National Review on the Coming White Minority

[William Joyce]

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzM0MGNmNTI3ZmI5MjIwNzUzYWNiNGU3NzY3NGFhMzU

And so white-Anglo America slips into minority status. Probably we never wanted it to happen. Probably, if asked around 1970 whether it ought to happen, most of us would have said no. The topic never rose to the status of a major political issue among the mass of Americans, though. The coming presidential election will be the first in my lifetime to have immigration as a major theme.

If Americans minded what was happening, they didn’t mind enough to stop it. To be sure, their indifference was aided and abetted by the late 20th-century browbeating campaigns by cultural elites on behalf of “diversity,” “political correctness,” and racial guilt; but Americans didn’t seem to mind those much, either — not enough to rebel against them in any significant way.

If there is any large general historical lesson to be taken from all this, it is that a population as prosperous, secure, well-employed, and well-entertained as the white Anglos of late 20th-century America, and as confident of its own cultural superiority, cannot be made to care much about matters of ethnic identity, and may altogether lose the habit of thinking in such terms.

Whether this ethnic insouciance will survive the coming great demographic changes, I don’t know. Things have gone so far now that there is very little we can do but wait and see.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Making decisions based on skin color needs to go away. Most especially in THIS country. Latest estimates that I saw have the Majority as Hispanic by the 2050 or so time period.

The threat is not ethnicity, it is foolish political beliefs.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Making decisions based on skin color needs to go away. Most especially in THIS country. Latest estimates that I saw have the Majority as Hispanic by the 2050 or so time period.

The threat is not ethnicity, it is foolish political beliefs.

Couldn't agree with you more. We need to get back to the idea of a meritocracy...Where superficial details such as race, ethnicity, religion etc. are no longer at issue.

 

[William Joyce]

These are naive views. Race and ethnicity aren't "skin color," they're real sociobiological categories and people act accordingly. The reason Mexico is a shithole isn't because of "skin color," it's because Mexicans are a different ethnic group. Whites make good countries not because of "skin color" but because that's how they evolved.

Neither of you seriously think "skin color," i.e., race, is irrelevant, because if you did, you'd have no objection to living in Africa.

Race can't be made "not to matter" any more than you can't make sex, the sun and the air "not matter".

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Mexico and most of South America is a shithole mainly because their governments have the baggage of Spanish law and traditions, specifically a lack of economic freedom and property rights for ordinary citizens. The US and Canada had the blessing of inheriting english common law. Likewise, Spain itself has been a bit of a shithole compared to the rest of western europe for much of the last few hundred years, even though it's inhabited by white people.

Anyway, I tend to think that the welfare state is going to collapse by 2050 or whenever this demographic trend plays out. I don't have a huge problem with immigration, so long as government doesn't point a gun at my head and force me to pay their bills. I also tend to be a little bit sceptical of predictions that are decades out. I think we're going to be in for a rather harsh recession/depression in the next decade or so, which will slow immigration a good bit. Mexican immigration has already slowed now that housing is in a slump and shows no signs of picking up anytime soon.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

These are naive views. Race and ethnicity aren't "skin color," they're real sociobiological categories and people act accordingly. The reason Mexico is a shithole isn't because of "skin color," it's because Mexicans are a different ethnic group. Whites make good countries not because of "skin color" but because that's how they evolved.

Neither of you seriously think "skin color," i.e., race, is irrelevant, because if you did, you'd have no objection to living in Africa.

Race can't be made "not to matter" any more than you can't make sex, the sun and the air "not matter".

You are so full of shit I wouldn't be surprised if your eyes aren't brown.

Last I checked "whites" have screwed up a shit load of countries.

 

[William Joyce]

Mexico and most of South America is a shithole mainly because their governments have the baggage of Spanish law and traditions, specifically a lack of economic freedom and property rights for ordinary citizens. The US and Canada had the blessing of inheriting english common law. Likewise, Spain itself has been a bit of a shithole compared to the rest of western europe for much of the last few hundred years, even though it's inhabited by white people.

