Peter Hitchens is too late to do much difference, but it least gives me some hope that he and others are acknowledging the damage. Remember, it was all a figment of our (racist, nativist) imaginations not so long ago.
46 male white here.
Anon at 5:53 PM:
"From the 1950's into the 1960's there was a mass migration of workers from all over the English-speaking Carribbean, particularly Jamaica, who settled in Britain. These immigrants were invited to fill labour requirements in London's hospitals, transportation venues and railway development. They are widely viewed as being a major contributing factor to the post-war urban London economy."
WHY was there such a 'labor shortage' in Britain after WW2? The U.K.'s losses in WW1 were fully twice as high and nobody in 1921 was calling for Jamaicans to come to work in Britain.
I also doubt they contributed all that much. Saying they did is simply the politiclaly correct accepted orthodoxy. What prominent Briton would say it was a mistake and not a gain?
Even if there were some economic benefits, the cost to Britain in national character, loss of social cohesion and increases in racial tensions more then cancelled it out. In the long run Britain would have been much better off had it endured some economic pain and preserved its racial and cultural origins.
The more I read the harder right my compass turns.
Between the explainations incompetence and malice aforthought, the judgement has been settling on malice.
Female, married, children, lawyer, Australia, ex-leftwing academic come to HBD and realist democracy via iSteve and his links.
Australia generally follows USA and the UK policy even if it is obviously wrong.
Food for thought - According to Wikipedia, England is 0.0874% of the land surface of the Earth and would be ranked 97th if an independent country - Africa is 20.4%, Russia is 11.0%.
Not a born again, but only because I detected leftist deception in other areas of my education and so I didn't really believe anything I was taught.
Northern upper middle class suburban whites are/were often remarkably isolated from black people and mestizos.
I remember that our high school had only one quadroon and one mestizo, both of whom were the moderately intelligent, successful and reasonably well behaved children of rich people. We had maybe three adopted Asian kids, who were mostly average in intelligence. Not enough anecdotal data to determine a trend and back then there was no internet to allow us to see reality via World Star Hip Hop videos.
In college some negative trends w/ regard to black performance began to manifest themselves, but of course black college students are well above the black average, so I could probably have fooled myself into going along with egalitarian meme if I wasn't already skeptical towards all aspects of the college experience (because I had already figured out that my profs were filthy Marxists).
I do not think we should blame Hitchens for his beliefs 40 years ago. The 60's were a crazy time both here and in the UK. The elites in the UK had been semi Marxists since the 1930's. He should be commended for being a realist now, esp when Political Correctness is a much larger force these days.
>it would be interesting to know what percentage of your readership always realized that the elites were full of shit (about black crime/intelligence and, by extension, many things) and what percentage are Born Agains<
There is a danger TPTB will reverse-engineer our answers and pinch future buds. Everyone be careful. Don't get too Facebook-y about your intellectual journey, that's what they want.
The social Marxists are correct about one thing: the Right, which bemoans looters, moochers, welfare bums, depraved barbarians, et al., is a major redoubt of would-be round-earthers (raciss). It is our GHQ - and something of a designed dead end or fly trap, which is my objection to it. Up the ass of both Punch and Judy are usually the same man's hands; never forget that.
Going for an amnesty whereby illegals get citizenship makes no sense - we just want to work and travel - not vote, work for the government or have our kids be automatic citizens.
Amnesty has nothing to do with what illegals want and everything to do with what government and business (but I repeat myself) wants.
I used to be an egalitarian because I wasnt really thinking clearly about the world I could actually see around me. That and living in a pretty much all white area.
Once I 'woke up' that was that, I cant ever go back to my left/liberal position on race. I would say I was pretty much a WN now.
The young need only be made to feel they have power in numbers to convince them to use it. Of course, they are easily manipulated into taking positions that are in opposition to those of their elders just for the fun of it.
I wonder whether this is a feature of institutional schooling. It seems an embrace of the public and rejection of the private. Many folks are miserable in school and may wish to get back at their tormenters, that is the older generation that includes the parents who abandoned them each day at the school and the teachers who penned them in all day.
