The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Democrats' Discriminating Taste
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

A YouGov survey released this week contains a battery of questions concerning which presidential candidate is perceived to be “better for” members of several different groups. The results among self-identified Republicans:

When Republicans carry on about the good things they’ve allegedly done for people who will never vote for them (blacks), it’s more than just a cynical ploy to please the groups that will vote for them (white boomers). They genuinely think their policies benefit everyone. We’re all Americans, after all!

Democrats, in contrast, are able to distinguish between the Good and the Bad:

Big business and the rich are groups Democrats–the rank-and-file that is, those with actual power are a different story–take pride in scorning. A substantial minority of Democrats are also happy not to do well by men and by whites, and especially by white men.

It is worth noting that most Democrats do think their party is better for white men than the GOP is. The idea that Democrats by and large are motivated by anti-white animus is overblown. Some certainly are, but most are not.

 
Hide 135 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The idea that Democrats by and large are motivated by anti-white animus is overblown. Some certainly are, but most are not.

    That’s not the point. Those who manipulate the rank-and-file use Whites as scapegoats and promise to correct the unfairness they successfully convince the rank-and-file exists.

    The longer they keep doing this, the more “some certainly are” will grow. This will really matter when Whites are a minority in their own country, and everyone else has been taught to blame Whites for everything. This “Brown Power” is dangerous, and it is being stoked, but not by the “rank-and-file.”

    • Agree: Ash Williams, Talha
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    E.g.,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM6L092e0jU
    , @Almost Missouri
    Agree.

    "Some certainly are"
     
    The young and future Democrats

    "but most are not"
     
    The old and dying Democrats.

    Trends matter.
    , @nebulafox
    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society, least of all at a time of unprecedented demographic shifts, increasing structural problems, and downward mobility...

    Only if you are completely out of touch with human nature (aka, your typical progressive) can you assume that Democratic fantasies about permanent rainbow America where whites are happy cosmopolitans are at all realistic...

  2. @Buzz Mohawk

    The idea that Democrats by and large are motivated by anti-white animus is overblown. Some certainly are, but most are not.
     
    That's not the point. Those who manipulate the rank-and-file use Whites as scapegoats and promise to correct the unfairness they successfully convince the rank-and-file exists.

    The longer they keep doing this, the more "some certainly are" will grow. This will really matter when Whites are a minority in their own country, and everyone else has been taught to blame Whites for everything. This "Brown Power" is dangerous, and it is being stoked, but not by the "rank-and-file."

    E.g.,

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    It's no threat to us whatsoever if we actually had balls.

    Unfortunately whites still play by the rules. Rules are for white people only.

    Sadly you boomers were too busy going to mexico for abortions and sleeping around. The demographic die has been cast. Maybe you'll yet a real nice and vibrant nurse when you're dying in the nursing home, with no kids to take care of you.

  3. The numbers speak for themselves. Scads of Democrat voters believe Republicans will do better for whites than Democrats. Not surprising: those Dems know they intend to oppress and plunder whites when they gain full power ( “reparations”) We should listen to what they are shouting from the rooftops. How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.

    • Replies: @WorkingClass
    How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.

    What the woke lack in self respect (candidates apologizing for their skin color) they more than compensate for in self esteem.
    , @Realist

    How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.
     
    You do know that the left side of the IQ graph is populated by as many Whites as the right?
  4. It speaks volumes about the GOP Establishment’s relationship with reality that they genuinely seem to believe that their free market fantasy world is in the interests of most Americans. More populist insurgents are coming.

    As far as the Democrats go, for all their supposed willingness to stick it to the rich, the DNC doesn’t seem too eager to scorn Silicon Valley’s crony capitalists or banksters. Irish Paleo’s comments about the internal split between the MBA and Trigglypuff Party must be quoted.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    It speaks volumes about the GOP Establishment’s relationship with reality that they genuinely seem to believe that their free market fantasy world is in the interests of most Americans.
     
    If they genuinely believe that then they're certainly deluded. I'm sceptical as to whether they actually believe it though. I suspect that they're very much aware that their policies are screwing a lot of people but they won't publicly admit it. They won't publicly admit that Trump could possibly be less than perfect. They've developed a full-blown Trump Personality Cult.
  5. @Buzz Mohawk

    The idea that Democrats by and large are motivated by anti-white animus is overblown. Some certainly are, but most are not.
     
    That's not the point. Those who manipulate the rank-and-file use Whites as scapegoats and promise to correct the unfairness they successfully convince the rank-and-file exists.

    The longer they keep doing this, the more "some certainly are" will grow. This will really matter when Whites are a minority in their own country, and everyone else has been taught to blame Whites for everything. This "Brown Power" is dangerous, and it is being stoked, but not by the "rank-and-file."

    Agree.

    “Some certainly are”

    The young and future Democrats

    “but most are not”

    The old and dying Democrats.

    Trends matter.

    • Agree: Rosie
  6. @Buzz Mohawk

    The idea that Democrats by and large are motivated by anti-white animus is overblown. Some certainly are, but most are not.
     
    That's not the point. Those who manipulate the rank-and-file use Whites as scapegoats and promise to correct the unfairness they successfully convince the rank-and-file exists.

    The longer they keep doing this, the more "some certainly are" will grow. This will really matter when Whites are a minority in their own country, and everyone else has been taught to blame Whites for everything. This "Brown Power" is dangerous, and it is being stoked, but not by the "rank-and-file."

    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society, least of all at a time of unprecedented demographic shifts, increasing structural problems, and downward mobility…

    Only if you are completely out of touch with human nature (aka, your typical progressive) can you assume that Democratic fantasies about permanent rainbow America where whites are happy cosmopolitans are at all realistic…

    • Replies: @Talha

    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society
     
    Yeah, I think if taken to its logical conclusion, it will eventually lead to inescapable fracturing. Even as the "certain races" gradually also turn on each other to divide the spoils.

    Peace.
    , @anon
    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society

    Depends on what one means by "works". You may be assuming that "works" is a functioning industrial country where most people get along well and have a pretty good life. Is that the only model?

    The Aztecs seem to have had a pretty good system going prior to the arrival of the Spanish. As a strong tribe they were in a position to win a war against most of their neighboring tribes, and impose tribute requirements on the losers. So they demanded human slaves from neighbors, and when the neighbors began to get too strong they would up the demands and trigger a war.

    A war that the Aztecs would win. A war that would provide the Aztecs with a good supply of young men to sacrifice to their sun god on a pyramid in Tenochticlan. That tribe could then avoid war for a time by providing more slaves.

    The Aztecs kept their neighbors divided and weak. Their system 'worked' - for the Aztecs. It was metastable, until an exogenous factor arrived in the form of Cortez and smallpox.

    A similar system of playing each minority off against all the others would be somewhat stable in the US and would keep the societal overseers in really posh living. A race or tribal based spoils system, where groups get or do not get goodies/bennies depending on the favor of a tiny minority of people at the financial and power apex of society. Any tribe or group that gets too strong will be denigrated, attacked, kept out of positions of authority, pushed out of certain jobs, in order to weaken that group and make them more easy to control...

    So what you mean by "works" may not be what some others mean by "works".

    tl;dr
    You assume good intentions where none may exist, in fact where malice may be dominant.

    , @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    They can discourage whites from "identity politics" but it's inevitable.

    I lived in an area that had been flooded with non-white aliens of all stripes for a while. They can say what they like, but you start to feel "relief" when you see another white person. A person you would have never thought twice about seeing before. When you meet other white people you become good friends with them more quickly. Unless the gov prevents white people from seeing each other this will continue.

    It's a good wakeup call for us.
  7. The biggest scam of all is the narrative that Republicans are the party of ‘rich people’. Most billionaires vote Democrat, simply because the cost of being seen as a rogue relative to the state is too high for a billionaire to risk.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  8. @MattinLA
    The numbers speak for themselves. Scads of Democrat voters believe Republicans will do better for whites than Democrats. Not surprising: those Dems know they intend to oppress and plunder whites when they gain full power ( "reparations") We should listen to what they are shouting from the rooftops. How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.

    How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.

    What the woke lack in self respect (candidates apologizing for their skin color) they more than compensate for in self esteem.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Why would a white man vote Republican either?

    Two sides of the same coin. Only thing Republicans are about, other than Zionism, cheap labour, and cutting taxes/social services is banning abortion. Firstly abortion is still legal and secondly banning abortion would also be bad for whites.

    Black fertility is actually plummeting in states with liberal family planning laws and education, like NY and CO.
  9. At least rhetorically, Republicans care about the country (“We all win!”) while Democrats care about who wins. And the latter also care about making the losers the winners.

    • Agree: Ash Williams
  10. @MattinLA
    The numbers speak for themselves. Scads of Democrat voters believe Republicans will do better for whites than Democrats. Not surprising: those Dems know they intend to oppress and plunder whites when they gain full power ( "reparations") We should listen to what they are shouting from the rooftops. How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.

    How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.

    You do know that the left side of the IQ graph is populated by as many Whites as the right?

    • Replies: @Ash Williams

    You do know that the left side of the IQ graph is populated by as many Whites as the right?
     
    Behold! ...The fatal flaw of universal suffrage in one sentence.
  11. @Realist

    How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.
     
    You do know that the left side of the IQ graph is populated by as many Whites as the right?

    You do know that the left side of the IQ graph is populated by as many Whites as the right?

    Behold! …The fatal flaw of universal suffrage in one sentence.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    AGREE with the whole series, Matt, Realist, and you, Ash.

    (I will say that many of these lefty whites are not necessarily low IQ, but pretty damn stupid just the same.)

    Amendment XV was a big fuck up that a century later let the Warren Court come up with all sorts of nonsense. I haven't done my morning Constitutional in about a week, so I'll probably get to possibly THE most egregious Amendment, number XVI, tomorrow or Tuesday.
  12. @Ash Williams

    You do know that the left side of the IQ graph is populated by as many Whites as the right?
     
    Behold! ...The fatal flaw of universal suffrage in one sentence.

    AGREE with the whole series, Matt, Realist, and you, Ash.

    (I will say that many of these lefty whites are not necessarily low IQ, but pretty damn stupid just the same.)

    Amendment XV was a big fuck up that a century later let the Warren Court come up with all sorts of nonsense. I haven’t done my morning Constitutional in about a week, so I’ll probably get to possibly THE most egregious Amendment, number XVI, tomorrow or Tuesday.

  13. @Buzz Mohawk
    E.g.,

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM6L092e0jU

    It’s no threat to us whatsoever if we actually had balls.

    Unfortunately whites still play by the rules. Rules are for white people only.

    Sadly you boomers were too busy going to mexico for abortions and sleeping around. The demographic die has been cast. Maybe you’ll yet a real nice and vibrant nurse when you’re dying in the nursing home, with no kids to take care of you.

    • LOL: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Maybe you’ll yet a real nice and vibrant nurse when you’re dying in the nursing home, with no kids to take care of you.
     
    And maybe you'll enjoy your life as a hated minority, getting beaten-up, robbed, falsely accused with no legal recourse, after I am gone, ASSHOLE.

    Jesus, I thought you could be communicated with. You can't. Enjoy your life in the brown toilet bowl. YOU DESERVE IT, LOUT.
  14. @WorkingClass
    How any self-respecting white man can remain a Democrat eludes me.

    What the woke lack in self respect (candidates apologizing for their skin color) they more than compensate for in self esteem.

    Why would a white man vote Republican either?

    Two sides of the same coin. Only thing Republicans are about, other than Zionism, cheap labour, and cutting taxes/social services is banning abortion. Firstly abortion is still legal and secondly banning abortion would also be bad for whites.

    Black fertility is actually plummeting in states with liberal family planning laws and education, like NY and CO.

  15. Why would a white man vote Republican either?

    Or a White woman. Neither the Dems nor the Republicans offer anything of interest to us. To the extent most White women can be considered feminists, they are defensive, conservative feminists, generally satisfied with the status quo. No, there isn’t any more work to be done, and Democrat appeals to sisterhood fail as a result.

    By the same token, I hope Democrat resistance to UBI, even on a temporary basis, exposes their economic populist pretensions as hollow: all talk and no action. At that point, White women would be officially done with the Democrats.

    • Replies: @fish

    Or a White woman. Neither the Dems nor the Republicans offer anything of interest to us. To the extent most White women can be considered feminists, they are defensive, conservative feminists, generally satisfied with the status quo. No, there isn’t any more work to be done, and Democrat appeals to sisterhood fail as a result.
     
    Now come on Rosie.....the only true sin for a woman is to appear "unfashionable"! Currently hating on Whitey be where it's at! So raise that fist!
  16. For many Democrats, “the wealthy” and “big business” are proxies for white males. Keep that in mind when interpreting these results.

    • Replies: @JohnnyWalker123
    Except that the poll found that Democrats think the Democratic candidate is better for Whites.
  17. A substantial minority of Democrats are also happy not to do well by men and by whites, and especially by white men.

    A wonder what it would look like if the coalition of the fringes was separated into its constituent parts. Like say you took black lesbians… Or whites separately.

    It is worth noting that most Democrats do think their party is better for white men than the GOP is.

    I got to wonder, what are these people smoking? Or could some be lying? Or perhaps some are just too old to understand how the rhetoric has changed. I think there are a lot of liberals who just don’t understand the legal and political dimensions of racial policy in the US, even young ones, but it is hard to understand how they could miss picking up on the rhetoric.

    Of course, the Republicans, and Trump are just the outer party. They are getting closer and closer to being like one of those political parties in China that nobody can even name.

