How much of elite enthusiasm in the Northeast for opening the borders further to, among other worthy goals, save Mexicans from starvation is a transmutation of the old Yankee missionary impulse? In the 19th and early 20th Centuries, the wealthier northern Protestant denominations did a lot of missionary work abroad, such as in Hawaii, China, and the Arab world. In Hawaii, the Yankees started off doing good and wound up doing well, while in China they got kicked out, one and all.
Eventually, the high WASP progressives tired of Christian proselytizing, and also realized they weren't always as welcome in other lands as they had assumed. So, rather than go to heathen lands to uplift the benighted, why not just have the vibrantly diverse come here to be uplifted? The uplift urge continues.
Of course, little of the traditional northeastern Yankee uplift effort is currently directed at immigrants, which would be insensitive. Instead, it is focused upon you unenlightened nativist yahoos for not being persuaded by the browbeating of your betters that allowing mass immigration is your post-Christian duty.
Commenter David M. immediately replies:
Eventually, the high WASP progressives tired of Christian proselytizing, and also realized they weren't always as welcome in other lands as they had assumed. So, rather than go to heathen lands to uplift the benighted, why not just have the vibrantly diverse come here to be uplifted? The uplift urge continues.
Of course, little of the traditional northeastern Yankee uplift effort is currently directed at immigrants, which would be insensitive. Instead, it is focused upon you unenlightened nativist yahoos for not being persuaded by the browbeating of your betters that allowing mass immigration is your post-Christian duty.
Commenter David M. immediately replies:
You know, I don't think they would really want us nativist yahoos to change our ways. We give them an enemy and someone to feel morally superior to.
I don't think that they want the immigrants to change either. They would rather that immigrants remain oppressed noble savages that they can protect from the evil nativists. As long as they remain foreign and distant (but simultaneously resident in the U.S.) they serve as excellent blank slates to project victimhood onto, while their actual behavior and beliefs remain totally irrelevant. If on the other hand they behave like white Americans (ala George Zimmerman) then they become real human beings, and must be lumped into the "good" or "evil" categories based on whether they have the right opinions and cultural habits.
Posts
86 comments:
"Of course, little of the traditional northeastern Yankee uplift effort is currently directed at immigrants, which would be insensitive. Instead, it is focused upon you unenlightened nativist yahoos..."
You know, I don't think they would really want us nativist yahoos to change our ways. We give them an enemy and someone to feel morally superior to.
I don't think that they want the immigrants to change either. They would rather that immigrants remain oppressed noble savages that they can protect from the evil nativists. As long as they remain foreign and distant (but simultaneously resident in the U.S.) they serve as excellent blank slates to project victimhood onto, while their actual behavior and beliefs remain totally irrelevant. If on the other hand they behave like white Americans (ala George Zimmerman) then they become real human beings, and must be lumped into the "good" or "evil" categories based on whether they have the right opinions and cultural habits.
Northeastern Wasp are still dealing with inferiority complex toward Anglo-Norman and Scot-Norman(Ulster Scot)of the South. Our problem stem from the South not feeling guilt of having any inferiority complex. This maybe annoying to some. Especially toward wasp new best friends, the Jews.
Watch it - you're starting to sound like Southern Nationalists ;-)
p.61 of The Diversity Illusion by Ed West
“Scruton cites mass immigration as an example of ‘unscrupulous optimism’ at work., a policy driven by an unthinking hope rather than calculated logic. It is an ‘unachievable goal chosen for its abstract purity, in which differences are reconciled, conflict overcome and mankind soldered together in a metaphysical unity (which) can never be questioned ‘”
This ‘unscrupulous optimism’ on the part of the delicate fingered Wasps is a sure fire way to demonstrate your conspicuous compassion and thus socially signal to others your wealth(whether you have it or not) that insulates you from the future crowded crime ridden results of this immigration.
What is forgotten in all this ‘immigration is wonderful hoopla’ is the effect on their grandchildren, who will be a real minority, and taxed(due to their white privilege) to the state of impecuniousness. The grandparents now stroke themselves for their moral goodness but the grandchildren’s teeth will be set on edge. I guess that means the granddaughters will be pulling tricks to survive.
This immigration Reform Act should be retitled as the ‘Gobble Your Grandchildren’s Future Act.”
But kids acan talk, I really do not understand what’s with these white kids, it is their future that their parents are giving away with their sanctimonious silence?
Nobody ruins more lives than do-gooders.
So where are all these Yankee WASPs I keep hearing about? You won't find them in elite institutions and actually running the country and having significant influence.
I think there's a desire to believe that our elites are comprised by a cohesive, prestigious ethnic group with a sense of history and tradition that goes back to the founding population of the country.
People don't want to believe that our elites are comprised of ambitious arrivistes.
Yankee liberals share with Canadians and Swedes a willingness to show their moral superiority by letting their homelands get overrun with diversity. The South does not. The immigration fight in the U.S. is entirely between Yankee liberals who want more, and Southerners who want it restricted. Canada and Australia admit three times as many immigrants per capita as the US does, and the only reason we aren't the same way is because of Southern opposition.
Open borders has not traditionally been supported by WASPs but by white ethnics who wanted more of their kinsmen in the United States. Emmanuel Cellar and Jacob Javits, both Jewish, supported the 1965 Immigration Act. So did Philip Hart and Ted Kennedy, both Irish.
Is the Pope a WASP?
goatweed
Canada and Australia admit three times as many immigrants per capita as the US does, and the only reason we aren't the same way is because of Southern opposition.
How about Haley Barbour, Lindsey Graham, and a host of other Southern politicians who feel otherwise? If Southerners would stop block voting for GOP establishment hacks, they might really do something, but that old addiction to cheap labor stops them.
OK, who were the "Yankee liberals" who spoke out against the Immigration Act of 1924?