Hmmm... whitish, I suppose. Yet I would continue to assert that race is what makes the difference. Why did the better legal systems develop in England, so far north and so white, and not elsewhere?

Last I checked "whites" have screwed up a shit load of countries.

Sigh. Which ones? Name one non-white country you think you could move to and be welcomed. Actually, name one non-white neighborhood in the U.S. you'd like to move to.

 

[Truthmatters]

http://www.pbs.org/race/001_WhatIsRace/001_00-home.htm

some homework for william

 

[William Joyce]

Some for you:

http://www.isteve.com/RealityofRace.htm

http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/miele.htm

Funny you should mention PBS (heh) as your source...

Sarich and Miele state: "While we were preparing the final draft of this book, the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) in 2003 aired a highly acclaimed documentary, Race: The Power of an Illusion. The contemporary scientific and ethical consensus in both the media and the social sciences regarding race was concisely summarized in the ten numbered statements that appear at the beginning of the website that accompanies the documentary (http://www.pbs.org/race). The documentary's numbered statements and their elaborations follow; the chapter numbers shown in italics and enclosed in square brackets refer to the chapters of this book that challenge the particular statement.

DESTROYED!

You might want to change your screen name. I doubt truth matters to you. Other things might, like safety, happy thoughts and ice cream, but don't kid yourself that truth matters to you. Not even close.

 

[Truthmatters]

what makes you think your sources are better?

 

[William Joyce]

what makes you think your sources are better?

Take a look - Vince Sarich, professor at Berkeley, goes POINT BY POINT in RESPONSE to the PBS series' assertions. Check out Sarich's other work on DNA, etc. and see what a powerhouse he is. Then look at whatever "scientists" PBS hired. Then think about PBS and consider the extreme liberal bias of it.

"Race does not exist" is a POLITICAL, not a SCIENTIFIC, assertion. It's like the creationism v. evolution debate, only with liberals on the other side. They, like creationists, first set down the "conclusion," i.e., race does not exist. Then they back into it by finding bits and pieces they like. But the scientific process takes us elsewhere....

You know exactly how the PBS series was born. A few editors were sitting around and said, "we don't think race SHOULD exist because we want to promote the 'multicultural' agenda." THEN they thought of how to create the show. They didn't start by asking, "So, does race exist? Let's investigate, and faithfully report whatever information we turn up!" No, no, no, no, no. I'll bet my life that's NOT how it happened.

THAT is why my source is better.

 

[Bullypulpit]

These are naive views. Race and ethnicity aren't "skin color," they're real sociobiological categories and people act accordingly. The reason Mexico is a shithole isn't because of "skin color," it's because Mexicans are a different ethnic group. Whites make good countries not because of "skin color" but because that's how they evolved.

Neither of you seriously think "skin color," i.e., race, is irrelevant, because if you did, you'd have no objection to living in Africa.

Race can't be made "not to matter" any more than you can't make sex, the sun and the air "not matter".

Sweet William, that cesspool you try to pass off as a mind is backing up and overflowing onto the BB thus wasting bandwidth. Your racist, anti-semitic views will carry weight with your fellow Nazis...But not with me nor, I believe, with most of the good folks who post here.

So just fuck off...okay?

 

[Edward]

These are naive views. Race and ethnicity aren't "skin color," they're real sociobiological categories and people act accordingly. The reason Mexico is a shithole isn't because of "skin color," it's because Mexicans are a different ethnic group. Whites make good countries not because of "skin color" but because that's how they evolved.

This assertion is simply false. The first part about race and ethnicity is only partly true. Race (i.e., the Jewish race) is based on sociological categories and therefore it often has little to do with skin color but Mexico isn't in the shape it is in because Mexicans are a different ethnic group and you are ignorant to believe this as the Spanish civilization which colonized Mexico was and is an advanced one, instead the country of Mexico started to decline when we started to raise and there is the inherent problem which needs to be addressed. For some countries, races or individuals to be successful others need to fail but this doesn't have to be the case.