In the old days, loyalty lay firmly with the family, not peers.
mid 30s canadian black male of haitian background with a somewhat international upbringing. A reluctant rootless cosmopolitan of sorts.
I'm racially west-african with a little bit of euro admixture.
I was always sort of on the right but only in my mid 20s did I realize that there was something fishy about the dominant discourse on race.
To relate to the topic of the article : I deeply, deeply resent the left for having thought that I'd make a good weapon of mass destruction against the Western Civilization and the blood and soil that it sprang from. I resent them for thinking that *I* would feel a need to destroy that most high achievement of mankind. Unfortunately for them, I'm drawn to defend and to laud it.
Age 20
Female
Religious
Biracial (Half African/Half Eastern European)
Interested in Sci-Fi/Fantasy & Philosophy/Religion
I Want To Marry a Nerdy White Man
And I want to have +3 kids with said Nerdy White Man.
Male
Age 34
Triracial admixture of European, Asian and Polynesian
Ethnic identification: I am Local
Religion: Neville Chamberlain Atheist
Political Affiliation: Anarcho-Dandyist ala "The Chap" magazine
Age:29
Sex: XY
Ethnicity:Ashkenazi Jewish and Anglo-Celtic (Welsh, Cornish and Scottish)
Path to the Dark side: iSteve was mentioned by John J. Reilly (Requiescat in Pace) in a discussion on Asia Times' Spengler. His discussion forum featured a very lively back and forth between his readers, many of whom occasionally comment here (Vilko, JoeTexxx, Baduin, and Ben Espen, among others.)
Burkean Conservative,
I'm for immigration, not because I resent whites. That might be hard for you to imagine because you call yourself a Burkean.
It's really hard argue this point that whites have alienated themselves from planet Earth. Get that "idea" across, because its not really an idea. It's even beyond culture, you know. It even goes beyond having faith in the comforts of an irrelevant 18th C taste maker.
But don't bitch and be pretentious. I hate that in white people.
I just rather you push the technology further. Advance humanity, all that stuff.
>Chomsky<
He recently made flat-earther noises. In the past few months he said that IQ is unimportant, at least in certain social questions, and that evolution hasn't occurred in humans in 50,000+ years (Gouldian punctuated equilibrium). He did acknowledge what is elsewhere called "genetic drift," though without mentioning Dawkins, continuously variable speedism etc.
Like with most people there is a tension between his moral commitments on one side and his scientific bent on the other. He resolved this rather well, by concentrating on digging out and publishing the barely acknowledged crimes of his country. But I would shudder to ask him for his thoughts on Gould: smoke might rise from his head, or worse, he might emit embarrassing PC. He has shown a bit of fortitude in the past, though.
Anon:
" Anonymous said...
The British working class are way more fiercely anti-immigrant than our American working class. Though their anti-immigrant sentiment (and violence) is much more directed to British Muslims/Pakistanis.
Unlike the U.S., where whites tend to be regarded as pretty wimpy in general, British whites are ferocious when riled up..."
British working class whites are certainly ferocious, and it's true they dislike Pakistanis but not most other immigrant groups. They tend not to dislike non-Muslim blacks (apart from the crime), especially the Afro-Caribbeans tend to integrate into white working-class culture. They dislike the Pakistanis because the Pakistanis engage in an overt program of ethnic cleansing in areas they settle. Other groups (such as Afro-Caribbeans) tend to dislike Pakistanis for exactly the same reason.
But, American working class whites are hardly 'wimpy'! You wouldn't have conquered the planet with wimps. >:)
I think the issue with the US white working class is more that they often don't have strong community bonds or place-identification, their bonds often don't extend beyond their nuclear family, and so when things get tough they would rather pick up and leave than fight for their piece of turf. As opposed to upper class US whites, who are ferociously protective of their turf. Also, 'wimpy whites' as a meme seems to be propagated by people who hate whites.