  18. Donald Trump had an opportunity to change the perception that the Republicans were the party of big business and the rich but may have blown it by embracing Wall Street and the military-industrial complex once he got in office.

    Recently there have been three straight years of decreases in U.S. life expectancy. If you look at this closely, this is occurring mostly in the white working class. Life expectancy in the white working class has been decreasing for the past twenty years but was previously offset by increases in other groups. Even blacks had increasing life expectancy up until recently.

    White working class life expectancy started decreasing around the time that the bailouts for big business were put into effect after the first crash in 2000 and the neocon wars started up. While others were receiving benefits, the cost for all this fell most heavily on this group and they had to bear the biggest burden. This group finally realized that the establishment, the Demopublican party, was behind this and started looking for a political outsider to vote for. Trump was smarter than Hillary and saw this and tailored his message to this group.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
  19. CPK says:

    Well, the survey only asks them what they believe; it doesn’t require that those beliefs make any sense.

    What’s struck me, sparring with the “diversity & inclusion” mob at my law school, is that they insist they’re not advocating that the school discriminate against white males. Perish the thought. They’re just advocating that the school discriminate in favor of everyone else. And the argument for “diversity” (as in Grutter) is precisely that this benefits white males too.

    We recognize this as obvious bullshit, but that doesn’t mean they don’t genuinely believe it.

  20. I know this is the Unz Review and talking about race is just what we do here, but all of this stuff is very close to becoming a moot point. The next crisis, which is now steadily advancing upon us, is going to put an end to the identity politics of the civil rights era. The whole big state, post-war, lawsuit and grievance, surplus and redistribution model of which it is derivative is collapsing before us. How shall racial gramscian politics continue when program politics in general is crumbling into Caesarism?

    We are on the precipice of an epochal transformation of society that isn’t going to stop any time soon. It isn’t going to stop when the bullshit coronavirus lockdowns are lifted and the economy temporarily bounces back, as it will. The damage to the illusions of clown world is already done. There is not enough wealth in the world to satisfy all the claims upon it. Old people will never be able to retire comfortably and young people know they have no future in the current order. This situation is going to explode and produce upheavals the outcome of which no one can predict. Racial grievance politics will become a minor chapter in the history of America’s Century.

    • Replies: @songbird
    I'm not quite sure what you are saying - that racial warfare will replace racial lawfare - or that power consolidation will end the coalition of the fringes. I'm not sure if you are trying to evoke post-racialism even in a dystopian sense, but we have a long way to fall, in any case.

    The US isn't Brazil yet - it is still more functional and more prosperous, but even Brazil has a system of racial redistribution.

    As to dictators: in Paraguay, whites were forced into miscegenation. In Haiti, the fist order was to kill them. Subsequent small groups of whites who landed on the island were sometimes allowed to live and miscegenate, but this only created a hierarchy of gradients of black and there are still severe tensions among the gradients, just as there are between Haitians and Dominicans.

    Of course, one can speculate that we are so multicult, that there are too many groups to create a similar power system, but given enough time, it seems likely that one group will dominate. If this displacement dynamic continues, I expect the end will be forced miscegenation. In a way, the precursors to it, are already present in America - for instance the idea that whites must be distributed between schools, or how AA incentivizes miscegenation.
  21. @Intelligent Dasein
    I know this is the Unz Review and talking about race is just what we do here, but all of this stuff is very close to becoming a moot point. The next crisis, which is now steadily advancing upon us, is going to put an end to the identity politics of the civil rights era. The whole big state, post-war, lawsuit and grievance, surplus and redistribution model of which it is derivative is collapsing before us. How shall racial gramscian politics continue when program politics in general is crumbling into Caesarism?

    We are on the precipice of an epochal transformation of society that isn't going to stop any time soon. It isn't going to stop when the bullshit coronavirus lockdowns are lifted and the economy temporarily bounces back, as it will. The damage to the illusions of clown world is already done. There is not enough wealth in the world to satisfy all the claims upon it. Old people will never be able to retire comfortably and young people know they have no future in the current order. This situation is going to explode and produce upheavals the outcome of which no one can predict. Racial grievance politics will become a minor chapter in the history of America's Century.

    I’m not quite sure what you are saying – that racial warfare will replace racial lawfare – or that power consolidation will end the coalition of the fringes. I’m not sure if you are trying to evoke post-racialism even in a dystopian sense, but we have a long way to fall, in any case.

    The US isn’t Brazil yet – it is still more functional and more prosperous, but even Brazil has a system of racial redistribution.

    As to dictators: in Paraguay, whites were forced into miscegenation. In Haiti, the fist order was to kill them. Subsequent small groups of whites who landed on the island were sometimes allowed to live and miscegenate, but this only created a hierarchy of gradients of black and there are still severe tensions among the gradients, just as there are between Haitians and Dominicans.

    Of course, one can speculate that we are so multicult, that there are too many groups to create a similar power system, but given enough time, it seems likely that one group will dominate. If this displacement dynamic continues, I expect the end will be forced miscegenation. In a way, the precursors to it, are already present in America – for instance the idea that whites must be distributed between schools, or how AA incentivizes miscegenation.

    • Replies: @anon
    I’m not quite sure what you are saying

    He's saying he's the smartest guy in the room.That's it. That's all.
    , @anon
    How does AA incentivize miscegenation? (Serious question -- I never heard about this before.)
  22. AE, this is one of the most illuminating charts I have seen.

    If someone can find the key to unlock ” most Democrats do think their party is better for white men than the GOP”, that will get the GOP white vote share past 70%.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    They'll only vote R if they think that things SHOULD be better for White men.

    As for myself, I think the 'hoods and barrios should be baby-free zones.  No more pockets of the third world in the USA; assimilate or go home.
    , @Talha

    AE, this is one of the most illuminating charts I have seen.
     
    I have to agree, this was fascinating. The only issue I have with is is the small sample size; would love it to be in the 15K-25K range for good measure, but it is still very interesting nonetheless.

    Peace.
  23. @indocon
    AE, this is one of the most illuminating charts I have seen.

    If someone can find the key to unlock " most Democrats do think their party is better for white men than the GOP", that will get the GOP white vote share past 70%.

    They’ll only vote R if they think that things SHOULD be better for White men.

    As for myself, I think the ‘hoods and barrios should be baby-free zones.  No more pockets of the third world in the USA; assimilate or go home.

  24. @songbird
    I'm not quite sure what you are saying - that racial warfare will replace racial lawfare - or that power consolidation will end the coalition of the fringes. I'm not sure if you are trying to evoke post-racialism even in a dystopian sense, but we have a long way to fall, in any case.

    The US isn't Brazil yet - it is still more functional and more prosperous, but even Brazil has a system of racial redistribution.

    As to dictators: in Paraguay, whites were forced into miscegenation. In Haiti, the fist order was to kill them. Subsequent small groups of whites who landed on the island were sometimes allowed to live and miscegenate, but this only created a hierarchy of gradients of black and there are still severe tensions among the gradients, just as there are between Haitians and Dominicans.

    Of course, one can speculate that we are so multicult, that there are too many groups to create a similar power system, but given enough time, it seems likely that one group will dominate. If this displacement dynamic continues, I expect the end will be forced miscegenation. In a way, the precursors to it, are already present in America - for instance the idea that whites must be distributed between schools, or how AA incentivizes miscegenation.

    I’m not quite sure what you are saying

    He’s saying he’s the smartest guy in the room.That’s it. That’s all.

    • LOL: Twinkie, songbird
  25. anon[124] • Disclaimer says:

    “Most” = barely more than half. It’s not overblown. As demographics continue changing, expect that number to dip below “most” to merely a plurality.

    The whole big state, post-war, lawsuit and grievance, surplus and redistribution model of which it is derivative is collapsing before us.

    I don’t see that. After the crisis is over, people will demand even more government to protect them, and they’ll have the demographic power to get it, too. The economic crisis in Zimbabwe didn’t cause the black population there to become less racist and change their ways. Instead, they put Robert Mugabe back into power. Only now, many years after destroying their economy by stealing white farm lands, have they made token gestures about bringing them back. It won’t work. Too little, too late. Same here over the long term. It will get worse, not better. The US also has immense resource wealth — coal, oil, timber, agriculture, fishing, etc. There’s plenty to steal, regardless of how bad things get on Wall Street or Main Street. Democrats are already trying to give unemployment checks to illegal aliens in the middle of a crisis. That’s bold. I don’t see that changing once they take back congress and the White House.

    How shall racial gramscian politics continue when program politics in general is crumbling into Caesarism?

    Easy. Be the Caesar and vote yourself free stuff. The democrats will soon have the permanent voting majority due to demographic change. That’s inevitable at this point. You’re celebrating waaaaaay too early. Racial minorities aren’t going to vote meritocracy for other racial groups — mainly benefiting whites and Asians — while also eschewing social services and affirmative action for themselves, which would be detrimental for their group. You may not want to hear this, but this mentality you’ve repeated here is really just wishful thinking. Libertarians are having a wet dream at the moment after years of being proven wrong on virtually everything, but their predictions will soon enough be discredited once again.

    Racial grievance politics will become a minor chapter in the history of America’s Century.

    There’s no chance of that. This crisis has been dramatically worsened by racial divisions. I don’t see that magically changing anytime soon considering the demographic situation. It’s wishful thinking to assert otherwise. It’s not surprising, though. It’s a comfortable, soothing lie to think intractable racial divisions will magically disappear. But that’s all it is — a convenient lie.

    The new century belongs to China. Their magnificent response to the virus — only capable in cohesive, patriotic, high IQ countries — demonstrates this. Compare that with the US response: infighting and acrimony, much of it tacitly based on race; hundreds of thousands or even millions will die horribly because their inept, corrupt government didn’t prepare in advance and couldn’t deal with the situation once it occurred. Ask yourself, is this really the nation that beats China in the 21st century? Lol. Not a chance.

    In Wuhan, the masses sang patriotic hymns from balconies. In Italy, the masses played the Italian national anthem in hospitals. In the US, celebrities sang a song written by an Englishman … and were denounced. The best they could do was to sing the praises of healthcare workers. No national anthem, no patriotism, no flag. Just more gun sales and selfishly hoarding toilet paper. Divisions aren’t going away. This crisis exposes just how fragile this so-called proposition nation really is. All brought to you by libertarian Conservatism Inc. ™. I see no mechanism that changes the situation for the better. Your demographic’s eyes may have been opened (a little), but your demographic also no longer has the power to do anything about it due to demographic change.

    America’s corrupt ruling class isn’t going away. Racial divisions aren’t magically disappearing, no matter how much you may want them to. The leftist journalistic class isn’t going to stop stirring the pot. Hollywood isn’t going to make good movies again; they’ve made that clear by now. Other cultural institutions like comics are all but dead and won’t be coming back. Political correctness will worsen as upperclass liberal whites signal their loyalty to the new POC boss in town. Wall Street will still buy off politicians who’ll rule in favor of the elite at your expense. Free trade and outsourcing and mass immigration will all return with a vengeance once Trump is gone; they never really went away, and he was the outsider who was supposed to change it all.

    Italians Find ‘a Moment of Joy in This Moment of Anxiety’

    It started with the national anthem. Then came the piano chords, trumpet blasts, violin serenades and even the clanging of pots and pans — all of it spilling from people’s homes, out of windows and from balconies, and rippling across rooftops. … The Italian media reported a spike in sales of the Italian flag. The national anthem, usually limited to the start of soccer matches, reverberated off palazzo walls at 6 p.m. on Friday.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/14/world/europe/italians-find-a-moment-of-joy-in-this-moment-of-anxiety.html

    VIDEO: Quarantined New Yorker Tries to Recreate ‘Italy Magic’ By Singing Out Window — But is Told to ‘Shut The F**k Up’

    https://www.theamericanmirror.com/2020/03/video-quarantined-new-yorker-tries-to-recreate-italy-magic-by-singing-out-window-but-is-told-to-shut-the-fk-up/

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Pretty much.

    I mean, why would bringing the 3rd world masses into a white country produce anything else than shit? The USA is totally at fault for China's rise. Not only will China surpass the former USA (now minority white, full of Indians, Pakistanis, Burmese, Viets, Mexicans, Brazilians, Nigerians, Chinese), but frankly even Russia, and just about every homogeneous nation will surpass it in the 21st century as the USA falls down to a Brazil status or worse.

    Whites are doing it to themselves; every race knows that our "diversity" is not going to work but the white people. I don't know why we keep choosing to be so blinded by this lunacy.
  26. @indocon
    AE, this is one of the most illuminating charts I have seen.

    If someone can find the key to unlock " most Democrats do think their party is better for white men than the GOP", that will get the GOP white vote share past 70%.

    AE, this is one of the most illuminating charts I have seen.

    I have to agree, this was fascinating. The only issue I have with is is the small sample size; would love it to be in the 15K-25K range for good measure, but it is still very interesting nonetheless.

    Peace.

  27. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    It's no threat to us whatsoever if we actually had balls.

    Unfortunately whites still play by the rules. Rules are for white people only.

    Sadly you boomers were too busy going to mexico for abortions and sleeping around. The demographic die has been cast. Maybe you'll yet a real nice and vibrant nurse when you're dying in the nursing home, with no kids to take care of you.

    Maybe you’ll yet a real nice and vibrant nurse when you’re dying in the nursing home, with no kids to take care of you.

    And maybe you’ll enjoy your life as a hated minority, getting beaten-up, robbed, falsely accused with no legal recourse, after I am gone, ASSHOLE.

    Jesus, I thought you could be communicated with. You can’t. Enjoy your life in the brown toilet bowl. YOU DESERVE IT, LOUT.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Quebec will be fine lol.