I live in the Northeast. There is no widespread enthusiasm for open borders here among ordinary people. Quite the opposite. Even many Hispanics here, who are largely Puerto Rican, Cuban and South America are against high levels of immigration. They are often openly contemptuous of Mexicans and Central Americans.
We have fewer WASPs here than any other part of the country. There are virtually none of them across large swaths. The small number of WASPs here in NYC are mostly transplants from other regions.
I can't emphasize enough that WASPs are practically extinct in most places around here and that open borders politicians here are mostly garden variety ethnic/mixed ethnicity whites.
Yankees like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Hermann Melville were cheering for mass immigration and race mixing long before their fellow Protestants got tired of missionaryizing.
Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1846: [America is] the asylum of all nations...the energy of Irish, Germans, Swedes, Poles and Cossacks, and all the European tribes, of the Africans and Polynesians, will construct a new race...as vigorous as the new Europe which came out of the smelting pot of the Dark Ages.
Hermann Melville: [Americans are] not a nation, so much as a world...the heirs of all time...On this Western Hemisphere all tribes and peoples are forming into one federated whole.
Here's Emerson again: How much more are men than nations.... The office of America is...to take in the immigrant, to open the doors of the sea and the fields of the earth.
Yankees.
Two things come to mind, each tangential.
Yankees: Too much missionary impulse, not enough missionary position.
and
Yankees: I'm reminded of Captain "Red Legs" Terril from The Outlaw Josey Wales. "Doin' right ain't got no end."
If Yankees did all this on their own, it would be one thing. But much of what Yankees have done in the past 40 yrs cannot be separated from Jewish influence and competition.
Initially, Yankees(and even liberal Yankees) and Jews didn't see eye to eye, and there was ethnic competition, with Yankees clinging to what they have, and Jews gaining.
But there came a time when Yankees pretty much surrendered to the Jews morally, culturally, intellectually, legally, economically, and etc.
Thus, GOP Yankees in the North ironically found the last bastion of 'yankee'--meaning northern white protestant power--down in Dixie.
This fusion of GOP that historically started in the north but found new pastures in the south should be called Yaxies or Dinkies.
The personalities of missionaries, teachers, and welfare caseworkers are much the same.
The original Yankees are now without influence and their religion, Congregationalism, is nearly dead. But their religion morphed into a belief in the power of education and welfare to uplift, and many influential Americans today share that belief.
Oppose them at your peril. Go around in polite company saying, "The schools in this country don't do jack shit. People are born stupid and they stay that way," and see where it gets you.
A difference between the 19th century Yankee missionary impulse and today's zeal for mass immigration is the potential for doing well. The potential of China as a huge market was obvious, as was the agricultural potential of Hawaii. The market potential of adding another few tens of millions of poor people in America is less compelling. Maybe the surviving upper class Yankees have enough inherited wealth today that they are content to focus more on doing "good" as they see it (e.g., railing against carbon and nativism) rather than on doing well.
The Jews took the Yankees measure and their power two generations ago. The present mass immigration enthusiasts are Democratic politicians who know which side their political bread is buttered on and Republican politicians who want the cheap labor coming for their corporate overlords (including the influential Southerners alluded to in the previous comments).
Here in my town in Fairfield County, CT, I get the feeling most people support open borders. Our town is 95% white, with the remainder mainly being Asian women that married white nerds. There are towns in Fairfield county that have big minority populations, such as Norwalk, Danbury and Stamford, and Bridgeport.
These are the women that live conservative lifestyles: they are married (got married when they were 32-35 or so), have 1-3 kids, stay at home, and their husband works at an office job for IBM, Mastercard, Pepsi, Factset or some other large company or in the financial sector. They drive minivans, and put their kids in French enrichment programs. However, they also are the women who have the red/white marriage equality logo as their Facebook avatar. They're all about posting on FB how evil the Arizona immigration bill is. But if anyone were to suggest combining our all white school district with the next town, they'd go completely insane, doing everything they could to stop it. They talk up diversity, but they don't really want any of it. Heck, if they wanted it, they could move five miles away, and for the same money get twice the house. But the schools would suck. So would the crime rate.
Heck, when someone proposes to build affordable housing in town, the locals go nuts (and affordable isn't low income, it's something like income of $50K to $100K for subsidized housing).
These aren't necessarily WASPs, there's jews and catholics and other white ethnics in this bunch. But the women especially love to think they love diversity and open borders, because it has no chance of ever impacting them.
I keep seeing this theme that the Yankees or Puritans are responsible for all this multi-culti mess we are in. Sort of like how Ann Coulter keeps blaming the 1965 Immigration Act on Teddy Kennedy.
Keep in mind WASPs were responsible for the 1924 Immigration Act. Had we still been under its auspices, we would not be in our present predicament. Blame the boys behind the 1965 Immigration Act, and here's a hint, it ain't Teddy Kennedy.
I suppose when the Immigration Act of 2013 passes, it will be named the Rubio or McCain act. I doubt in a few years anyone will even know of the brains in the Senate behind it.
Yankees like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Hermann Melville were cheering for mass immigration and race mixing long before their fellow Protestants got tired of missionaryizing.
So if a Yankee makes a statement, say, cheering bestiality, then that means that Yankees as a whole or in general are supportive of bestiality?
While if a member of a non-Yankee ethnic group makes a statement cheering something, nothing is to be inferred about the non-Yankee group as a whole or in general.
Is that how it's supposed to work?