Think about Hitchens' quote that the left wanted immigrants because they hated Britain. In other words they did not like the people, culture or society of Britain, and chose to import aliens, THAT THEY KNEW WERE UNASSIMILABLE, to destroy, or at the very least water down, the people, culture and society they hated.
We are routinely told by globalists and open border supporters that we only oppose third world immigration because we are racists. That is the charge they use to shut us up. Well, who really are the racists? Assuming what Hitchens said is prevalent among the Left, can't they be accused of genocide for wanting to destroy an existing culture and society?
And how is wishing to preserve one's culture racist? If wanting to preserve your culture is racist, then every society on Earth is racist.
I don't want MASS third world immigration because I don't what my nation or culture to be changed. According to Hitchens, the Left only supports MASS third world immigration because they do want our nation and culture to change.
So why is one side bad, but the other good? Why is wanting to destroy a culture honorable, but wanting to preserve it objectionable?
By the way, allow me to point out that this is by Peter Hitchens, not by his late brother Christopher Hitchens.
Good point Steve. There seem to be an immoderate number of Knee-Jerk Angry sorts who are sufficiently ignorant of Peter to treat him as though he were a Johnny-come-lately to paleoconservativism rather than being a washed-in-the-blood guy who's spicing up his latest article with half-remembered reminisces from his useless college days.
Hitchens is pretty much spot-on. It certainly was a matter of bewilderment for revolutionary leftists why the British working classes seemed so reluctant to rally to their cause.
Unrequited love is a terrible thing, and sooner or later the one in love starts to realise they're on a hiding to nothing. That's when the hostility takes over.
"Sorry to tell y'all but when Enoch "rivers of blood" Powell was in office as the minister for health he brought in the first waves of immigrants to work the bottom rung or the British health care system during the early 1960s." Not so - he brought in doctors and nurses from India; he was rather a fan of India and thought that modest numbers of educated Indians filling vacant posts would prove a boon. What he took against was mass immigration from the Caribbean and from backward Punjabi villages. The analogy with the US since those days is pretty clear, I'd say.
"Assuming what Hitchens said is prevalent among the Left, can't they be accused of genocide for wanting to destroy an existing culture and society?"
I think so. I notice that quite a few people have talked about what Blair et al have done as treason.
Almost 50, white, married, one child. There is way more realtalk out there than before.
The system still has a lot of ruin left in it. Decades of grievance won't explode until the system can no longer guarantee security and a decent living, as in the old USSR. We are not in the home stretch but we are rounding second. Leverage could accelerate events to the point I live to see it.
>>>"Sorry to tell y'all but when Enoch "rivers of blood" Powell was in office as the minister for health he brought in the first waves of immigrants to work the bottom rung or the British health care system during the early 1960s." Not so - he brought in doctors and nurses from India;<<<
Not so, Powell brought all manner of immigrants, notably bringing in waves of Caribbean immigrants. But admitting he got the ball rolling by bringing in the first wave is a good start.
It is true that once out of power he may have regretted it. He may have given the Thatcher government the backbone to stand up to immigrant enthusiasts. But when in power he saw the logic and possibilities of immigrants, and he went along with it.
The left today seems to be going against it, but only because it seems the children of tribal Pakistani immigrants are no longer supporting Labor and the neocons, and are electing actual leftists like George Galloway. It is also not clear that left wing British Muslims see the logic behind issues like gay rights. Peter Hitchens complaint is he is not being paid attention to. He liked the Pakistanis when they served up cheap curry and voted as their tribal elders ordered them to.
Well, most of the real working class is not Republican or Democraitc one reason why the GOP lost in the Rustbelt. Whites in states like Texas or Florida tend to have higher incomes than whites in Oh, Michigan and so forth. The Tea party are not working class jocks but midde age small business who might hire an illegal immirgant but doesn't like paying texas or regulations. In San Diego the Tea Prty is oppose to illegal immirgants but a lot of them are retired engineers from Aerospace. Obama did pretty well with whites under 30,000. Between 30,000 to 50,000 he spilit more with Romeny and Romeny did better in the 50,000 to 85,000. The over 250,000 is where the Dems get the higher income whites but still split with Republicans.