    You guys are the ones who should worry.
  28. @Buzz Mohawk

    Maybe you’ll yet a real nice and vibrant nurse when you’re dying in the nursing home, with no kids to take care of you.
     
    And maybe you'll enjoy your life as a hated minority, getting beaten-up, robbed, falsely accused with no legal recourse, after I am gone, ASSHOLE.

    Jesus, I thought you could be communicated with. You can't. Enjoy your life in the brown toilet bowl. YOU DESERVE IT, LOUT.

    Quebec will be fine lol.

    You guys are the ones who should worry.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    We're all going to be fine, you lout. That's the laugh, but the future will come, after I am gone and you are living in Hell -- well deserved, judging from your cruel comment.

    What this overblown event has done is bring out the rats like you from behind the walls, the creepy bugs from under the rocks.

    You just revealed your true self, and it is as ugly as the dirty, faux-French linguistic division brought on in my lifetime in your province.

    Enjoy your future, your dirty, low-French Quebec life in the brown toilet bowl as a hated minority after I am gone. The thought beings me consolation. You earned this scorn with your comment, not I.

    Down here, we say, "Go to Hell." That is where you will live.

  29. @nebulafox
    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society, least of all at a time of unprecedented demographic shifts, increasing structural problems, and downward mobility...

    Only if you are completely out of touch with human nature (aka, your typical progressive) can you assume that Democratic fantasies about permanent rainbow America where whites are happy cosmopolitans are at all realistic...

    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society

    Yeah, I think if taken to its logical conclusion, it will eventually lead to inescapable fracturing. Even as the “certain races” gradually also turn on each other to divide the spoils.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @iffen
    An interesting analysis made by some of the more astute SJW's is that, "Sure it's identity politics. All groups do it. Whites do it as well. It is okay for nonwhites to do it, but it is forbidden for whites because ..."
  30. anon[222] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox
    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society, least of all at a time of unprecedented demographic shifts, increasing structural problems, and downward mobility...

    Only if you are completely out of touch with human nature (aka, your typical progressive) can you assume that Democratic fantasies about permanent rainbow America where whites are happy cosmopolitans are at all realistic...

    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society

    Depends on what one means by “works”. You may be assuming that “works” is a functioning industrial country where most people get along well and have a pretty good life. Is that the only model?

    The Aztecs seem to have had a pretty good system going prior to the arrival of the Spanish. As a strong tribe they were in a position to win a war against most of their neighboring tribes, and impose tribute requirements on the losers. So they demanded human slaves from neighbors, and when the neighbors began to get too strong they would up the demands and trigger a war.

    A war that the Aztecs would win. A war that would provide the Aztecs with a good supply of young men to sacrifice to their sun god on a pyramid in Tenochticlan. That tribe could then avoid war for a time by providing more slaves.

    The Aztecs kept their neighbors divided and weak. Their system ‘worked’ – for the Aztecs. It was metastable, until an exogenous factor arrived in the form of Cortez and smallpox.

    A similar system of playing each minority off against all the others would be somewhat stable in the US and would keep the societal overseers in really posh living. A race or tribal based spoils system, where groups get or do not get goodies/bennies depending on the favor of a tiny minority of people at the financial and power apex of society. Any tribe or group that gets too strong will be denigrated, attacked, kept out of positions of authority, pushed out of certain jobs, in order to weaken that group and make them more easy to control…

    So what you mean by “works” may not be what some others mean by “works”.

    tl;dr
    You assume good intentions where none may exist, in fact where malice may be dominant.

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @Athletic and Whitesplosive
    That's the theory, but you have such faith in the aptitude of the elite for governing a chaotic and inefficient system like that indefinitely?

    If any form of governance was self-maintaining and stable given the right propaganda regime then eastern Europe should be a post-scarcity worker's paradise now, and likewise I think you'd be a fool to bet that the maian system would have just trundled on as it was forever if no one ever came to the new world.

    The value of "divide and conquer" internal politics is seriously overblown, good rulers sensibly valued creating genuine stability and prosperity for people because a chaotic and miserable society is both unprofitable and difficult to govern (see the third world from which globos want to draw more population, this is your idea of the materials for stable governance?).

    This model also ignores that whatever the elites gain relative to the commoners they lose relative to other elites. Common misery is an awesome pretext to kill the guy in charge and assume command yourself. I'm sure I don't need to remind you of a modern example of one of the elites leveraging common despair to advance himself and turn on the mainstream body of elites (hint: he's tall and has a tan everybody loves to talk about). Insurgent elites would be much more common and more extreme under a fully realised dystopian system like that.
  31. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Quebec will be fine lol.

    You guys are the ones who should worry.

    We’re all going to be fine, you lout. That’s the laugh, but the future will come, after I am gone and you are living in Hell — well deserved, judging from your cruel comment.

    What this overblown event has done is bring out the rats like you from behind the walls, the creepy bugs from under the rocks.

    You just revealed your true self, and it is as ugly as the dirty, faux-French linguistic division brought on in my lifetime in your province.

    Enjoy your future, your dirty, low-French Quebec life in the brown toilet bowl as a hated minority after I am gone. The thought beings me consolation. You earned this scorn with your comment, not I.

    Down here, we say, “Go to Hell.” That is where you will live.

    • Replies: @Truth
    Well.

    It's nice to see this CV thing is bringin' crackaz together.
  32. @songbird
    I'm not quite sure what you are saying - that racial warfare will replace racial lawfare - or that power consolidation will end the coalition of the fringes. I'm not sure if you are trying to evoke post-racialism even in a dystopian sense, but we have a long way to fall, in any case.

    The US isn't Brazil yet - it is still more functional and more prosperous, but even Brazil has a system of racial redistribution.

    As to dictators: in Paraguay, whites were forced into miscegenation. In Haiti, the fist order was to kill them. Subsequent small groups of whites who landed on the island were sometimes allowed to live and miscegenate, but this only created a hierarchy of gradients of black and there are still severe tensions among the gradients, just as there are between Haitians and Dominicans.

    Of course, one can speculate that we are so multicult, that there are too many groups to create a similar power system, but given enough time, it seems likely that one group will dominate. If this displacement dynamic continues, I expect the end will be forced miscegenation. In a way, the precursors to it, are already present in America - for instance the idea that whites must be distributed between schools, or how AA incentivizes miscegenation.

    How does AA incentivize miscegenation? (Serious question — I never heard about this before.)

    • Replies: @songbird

    How does AA incentivize miscegenation?
     
    Well, I don't know how effective it is in reality - but I think it might work with some - there's the idea that your kids will be able to check the box, maybe even get a free ride, if they are a racial mixture. That is, if you are white. Like, if your kid is a mulatto, then he is considered black. Probably not as true for some other groups.

    Right now, I wouldn't guess that it changes a lot of minds, but it seems to have the structure of an incentive, so it is easy to see it being modified to become a more powerful incentive.

    In a way, this would also be true on the spousal level, AA decreases the economic potential of white males, and increases the economic potential of many others. There's a lot of six-figure government jobs awarded to warm bodies that are non-white.

    Maybe, the Brazilian model, which seems to involve phenotypic degrees on a scalar points system might be considered superior, as it would wouldn't be as large an incentive, in theory, since there is some middle ground.
  33. @Talha

    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society
     
    Yeah, I think if taken to its logical conclusion, it will eventually lead to inescapable fracturing. Even as the "certain races" gradually also turn on each other to divide the spoils.

    Peace.

    An interesting analysis made by some of the more astute SJW’s is that, “Sure it’s identity politics. All groups do it. Whites do it as well. It is okay for nonwhites to do it, but it is forbidden for whites because …”

    • Replies: @Talha
    "because...reasons!"

    It's silly, very silly - at least to me. These anti-whiteness shenanigans are a bit like how I see the white-unity thing.

    Once/if whites get rid of darkies on the European continent in the name of ethnic-politics, they'll likely go back to their age-old, hey-let's-slaughter-each-other-over-stuff business.

    Once/if non-whites push whites out of top-billing in the name of ethnic politics, they will also tear each other apart since "brown-power" and "non-white unity" is about as historically true as "white unity".

    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes*.

    Peace.

    *This has become a favored saying now among my sons since I introduced it to them.

    I'm just really pissed off when Muslims do this stuff to be honest. Just recently a white convert brother mentioned how he got flack from some "brown-power" Muslims because he dared - DARED - to suggest that white converts should concentrate on dawah (inviting to the religion) within their families and communities!

    Can you believe the nerve of that guy??!! How dare he suggest that - like at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) when people converted, he often sent them back to their own tribes to invite the rest of their people - these kinds of things also apply to whites??!! What is he, some kind of Nazi??!!
  34. @anon
    How does AA incentivize miscegenation? (Serious question -- I never heard about this before.)

    How does AA incentivize miscegenation?

    Well, I don’t know how effective it is in reality – but I think it might work with some – there’s the idea that your kids will be able to check the box, maybe even get a free ride, if they are a racial mixture. That is, if you are white. Like, if your kid is a mulatto, then he is considered black. Probably not as true for some other groups.

    Right now, I wouldn’t guess that it changes a lot of minds, but it seems to have the structure of an incentive, so it is easy to see it being modified to become a more powerful incentive.

    In a way, this would also be true on the spousal level, AA decreases the economic potential of white males, and increases the economic potential of many others. There’s a lot of six-figure government jobs awarded to warm bodies that are non-white.

    Maybe, the Brazilian model, which seems to involve phenotypic degrees on a scalar points system might be considered superior, as it would wouldn’t be as large an incentive, in theory, since there is some middle ground.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    There's no question that AA works well for societal elites. Take college admissions as one example: great way of tilting the scales against potentially threatening competition from middle/working class white and Asian kids.

    Whether it works for the people it supposedly advances is another question. Many elite colleges get around the black quota by utilizing high-octane Nigerian immigrant kids, who can hold their own just fine on standardized tests, coursework, etc. So, ironically, you have the descendants of those who sold the slaves to the Europeans taking up AA benefits, rather than the descendants of the actual slaves.

    (Also, I tend to get the impression that real female geeks-my definition tends to lean toward C++ and quantum mechanics, not comic books and video games-aren't too happy that you have tons of female "tech evangelicals" hanging around these days, because they usually tend to be the same kind of girl who would have bullied them in high school.)

    , @anon
    Thanks. That makes sense. (I had guessed by AA you meant Alcoholics Anonymous, not Affirmative Action!)
  35. @anon
    "Most" = barely more than half. It’s not overblown. As demographics continue changing, expect that number to dip below "most" to merely a plurality.

    The whole big state, post-war, lawsuit and grievance, surplus and redistribution model of which it is derivative is collapsing before us.
     
    I don't see that. After the crisis is over, people will demand even more government to protect them, and they'll have the demographic power to get it, too. The economic crisis in Zimbabwe didn't cause the black population there to become less racist and change their ways. Instead, they put Robert Mugabe back into power. Only now, many years after destroying their economy by stealing white farm lands, have they made token gestures about bringing them back. It won't work. Too little, too late. Same here over the long term. It will get worse, not better. The US also has immense resource wealth -- coal, oil, timber, agriculture, fishing, etc. There's plenty to steal, regardless of how bad things get on Wall Street or Main Street. Democrats are already trying to give unemployment checks to illegal aliens in the middle of a crisis. That's bold. I don't see that changing once they take back congress and the White House.

    How shall racial gramscian politics continue when program politics in general is crumbling into Caesarism?
     
    Easy. Be the Caesar and vote yourself free stuff. The democrats will soon have the permanent voting majority due to demographic change. That's inevitable at this point. You're celebrating waaaaaay too early. Racial minorities aren't going to vote meritocracy for other racial groups -- mainly benefiting whites and Asians -- while also eschewing social services and affirmative action for themselves, which would be detrimental for their group. You may not want to hear this, but this mentality you've repeated here is really just wishful thinking. Libertarians are having a wet dream at the moment after years of being proven wrong on virtually everything, but their predictions will soon enough be discredited once again.

    Racial grievance politics will become a minor chapter in the history of America’s Century.
     
    There's no chance of that. This crisis has been dramatically worsened by racial divisions. I don't see that magically changing anytime soon considering the demographic situation. It's wishful thinking to assert otherwise. It's not surprising, though. It's a comfortable, soothing lie to think intractable racial divisions will magically disappear. But that's all it is -- a convenient lie.

    The new century belongs to China. Their magnificent response to the virus -- only capable in cohesive, patriotic, high IQ countries -- demonstrates this. Compare that with the US response: infighting and acrimony, much of it tacitly based on race; hundreds of thousands or even millions will die horribly because their inept, corrupt government didn't prepare in advance and couldn't deal with the situation once it occurred. Ask yourself, is this really the nation that beats China in the 21st century? Lol. Not a chance.

    In Wuhan, the masses sang patriotic hymns from balconies. In Italy, the masses played the Italian national anthem in hospitals. In the US, celebrities sang a song written by an Englishman ... and were denounced. The best they could do was to sing the praises of healthcare workers. No national anthem, no patriotism, no flag. Just more gun sales and selfishly hoarding toilet paper. Divisions aren't going away. This crisis exposes just how fragile this so-called proposition nation really is. All brought to you by libertarian Conservatism Inc. (tm). I see no mechanism that changes the situation for the better. Your demographic's eyes may have been opened (a little), but your demographic also no longer has the power to do anything about it due to demographic change.