David wrote, "You know, I don't think they would really want us nativist yahoos to change our ways. We give them an enemy and someone to feel morally superior to. "
The late Lawrence Auster wrote something similar which he described as the script of liberalism:
As I have often written, the liberal order articulates the world through a “script” in which there are three characters: the white liberal, who embodies the non-discriminatory virtue of the liberal regime; the white non-liberal, who discriminates against nonwhites and who must be crushed by the white liberal; and the nonwhite/non-Westerner, who either is discriminated against by the white non-liberal or is non-discriminatorily included by the white liberal. In the script, furthermore, only the white liberal and the white non-liberal are moral actors, with the first representing good and the second representing evil. The nonwhite/non-Westerner is not a moral actor, but is simply the passive recipient of the white liberal’s goodness or of the white non-liberal’s bigotry. The reason that the nonwhite/non-Westerner cannot be a moral actor is that his very function in the script is to be the recipient of either good non-discrimination or evil discrimination. If he were a moral actor, then his own actions would have to be judged; specifically, his bad actions would have to be judged. But to judge his bad actions would be to discriminate against him. And since the central purpose of liberalism is to eliminate all discriminatory treatment of nonwhites/non-Westerners, moral judgement of nonwhites/non-Westerners must also be eliminated. Therefore nonwhites/non-Westerners cannot be seen as responsible moral actors.
Unfair. The original Yankee Progressives fought for immigration restriction in the early 20th century. You can hardly blame open borders on Theodore Roosevelt or Henry Cabot Lodge!
http://voices.suntimes.com/early-and-often/politics/house-blocks-quinns-concealed-carry-amendatory-veto/
Guns and buns both coming out of the closet.
Steve, this is very post-Calvinist.
Simon Kuper, a South African/Dutch expatriate, is typical of this sort of attitude, his last column this past weekend on how Bill Gates and George Soros are going to make Pakistanis smart by having early childhood education has to be seen to be believed. It is obviously post-Christian in nature, and pathetic. Kuper it must be emphasized, was born to Afrikaaner parents part of the elite but maintains an effective anti-White attitude and pro-Black admiring attitude in his writings.
Anon asks where are the Yankee Wasps? Look no further than the Prescott Bush family, two sons as President. Or perhaps you'd prefer Bill Gates. Or perhaps Bill Ayers, son of the Chair of Commonwealth Edison.
As for Lindsay Grahamnesty, he's old money, has a lot of powerful connections, and a primary challenger would likely need a war chest of around $40 million at least to unseat him. It can be done, but recall that people vote for Grahamnesty because he delivers pork to his poor state, and delivers a lot of Tammany patronage. Incumbents have their hands on the pork, and thus get re-elected save disasters or tidal waves of electoral shifts.
As for the lunatics who can't count -- Jews are 3 percent of America. And disappearing fast, due to intermarriage and such. Are Amy Chua's daughters Jews or Chinese (their father is Jewish)? They self-identify not as Jewish but Chinese. WASPs remain, Warren Buffett, The Bushes, Karl Rove, all being good examples, as are Senators Patty Murray, Elizabeth (Fauxcahontas) Warren, and David Rockefeller. You don't get more WASP or powerful than David Rockefeller.
1) The last important American to merit the term "Yankee" was the late Samuel P Huntington-- and even he grew up down the alley from Tony Bennett. The term should be buried with him.
2) The worst avatar of this "Yankee" impulse in the last century was a Virginian who never lived north of Princeton. As with Monroe, his policy still carries his name.
3) The only county where Unitarians reach 1% is in the Ozarks. The last major Unitarian politician, Stevenson, got nearly all his electors from the South. Unitarians are not a factor in US politics.
4) Much of what Dixie rails against today, such as gun control and racial diversity, are her own inventions. The income tax and Prohibition met a lot more resistance in New England than in the South, where they were practically ratified overnight. Dixie was sad to see the original cheap-labor open-borders policy-- the slave trade-- go.
Sorry if I've confused anyone.
The WASPs are not behind immigration is is the Jews. I know you can't say that but let's not pretend that America is controlled by WASPs anymore.
Let me add, I think Steve is on to something here. Rather than a Deep State, a Deep Culture tends to survive if it has things in it that appeal to the group and make it successful. Spengler at the Asia Times and PJM notes that most of the world's cultures have disappeared, and it is true. Most of them have.
But if you read say, Tacitus (it is unclear if he ever went to Germany, or merely recounted tales), and then observations on the Calvinists in the Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, David Hackett Fischer's "Albion's Seed" and the account of the East Anglian emigration into New England, cultural patterns emerge that are very different from other Whites in the UK and have very good and bad points.
1. Cultural cohesion and "Japanese style" conformity, see Edvard Munch and the writings of Ibsen for the downside of Nordic/Germanic/Puritan conformity. There is always witch-hunting to find non-conformers to hang. Fischer recounts the hanging of an elderly Quaker woman while the Aristocrats of the South merely demanded social groveling to their status and could care less about the religion of inferiors.
Nevertheless the social cohesion of Puritans/WASPs led to much better treatment of animals, of women, higher literacy rates, better care for the sick, public hospitals and schools, social organizations and civic society, higher skills among workmen, and a tendency not to lord things over others by the leaders, who had to pretend to egalitarianism.
That's why the social cohesion lasted, it gave more good than bad though it has a lot of bad.
And the same goes for attitudes towards non-Whites and religious belief. Puritans thought themselves like the Norse Vikings did, a point of light and goodness in a sea of utter darkness and depravity, and ordered by God or the gods to bring the light to others, once they have extinquished the evil amongst themselves.
Certainly modern PC/Multiculti attitudes are nothing more than debased Calvinism and nothing like it can be seen among the Borders/Scots-Irish, or the Catholic Irish, or the Tidewater Aristocrats from South England (the old Saxon Kingdom of Wessex), or Catholic Germans, or the Italians, or Poles, or Hungarians etc.
Again, the FT's Simon Kuper, is a good example. He's cut from the same culture. His group/class/people the embodiment of light and goodness, other Whites the embodiment of evil and darkness, and non-Whites as objects of moral uplift to show concretely God's favor (or Gaia's) to the "good White people." And so on.
Yankees like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Hermann Melville were cheering for mass immigration and race mixing long before their fellow Protestants got tired of missionaryizing. -- A Gross
Yeah, but it took George Washington to say that even Mohammedans should be invited, if they worked hard.