Hitchens, the time for rueful words, if ever there was one, is long since past. Very brave of you to leave yourself the out of condemning Powell, a mind more prescient and a soul more principled by far than you. I'll grant you this: it's astonishing, truly, to see that your mouth isn't so dry that you can't pronounce the standard shibboleth: "It couldn't have been more obvious that 'race' wasn't the problem."
Are you looking to wash your hands, Hitchens? Grime finally giving you a twinge beneath those nails? You're in luck then. The headwaters are swelling ... the rivers will flow.
(Korean, male, 20s.)
I think people like Peter Hitchens liked immigration when it first started, because, as others have mentioned, it gave him the chance to eat affordable ethnic meals and have cheap nannies and cleaning services. The rotten neighborhoods and schools that resulted from the foreigners had little or no effect on his life, because people of his class use private schools and live in expensive neighborhoods that few immigrants can afford.
People like Hitchens also pay taxes, so there is a short-term negative effect on his life. Whether that is outweighed by the short-term positive effects is another question.
As a Black man from an immigrant background I can relate to you. I find the Left's demonization of Western Civilization deeply troubling and worrying. Why are they so determined to weaken a civilization that has advanced humanity so far?
Although Black I find no reason to celebrate the joys of diversity. I see nothing but trouble ahead and due to my skin color I will be forced to side with a group that is mostly of limited intellect and thus destined to lose in the upheavals to come.
Prof. Woland said...
...I think much of the recent hand wringing and reflection by the left on the impact of mass immigration into England foreshadows the fact that as the electorate is turning right on this issue and that if the left does not get out in front of this now, they will be hung by this for the next 50 to 100 years the same way Hitler hung the right in Europe for 70 years. The wind is changing.
Could that happen without repatriating the aliens? No matter how bad the immivasion turns out either for the actual British or the alien 'British,' would the Caribbean Negroes or Pakistanis and whatnots ever vote for a a conservative or pro-British party?
32, non-hispanic, non-Jewish white, Anglo-Saxon/indigenous paleolithic tribe with no real name Protestant. Started reading VDARE around 2000, and iSteve not long after, although in earnest since about 2007. I don't read VDARE any more, apart from the odd glance - I got tired of Michelle Malkin's neocon BS and felt the "team" lost its way somewhat. I reckon Steve does a better job than the VDARE collective these days.
I value Hitchens for his current contributions. He absolutely refuses to touch the third rail of race/ethnicity/demographics, but still goes far, far further than the vast majority of pundits and journalists in criticising the mess that has been made of my country.
Unlike the blatantly false mea culpas of Miliband and his Labour Party colleagues, I suspect his is sincere. I also find it hard to be too critical of his 1960s views because I suspect his influence on actual events in those days was negligible to nil.
In my darker moments, which are getting more and more frequent these days, I sense that there is not much worth fighting for here any more. The left has absolutely blitzed us in the past fifteen years, and some pretty heavy damage was sustained in the preceding 40 years too. I still hope that Anglo-America can regroup in some form in the mid-west, the north or New England, but here space is so limited, and the entirety of the country so accessible to so many immigrants, that we're likely to be drowned by migration. It's tragic, but we seem to have had our immune system completely annihilated.
I'm less concerned about London than about our other cities (and towns). For better or for worse, London does have a pretty long history of in-migration, so in some ways is better able to cope psychologically. But our other towns and cities were unprepared and have not been able to cope - the native English have simply packed up, moved out and never really returned, and they are largely lost. London is continually replenished by internal migration of bright, young, talented natives, but Birmingham, Leicester, Reading etc are not. We still have the medium-sized towns, including national treasures like Bath, York, Salisbury and so on, but I don't have much confidence that we'll keep them for long.