    America's corrupt ruling class isn't going away. Racial divisions aren't magically disappearing, no matter how much you may want them to. The leftist journalistic class isn't going to stop stirring the pot. Hollywood isn't going to make good movies again; they've made that clear by now. Other cultural institutions like comics are all but dead and won't be coming back. Political correctness will worsen as upperclass liberal whites signal their loyalty to the new POC boss in town. Wall Street will still buy off politicians who'll rule in favor of the elite at your expense. Free trade and outsourcing and mass immigration will all return with a vengeance once Trump is gone; they never really went away, and he was the outsider who was supposed to change it all.

    Italians Find ‘a Moment of Joy in This Moment of Anxiety’

    It started with the national anthem. Then came the piano chords, trumpet blasts, violin serenades and even the clanging of pots and pans — all of it spilling from people’s homes, out of windows and from balconies, and rippling across rooftops. ... The Italian media reported a spike in sales of the Italian flag. The national anthem, usually limited to the start of soccer matches, reverberated off palazzo walls at 6 p.m. on Friday.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/14/world/europe/italians-find-a-moment-of-joy-in-this-moment-of-anxiety.html
     

    VIDEO: Quarantined New Yorker Tries to Recreate ‘Italy Magic’ By Singing Out Window — But is Told to ‘Shut The F**k Up’

    https://www.theamericanmirror.com/2020/03/video-quarantined-new-yorker-tries-to-recreate-italy-magic-by-singing-out-window-but-is-told-to-shut-the-fk-up/
     

    Pretty much.

    I mean, why would bringing the 3rd world masses into a white country produce anything else than shit? The USA is totally at fault for China’s rise. Not only will China surpass the former USA (now minority white, full of Indians, Pakistanis, Burmese, Viets, Mexicans, Brazilians, Nigerians, Chinese), but frankly even Russia, and just about every homogeneous nation will surpass it in the 21st century as the USA falls down to a Brazil status or worse.

    Whites are doing it to themselves; every race knows that our “diversity” is not going to work but the white people. I don’t know why we keep choosing to be so blinded by this lunacy.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    as the USA falls down to a Brazil status or worse.
     
    Sounds like a very wishful thinking. I think this says more about the resentments you harbor than about the future of the United States.

    USA (now minority white, full of Indians, Pakistanis, Burmese, Viets, Mexicans, Brazilians, Nigerians, Chinese
     
    Burmese? That’s comical.

    Only one of those groups is demographically significant. Guess.

    Setting aside the that one group, the next largest is Chinese at about 1.5%. Pakistanis, for example, are about 0.15% of the population in the U.S. Burmese are 0.03%.

    Your random list of ethnicities you think are “full of...” in the U.S. reveals your utter ignorance of the United States.

    Couldn’t you find some Québécois equivalent of Stormfront and comment there?
  36. @iffen
    An interesting analysis made by some of the more astute SJW's is that, "Sure it's identity politics. All groups do it. Whites do it as well. It is okay for nonwhites to do it, but it is forbidden for whites because ..."

    “because…reasons!”

    It’s silly, very silly – at least to me. These anti-whiteness shenanigans are a bit like how I see the white-unity thing.

    Once/if whites get rid of darkies on the European continent in the name of ethnic-politics, they’ll likely go back to their age-old, hey-let’s-slaughter-each-other-over-stuff business.

    Once/if non-whites push whites out of top-billing in the name of ethnic politics, they will also tear each other apart since “brown-power” and “non-white unity” is about as historically true as “white unity”.

    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes*.

    Peace.

    *This has become a favored saying now among my sons since I introduced it to them.

    [MORE]

    I’m just really pissed off when Muslims do this stuff to be honest. Just recently a white convert brother mentioned how he got flack from some “brown-power” Muslims because he dared – DARED – to suggest that white converts should concentrate on dawah (inviting to the religion) within their families and communities!

    Can you believe the nerve of that guy??!! How dare he suggest that – like at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) when people converted, he often sent them back to their own tribes to invite the rest of their people – these kinds of things also apply to whites??!! What is he, some kind of Nazi??!!

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    I was thinking about this the other day lol. A few white converts might be fine, but the vast majority of Muslims at best are neutral to whites, and more hate us. They see Muslim as a synonym with "brown" (not the Latin or Indian "brown", ofc). Especially the Canadian-born ones.

    I just don't see it possible for a mass conversion of whites into Islam, mainly because of the "brown power" stuff. Also, whites would be converting to Islam presumably out of a desire for stability and social conservatism; whereas the Canadian-born brown Muslims see it as a cultural marker of their "non-whiteness" (AKA stability and the nuclear family). Doesn't work.

    Anyways, some of the Muslim (Arab?) women have very white skin and are gorgeous.
    , @songbird
    In some ways, I am the scion of over 800 years of inter-European ethnic conflict, longer if you count the Vikings. They liked fighting each other, well enough, before anyone else showed up, and it wasn't always a case of 100% of one group against 100% of the other, far from it, but the core of it was always ethnic.

    There was a lot of destruction - it still makes me a bit sad thinking about it. (not mad, but sad) As you can imagine, the surviving genealogical record isn't that great (and my people are partly to blame.) But due to a lot of luck, the barest of threads survives for me, and I am able to re-construct part of it.

    I think one of my ancestors was summarily executed in 1798 - I mean murdered. Hard to be 100% certain - it's not the sort of thing they keep good records of - and that's a pretty bad period for records besides, since many churches were burnt.

    On another line, constant warfare, they were mostly trying to retake land that had been stolen from them. After some initial successes, 26 of them (including my ancestor) were invited to a feast by a Norman, who murdered them at the dinner table, during a local saint's feast. He had their heads cut off and sold them. BTW, less confident, but I think the other guy, the treacherous Norman, was probably also one of my ancestors.

    Another of my ancestors was in charge of erecting barriers on bridges and building fortifications by rivers to prevent raids ("murders") by the natives. His lineal ancestor literally got off a ship, killed the people on the shore in the first place he landed and build a castle there - that is the family story. For hundreds of years, foreign armies landed in his harbor, and the head of the family dined their commanders.

    Still another, on the native side, was killed when the army he was leading was defeated by larger forces. His enemies put up a stone cross to mark the spot of his defeat - a monument to his death and defeat in his own country! And it was there for over 350 years, before new invaders demolished it because it offended their Puritan sensibilities.

    And that is the short version - I know other stories. Most of that conflict was between people from a fairly small geographic area: Ireland, Britain, Normandy. The people were closely related. Not a certainty, but I'd guess I'm at least 8% invader (at least going back only a few thousand years).

    Anyway, what I'm trying to say is this: 800 years of conflict, much destroyed, but still, what survives is impressive, most of all the blood. (I exclude the pozzed). But what would 800 years of the current level of invasion lead to? Quite simply, it would all be destroyed. There would be absolutely nothing left. Not even a stone in Eastern Europe, at the current rate of immigration into it.

    So, while I don't think a return to intra-European conflict is likely, I'd much rather be killed off by my cousins and have them survive, than to have all of us completely gone.
  37. @nebulafox
    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society, least of all at a time of unprecedented demographic shifts, increasing structural problems, and downward mobility...

    Only if you are completely out of touch with human nature (aka, your typical progressive) can you assume that Democratic fantasies about permanent rainbow America where whites are happy cosmopolitans are at all realistic...

    They can discourage whites from “identity politics” but it’s inevitable.

    I lived in an area that had been flooded with non-white aliens of all stripes for a while. They can say what they like, but you start to feel “relief” when you see another white person. A person you would have never thought twice about seeing before. When you meet other white people you become good friends with them more quickly. Unless the gov prevents white people from seeing each other this will continue.

    It’s a good wakeup call for us.

    • Troll: Buzz Mohawk
    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    ... you start to feel “relief” when you see another white person. A person you would have never thought twice about seeing before. When you meet other white people you become good friends with them more quickly.
     
    That sounds nice, but you are lying.

    You lout, when you encounter an older White man, you insult him. You blame him for your troubles and wish him the worst. You are divisive, and you make White men of your generation look terrible.

    Your general thoughts about demographic change in MY country are correct (though laughably ignorant on details) but the "angry young man" is a cliché as old as the hills. You deserve the world you are going to inherit, because you did nothing to build the one we are losing.

  38. @Talha
    "because...reasons!"

    It's silly, very silly - at least to me. These anti-whiteness shenanigans are a bit like how I see the white-unity thing.

    Once/if whites get rid of darkies on the European continent in the name of ethnic-politics, they'll likely go back to their age-old, hey-let's-slaughter-each-other-over-stuff business.

    Once/if non-whites push whites out of top-billing in the name of ethnic politics, they will also tear each other apart since "brown-power" and "non-white unity" is about as historically true as "white unity".

    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes*.

    Peace.

    *This has become a favored saying now among my sons since I introduced it to them.

    I'm just really pissed off when Muslims do this stuff to be honest. Just recently a white convert brother mentioned how he got flack from some "brown-power" Muslims because he dared - DARED - to suggest that white converts should concentrate on dawah (inviting to the religion) within their families and communities!

    Can you believe the nerve of that guy??!! How dare he suggest that - like at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) when people converted, he often sent them back to their own tribes to invite the rest of their people - these kinds of things also apply to whites??!! What is he, some kind of Nazi??!!

    I was thinking about this the other day lol. A few white converts might be fine, but the vast majority of Muslims at best are neutral to whites, and more hate us. They see Muslim as a synonym with “brown” (not the Latin or Indian “brown”, ofc). Especially the Canadian-born ones.

    I just don’t see it possible for a mass conversion of whites into Islam, mainly because of the “brown power” stuff. Also, whites would be converting to Islam presumably out of a desire for stability and social conservatism; whereas the Canadian-born brown Muslims see it as a cultural marker of their “non-whiteness” (AKA stability and the nuclear family). Doesn’t work.

    Anyways, some of the Muslim (Arab?) women have very white skin and are gorgeous.

    • Replies: @Talha

    They see Muslim as a synonym with “brown” (not the Latin or Indian “brown”, ofc).
     
    Which is really dumb. During the time of the Ottomans, there was a traffic of black slaves going towards mostly white-skinned people and a concurrent traffic of white slaves going towards dark-skinned people. I wonder what they make of that?

    These people have no idea what they are talking about and frankly just get in the way as far as I'm concerned. Their arguments are not based upon anything substantial from Qur'an and Sunnah, it's just boilerplate Left-liberal, SJW talking points.


    I just don’t see it possible for a mass conversion of whites into Islam, mainly because of the “brown power” stuff.
     
    Exactly why these people are in the way.

    whereas the Canadian-born brown Muslims see it as a cultural marker of their “non-whiteness”
     
    Again, major problem if that is what is really keeping them in Islam; definitely won't result in anything spiritually fruitful.

    Anyways, some of the Muslim (Arab?) women have very white skin and are gorgeous.
     
    One of my very good friends mentioned that this was a major problem for some of the brothers that went to Damascus to study the religion (like he did). He was already married at the time, but quite a few of the younger brothers get there are were just amazed at how pretty the local sisters were and then they got sidetracked in their studies basically stuck around trying to figure out a way to marry one of them - LOL! I have quite a few Syrian friends and my brother also came close to marrying one, they look quite white.

    Also, the convert brother I was just mentioning also married a white convert sister, but that didn't work out for whatever reason and - surprise, surprise - he ended up marrying a Syrian sister. A LOT of the families from there are from refugee stock from Europe (two of the most famous hadith scholars in the area from the last century came from Albanian background) or places like Russia (specifically the Caucasus area) when the Ottoman empire was collapsing and hundreds of thousands migrated into and settled in the greater Levant.

    Peace.

  39. @Rosie

    Why would a white man vote Republican either?
     
    Or a White woman. Neither the Dems nor the Republicans offer anything of interest to us. To the extent most White women can be considered feminists, they are defensive, conservative feminists, generally satisfied with the status quo. No, there isn't any more work to be done, and Democrat appeals to sisterhood fail as a result.

    By the same token, I hope Democrat resistance to UBI, even on a temporary basis, exposes their economic populist pretensions as hollow: all talk and no action. At that point, White women would be officially done with the Democrats.

    Or a White woman. Neither the Dems nor the Republicans offer anything of interest to us. To the extent most White women can be considered feminists, they are defensive, conservative feminists, generally satisfied with the status quo. No, there isn’t any more work to be done, and Democrat appeals to sisterhood fail as a result.

    Now come on Rosie…..the only true sin for a woman is to appear “unfashionable”! Currently hating on Whitey be where it’s at! So raise that fist!

    • Replies: @Rosie
    https://youtu.be/UbY7p7FK8ZY
  40. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    I was thinking about this the other day lol. A few white converts might be fine, but the vast majority of Muslims at best are neutral to whites, and more hate us. They see Muslim as a synonym with "brown" (not the Latin or Indian "brown", ofc). Especially the Canadian-born ones.

    I just don't see it possible for a mass conversion of whites into Islam, mainly because of the "brown power" stuff. Also, whites would be converting to Islam presumably out of a desire for stability and social conservatism; whereas the Canadian-born brown Muslims see it as a cultural marker of their "non-whiteness" (AKA stability and the nuclear family). Doesn't work.

    Anyways, some of the Muslim (Arab?) women have very white skin and are gorgeous.

    They see Muslim as a synonym with “brown” (not the Latin or Indian “brown”, ofc).

    Which is really dumb. During the time of the Ottomans, there was a traffic of black slaves going towards mostly white-skinned people and a concurrent traffic of white slaves going towards dark-skinned people. I wonder what they make of that?

    These people have no idea what they are talking about and frankly just get in the way as far as I’m concerned. Their arguments are not based upon anything substantial from Qur’an and Sunnah, it’s just boilerplate Left-liberal, SJW talking points.