Some claim there's no evidence that he smoked any of his own hemp. But what about this statement?
Anonymous asks . . .
"Yankees like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Hermann Melville were cheering for mass immigration and race mixing long before their fellow Protestants got tired of missionaryizing."
So if a Yankee makes a statement, say, cheering bestiality, then that means that Yankees as a whole or in general are supportive of bestiality?
It depends. If you are Mencius Moldbug or one of his sad little dittoheads, then, yes.
I simply think the fact that for the most past Yankees aren't really dealing with influx of immigration they don't really care and can afford to come across morally superior. If and when this changes their tune will change as well.
It's an echo of the slavery debates 150 years ago or so. When 90%+ of Blacks resided in the South.
"It's an echo of the slavery debates 150 years ago or so. When 90%+ of Blacks resided in the South."
The South and SW needs more policies to send more more black and brown people to the North.
We need more 'Swedish riots' in the North.
http://news.yahoo.com/rand-pauls-troubling-ties-racists-160500978.html
Never mind all US politicians are tied to Zionist Jewish supremacists.
"Yankees like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Hermann Melville were cheering for mass immigration and race mixing long before their fellow Protestants got tired of missionaryizing."
So if a Yankee makes a statement, say, cheering bestiality, then that means that Yankees as a whole or in general are supportive of bestiality?
It depends. If you are Mencius Moldbug or one of his sad little dittoheads, then, yes.
Uh... he's not just talking about one random crazy Yankee crank, but two of the most famous, influential Yankees ever. Just a slight difference.
I simply think the fact that for the most past Yankees aren't really dealing with influx of immigration they don't really care and can afford to come across morally superior. If and when this changes their tune will change as well.
It's an echo of the slavery debates 150 years ago or so. When 90%+ of Blacks resided in the South.
It ties into Whiskey's remark about PC being "debased Calvinism", which was actually pretty astute. If you're white and rich, you're blessed. If you're white and poor, you're cursed, and therefore, your opinion on how detrimental mass immigration is to your own well-being doesn't account for squat.
Although it's obviously not WASP Yankee liberals behind the campaign for open borders and the dispossession of White America that demographic did and does have a missionary impulse which is easily manipulated.
For example Jews, or pretty much any other ethnic group, who were the majority in a particular living space would never give their children's birthright away because it's "selfish" or "unfair" to keep it all for yourself but some NW Euro populations can be manipulated on that basis.
Tis very strange.
" Kuper it must be emphasized, was born to Afrikaaner parents part of the elite but maintains an effective anti-White attitude and pro-Black admiring attitude in his writings."
I don't think Kuper was born to Afrikaaner parents. See here and here.
Canada and Australia admit three times as many immigrants per capita as the US does, and the only reason we aren't the same way is because of Southern opposition.
I don't think Canada and Australia admit three times as many third worlders. Aren't most of their immigrants actually British and citizens of commonwealth countries?
Naive American voters tend to think of citizenship as entailing responsibilities as well as privileges, even though that's increasingly less true in the real world.
Less true or sadly perhaps not true at all now.
An unusual but colorful story involved Texas Baptists in the late 19th century. William Cowper Brann, editor of the Iconoclast in Waco, accused Baylor University officials of using South American children, that they got from the missionaries, as servants. Brann reported that one Brazilian house servant in the Baylor University president's household got pregnant by a family member of the president. Brann accused male faculty of having sex with female students. He warned fathers not to send their daughters to Baylor, lest they get raped of become magdalenes. Brann died after a shoot out on the streets of Waco, the shooter was an angry Baylor supporter.
I don't think Kuper was born to Afrikaaner parents. See here and here.
Ahahahaha. Whiskey is as predictable as cold weather in Fargo. I swear the guy must have alarms rigged to his computer when ever Steve posts "Jews" or "WASPs."
That being said, no question New England WASPs really thought they'd built a city on a hill, and still do.
I don't think Kuper was born to Afrikaaner parents. See here and here.
So he's a Litvak. That means he's as Afrikaner as Joe Slovo.
Had to laugh at this quote from the second link.
He also thinks English football needs to start including the middle classes. Nearly all footballers are still recruited from the traditional working class — one reason, Kuper thinks, why we are still waiting for the first British Jew to debut in the Premier League. “When you get the middle classes involved, you will get Jewish footballers — the racial idea about Jews being unfit is ridiculous."
So that is the key to getting England its second World Cup title! Someone should inform, David Bernstein, the current head of the English Football Association so he get started on this right away. Alas, Bernstein is likely too busy fighting racism in the English game to take on any new challenges.
borderline mental disorder
I don't think Canada and Australia admit three times as many third worlders. Aren't most of their immigrants actually British and citizens of commonwealth countries?
In Canada the vast majority now come from Asia, especially China, the Philippines and India, with the USA, UK, and France the main non-Asian source countries.
Reformers are usually Satan's men. They cannot stand the facts of living. Their sense of guilt and depravity is too deep. They are always guilty, because they want power over others.... Puritans are always incomplete men, composed of will and intellect and appetites. Lacking love, they can express themselves only through power.
-- Andrew Lytle
I find myself agreeing almost entirely with Whiskey on this issue.
I’m actually a living Calvinist, of sorts, and I agree that many of the manifestations of the current liberal American ethos – e.g. multiculti/PC/open borders etc. -- are indeed debased/misdirected Christian impulses.
A couple of complicating factors.
First, Calvinists aren’t noted for being particularly mission-oriented, since if the fate of any particular soul is predestined, well, then, why bother? Other protestant groups have been much more devoted to missions than the Calvinists.
But what the Calvinists (in the form of Puritans in colonial America) specialized in was ordering society, i.e. by working out ways of combining laissez faire economics with informal but powerful, effective policing of cultural issues. This is exactly what you see today in liberal-dominated institutions such as the universities and mass media.