I don't consider myself a white nationalist - at least not a full-on one. Most of the immigration of the last 10 years has been by (very) white eastern Europeans, but I find it hard to feel much more positive about this than about the vibrant immigration that preceded it (and does still go on). I respect the civilisations of Europe and hope they prosper/rebound - but in their own lands, not here.
As others have pointed out, the damage is largely done now. What Labour and their dishonest fellow travellers are proposing amounts to donning a radiation suit - after you swallowed a spoonful of uranium. It's too late. And it's deliberately avoiding the real problem.
WN only makes sense in colonies like the U.S. where a bunch of white ethnic groups are already mixed together. The U.S. isn't a real nation, it's a failed social experiment, so it makes sense for the various European-American groups to try and minimize their differences and cooperate in order to save something from this failed experiment that we are stuck in.
If you're European it makes much more sense to be a Slovenian nationalist or Finnish nationalist or whatever.
Because there are real measurable and heritable mental differences between British people and Polish people, even though they basically have the same IQ. Same goes for the other European nationalities.
There is nothing wrong with Polish people, but it is wrong to expect that you can bring in massive amounts of Polish people (or whatever group) and have the British national character remain the same as it was previously
Post-racial, 22, Male-bodied, Citizen of The World.
Hacienda:'I'm for immigration, not because I resent whites."
Whatever lies help you to sleep at night, dear boy..
Hacienda:"It's really hard argue this point that whites have alienated themselves from planet Earth. Get that "idea" across, because its not really an idea."
"Alienated from the Earth?" Compared to whom, dear boy?Glancing at the latest reports on environmental damage in China (the homeland of your revered Lao Tzu), the Chinese certainly seem to be rather "alienated" from the Earth...
Hacienda:"It's even beyond culture, you know."
Biology is the only thing beyond culture, dear boy;do you really want to there? If so, there are some absolutely fascinating studies comparing East Asian and Caucasoid infants...
Hacienda:" It even goes beyond having faith in the comforts of an irrelevant 18th C taste maker."
Sadly, Burke has never been more vital than he is now.
Hacienda:"But don't bitch"
Isn't "bitchiness" the sine qua non of people like yourself, the Anti-Western civilization brigade?
Hacienda:"I just rather you push the technology further. Advance humanity, all that stuff."
....and importing all of these millions in dead weight from the Third World will sadly make that much more difficult, if not impossible.
syon
There is nothing wrong with Polish people, but it is wrong to expect that you can bring in massive amounts of Polish people (or whatever group) and have the British national character remain the same as it was previously
But if you controlled the culture [the way that the BBC does in the UK], then you could at least try to wean them off of Vodka, and into Single Malt Scotch [as a first step towards, say, weaning them off of Roman Popery, and into Presbyterianism].
lotta young ppl here. you all live in ny right? we should hang...
"WHY was there such a 'labor shortage' in Britain after WW2? The U.K.'s losses in WW1 were fully twice as high and nobody in 1921 was calling for Jamaicans to come to work in Britain.
I also doubt they contributed all that much. Saying they did is simply the politiclaly correct accepted orthodoxy. What prominent Briton would say it was a mistake and not a gain?
Even if there were some economic benefits, the cost to Britain in national character, loss of social cohesion and increases in racial tensions more then cancelled it out. In the long run Britain would have been much better off had it endured some economic pain and preserved its racial and cultural origins."
Good point. The labour shortage could have been just made up by historians.
You can't believe what historians say.
They interviewed some English people in 1970 and some said that they didn't want black people in the UK. They didn't even want to see a black face. many of this people fought in WWII, but the elites by then hated their own people.
Read the book "State of Emergency" about the Uk in the early 70's and you'll see the complete hatred the author has for English people and te love he has for blacks and Indians.
I'm anon 5:53 and I think it was a mistake to let the immigrants in too.
>would the Caribbean Negroes or Pakistanis and whatnots ever vote for a conservative or pro-British party?<
It's not a bet that 10 Downing bothered to consult the British people about; nor should anyone ever take the bet, given the consequences of losing.