    I just don’t see it possible for a mass conversion of whites into Islam, mainly because of the “brown power” stuff.

    Exactly why these people are in the way.

    whereas the Canadian-born brown Muslims see it as a cultural marker of their “non-whiteness”

    Again, major problem if that is what is really keeping them in Islam; definitely won’t result in anything spiritually fruitful.

    Anyways, some of the Muslim (Arab?) women have very white skin and are gorgeous.

    One of my very good friends mentioned that this was a major problem for some of the brothers that went to Damascus to study the religion (like he did). He was already married at the time, but quite a few of the younger brothers get there are were just amazed at how pretty the local sisters were and then they got sidetracked in their studies basically stuck around trying to figure out a way to marry one of them – LOL! I have quite a few Syrian friends and my brother also came close to marrying one, they look quite white.

    Also, the convert brother I was just mentioning also married a white convert sister, but that didn’t work out for whatever reason and – surprise, surprise – he ended up marrying a Syrian sister. A LOT of the families from there are from refugee stock from Europe (two of the most famous hadith scholars in the area from the last century came from Albanian background) or places like Russia (specifically the Caucasus area) when the Ottoman empire was collapsing and hundreds of thousands migrated into and settled in the greater Levant.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Yahya K.

    I have quite a few Syrian friends and my brother also came close to marrying one, they look quite white.
     
    Correct. We had a few Syrians in my school and they were always the prettiest girls. Some even had green eyes and darkish blonde hair (different shade though - darker than your average European blonde).

    Egyptians can be white (i'm personally white-skinned) too, but we have only dark hair and dark eyes. Most Egyptians are brown though. There aren't any statistics, and it can be hard to guess from anecdotal observation, but if I had to guess Egypt is maybe 65% brown, 30% white, 5% black (Nubians).

    Saudi Arabia likewise could be ~65% brown, ~25% white, ~10% black (descendants of slaves). Interestingly, all are just considered 'Arab' because we speak the same language and kind of look the same, even if the skin color is different. No-one ever talks about it really. I only began to notice differences in skin color and genetic ancestry once I got into HBD a couple of years ago.

    Both Egypt and Saudi Arabia experienced lots of migration from different parts of the Middle East, and my guess is that's why skin color is different. I have quite a bit of Turkish and Persian ancestry. That's probably where the light-skin came from.



    Here are some pictures of Egyptian presidents to compare the skin colors:

    Hosni Mubarak (White):
    https://images.app.goo.gl/Wx3nXvaVq7CM8eYR9

    President Al-Sisi (Brown)
    https://images.app.goo.gl/vESAHXWi4JNaAH1t5

    Note: Sisi looks very Egyptian, without any admixture from other parts of the ME.

    Anwar Sadat (Brownish-Black):
    https://images.app.goo.gl/F1HVaS6KPJvcJhHR8
  41. @Talha

    They see Muslim as a synonym with “brown” (not the Latin or Indian “brown”, ofc).
     
    Which is really dumb. During the time of the Ottomans, there was a traffic of black slaves going towards mostly white-skinned people and a concurrent traffic of white slaves going towards dark-skinned people. I wonder what they make of that?

    These people have no idea what they are talking about and frankly just get in the way as far as I'm concerned. Their arguments are not based upon anything substantial from Qur'an and Sunnah, it's just boilerplate Left-liberal, SJW talking points.


    I just don’t see it possible for a mass conversion of whites into Islam, mainly because of the “brown power” stuff.
     
    Exactly why these people are in the way.

    whereas the Canadian-born brown Muslims see it as a cultural marker of their “non-whiteness”
     
    Again, major problem if that is what is really keeping them in Islam; definitely won't result in anything spiritually fruitful.

    Anyways, some of the Muslim (Arab?) women have very white skin and are gorgeous.
     
    One of my very good friends mentioned that this was a major problem for some of the brothers that went to Damascus to study the religion (like he did). He was already married at the time, but quite a few of the younger brothers get there are were just amazed at how pretty the local sisters were and then they got sidetracked in their studies basically stuck around trying to figure out a way to marry one of them - LOL! I have quite a few Syrian friends and my brother also came close to marrying one, they look quite white.

    Also, the convert brother I was just mentioning also married a white convert sister, but that didn't work out for whatever reason and - surprise, surprise - he ended up marrying a Syrian sister. A LOT of the families from there are from refugee stock from Europe (two of the most famous hadith scholars in the area from the last century came from Albanian background) or places like Russia (specifically the Caucasus area) when the Ottoman empire was collapsing and hundreds of thousands migrated into and settled in the greater Levant.

    Peace.

    I have quite a few Syrian friends and my brother also came close to marrying one, they look quite white.

    Correct. We had a few Syrians in my school and they were always the prettiest girls. Some even had green eyes and darkish blonde hair (different shade though – darker than your average European blonde).

    Egyptians can be white (i’m personally white-skinned) too, but we have only dark hair and dark eyes. Most Egyptians are brown though. There aren’t any statistics, and it can be hard to guess from anecdotal observation, but if I had to guess Egypt is maybe 65% brown, 30% white, 5% black (Nubians).

    Saudi Arabia likewise could be ~65% brown, ~25% white, ~10% black (descendants of slaves). Interestingly, all are just considered ‘Arab’ because we speak the same language and kind of look the same, even if the skin color is different. No-one ever talks about it really. I only began to notice differences in skin color and genetic ancestry once I got into HBD a couple of years ago.

    Both Egypt and Saudi Arabia experienced lots of migration from different parts of the Middle East, and my guess is that’s why skin color is different. I have quite a bit of Turkish and Persian ancestry. That’s probably where the light-skin came from.

    [MORE]

    Here are some pictures of Egyptian presidents to compare the skin colors:

    Hosni Mubarak (White):
    https://images.app.goo.gl/Wx3nXvaVq7CM8eYR9

    President Al-Sisi (Brown)
    https://images.app.goo.gl/vESAHXWi4JNaAH1t5

    Note: Sisi looks very Egyptian, without any admixture from other parts of the ME.

    Anwar Sadat (Brownish-Black):
    https://images.app.goo.gl/F1HVaS6KPJvcJhHR8

    • Replies: @Talha

    but if I had to guess Egypt is maybe 65% brown, 30% white, 5% black (Nubians).
     
    That's probably around what I've seen too. I've seen some that are totally white, have freckles, etc.

    Interestingly, all are just considered ‘Arab’ because we speak the same language and kind of look the same, even if the skin color is different. No-one ever talks about it really.
     
    Makes sense. You get a similar situation in places like Pakistan - you get anywhere on the white, brown to dark-brown spectrum but most of it comes down to your ethno-linguistic background; Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, etc. and since many people are bilingual - it's also not often a huge deal...though, if I'm being honest, I could easily see Pakistan tear itself apart otherwise along ethno-linguistic lines without Islam keeping it together.

    once I got into HBD a couple of years ago.
     
    HBD is certainly an interesting part of the puzzle. Have you heard of the YouTube channel of "Masaman"? He does some great stuff about ancestries of various peoples, differences, which ones have disappeared, etc. And he does it all in a very academic way without any sot of superiority of this or that, just presenting findings - it's one of the few channels I subscribe to.

    I have quite a bit of Turkish and Persian ancestry. That’s probably where the light-skin came from.
     
    Likely. As you know, the last dynasty of Egypt (before King Farouk was booted) was descended from an Albanian, Muhammad Ali.

    As the crossroads into the rest of Africa from Asia and often as the landing point from Europe into the continent, this is to be expected.

    Wa salaam.
  42. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Pretty much.

    I mean, why would bringing the 3rd world masses into a white country produce anything else than shit? The USA is totally at fault for China's rise. Not only will China surpass the former USA (now minority white, full of Indians, Pakistanis, Burmese, Viets, Mexicans, Brazilians, Nigerians, Chinese), but frankly even Russia, and just about every homogeneous nation will surpass it in the 21st century as the USA falls down to a Brazil status or worse.

    Whites are doing it to themselves; every race knows that our "diversity" is not going to work but the white people. I don't know why we keep choosing to be so blinded by this lunacy.

    as the USA falls down to a Brazil status or worse.

    Sounds like a very wishful thinking. I think this says more about the resentments you harbor than about the future of the United States.

    USA (now minority white, full of Indians, Pakistanis, Burmese, Viets, Mexicans, Brazilians, Nigerians, Chinese

    Burmese? That’s comical.

    Only one of those groups is demographically significant. Guess.

    Setting aside the that one group, the next largest is Chinese at about 1.5%. Pakistanis, for example, are about 0.15% of the population in the U.S. Burmese are 0.03%.

    Your random list of ethnicities you think are “full of…” in the U.S. reveals your utter ignorance of the United States.

    Couldn’t you find some Québécois equivalent of Stormfront and comment there?

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @iffen
    Burmese? That’s comical.

    Reading about those pythons in the Everglades probably stuck in his mind.
    , @songbird

    Only one of those groups is demographically significant.
     
    This idea that almost no group of immigrants is demographically significant unless they are double digits of the population is obvious folly. They are all demographically significant.

    Jews make up around 1.7% and 2.6% of the total U.S. population. Are you going to tell us that they aren't demographically significant?

    In 1948, Windrush carried only about 802 blacks. Last census, they were about 3% of the population, and the British people are already being rewritten out of their own history and mythology.

    In Bavaria, many of the schools used to have crosses on the walls of the classrooms. The rule is that only one person has to complain before they are taken down. There's no rule for putting them back up, once they have been taken down.
  43. @Yahya K.

    I have quite a few Syrian friends and my brother also came close to marrying one, they look quite white.
     
    Correct. We had a few Syrians in my school and they were always the prettiest girls. Some even had green eyes and darkish blonde hair (different shade though - darker than your average European blonde).

    Egyptians can be white (i'm personally white-skinned) too, but we have only dark hair and dark eyes. Most Egyptians are brown though. There aren't any statistics, and it can be hard to guess from anecdotal observation, but if I had to guess Egypt is maybe 65% brown, 30% white, 5% black (Nubians).

    Saudi Arabia likewise could be ~65% brown, ~25% white, ~10% black (descendants of slaves). Interestingly, all are just considered 'Arab' because we speak the same language and kind of look the same, even if the skin color is different. No-one ever talks about it really. I only began to notice differences in skin color and genetic ancestry once I got into HBD a couple of years ago.

    Both Egypt and Saudi Arabia experienced lots of migration from different parts of the Middle East, and my guess is that's why skin color is different. I have quite a bit of Turkish and Persian ancestry. That's probably where the light-skin came from.



    Here are some pictures of Egyptian presidents to compare the skin colors:

    Hosni Mubarak (White):
    https://images.app.goo.gl/Wx3nXvaVq7CM8eYR9

    President Al-Sisi (Brown)
    https://images.app.goo.gl/vESAHXWi4JNaAH1t5

    Note: Sisi looks very Egyptian, without any admixture from other parts of the ME.

    Anwar Sadat (Brownish-Black):
    https://images.app.goo.gl/F1HVaS6KPJvcJhHR8

    but if I had to guess Egypt is maybe 65% brown, 30% white, 5% black (Nubians).

    That’s probably around what I’ve seen too. I’ve seen some that are totally white, have freckles, etc.

    Interestingly, all are just considered ‘Arab’ because we speak the same language and kind of look the same, even if the skin color is different. No-one ever talks about it really.

    Makes sense. You get a similar situation in places like Pakistan – you get anywhere on the white, brown to dark-brown spectrum but most of it comes down to your ethno-linguistic background; Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, etc. and since many people are bilingual – it’s also not often a huge deal…though, if I’m being honest, I could easily see Pakistan tear itself apart otherwise along ethno-linguistic lines without Islam keeping it together.

    once I got into HBD a couple of years ago.

    HBD is certainly an interesting part of the puzzle. Have you heard of the YouTube channel of “Masaman”? He does some great stuff about ancestries of various peoples, differences, which ones have disappeared, etc. And he does it all in a very academic way without any sot of superiority of this or that, just presenting findings – it’s one of the few channels I subscribe to.

    I have quite a bit of Turkish and Persian ancestry. That’s probably where the light-skin came from.

    Likely. As you know, the last dynasty of Egypt (before King Farouk was booted) was descended from an Albanian, Muhammad Ali.

    As the crossroads into the rest of Africa from Asia and often as the landing point from Europe into the continent, this is to be expected.

    Wa salaam.

    • Replies: @Yahya K.

    Makes sense. You get a similar situation in places like Pakistan – you get anywhere on the white, brown to dark-brown spectrum but most of it comes down to your ethno-linguistic background; Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, etc. and since many people are bilingual – it’s also not often a huge deal…though, if I’m being honest, I could easily see Pakistan tear itself apart otherwise along ethno-linguistic lines without Islam keeping it together.

     

    Yeah. I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as "not one nation, but 32 nations put together" or something of the sort. Thankfully Islam keeps Pakistan united (although if i'm correct, Bangladesh used to be part of Pakistan but they split off despite being Muslims as well).

    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus? Who will they side with if there is a war? Why don't Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?

    One of my Dad's employees was an Indian Muslim. I once asked him why he didn't move to Pakistan. He said something to the effect of "this (India) is my land. I can't leave". So he must have had a strong attachment to India. I found it interesting.


    Likely. As you know, the last dynasty of Egypt (before King Farouk was booted) was descended from an Albanian, Muhammad Ali.
     