Neither of you seriously think "skin color," i.e., race, is irrelevant, because if you did, you'd have no objection to living in Africa.

I would have no problem living in Africa if it stopped being a sub-continent that services the needs of the United States and Europe. So long as it remains the continent of America's and Europe's bitches I wouldn't want to live there. At the end of the day I can be honest and say, "do I want to be the slave owner who lives in the mansion that is America or do I want to be the slave who lives in Africa my response will consistently be that I want to be the slave owner who lives in America and who has all the freedom, rights and benefits that comes from it even if it means that the people of Africa, certain parts of Asia and South America will continue to fail so that I can have a higher standard of living than so be it." This is a hard reality that we need to accept. If Africa was successful then we wouldn't be and that is why the majority of U.S. policy is nationalistic and racist and not one of friendships among all nations.

Race can't be made "not to matter" any more than you can't make sex, the sun and the air "not matter".

Race doesn't matter except in our own minds, instead what matters is our social structure that keeps Africa, and parts of Asia and South America unsuccessful and at our service and us successful slave owners. This is probably the hardest comparison to accept because it makes us seem bad and this is why many countries and people hate us. It isn't because we are bad but because in our system for one person to buy a awesome new car someone else must not have that opportunity. There is no problem with this but there is a problem with entire countries and continents not being able to do so.

 

[Edward]

Hmmm... whitish, I suppose. Yet I would continue to assert that race is what makes the difference. Why did the better legal systems develop in England, so far north and so white, and not elsewhere?

You are ignorant of world history because the "better legal systems" did not develop in England like you assert instead they developed primarily in countries located within the furtile crescent region which does not include England. In fact, England benefited directly from the advances made in these countries and even copied their legal systems. Where is the furtile crescent? It is in the Middle East and Africa. Where did human civilization begin? Where did writing begin? Again, the furtile crescent especially Sumeria. Where is Sumeria? Does Badghad sound familiar? Now get a life and get a clue and at least get a high school history level education.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This assertion is simply false. The first part about race and ethnicity is only partly true. Race (i.e., the Jewish race) is based on sociological categories and therefore it often has little to do with skin color but Mexico isn't in the shape it is in because Mexicans are a different ethnic group and you are ignorant to believe this as the Spanish civilization which colonized Mexico was and is an advanced one, instead the country of Mexico started to decline when we started to raise and there is the inherent problem which needs to be addressed. For some countries, races or individuals to be successful others need to fail but this doesn't have to be the case.



I would have no problem living in Africa if it stopped being a sub-continent that services the needs of the United States and Europe. So long as it remains the continent of America's and Europe's bitches I wouldn't want to live there. At the end of the day I can be honest and say, "do I want to be the slave owner who lives in the mansion that is America or do I want to be the slave who lives in Africa my response will consistently be that I want to be the slave owner who lives in America and who has all the freedom, rights and benefits that comes from it even if it means that the people of Africa, certain parts of Asia and South America will continue to fail so that I can have a higher standard of living than so be it." This is a hard reality that we need to accept. If Africa was successful then we wouldn't be and that is why the majority of U.S. policy is nationalistic and racist and not one of friendships among all nations.



Race doesn't matter except in our own minds, instead what matters is our social structure that keeps Africa, and parts of Asia and South America unsuccessful and at our service and us successful slave owners. This is probably the hardest comparison to accept because it makes us seem bad and this is why many countries and people hate us. It isn't because we are bad but because in our system for one person to buy a awesome new car someone else must not have that opportunity. There is no problem with this but there is a problem with entire countries and continents not being able to do so.

Your not much better. What a load of BS.

 

[Edward]

Your not much better. What a load of BS.

I don't recall saying that I was "much better."