I also agree with Whiskey that this is indeed a form of ‘deep culture’, i.e. an impulse that goes well beyond a particular ethnic group. It’s far too pervasive to be associated with ‘the WASPs’ these days.
Larry Auster understood this dynamic well. His explanation rings true in that liberals see only themselves and their opponents as fully human, i.e. capable of either being saved or being damned. Immigrants/the ‘oppressed’/foreigners are just stage props in a members-only morality play.
I would take a step back, actually, and posit that essentially all leftist socio-cultural impulses of the past 200 years are just Christian heresies. The Marxists perverted the teleological culmination of the cosmos (i.e. the Second Coming and the redemption of creation) by immanentizing the eschaton. Current leftists are, in post-modern fashion, less focused, but they similarly pervert Christian beliefs; e.g. turning the equality of all in God’s eyes into radical egalitarianism and multiculturalism; transmogrifying Christian ‘hospitality’, i.e. welcoming the foreigner or stranger, into open borders; and so on.
"Uh... he's not just talking about one random crazy Yankee crank, but two of the most famous, influential Yankees ever. Just a slight difference."
“Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world; only to serve the People of Israel,” he said during a public discussion of what kind of work non-Jews are allowed to perform on Shabbat.
"Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat,"
Yosef, the spiritual leader of the Shas Party and the former chief Sephardi rabbi of Israel, also said that the lives of non-Jews are protected in order to prevent financial loss to Jews.
"With gentiles, it will be like any person: They need to die, but God will give them longevity. Why? Imagine that one’s donkey would die, they’d lose their money. This is his servant. That’s why he gets a long life, to work well for this Jew,” said the rabbi, who recently turned 90.
An audio recording of some of the rabbi’s remarks was broadcast on Israel’s Channel 10.
Read more: http://www.jta.org/2010/10/18/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/sephardi-leader-yosef-non-jews-exist-to-serve-jews#ixzz2YbLfOg3M
"It ties into Whiskey's remark about PC being "debased Calvinism", which was actually pretty astute. If you're white and rich, you're blessed. If you're white and poor, you're cursed, and therefore, your opinion on how detrimental mass immigration is to your own well-being doesn't account for squat."
The phenomenon can be just as well explained as Judaism. If you're Jewish and rich, it's because you're a Chosen, and if you're White and poor, you're cattle and therefore your opinion on how detrimental mass immigration is to your own well-being doesn't account for squat.
That being said, no question New England WASPs really thought they'd built a city on a hill, and still do.
"New England WASPs" are essentially an extinct group.
Uh... he's not just talking about one random crazy Yankee crank, but two of the most famous, influential Yankees ever. Just a slight difference.
Except they weren't "the most famous, influential Yankees ever". The WASPs who pushed the immigration restrictionist legislation of 1924 certainly weren't influenced by them. Anti-immigration, prejudiced WASPs like Henry Adams, Henry Cabot Lodge, Ezra Pound, etc. held views more in line with what WASPs actually did and felt, so clearly they'd have to be said to have had more influence.
Whiskey,
Simon Kuper is Jewish.
In your hypervigilant online activism dedicated towards deflecting criticism away from Jews and on WASPs, you inadvertently ended up blaming a Jew.
Lindsay Grahamn is so old money he was the first person in his family to go to college. They were so rich they literally did not have to educate their children for generations. Normally I like Whiskey but come on man you totally just made that up. It's not even that you were mistaken you just made it up.
Spengler at the Asia Times and PJM notes that most of the world's cultures have disappeared, and it is true. Most of them have.
That's an understatement. He doesn't merely note it, he cheers it on. He wants all independent cultures to disappear. The only culture acceptable to him for gentiles is one that's good for you know who.
I'm anon from 6:16 above.
I should have added that perhaps the biggest leftist heresy is taking Jesus' command to feed the hungry and minister to those in need, and blowing it up into the welfare state.
The Biblical record on this issue is pretty clear: if you are truly needy, you should be taken care of by believers. But if you can work, and you don't, you're sinning, and you should be left to the consequences of your own actions, even up to starvation.
The problem is that putting this vision into effect requires discrimination, i.e. identifying the truly needy from the malingerers.
This worked at various points in the past 2000 years, perhaps especially well in the late 19th century, but these days who's got the sense of conviction, plus the energy, to try to tell someone they're 'not worthy' of receiving handouts?
Blame the WASPs, even if you have to disinter their corpse to beat them up again. Moldbug is entertaining, but blithely indifferent to uncongenial evidence.
Puritan's pride.
The commenters here who suggest that there are no WASPs in Greater New England are quite mistaken. The big metro areas may contain heavy shares of other groups, particularly Irish and Italians, but the colonial Puritan stock is very much alive and well.
Also, for the curious, HBD Chick has a post up that mentions the Puritans:
the radical reformation | hbd* chick
"But what the Calvinists (in the form of Puritans in colonial America) specialized in was ordering society, i.e. by working out ways of combining laissez faire economics with informal but powerful, effective policing of cultural issues. This is exactly what you see today in liberal-dominated institutions such as the universities and mass media."
Makes sense.
Thanks for the shout out, Steve.
As a Calvinist, I used to think we got a bad rap, i.e. blame disproportionate to our numbers and influence. But the older I get, the more I see the essential Calvinistic struggle -- i.e. between feeling chosen, and being anxious and guilty about that status -- being worked out in many arenas in American life.
You know, sophisticated Euro-wannabe types are always busting on the USA for being too 'puritan', and perhaps they're right; they're just not right in quite the way they think.
The puritans now aren't the dudes in black stewing over the pollution of youth at barn dances; they're the puritan heretics running the Ivies, the State Department, and the NYT.
I know the term "nativist yahoo" is meant ironically/sarcastically, but in the end, even using those terms at all is conceding to the enemy.
It shows you are at some level even seriously thinking about how the enemy portrays you.
What people against mass immigration are, is simply what most people of most nations are: non-suicidal. Ask the Chinese in China if they want tons of latin americans, africans and all other sorts of people running into the millions into China.