    Yes. We have a few Egyptians who look Albanian. Like the chairman of Zamalek f.c, a major Egyptian football club, Mortada Mansour:

    http://dneegypt.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/2018/09/murtada-mansour-zamalek_ll07p81kzjs41c6ivz6mu19ig-768x430.jpg


    HBD is certainly an interesting part of the puzzle. Have you heard of the YouTube channel of “Masaman”? He does some great stuff about ancestries of various peoples, differences, which ones have disappeared, etc. And he does it all in a very academic way without any sot of superiority of this or that, just presenting findings – it’s one of the few channels I subscribe to.

     

    Jazak allah Talha. I will check him out. I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racial animosity and chauvinism. It takes a lot of moral courage.

    Asalaam.

  44. @Talha

    but if I had to guess Egypt is maybe 65% brown, 30% white, 5% black (Nubians).
     
    That's probably around what I've seen too. I've seen some that are totally white, have freckles, etc.

    Interestingly, all are just considered ‘Arab’ because we speak the same language and kind of look the same, even if the skin color is different. No-one ever talks about it really.
     
    Makes sense. You get a similar situation in places like Pakistan - you get anywhere on the white, brown to dark-brown spectrum but most of it comes down to your ethno-linguistic background; Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, etc. and since many people are bilingual - it's also not often a huge deal...though, if I'm being honest, I could easily see Pakistan tear itself apart otherwise along ethno-linguistic lines without Islam keeping it together.

    once I got into HBD a couple of years ago.
     
    HBD is certainly an interesting part of the puzzle. Have you heard of the YouTube channel of "Masaman"? He does some great stuff about ancestries of various peoples, differences, which ones have disappeared, etc. And he does it all in a very academic way without any sot of superiority of this or that, just presenting findings - it's one of the few channels I subscribe to.

    I have quite a bit of Turkish and Persian ancestry. That’s probably where the light-skin came from.
     
    Likely. As you know, the last dynasty of Egypt (before King Farouk was booted) was descended from an Albanian, Muhammad Ali.

    As the crossroads into the rest of Africa from Asia and often as the landing point from Europe into the continent, this is to be expected.

    Wa salaam.

    Makes sense. You get a similar situation in places like Pakistan – you get anywhere on the white, brown to dark-brown spectrum but most of it comes down to your ethno-linguistic background; Punjabi, Sindhi, Balochi, etc. and since many people are bilingual – it’s also not often a huge deal…though, if I’m being honest, I could easily see Pakistan tear itself apart otherwise along ethno-linguistic lines without Islam keeping it together.

    Yeah. I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as “not one nation, but 32 nations put together” or something of the sort. Thankfully Islam keeps Pakistan united (although if i’m correct, Bangladesh used to be part of Pakistan but they split off despite being Muslims as well).

    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus? Who will they side with if there is a war? Why don’t Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?

    One of my Dad’s employees was an Indian Muslim. I once asked him why he didn’t move to Pakistan. He said something to the effect of “this (India) is my land. I can’t leave”. So he must have had a strong attachment to India. I found it interesting.

    Likely. As you know, the last dynasty of Egypt (before King Farouk was booted) was descended from an Albanian, Muhammad Ali.

    Yes. We have a few Egyptians who look Albanian. Like the chairman of Zamalek f.c, a major Egyptian football club, Mortada Mansour:

    HBD is certainly an interesting part of the puzzle. Have you heard of the YouTube channel of “Masaman”? He does some great stuff about ancestries of various peoples, differences, which ones have disappeared, etc. And he does it all in a very academic way without any sot of superiority of this or that, just presenting findings – it’s one of the few channels I subscribe to.

    Jazak allah Talha. I will check him out. I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racial animosity and chauvinism. It takes a lot of moral courage.

    Asalaam.

  45. @Talha
    "because...reasons!"

    It's silly, very silly - at least to me. These anti-whiteness shenanigans are a bit like how I see the white-unity thing.

    Once/if whites get rid of darkies on the European continent in the name of ethnic-politics, they'll likely go back to their age-old, hey-let's-slaughter-each-other-over-stuff business.

    Once/if non-whites push whites out of top-billing in the name of ethnic politics, they will also tear each other apart since "brown-power" and "non-white unity" is about as historically true as "white unity".

    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes*.

    Peace.

    *This has become a favored saying now among my sons since I introduced it to them.

    I'm just really pissed off when Muslims do this stuff to be honest. Just recently a white convert brother mentioned how he got flack from some "brown-power" Muslims because he dared - DARED - to suggest that white converts should concentrate on dawah (inviting to the religion) within their families and communities!

    Can you believe the nerve of that guy??!! How dare he suggest that - like at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) when people converted, he often sent them back to their own tribes to invite the rest of their people - these kinds of things also apply to whites??!! What is he, some kind of Nazi??!!

    In some ways, I am the scion of over 800 years of inter-European ethnic conflict, longer if you count the Vikings. They liked fighting each other, well enough, before anyone else showed up, and it wasn’t always a case of 100% of one group against 100% of the other, far from it, but the core of it was always ethnic.

    [MORE]

    There was a lot of destruction – it still makes me a bit sad thinking about it. (not mad, but sad) As you can imagine, the surviving genealogical record isn’t that great (and my people are partly to blame.) But due to a lot of luck, the barest of threads survives for me, and I am able to re-construct part of it.

    I think one of my ancestors was summarily executed in 1798 – I mean murdered. Hard to be 100% certain – it’s not the sort of thing they keep good records of – and that’s a pretty bad period for records besides, since many churches were burnt.

    On another line, constant warfare, they were mostly trying to retake land that had been stolen from them. After some initial successes, 26 of them (including my ancestor) were invited to a feast by a Norman, who murdered them at the dinner table, during a local saint’s feast. He had their heads cut off and sold them. BTW, less confident, but I think the other guy, the treacherous Norman, was probably also one of my ancestors.

    Another of my ancestors was in charge of erecting barriers on bridges and building fortifications by rivers to prevent raids (“murders”) by the natives. His lineal ancestor literally got off a ship, killed the people on the shore in the first place he landed and build a castle there – that is the family story. For hundreds of years, foreign armies landed in his harbor, and the head of the family dined their commanders.

    Still another, on the native side, was killed when the army he was leading was defeated by larger forces. His enemies put up a stone cross to mark the spot of his defeat – a monument to his death and defeat in his own country! And it was there for over 350 years, before new invaders demolished it because it offended their Puritan sensibilities.

    And that is the short version – I know other stories. Most of that conflict was between people from a fairly small geographic area: Ireland, Britain, Normandy. The people were closely related. Not a certainty, but I’d guess I’m at least 8% invader (at least going back only a few thousand years).

    Anyway, what I’m trying to say is this: 800 years of conflict, much destroyed, but still, what survives is impressive, most of all the blood. (I exclude the pozzed). But what would 800 years of the current level of invasion lead to? Quite simply, it would all be destroyed. There would be absolutely nothing left. Not even a stone in Eastern Europe, at the current rate of immigration into it.

    So, while I don’t think a return to intra-European conflict is likely, I’d much rather be killed off by my cousins and have them survive, than to have all of us completely gone.

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
    I'm out of reaction-comments, but your concluding line is one I heartily agree with.
    , @Talha
    Thanks for the interesting post.

    but the core of it was always ethnic.
     
    This may well be the case in the specific conflicts you describe, but many conflicts on the wider continent were religious in nature.

    But what would 800 years of the current level of invasion lead to? Quite simply, it would all be destroyed.
     
    Sure - or replaced or whatever - hard to argue with this, especially given that whites are not having enough kids themselves.

    while I don’t think a return to intra-European conflict is likely
     
    Possibly, but it’s only really been 70 years since the last big continental conflict. And Europe came close a couple of times during the Cold War. I don’t know the future, I’m just going by past record.

    than to have all of us completely gone.
     
    Yeah, I’m not black-pilled about white survival. The One Who created whites as one of His signs will make them come through:
    “And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of your languages and your colors. Indeed in that are signs for those of knowledge.” (30:22)

    Peace.
  46. Can’t speak for India, but in China, there’s definitely a gap between the Hui and Uyghurs.

    As a disclaimer, I was basically a casual observer on this, and I never made it out to the trouble spots in Xinjiang. But my experience seemed to be that the Hui Muslims and the Uyghurs lived quite separate lives, to the point of attending separate mosques, and didn’t identify with each other at all: the Hui saw themselves as Chinese. They spoke Mandarin and were basically indistinguishable from their neighbors save the occasional bit of religious attire. The former were basically viewed as Chinese who happened to not eat pork or drink, and engaged in exotic religious rituals. This is different from a place like Singapore where the Indian Muslims are usually fully fluent in Malay, use it for business, and the two Muslim communities are pretty intertwined.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle. But I haven’t been back since the CPC took over direct control of religious affairs in 2018: came close a couple of times, but life back in the States intervened. I’d be interested in hearing if it has become a little more about religion and a little less about race in the last couple of years.

    Re, HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

    • Replies: @Yahya K.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle.
     
    Whoa. I haven't heard of the racial angle before. That would just make it worse. It means they are arbitrarily persecuting the Uyghurs for their race.

    I could see a rational reason if they wanted to 'De-Islamisize' the Uyghurs so they could assimilate better or reduce terrorism or something. I mean, I still abhor it because I'm a Muslim. But I could at least see some sort of rational reason. But persecuting them just because they are racially different seems cruel and arbitrary.

    Here is a question: why don't the Chinese rulers just splinter off Xinjiang as a separate country? They don't need the land. And they wont need to deal with ethno-religious problems anymore.


    Re, HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

     

    Absolutely. But its difficult to resist going down that rabbit hole (I personally have fallen into it before). Its tempting to look down on the less intelligent as less worthy. Especially because low-IQ people's behavior (such as crime, welfare use etc.) make it easy to find an excuse to hate. But you have to override that aspect of human nature. I've seen very few use HBD as an impetus to be more compassionate towards less fortunate races/individuals. It takes some moral backbone. That's why I complimented you for it before.
    , @Talha

    there’s definitely a gap between the Hui and Uyghurs.
     
    Yes. Though one wonders if this is a relatively recent phenomenon or something that is centuries old.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle.
     
    There you go. The issue with Islam in China is that it is old, very, very old. I mean one of the Companions - Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas (ra) - is buried in China:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKLTC_ajk0k

    He was no lightweight, he was probably the major architect of the fall of Persia, being the commanding general on that front (after Khalid Ibn Walid [ra] was reassigned to the Syrian theater). So the history goes back hundreds of years. One wonders if the relations were always like this between the Hui and the Uyghurs. Honestly part of it may be because of how they are separated by distance.

    Though I do know a significant Hui Muslim force was involved in crushing the rebelling Hui Muslims in the very bloody Dungan conflict of the 19th century - so there was a kind of loyalist/rebel demarcation even among the Hui.


    HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.
     
    Seems quite reasonable to me.

    Peace.
    , @Twinkie

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it
     
    The Hui don’t engage in separatist/liberationist struggles. The Uighur do.

    Mind you, I’m not sympathetic to the Chinese government at all, but it is a known fact that its ruling class is extremely allergic to even a hint of separatism from any group, whatever its phenotypical traits or ethnic culture.

    Ethnic Koreans, for example, are an identifiable ethnic minority in China and yet get to keep lots of ethnic goodies (an “autonomous” Korean prefecture, Korean language schools, museum, etc.), because they tend to be highly loyal to the Chinese state and never agitate for separatism.
  47. @songbird

    How does AA incentivize miscegenation?
     
    Well, I don't know how effective it is in reality - but I think it might work with some - there's the idea that your kids will be able to check the box, maybe even get a free ride, if they are a racial mixture. That is, if you are white. Like, if your kid is a mulatto, then he is considered black. Probably not as true for some other groups.

    Right now, I wouldn't guess that it changes a lot of minds, but it seems to have the structure of an incentive, so it is easy to see it being modified to become a more powerful incentive.

    In a way, this would also be true on the spousal level, AA decreases the economic potential of white males, and increases the economic potential of many others. There's a lot of six-figure government jobs awarded to warm bodies that are non-white.

    Maybe, the Brazilian model, which seems to involve phenotypic degrees on a scalar points system might be considered superior, as it would wouldn't be as large an incentive, in theory, since there is some middle ground.

    There’s no question that AA works well for societal elites. Take college admissions as one example: great way of tilting the scales against potentially threatening competition from middle/working class white and Asian kids.

    Whether it works for the people it supposedly advances is another question. Many elite colleges get around the black quota by utilizing high-octane Nigerian immigrant kids, who can hold their own just fine on standardized tests, coursework, etc. So, ironically, you have the descendants of those who sold the slaves to the Europeans taking up AA benefits, rather than the descendants of the actual slaves.

    (Also, I tend to get the impression that real female geeks-my definition tends to lean toward C++ and quantum mechanics, not comic books and video games-aren’t too happy that you have tons of female “tech evangelicals” hanging around these days, because they usually tend to be the same kind of girl who would have bullied them in high school.)

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    ironically, you have the descendants of those who sold the slaves to the Europeans taking up AA benefits, rather than the descendants of the actual slaves.
     
    In other words, "them that has, gets"?
    , @Twinkie

    There’s no question that AA works well for societal elites. Take college admissions as one example: great way of tilting the scales against potentially threatening competition from middle/working class white and Asian kids.

    Whether it works for the people it supposedly advances is another question.
     
    Affirmative Action is a win-win for elite whites (with a disproportionately very high representation of Jews) - they get to suppress competition from Asians and bright flyover country whites AND virtue-signal about blacks and Hispanics, from whom they clearly feel little competition.

    Audacious Epigone and I have discussed it - he even confirmed from a survey that the support for AA increases as income rises among whites. Poor whites don’t care for it at all, even liberal ones.
  48. @songbird

    How does AA incentivize miscegenation?
     