 

[William Joyce]

You are ignorant of world history because the "better legal systems" did not develop in England like you assert instead they developed primarily in countries located within the furtile crescent region which does not include England. In fact, England benefited directly from the advances made in these countries and even copied their legal systems. Where is the furtile crescent? It is in the Middle East and Africa. Where did human civilization begin? Where did writing begin? Again, the furtile crescent especially Sumeria. Where is Sumeria? Does Badghad sound familiar? Now get a life and get a clue and at least get a high school history level education.

In other words, you're the type who believes Cleopatra was black and Africans invented the jet. OK, fine. A black supremacist! I don't know, man... if blacks are superior to whites, they sure are holding back!

 

[jillian]

In other words, you're the type who believes Cleopatra was black and Africans invented the jet. OK, fine. A black supremacist! I don't know, man... if blacks are superior to whites, they sure are holding back!

And if you're an indication of the supremacy of white people, you're a pretty pathetic example.

 

[William Joyce]

And if you're an indication of the supremacy of white people, you're a pretty pathetic example.

Well, there are number of different tacks I could take with this.

1. This is ad hominen and doesn't address the debate at hand: whether a minority-white America will be good overall, or good for whites. Me, personally, has about as much to do with it as whether we should base the existence of Israel on your GPA at the yeshiva.

2. Nobody's ever mentioned a thing about the "supremacy of white people." Do you ever harp on Jews for their "supremacy" in wanting Israel? I doubt it. The question here is whether whites are better off in a majority-white country, or not. Agree or disagree?

3. It should be possible to have a debate about ethnopolitics without this childish dissolving into whether one is claiming "supremacy," which, by the way, is never laid at the feet of blacks, Jews, etc. If blacks want something, nobody EVER FUCKING SAYS BACK TO THEM: So, you think you're "supreme"? No, no, no. And G-d knows nobody does this to Jews. But if a white person wants the slightest thing, they get hit with this!

4. If one or another race is in fact "supreme," it might be to the benefit of others not to co-exist with them because of the possibility of exploitation, don't you think?

5. If no race is "supreme" over all the others, THEN IT WOULDN'T MATTER if whites wanted a place to live. You all would do just fine on your own, without us.

6. If whites are INFERIOR to other groups, well, hell, aren't we doing you a favor by extricating ourselves? Ha!

7. Don't think anybody has ever answered the question: Why do Jews get to have Israel, but whites nothing?

The Census Bureau estimated yesterday that from July 1, 2005 to July 1, 2006, the nation’s minority population grew to 100.7 million from 98.3 million... Nearly half the children under age 5 are Hispanic, black or Asian... 80 percent of Americans over age 60 are non-Hispanic whites, compared with only 60 percent among those in their 20s and 30s, and 58 percent among people younger than 20...

Damn this has me hot. Can't anyone see the implication here? The future of America is the white race swallowed whole. What of affirmative action THEN? Where will you live, since whites ALWAYS end up living with other whites? Who will represent you, since blacks and Hispanics all get their reps... you gonna fight for yours? What will we speak? Gangster-Spanish? Real nice. What kinds of spray-paint tags will cover the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I wonder? HAVE YOU EVER SEEN AN INNER CITY AREA ONCE INHABITED BY WHITES, NOW BLACKS? They let it rot!!! It looks like a bomb hit. Just go through Detroit and see. Whites need to wake the fuck up.

 

[Edward]

In other words, you're the type who believes Cleopatra was black and Africans invented the jet. OK, fine. A black supremacist! I don't know, man... if blacks are superior to whites, they sure are holding back!

If you enjoy twisting what others say than so be it but I am more than willing to tell your lying butt to go to hell because I did not say that I believe (nor do I) that blacks and Africans were or are superior to whites. Every race and ethnicity has had a dominant culture at some point in world history (i.e., the Aztecs, Mayans, Egyptians, Sumerians, the Chinese, etc). It is you who has been saying one race is superior to another while I have pointed out that this is not borne out by history.