A refreshing confession.
Perhaps you, Anglo-Saxons, should start feeling more akin to your Mediterranean cousins and start reading more about the recent developments in Greece, namely thoroughly-anti-immigrant party Golden Dawn's (google it!) rise to 10% of the vote.
While the rest of the world may have been considering the economic crisis in the European South as the main problem to be solved, us Southerners have been increasingly focusing on immigration issues, which, by some weird twist of fate, have come to be exactly the same as the ones you're having in the past years.
From what I've been reading, the "balkanization" concept is still a popular meme in the West; however, this is no longer a major issue, especially in Greece.
What IS a major issue, though, is the increasing number of ghettos and no-go zones in the capital, Athens, and the increasing diversification of population groups. Both phenomenae bear the same characteristics as the ones you describe in your articles and its comments.
This is not a problem solely restricted to the Anglo-Saxon world and its immediate neighbours. It affects the whole white world.
White immigrants (Eastern Europeans mostly) have been adapting to Greek society at a much faster pace than other ethnic and/or racial groups (Africans, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis etc). The Greek society has generally responded in much the same way - provided you don't believe what the local news outlets say.
I'm absolutely positive a Greek leftist elite would have increased his popularity had he made the same declaration as Hitchens.
The term "racism" was virtually non-existent in Greece before the giant immigration wave struck the country in the mid-90s; a wave which keeps bringing up 3rd world immigrants in our shores. Nobody prepared the society for such a massive change.
Now, the society tries to adapt, in ways very similar - almost identical - to the ones i'm seeing here, at this blog, among others. That's why I'm reading it: because i can totally identify with it.
I find it strange that there were only 3 Jews and 2 partial Jews who commented, and yet Steve supposedly has such a lot of very literate black readers.
And yet, whenever there is an article critical of Israel, the comments section feels like someone kicked over a nest of hornets.
Age: 57
Sex: male
Race: Caucasus*/Iceland/Malay
IQ: 180
Weight: 115 pounds (skin & bones)
Religion: Asatru/Buddhist
Politics: Shift-Alt-Right
* I'm a REAL Caucasian!!!
Burke Conservative,
Burke is NOT relevant. You don't get off the net much, do you.
Thanks for calling me boy. I feel so young. Trying hard to insult me with that 19th C, mid 20th C all-purpose whity insult at colored folks like myself. That grandeur of whitey highlighting the paucity of colored people with that simple slander. Oh, my, my.
Honest, I'm for immigration on principle. Not because I resent whites. I feel kinda sorry for whites. But, whites being pitied by another race is such a strange and novel feeling in society that people think I'm strange. It tires me out, so I avoid it.
35yo white female, happily married mother of four (not a 'blended' family either). Was raised a Leftist atheist America-hater; can't really shake off the atheism (or at least agnosticism), but sometime in my 20s I got absolutely gobsmacked by gratitude, cemented by my anger and disgust at the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks. Started out as a rah-rah Neocon, but said goodbye to all that thanks to isteve and others (plus my own experiences in the military).
White, male, in my early sixties, Founding Stock American, raised Methodist, now attend Traditional Anglican services (Fuck you, ECUSA) , proud that all four of my great-grandfathers served honorably against the USA in The War.
I'm a White Nationalist who has no problem with my church (AMIA) being run by black Africans, the last honest Anglicans. God seems to be fond of little jokes like that.
I'd take Poles over Jamaicans, Somalis, Pakistanis, Vietnamese, or any of the other various crime-prone violent, welfare inclined third worlders my rotten government chooses to let in.
Vietnamese are not that bad. I don't see why you lump them with those other three nations.
I don't think we should cut Hitchens any slack, even if he didn't play as big a role as he thinks. Fellow Travelers did their bit.
The old avant garde of his age are slowly realizing that they will go down in history as a bunch of foolish people who tried to destroy their heritage, well-being, and a good bit of what was good in the world for reasons as simple as thoughtlessly impressing their friends of the moment. They sold their future and inheritance for a mess of words. Many of them probably mentally never left school. It was all just words.