We are the sane people.
They are the europhobic extremists.
So don't even use the terminology of the enemy, even if sarcastically, to refer to yourself. A sign of weakness.
In a post-Oprah age, guilt is a word that Americans can barely pronounce. But it is never the less a tremendously powerful force.
The 'chosen' Americans today still feel this guilt: they, just like real Calvinists like me, find it hard to feel worthy of all that they've been given.
The difference is that while I feel unworthy of Jesus giving His life for me, today's Heretical Calvinist Chosen People (HCCPs) feel guilty that they have been handed peaceful, rewarding, historically-worry-free lives -- and that other people, especially people to whom great historical wrongs have been done -- don't seem to have access to that life.
So what results is the classic Weberian dilemma: you must work like crazy to prove to yourself and others that you really are among the chosen, while at the same time eschewing the worldly success this requires as irrelevant. Doubt, and guilt . . . .
It's the Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism all over again, but we have to remember that it's now a bizarro version of this ethic, since the HCCPs are heretics. So they must also try to prove that they're worthy of their high status, but since that status is now enmeshed in a worldly, material context, this leads to all manner of sub-heresies such as the welfare state, multiculturalism, and the others I've outlined above.
By the way, since I'm posting a lot on this topic, I'm going to call myself The Last Real Calvinist, or TheLRC, for short.
The post-Calvinist chosen-vs-guilty struggle is currently most evident in the immigration debate: why do we who were born here deserve this great country? How dare we keep others from enjoying this earthly salvation, when only bad people would be so selfish?
How do we resolve this dilemma?
We prove we are indeed worthy by letting everybody else in, too.
I believe this is what makes it impossible for many members of the Republican party to go hard-line on immigration. They just feel too guilty, so 'arguments' in favor of amnesty and lax border control from Chuck Schumer and the like find far more purchase than you would think they might.
As for Lindsay Grahamnesty, he's old money....
LMFAO. He was the first in his family to attend college. He comes from a town where the big industry was a Purina Roller Mill.
His family didn't own it.
Kuper it must be emphasized, was born to Afrikaaner parents part of the elite but maintains an effective anti-White attitude and pro-Black admiring attitude in his writings.
His parents are/were Jewish, which should be obvious, but thanks to Dave Pinsen for the links.
@Anonymous, the irony in my comment ("Yankees") didn't come across on the internet. I didn't mean it seriously. Of course Anglo-Saxons mostly opposed the take-over of their country by Germans, Irish, Jews, Italians, Chinese, Poles, etc.
It was an influential set of elite Yankees, not "the Yankees," that was represented by people like Emerson and Melville. Similarly with WASP multi-culturalists like Randolph Bourne a few decades later. (I'm talking about an intellectual elite, not the business elite, which I'm sure had a lot more political influence in mass immigration.) The words I quoted weren't representative of Anglo-Saxon opinions; they weren't even completely representative of Emerson's and Melville's own opinions!
The point I tried to make is that these ideas were in the air - in the elite air - long before Protestants even started their heavy-duty missionary projects overseas. Contra Steve Sailer, the glorification of America as a post-racial, post-national, cosmopolitan society wasn't a "turning inward" that occurred as missionary work was winding down. The Ralph Waldo Emerson quote is from 1846. This elite push for a cosmopolitan America went on simultaneously with overseas Protestant missionary work, and it was justified by a similar Protestant ideology.
An unusual but colorful story involved Texas Baptists in the late 19th century. William Cowper Brann, editor of the Iconoclast in Waco, accused Baylor University officials of using South American children, that they got from the missionaries, as servants. Brann reported that one Brazilian house servant in the Baylor University president's household got pregnant by a family member of the president. Brann accused male faculty of having sex with female students. He warned fathers not to send their daughters to Baylor, lest they get raped of become magdalenes.
Yeah, I dated a girl who went to Baylor, got raped, and transferred to a school where the partying was more under control: Ole Miss.
Yeah, I dated a girl who went to Baylor, got raped, and transferred to a school where the partying was more under control: Ole Miss.
So what happened to the girl, and how did you like Ole Miss?
The commenters here who suggest that there are no WASPs in Greater New England are quite mistaken. The big metro areas may contain heavy shares of other groups, particularly Irish and Italians, but the colonial Puritan stock is very much alive and well.
This is sophistry. "Alive and well" is so vague it could potentially mean anything.
The Sioux are "alive and well" too.
The point I tried to make is that these ideas were in the air - in the elite air - long before Protestants even started their heavy-duty missionary projects overseas. Contra Steve Sailer, the glorification of America as a post-racial, post-national, cosmopolitan society wasn't a "turning inward" that occurred as missionary work was winding down. The Ralph Waldo Emerson quote is from 1846. This elite push for a cosmopolitan America went on simultaneously with overseas Protestant missionary work, and it was justified by a similar Protestant ideology.
Except there was no "elite push for a cosmopolitan America" by elite WASPs, Yankees, whatever you want to call them.
I should note that, although Whiskey was wrong about Kuper's background, Kuper being Jewish supports the larger point about the primacy of Gentiles among the global elite; that, presumably, is why Kuper has no apparent worry about being thought of as a shanda fur die goyim.
BTW, this may be my favorite Kuper column, in which he cites blondes as the ideal handmaidens of assimilation.
Aaron says:
"This elite push for a cosmopolitan America went on simultaneously with overseas Protestant missionary work, and it was justified by a similar Protestant ideology."
Along those lines, you can look at Hawaii, where Yankees married into the native aristocracy (e.g., George Clooney's 1/32nd native landowner in "The Descendents") and then took over. The Yankees were happy to preside over a multiracial domain, as long as their descendants were on top.
I would be happy if the diversification crowd would diversify their communities first. We'll check the results then we'll think about diversifying the rest of the country.