    Well, I don't know how effective it is in reality - but I think it might work with some - there's the idea that your kids will be able to check the box, maybe even get a free ride, if they are a racial mixture. That is, if you are white. Like, if your kid is a mulatto, then he is considered black. Probably not as true for some other groups.

    Right now, I wouldn't guess that it changes a lot of minds, but it seems to have the structure of an incentive, so it is easy to see it being modified to become a more powerful incentive.

    In a way, this would also be true on the spousal level, AA decreases the economic potential of white males, and increases the economic potential of many others. There's a lot of six-figure government jobs awarded to warm bodies that are non-white.

    Maybe, the Brazilian model, which seems to involve phenotypic degrees on a scalar points system might be considered superior, as it would wouldn't be as large an incentive, in theory, since there is some middle ground.

    Thanks. That makes sense. (I had guessed by AA you meant Alcoholics Anonymous, not Affirmative Action!)

  49. @fish

    Or a White woman. Neither the Dems nor the Republicans offer anything of interest to us. To the extent most White women can be considered feminists, they are defensive, conservative feminists, generally satisfied with the status quo. No, there isn’t any more work to be done, and Democrat appeals to sisterhood fail as a result.
     
    Now come on Rosie.....the only true sin for a woman is to appear "unfashionable"! Currently hating on Whitey be where it's at! So raise that fist!

  50. I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as “not one nation, but 32 nations put together” or something of the sort.

    That is correct. If you know Indians and have spoke to them on a serious level, you realize how different India is from, say, Malabar to, say, Kashmir. Totally different people, ethnically and language-wise and by religion. Even the local gods are different from one part of India to the other.

    In fact, if you look at the geography and the way the Himalayas and their extensions to the Pamir and Hindu Kush (meaning “Hindu killer” in Farsi – not kidding, those Persianized-Afghans were NOT politically correct) cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains…other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff. India is certainly at least as (if not more) diverse as Europe is with respect to genetics and language and religion and I think is a good candidate to be truly looked at as a (sub)continent and not simply one nation.

    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus?

    interesting question; you’d have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy – the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.

    As far as I can tell in the West, they hang around with Pakistanis. Pakistanis intermarry with them and generally spend time together. Sure we debate whose version of biryani is better, but in general, I have not seen much bickering over Pakistan vs India (apart from a couple of grumpy uncles). For instance, most of my Islamic studies teachers (as well as the current mufti I’m studying under) have been Indians since Pakistan and India share a general adherence to the Hanafi school. I honestly don’t know many Indian Muslims that prefer to hang out with Hindus over Muslims, but then again, I’m mostly around religious folks…so maybe non-practicing Muslims from India prefer the company of Hindus, I don’t know.

    Who will they side with if there is a war?

    Don’t know honestly. They may side with India, but the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people. I honestly don’t think there will be a huge war (inshaAllah) now that India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers.

    Why don’t Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?

    Well, there was a very serious debate on what course to take (wiht very legitimate points on both sides) and the ones that wanted to, moved out and formed Pakistan. There was East and West Pakistan (one nation), but the West Pakistanis didn’t treat the Easterners right and so they split and now we have Bangladesh.

    He said something to the effect of “this (India) is my land. I can’t leave”.

    I can understand this. India is unique and has its special qualities like other places do. Even as a person born in Pakistan, I will acknowledge that Pakistan can never truly be fully separated from its Indian heritage (nor should it try to be). If I was to describe Pakistan, I’d say it was a baby with an Arab grandfather and a Persian father and Turkish mother that was nursed by a Hindu foster-mother, I don’t know if that makes sense.

    I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racism and chauvinism.

    Wa iyyakum. I mean, with something like this; you’re either going to lead the data or you’re going to let the data lead you. The problem I find is that only a subset of people are willing to touch the stuff because of the politics involved, thus the data and implications aren’t even able to be debated in a legitimate public manner. If they were, I think we’d be able to look at it from a holistic and mature perspective. Unfortunately, you get one extreme of racists who worship HBD like some sort of religion-custom-built-for-nerds and on the other side of the spectrum you get fools that don’t want to even discuss any data because Nazis-under-my-bed.

    I like Masaman because he is quite accessible to the non-expert and the wide breadth of topics he covers on genetics and HBD always keeps things interesting; everything from ghost DNA to what happened to certain legendary peoples/races to which ethnicities may well die out within our lifetimes.

    Wasalaam.

    [MORE]

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:

    • Thanks: Yahya K.
    • Replies: @Mr. Rational

    the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people.
     
    When 200 million are involved, there are far easier solutions than expulsion.

    Remember, the closest border is just 6 feet away.  From anywhere.
    , @Yahya K.

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:

     

    Mashallah.

    Its nice to see Muslims of such different backgrounds, cultures and appearances gather together like this. I don't think this happens much in countries outside the US (other than in Saudi Arabia of course. Lol.) Who knew the US, of all places, would bring together Muslims from all over the world?

    May Allah (swt) bless you Talha and god bless the United States.

    Asalaam.

    , @iffen
    We wuz kangz before you got here. No you weren't, we wuz always the kangz. Wuz not. Wuz too. Wuz not. Wuz too.
    , @songbird

    cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia
     
    I agree with this.

    I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains…other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff.
     
    Oddly enough, I actually kind of blame Indians for this. The way I see it is that Indians and East Asians are both fighting for pride of place - each wants to be called "Asian." Indians are used to it because of the British calling them "Asians." East Asians are used to it because of Americans calling them "Asians." Neither wants to cede it to the other. I think some don't like the term "subcon" or "sub-continent" as the prefix "sub" often has a negative connotation, as does "con." Meanwhile, people from Pakistan might not like being called "Indians."

    Could be wrong, but that's how I interpret it. I'd like to suggest that there be some sort of symposium, where representatives from different parts of the subcontinent meet and are forced to agree on a name. Preferably a short one. And I want to see it updated on all forms and surveys in order to give AE material for another bar on his charts.
    , @RSDB

    interesting question; you’d have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy – the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.
     
    This isn't even unique to Muslims-- my Goan relatives come from a family which also moved to Pakistan after Goa was absorbed into India. Why they chose Pakistan I'm not sure, it seems like a strange choice, but times were different then.

    Who will they side with if there is a war?
     
    There have been wars and so far as I know Indian Muslims haven't shown notable disaffection. (In the '47 war the highest-ranking Indian officer killed was Muslim, for instance.) Granted that might change, but there hasn't been evidence of this happening so far as I am aware. As you mentioned large-scale wars don't seem likely now anyway.
  51. @nebulafox
    Can't speak for India, but in China, there's definitely a gap between the Hui and Uyghurs.

    As a disclaimer, I was basically a casual observer on this, and I never made it out to the trouble spots in Xinjiang. But my experience seemed to be that the Hui Muslims and the Uyghurs lived quite separate lives, to the point of attending separate mosques, and didn't identify with each other at all: the Hui saw themselves as Chinese. They spoke Mandarin and were basically indistinguishable from their neighbors save the occasional bit of religious attire. The former were basically viewed as Chinese who happened to not eat pork or drink, and engaged in exotic religious rituals. This is different from a place like Singapore where the Indian Muslims are usually fully fluent in Malay, use it for business, and the two Muslim communities are pretty intertwined.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle. But I haven't been back since the CPC took over direct control of religious affairs in 2018: came close a couple of times, but life back in the States intervened. I'd be interested in hearing if it has become a little more about religion and a little less about race in the last couple of years.

    Re, HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle.

    Whoa. I haven’t heard of the racial angle before. That would just make it worse. It means they are arbitrarily persecuting the Uyghurs for their race.

    I could see a rational reason if they wanted to ‘De-Islamisize’ the Uyghurs so they could assimilate better or reduce terrorism or something. I mean, I still abhor it because I’m a Muslim. But I could at least see some sort of rational reason. But persecuting them just because they are racially different seems cruel and arbitrary.

    Here is a question: why don’t the Chinese rulers just splinter off Xinjiang as a separate country? They don’t need the land. And they wont need to deal with ethno-religious problems anymore.

    Re, HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

    Absolutely. But its difficult to resist going down that rabbit hole (I personally have fallen into it before). Its tempting to look down on the less intelligent as less worthy. Especially because low-IQ people’s behavior (such as crime, welfare use etc.) make it easy to find an excuse to hate. But you have to override that aspect of human nature. I’ve seen very few use HBD as an impetus to be more compassionate towards less fortunate races/individuals. It takes some moral backbone. That’s why I complimented you for it before.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    For the same reason they do what they do in Tibet and they have thrown a hissy fit about the Taiwanese helping combat corona, despite their well demonstrated extreme competence in doing so. This is a Han ethno nationalist party, regardless of what they claim to the world. The CPC gets "triggered", as they say, about any sort of implications about its borders, de jure or otherwise.

    Re, the rabbit hole: I personally don't get it. Calling people with an IQ of 90 lazy and bad for not becoming doctors or physicists isn't just counterproductive, but downright cruel. I'd attribute it to a society that has forgotten that IQ is not correlated with the fundamental character or worthiness of a human being. Nothing that you've been given at birth should be. Worthiness must be something you earn.

    And they say I'm not an idealist...

  52. @nebulafox
    Can't speak for India, but in China, there's definitely a gap between the Hui and Uyghurs.

    As a disclaimer, I was basically a casual observer on this, and I never made it out to the trouble spots in Xinjiang. But my experience seemed to be that the Hui Muslims and the Uyghurs lived quite separate lives, to the point of attending separate mosques, and didn't identify with each other at all: the Hui saw themselves as Chinese. They spoke Mandarin and were basically indistinguishable from their neighbors save the occasional bit of religious attire. The former were basically viewed as Chinese who happened to not eat pork or drink, and engaged in exotic religious rituals. This is different from a place like Singapore where the Indian Muslims are usually fully fluent in Malay, use it for business, and the two Muslim communities are pretty intertwined.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle. But I haven't been back since the CPC took over direct control of religious affairs in 2018: came close a couple of times, but life back in the States intervened. I'd be interested in hearing if it has become a little more about religion and a little less about race in the last couple of years.

    Re, HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

    there’s definitely a gap between the Hui and Uyghurs.

    Yes. Though one wonders if this is a relatively recent phenomenon or something that is centuries old.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle.

    There you go. The issue with Islam in China is that it is old, very, very old. I mean one of the Companions – Sa’ad ibn Abi Waqqas (ra) – is buried in China:

    He was no lightweight, he was probably the major architect of the fall of Persia, being the commanding general on that front (after Khalid Ibn Walid [ra] was reassigned to the Syrian theater). So the history goes back hundreds of years. One wonders if the relations were always like this between the Hui and the Uyghurs. Honestly part of it may be because of how they are separated by distance.

    Though I do know a significant Hui Muslim force was involved in crushing the rebelling Hui Muslims in the very bloody Dungan conflict of the 19th century – so there was a kind of loyalist/rebel demarcation even among the Hui.

    HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

    Seems quite reasonable to me.

    Peace.

  53. @songbird
    In some ways, I am the scion of over 800 years of inter-European ethnic conflict, longer if you count the Vikings. They liked fighting each other, well enough, before anyone else showed up, and it wasn't always a case of 100% of one group against 100% of the other, far from it, but the core of it was always ethnic.

    There was a lot of destruction - it still makes me a bit sad thinking about it. (not mad, but sad) As you can imagine, the surviving genealogical record isn't that great (and my people are partly to blame.) But due to a lot of luck, the barest of threads survives for me, and I am able to re-construct part of it.

    I think one of my ancestors was summarily executed in 1798 - I mean murdered. Hard to be 100% certain - it's not the sort of thing they keep good records of - and that's a pretty bad period for records besides, since many churches were burnt.

    On another line, constant warfare, they were mostly trying to retake land that had been stolen from them. After some initial successes, 26 of them (including my ancestor) were invited to a feast by a Norman, who murdered them at the dinner table, during a local saint's feast. He had their heads cut off and sold them. BTW, less confident, but I think the other guy, the treacherous Norman, was probably also one of my ancestors.

    Another of my ancestors was in charge of erecting barriers on bridges and building fortifications by rivers to prevent raids ("murders") by the natives. His lineal ancestor literally got off a ship, killed the people on the shore in the first place he landed and build a castle there - that is the family story. For hundreds of years, foreign armies landed in his harbor, and the head of the family dined their commanders.

    Still another, on the native side, was killed when the army he was leading was defeated by larger forces. His enemies put up a stone cross to mark the spot of his defeat - a monument to his death and defeat in his own country! And it was there for over 350 years, before new invaders demolished it because it offended their Puritan sensibilities.

    And that is the short version - I know other stories. Most of that conflict was between people from a fairly small geographic area: Ireland, Britain, Normandy. The people were closely related. Not a certainty, but I'd guess I'm at least 8% invader (at least going back only a few thousand years).

    Anyway, what I'm trying to say is this: 800 years of conflict, much destroyed, but still, what survives is impressive, most of all the blood. (I exclude the pozzed). But what would 800 years of the current level of invasion lead to? Quite simply, it would all be destroyed. There would be absolutely nothing left. Not even a stone in Eastern Europe, at the current rate of immigration into it.

    So, while I don't think a return to intra-European conflict is likely, I'd much rather be killed off by my cousins and have them survive, than to have all of us completely gone.

    I’m out of reaction-comments, but your concluding line is one I heartily agree with.

  54. @nebulafox
    There's no question that AA works well for societal elites. Take college admissions as one example: great way of tilting the scales against potentially threatening competition from middle/working class white and Asian kids.