The ancient Greeks knew about hubris and tragedy. The stagelight should be kept on these people to reinforce the age-old lesson. No fairy-tale make-believe endings.
Though in addition, somewhere there's probably an interesting file, which Putin now has deeply buried (if it ever wasn't), as to the role of the KGB with respect to post Cuban Missile Crisis Soviet strategy to encourage wars of national liberation throughout the Third World and the West. Remember Comrades! You can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs! Come the Revolution! Down with The Man!
We're talking Active Measures here (your KKK news of the day):
"...stirring up racial tensions in the United States by mailing bogus letters from the Ku Klux Klan, placing an explosive package in "the Negro section of New York" (operation PANDORA), and spreading conspiracy theories that Martin Luther King, Jr.'s assassination had been planned by the US government...
... GRU alone spent more than $1 billion for propaganda and peace movements..."
Whatever the actual details, there probably was a sustained effort. Maybe it's now an amok zombie weapon. Die, Zombie, Die!
"Honest, I'm for immigration on principle. ... I'm pro-immmigration and anti-white...
Messages such as these need to be made widely available. It would make a good debate topic in high schools. There are probably some young Hitchens out there who are clueless about the world outside their immediate circle.
"Vietnamese are not that bad. I don't see why you lump them with those other three nations."
LOL, don't you get it, Sport? That milquetoast, conciliatory, "oh, some of the muds aren't that bad" attitude is PRECISELY WHY YOU CLOWNS ARE LOSING!
Hacienda:"Burke is NOT relevant. You don't get off the net much, do you."
Love the caps on "Not." It just screams leftist hissy-fit. As for the relevancy of Burke, who stands as a better antidote to the twin-forces of leftist multiculturalism and neo-liberal economics?Burke speaks to all that the left loathes.Hence, your disregard for him, dear boy.
Hacienda:"Thanks for calling me boy. I feel so young. Trying hard to insult me with that 19th C, mid 20th C all-purpose whity insult at colored folks like myself."
So touchy, dear boy.Typical behavior for the the anti-White Left, whose politics are simply a manifestation of their hatred for Western Civilization. Actually, if you would go over my older postings on Steve's blog, you would see that my "dear boys" are a schoolmasterish affectation, not a racial invective. I simply love schooling leftists, as it were. They are so ignorant, like children...
Hacienda:"Honest, I'm for immigration on principle. Not because I resent whites."
Ah, the old Lewis Carroll technique....sadly, dear boy, repetition does not equal truth, and your resentment of Whites bleeds out of every utterance. Again, though, if such pretty lies help you to feel better about yourself...
syon
syon,
Let me clarify. I don't resent whites. I resent whites like you.
Simple. See?
To anon at 9:02 PM:
I don't know if you are also from Canada or not, but Vietnamese are very active in Asian organized crime, up here. They play a big role in the overseas drug trades, and are a big player in the ever growing domestic drug industry here. They also have a lock on the home-invasion market and many of their street gangs are very violent. We just had a shootout execution at Yorkdale mall where the "Asians Assassins" were targeted. Vietnamese were non-existent in this country until about just over thirty years ago. I'd say we were doing just fine without them.
">would the Caribbean Negroes or Pakistanis and whatnots ever vote for a conservative or pro-British party?<"
There's a class axis and a racial axis and a religious axis so it depends what group you're talking about and whether the pro-British party was more labor or business focused.
Some groups under exactly the right circumstances you could get up to 50% maybe but they'd always be paranoid it was going to go further so i don't think you could ever get more than that.
White immigrants (Eastern Europeans mostly) have been adapting to Greek society at a much faster pace than other ethnic and/or racial groups (Africans, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis etc). The Greek society has generally responded in much the same way - provided you don't believe what the local news outlets say.