Along those lines, you can look at Hawaii, where Yankees married into the native aristocracy (e.g., George Clooney's 1/32nd native landowner in "The Descendents") and then took over. The Yankees were happy to preside over a multiracial domain, as long as their descendants were on top.
People that move anywhere tend to want to be "on top". This is independent of whatever people's preferences regarding cosmopolitanism might be.
Yeah, I dated a girl who went to Baylor, got raped, and transferred to a school where the partying was more under control: Ole Miss.
So what happened to the girl, and how did you like Ole Miss?
Ole Miss is a great place for a girl to get an MRS degree, and not much else. It used to have lots of east TX girls there.
Most of my family went there, though my grandfather recently told me that he regretted it. Too much of a frat school then and now.
Except there was no "elite push for a cosmopolitan America" by elite WASPs, Yankees, whatever you want to call them.
I said "an influential set of elite Yankees," not the entire intellectual elite; they were a minority, but obviously (obvious in hindsight) they were very influential. Emerson and Melville were not just isolated cases. And yes, this subset of the Yankee intellectual elite was pushing for cosmopolitanism.
Later, in the early 20th century, you had powerful, elite Protestant organizations like the Federal Council of Churches (today's National Council of Churches) pushing for mass immigration and ecumenicism. Maybe not exactly the same as cosmopolitanism, but very close.
As the mainline Protestant religious elite started to reject European Christian hegemony in the early 20th century, they condemned earlier Protestant missionary projects as imperialism and started praising Islam as some kind of Eastern denomination of Protestantism. This is the grain of truth in Steve's original post.
That Protestant religious elite fought against restrictionist legislation and against Anglo-Saxon anti-immigration groups like the KKK, which had become mostly an anti-Catholic organization by then.
But the most obvious example of an entire Anglo-Saxon elite pushing for mass immigration (though not for cosmopolitanism), from the 19th century on, was the capitalist elite:
All I want in my business is muscle. I don't care whether it be obtained from a Chinaman or a white man - from a mule or a horse!
Those are the words of a major employer in the 1870s.
Our elites aren't interested in Americans and their problems anymore.
For one thing, think about it -- how many of our problems are not complex? do any of the people in charge in DC have a clue about how to create the tens of millions of new, good paying jobs we need? No, and nobody else does, either.
Also our lords and masters have become greedy.
We ask them to help us but it will cost them money.
The immigrants ask our lords and masters to help them -- and our lords and masters can take jobs and money away from us and redistribute it to the newcomers.
They get to save their money and look like heroes to themselves.
I suggest we get a new set of lords and masters. They wanted a new people, let us have a new elite.
"How much of elite enthusiasm in the Northeast for opening the borders further to, among other worthy goals, save Mexicans from starvation is a transmutation of the old Yankee missionary impulse? " How much of politcal correctness is just Yankee puritanism? They seem to have replaced prudishness about sex (to the point of changing it language i.e. cock was changed by 19th century puritans to rooster and cockroach was changed to roach)with prudishness about race, gender, and sexual orientation.
Read this essay for proof of your thesis
http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/22524-Underclass-schools,-more-the-cruelty-of-the-system.html
How much of politcal correctness is just Yankee puritanism? They seem to have replaced prudishness about sex (to the point of changing it language i.e. cock was changed by 19th century puritans to rooster and cockroach was changed to roach)with prudishness about race, gender, and sexual orientation.
It may or may not be true, but a number of European commentators have been saying this for decades.
>Yankees aren't really dealing with influx of immigration [so] they don't really care and can afford to come across morally superior. If and when this changes their tune will change as well.<
Not so. See E. Michael Jones's The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing. Just within the past 100 years, Yankees righteously destroyed the old white ethnic neighborhoods of the northern cities, motivated by such things as an urge to scourge Papists. This was in their own backyard; goodness knows they paid a steep price for their commitment to racial equality. They would do it all again in a heartbeat. They would burn down the whole country in pursuit of The Good.
>So if a Yankee makes a statement, say, cheering bestiality, then that means that Yankees as a whole or in general are supportive of bestiality?<
Data are constituted of many verified anecdotes. There are Yankee exceptions.
The evidence for Jewish displacement of the WASP is just overwhelming. Any man who argues for a "WASPs did it" line ought to be, frankly, immediately suspected of (a) being Jewish himself and just deflecting, (b) Having some other axe to grind against "Yankees".
"[T]wo-thirds of the white Freedom Riders who traveled to Mississippi were Jewish; a majority of the steering committee of the 1964 Berkeley Free Speech Movement were Jewish; the SDS chapters at Columbia and the University of Michigan were more than half Jewish; at Kent State in Ohio, where only 5 percent of the student body was Jewish [...] three of the four students shot by the National Guard at Kent State were Jewish. This, of course, defies all odds." [Mark Rudd, Weatherman Radical (and Jew)]
By the way, I did some analysis of the vote in 2012 by race and religion, and my result showed that Northeastern White-Protestants would've easily elected Romney.
NJ, NY, New England
% Voting for Romney in 2012
54% White-Protestants
45% Whites Overall
29% Jews
12% Nonwhites
You're wrong, Aaron.
There was no "elite push for a cosmopolitan America" by elite WASPs. They opposed cosmopolitanism and lead an populist-patrician alliance against greater cosmopolitanism:
http://books.google.com/books?id=FHgM9NjYQ6EC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA78#v=onepage&q&f=false
"Patrician Anti-Semitism
"For the New England brahmins, the Jew served as a symbol of the greed and corruption of the new order. By assailing Jews, they attacked the industrialists, financiers, and railroad barons who were displacing them in the nation's political and economic life. This fear was expressed in a stream of anti-Semitic writings and speeches on the part of New England's leading public figures and intellectuals during the late nineteenth century."
...