Interesting how Greeks sit back and allow hundreds of thousands (soon millions?) of Ukrainians and Albanians to flood in without minding too much, but all it takes is for one little slavophone from Florina to declare "I am Macedonian" all hell breaks loose. Lol, that's a pretty open-and-shut case of mixed up priorities right there.
I'm absolutely positive a Greek leftist elite would have increased his popularity had he made the same declaration as Hitchens.
You're right about this. A little bit of honesty here could go a long, long way. It's a perfect lie for a politician (and for once it's a lie that would actually help the Right rather than hurt us). In fact, I fully expect them to start saying these things if support for Xrisi Avgi continues to rise. On the other hand, it may be seen to aid the racial right rather draw support away from it. I'm sure this reasoning has figured in the minds of some politicians who have contemplated using this line, and it's not necessarily a case of cold political calculation, either. Let's face it, the racial right's extremist nonsense can be extremely off-putting, and some people get so upset by it they are more than happy to cut of their noses to spite their faces. It's imperative racialists understand the nature of this unfortunate tendency.
Btw, support for Xrisi Avgi was only 7% (not 10%) last election. It's not all that exciting. That's only 1% better than the Sweden Democrats, and SD hasn't aroused anywhere near the excitement in racialist circles, which is surprising since for obvious historical reasons northern european 'racism' faces much tougher hurdles.
Honest, I'm for immigration on principle. Not because I resent whites. I feel kinda sorry for whites. But, whites being pitied by another race is such a strange and novel feeling in society that people think I'm strange. It tires me out, so I avoid it.
If you sincerely pity whites I don't understand why you are often so aggressively anti-white. I understand some kinds of WNs can be extremely annoying, but you seem to react the same way to even much milder types.
It is strange to see that kind of pity for whites, but it's not impossible to understand: their cause is quite justice so it's really just a case of having the courage to take a stand for baseline racial justice, even if it means standing up for the hated white man.
I feel pretty much the same way. I get pulled into their group as a 'fellow white' sometimes, which is fair enough in the sense that I belong to a white ethnicity, but I don't feel very much in the way of racial closeness to northern europeans. Still, as I said, it's not wrong for them to not to be wiped off the planet, so I have to support them.
And morality aside, if you like your own kind and want your own kind to have a racial future then supporting whites is the best strategy. In the American context, it's the only strategy that makes any sense. If whites go down, we'll all eventually go down; if whites win, we'll win too.
See, if you're going to attack whites and support immigration 'on principle,' then sooner or later they are going to apply that principle to you, and demand that Korea be flooded with 50 million africans. If you're a man of principle how could you refuse? (And you need them to grow your economy and diversity is such a strength and all that..) It's pure negrify-thy-neighbor. That way we all lose. Much simpler to support whites' racial existence on the agreement they support yours.
Honest, I'm for immigration on principle.
What principle is that?
You can be an admirer of Powell's intellect and bravery, and believe that the Rivers of Blood speech addressed the right issues at the right time. You can even agree that integration is going to be harder generations down the line when people are of a different appearance.
However that still does not mean that Hitchen's wrong to bemoan the way in which that speech was made, with "black man will have the whip hand over the white man" and "charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies".
I've no idea if Hitchens shares the view that Powell was clever and brave, although its clear he thinks that he addressed the right subject at the right time. However as someone who appreciates Powell as a politician over many areas I find the language within the Rivers of Blood speech to have been unhelpful.
You do not have to disagree with the warnings in it, or dislike the man to say that the speech was ill judged.
I also think that Hitchen's readers
Adult indian-american male, pro-immigration, but not mass,mono-country (i.e. Mexico) immigration, controlled at rate that will assimilate. Also immigration should be diverse, there shouldn't be more from one country or another, where large enclaves start to develop that allows isolation from mainstream, and skill levels should not vary by country, i.e. unskilled workers should not just come from countries like Mexico in the US or the middleeast, north africa in europe, they should be evenly distributed from elsewhere such as europe asia africa south america etc, fair is fair. Above all assimilate, and countries promote assimilation not multi-culturalism!
Post a Comment