"These themes were echoed by other New England patricians, including Henry James who used Jewish characters to symbolize greed and the decline of society. Similarly, Henry Adams's brother, Brooks, in his 1896 work, The Law of Civilization and Decay, demonstrated that throughout history Jews had used their money and financial acumen as instruments of exploitation, domination, and oppression. In the United States and Britain, productive industrial capitalism had been replaced by parasitic finance capitalism, symbolized by the Jewish usurer. This became a common theme in the literary and scholarly works of the New England patricians and other upper-class intellectuals. The Jew was attacked as the representative of a materialistic society with no values or culture."
Immigration Restriction
"From the patrician perspective, not only was the Jew was a symbol of the corruption of America's new ruling class, but the Jew symbolized the decay of American values in another was as well. To the patricians, Jewish immigrants, along with other newcomers from Southern and Eastern Europe, represented a threat to American culture, society, and the Anglo-Saxon race."
...
"One major vehicle for this aspect of the patrician attack on the industrialist regime was the Immigration Restriction League. The League was founded in 1894 by a trio of New England bluebloods - Charles Warren, Robert Ward, and Prescott Farnsworth Hall - and a group of their Harvard classmates. The League quickly promoted the creation of affiliates throughout the nation, often making use of the Harvard alumni network and other organizations of transplanted New Englanders."
...
"Among the League's most important intellectual spokesman was Edward Ross, one of the pioneers of American sociology. In his widely read 1914 work, The Old World and the New, Ross explains the importance of protecting Anglo-Saxon Americanism against pollution through immigration."
Populist-Patrician Alliance?
"The initial support for immigration restriction was provided mainly by the political spokesman of the Northeastern upper classes. However, the vague outlines of an alliance began to develop around the issue of immigration--and on opposition to the industrialist order more generally--between the Brahmins and the political representatives of the South and rural West."
...
"For a brief moment at the turn of the century, what might have seemed to be an improbable alliance between agrarian radicals and patricians, an American coalition of the top and bottom, was a possibility. The two groups were divided by an enormous cultural chasm, but, nevertheless, shared a common hatred for the new capitalist order and the forces that it was bringing to power."
The push for greater cosmopolitanism was not by elite WASPs, but by the heterogeneous coalition that made up the progressives:
http://books.google.com/books?id=FHgM9NjYQ6EC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA91#v=onepage&q&f=false
"The political system that had emerged in the United States at the turn of the century was one that deprived Jews of access to economic and political power and to social standing. Not surprisingly, Jews were attracted to political movements that opposed that regime. Working-class Jews espoused socialism. Many middle- and upper-class Jews, on the other hand, supported Progressivism. The Progressives were a heterogeneous group of politicians that included diverse individuals as Robert LaFollette of Wisconsin, Hiram Johnson of California, Albert Cummins of Iowa, William U'Ren of Oregon, Woodrow Wilson of New Jersey, and Theodore Roosevelt of New York, tied together by a network of organizations such as the National Municipal League and publications such as the National Municipal Review.
As Martin Shefter has noted, Progressives were united less by ideology than by a common place in the political system. In the wake of the election of 1896, the great majority of states and the national government, as well, came to be governed by one-party systems. The Progressive movement linked politicians who found their careers blocked by the leadership of the dominant party, with groups and forces that did not enjoy the favor of or access to the locally dominant party - shippers in states where that party was tied to a railroad, firms that sold in national markets in cities where the party machine was tied to businesses that sold in local markets, and so forth."
Even KMac says you can't blame it all on Jews.
American Transcendentalists: An Indigenous Culture of Critique
(The Jew thing aside, this is a very instructive essay.)
Simon Kuper is Jewish.
This, and his many other bone-headed missteps, have long given me pause in assigning Jewish ethnicity to Whis. What real Jew doesn't get his Jewdar pinged by a name like "Simon Kuper"?
"By the way, I did some analysis of the vote in 2012 by race and religion, and my result showed that Northeastern White-Protestants would've easily elected Romney. "
This does not necessarily indicate that they are conservative. There are plenty of moderate and liberal "country club" Republicans (both amongst Yankees and affluent Southerners)who favor open borders, gay marriage, etc.
Wealthy WASPs (again, both the Yankees and elsewhere) do literally still have a missionary impulse- it is a status symbol for them to send their children on a mission trips to Africa or other third world countries. Non-religious WASPs also take these trips, but for charity instead of religious reasons. I don't really notice ordinary Catholics or Lutherans taking these mission trips at the same rate.
Whiskey wrote:
As for the lunatics who can't count -- Jews are 3 percent of America
35 percent of the Forbes 400.
Provide ~50% (maybe more) of dollars from individual donations to the Democrats, ~25% to the Republicans (including some of their largest donors, such as Sheldon Adelson and Paul Singer).
Dominate film and television production and major news providers, meaning they control cultural narratives -- what we think, that is, especially people who matter.
20-30% of Ivy League student bodies (similar or greater proportion of faculty).
Need I go on? Aren't you familiar with these sorts of metrics, especially given your internet haunts?
"4) Much of what Dixie rails against today, such as gun control and racial diversity, are her own inventions. The income tax and Prohibition met a lot more resistance in New England than in the South, where they were practically ratified overnight. Dixie was sad to see the original cheap-labor open-borders policy-- the slave trade-- go. " - Actually the south was in favor of banning the importation of additional slaves, that would have reduced the value of their own slaves, and hurt them directly.
Slaves were worth more than every road, every rail, and every factory in this country at one time, can you say the same about illegal immigrants?
"Even KMac says you can't blame it all on Jews."
KMac provides rock-solid research to prove that opening America's borders and dispossessing White Americans was a Jewish project from the 1880s onwards.
There is no doubt about this.
That doesn't mean the outcome is entirely the fault of Jews. There are many other factors e.g. Anglos having a weakness to guilt-based manipulation, but the simple fact that opening America's borders has been a Jewish political project since the 1880s has been proven beyond any doubt - hence why KMac's research is only attacked via ad hominems.
Post a Comment