    Whether it works for the people it supposedly advances is another question. Many elite colleges get around the black quota by utilizing high-octane Nigerian immigrant kids, who can hold their own just fine on standardized tests, coursework, etc. So, ironically, you have the descendants of those who sold the slaves to the Europeans taking up AA benefits, rather than the descendants of the actual slaves.

    (Also, I tend to get the impression that real female geeks-my definition tends to lean toward C++ and quantum mechanics, not comic books and video games-aren't too happy that you have tons of female "tech evangelicals" hanging around these days, because they usually tend to be the same kind of girl who would have bullied them in high school.)

    ironically, you have the descendants of those who sold the slaves to the Europeans taking up AA benefits, rather than the descendants of the actual slaves.

    In other words, “them that has, gets”?

  55. @Talha

    I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as “not one nation, but 32 nations put together” or something of the sort.
     
    That is correct. If you know Indians and have spoke to them on a serious level, you realize how different India is from, say, Malabar to, say, Kashmir. Totally different people, ethnically and language-wise and by religion. Even the local gods are different from one part of India to the other.

    In fact, if you look at the geography and the way the Himalayas and their extensions to the Pamir and Hindu Kush (meaning "Hindu killer" in Farsi - not kidding, those Persianized-Afghans were NOT politically correct) cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don't see why it doesn't get it's own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains...other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff. India is certainly at least as (if not more) diverse as Europe is with respect to genetics and language and religion and I think is a good candidate to be truly looked at as a (sub)continent and not simply one nation.


    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus?
     
    interesting question; you'd have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy - the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.

    As far as I can tell in the West, they hang around with Pakistanis. Pakistanis intermarry with them and generally spend time together. Sure we debate whose version of biryani is better, but in general, I have not seen much bickering over Pakistan vs India (apart from a couple of grumpy uncles). For instance, most of my Islamic studies teachers (as well as the current mufti I'm studying under) have been Indians since Pakistan and India share a general adherence to the Hanafi school. I honestly don't know many Indian Muslims that prefer to hang out with Hindus over Muslims, but then again, I'm mostly around religious folks...so maybe non-practicing Muslims from India prefer the company of Hindus, I don't know.


    Who will they side with if there is a war?
     
    Don't know honestly. They may side with India, but the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people. I honestly don't think there will be a huge war (inshaAllah) now that India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers.

    Why don’t Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?
     
    Well, there was a very serious debate on what course to take (wiht very legitimate points on both sides) and the ones that wanted to, moved out and formed Pakistan. There was East and West Pakistan (one nation), but the West Pakistanis didn't treat the Easterners right and so they split and now we have Bangladesh.

    He said something to the effect of “this (India) is my land. I can’t leave”.
     
    I can understand this. India is unique and has its special qualities like other places do. Even as a person born in Pakistan, I will acknowledge that Pakistan can never truly be fully separated from its Indian heritage (nor should it try to be). If I was to describe Pakistan, I'd say it was a baby with an Arab grandfather and a Persian father and Turkish mother that was nursed by a Hindu foster-mother, I don't know if that makes sense.

    I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racism and chauvinism.
     
    Wa iyyakum. I mean, with something like this; you're either going to lead the data or you're going to let the data lead you. The problem I find is that only a subset of people are willing to touch the stuff because of the politics involved, thus the data and implications aren't even able to be debated in a legitimate public manner. If they were, I think we'd be able to look at it from a holistic and mature perspective. Unfortunately, you get one extreme of racists who worship HBD like some sort of religion-custom-built-for-nerds and on the other side of the spectrum you get fools that don't want to even discuss any data because Nazis-under-my-bed.

    I like Masaman because he is quite accessible to the non-expert and the wide breadth of topics he covers on genetics and HBD always keeps things interesting; everything from ghost DNA to what happened to certain legendary peoples/races to which ethnicities may well die out within our lifetimes.

    Wasalaam.

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbju9As_EWo

    the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people.

    When 200 million are involved, there are far easier solutions than expulsion.

    Remember, the closest border is just 6 feet away.  From anywhere.

    • Replies: @Talha

    When 200 million are involved, there are far easier solutions than expulsion.
     
    Certainly, but it wouldn’t be easy since those people would necessarily fight back with nothing to lose, you can look at the bloodbaths involved in the Partition.

    Second, it depends on whether the Muslim world would sit by idly. India’s economy could be brought to a grinding halt relatively quickly:
    https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/nghyjggdtyg1.jpg

    So it would really be the Ummah’s fault if it were allowed to happen. While I don’t think all Hindus operate along those lines, I don’t really expect Hindutva-fanatics to grant any quarter and the Ummah should plan along those assumptions.

    Peace.
  56. @Talha

    I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as “not one nation, but 32 nations put together” or something of the sort.
     
    That is correct. If you know Indians and have spoke to them on a serious level, you realize how different India is from, say, Malabar to, say, Kashmir. Totally different people, ethnically and language-wise and by religion. Even the local gods are different from one part of India to the other.

    In fact, if you look at the geography and the way the Himalayas and their extensions to the Pamir and Hindu Kush (meaning "Hindu killer" in Farsi - not kidding, those Persianized-Afghans were NOT politically correct) cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don't see why it doesn't get it's own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains...other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff. India is certainly at least as (if not more) diverse as Europe is with respect to genetics and language and religion and I think is a good candidate to be truly looked at as a (sub)continent and not simply one nation.


    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus?
     
    interesting question; you'd have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy - the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.

    As far as I can tell in the West, they hang around with Pakistanis. Pakistanis intermarry with them and generally spend time together. Sure we debate whose version of biryani is better, but in general, I have not seen much bickering over Pakistan vs India (apart from a couple of grumpy uncles). For instance, most of my Islamic studies teachers (as well as the current mufti I'm studying under) have been Indians since Pakistan and India share a general adherence to the Hanafi school. I honestly don't know many Indian Muslims that prefer to hang out with Hindus over Muslims, but then again, I'm mostly around religious folks...so maybe non-practicing Muslims from India prefer the company of Hindus, I don't know.


    Who will they side with if there is a war?
     
    Don't know honestly. They may side with India, but the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people. I honestly don't think there will be a huge war (inshaAllah) now that India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers.

    Why don’t Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?
     
    Well, there was a very serious debate on what course to take (wiht very legitimate points on both sides) and the ones that wanted to, moved out and formed Pakistan. There was East and West Pakistan (one nation), but the West Pakistanis didn't treat the Easterners right and so they split and now we have Bangladesh.

    He said something to the effect of “this (India) is my land. I can’t leave”.
     
    I can understand this. India is unique and has its special qualities like other places do. Even as a person born in Pakistan, I will acknowledge that Pakistan can never truly be fully separated from its Indian heritage (nor should it try to be). If I was to describe Pakistan, I'd say it was a baby with an Arab grandfather and a Persian father and Turkish mother that was nursed by a Hindu foster-mother, I don't know if that makes sense.

    I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racism and chauvinism.
     
    Wa iyyakum. I mean, with something like this; you're either going to lead the data or you're going to let the data lead you. The problem I find is that only a subset of people are willing to touch the stuff because of the politics involved, thus the data and implications aren't even able to be debated in a legitimate public manner. If they were, I think we'd be able to look at it from a holistic and mature perspective. Unfortunately, you get one extreme of racists who worship HBD like some sort of religion-custom-built-for-nerds and on the other side of the spectrum you get fools that don't want to even discuss any data because Nazis-under-my-bed.

    I like Masaman because he is quite accessible to the non-expert and the wide breadth of topics he covers on genetics and HBD always keeps things interesting; everything from ghost DNA to what happened to certain legendary peoples/races to which ethnicities may well die out within our lifetimes.

    Wasalaam.

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbju9As_EWo

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:

    Mashallah.

    Its nice to see Muslims of such different backgrounds, cultures and appearances gather together like this. I don’t think this happens much in countries outside the US (other than in Saudi Arabia of course. Lol.) Who knew the US, of all places, would bring together Muslims from all over the world?

    May Allah (swt) bless you Talha and god bless the United States.

    Asalaam.

    • Agree: Talha
  57. Two sets of useless commie decievers. as George McGovern said; ‘ain’t a dime’s worth of difference.”

  58. @Mr. Rational

    the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people.
     
    When 200 million are involved, there are far easier solutions than expulsion.

    Remember, the closest border is just 6 feet away.  From anywhere.

    When 200 million are involved, there are far easier solutions than expulsion.

    Certainly, but it wouldn’t be easy since those people would necessarily fight back with nothing to lose, you can look at the bloodbaths involved in the Partition.

    Second, it depends on whether the Muslim world would sit by idly. India’s economy could be brought to a grinding halt relatively quickly:

    So it would really be the Ummah’s fault if it were allowed to happen. While I don’t think all Hindus operate along those lines, I don’t really expect Hindutva-fanatics to grant any quarter and the Ummah should plan along those assumptions.

    Peace.

    • Agree: Yahya K.
    • Replies: @Yahya K.
    Hopefully there will be another Faisal inshallah if that happens .


    http://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.timetoast.com/public/uploads/photos/9341283/1615201503.jpg

  59. @Talha

    When 200 million are involved, there are far easier solutions than expulsion.
     
    Certainly, but it wouldn’t be easy since those people would necessarily fight back with nothing to lose, you can look at the bloodbaths involved in the Partition.

    Second, it depends on whether the Muslim world would sit by idly. India’s economy could be brought to a grinding halt relatively quickly:
    https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/nghyjggdtyg1.jpg

    So it would really be the Ummah’s fault if it were allowed to happen. While I don’t think all Hindus operate along those lines, I don’t really expect Hindutva-fanatics to grant any quarter and the Ummah should plan along those assumptions.

    Peace.

    Hopefully there will be another Faisal inshallah if that happens .

    • Agree: Talha
  60. @songbird
    In some ways, I am the scion of over 800 years of inter-European ethnic conflict, longer if you count the Vikings. They liked fighting each other, well enough, before anyone else showed up, and it wasn't always a case of 100% of one group against 100% of the other, far from it, but the core of it was always ethnic.

    There was a lot of destruction - it still makes me a bit sad thinking about it. (not mad, but sad) As you can imagine, the surviving genealogical record isn't that great (and my people are partly to blame.) But due to a lot of luck, the barest of threads survives for me, and I am able to re-construct part of it.

    I think one of my ancestors was summarily executed in 1798 - I mean murdered. Hard to be 100% certain - it's not the sort of thing they keep good records of - and that's a pretty bad period for records besides, since many churches were burnt.

    On another line, constant warfare, they were mostly trying to retake land that had been stolen from them. After some initial successes, 26 of them (including my ancestor) were invited to a feast by a Norman, who murdered them at the dinner table, during a local saint's feast. He had their heads cut off and sold them. BTW, less confident, but I think the other guy, the treacherous Norman, was probably also one of my ancestors.

    Another of my ancestors was in charge of erecting barriers on bridges and building fortifications by rivers to prevent raids ("murders") by the natives. His lineal ancestor literally got off a ship, killed the people on the shore in the first place he landed and build a castle there - that is the family story. For hundreds of years, foreign armies landed in his harbor, and the head of the family dined their commanders.

    Still another, on the native side, was killed when the army he was leading was defeated by larger forces. His enemies put up a stone cross to mark the spot of his defeat - a monument to his death and defeat in his own country! And it was there for over 350 years, before new invaders demolished it because it offended their Puritan sensibilities.

    And that is the short version - I know other stories. Most of that conflict was between people from a fairly small geographic area: Ireland, Britain, Normandy. The people were closely related. Not a certainty, but I'd guess I'm at least 8% invader (at least going back only a few thousand years).

    Anyway, what I'm trying to say is this: 800 years of conflict, much destroyed, but still, what survives is impressive, most of all the blood. (I exclude the pozzed). But what would 800 years of the current level of invasion lead to? Quite simply, it would all be destroyed. There would be absolutely nothing left. Not even a stone in Eastern Europe, at the current rate of immigration into it.

    So, while I don't think a return to intra-European conflict is likely, I'd much rather be killed off by my cousins and have them survive, than to have all of us completely gone.

    Thanks for the interesting post.

    but the core of it was always ethnic.

    This may well be the case in the specific conflicts you describe, but many conflicts on the wider continent were religious in nature.

    But what would 800 years of the current level of invasion lead to? Quite simply, it would all be destroyed.

    Sure – or replaced or whatever – hard to argue with this, especially given that whites are not having enough kids themselves.

    while I don’t think a return to intra-European conflict is likely

    Possibly, but it’s only really been 70 years since the last big continental conflict. And Europe came close a couple of times during the Cold War. I don’t know the future, I’m just going by past record.

    than to have all of us completely gone.

    Yeah, I’m not black-pilled about white survival. The One Who created whites as one of His signs will make them come through:
    “And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of your languages and your colors. Indeed in that are signs for those of knowledge.” (30:22)

    Peace.

  61. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    They can discourage whites from "identity politics" but it's inevitable.

    I lived in an area that had been flooded with non-white aliens of all stripes for a while. They can say what they like, but you start to feel "relief" when you see another white person. A person you would have never thought twice about seeing before. When you meet other white people you become good friends with them more quickly. Unless the gov prevents white people from seeing each other this will continue.

    It's a good wakeup call for us.

    … you start to feel “relief” when you see another white person. A person you would have never thought twice about seeing before. When you meet other white people you become good friends with them more quickly.

    That sounds nice, but you are lying.

    You lout, when you encounter an older White man, you insult him. You blame him for your troubles and wish him the worst. You are divisive, and you make White men of your generation look terrible.

    Your general thoughts about demographic change in MY country are correct (though laughably ignorant on details) but the “angry young man” is a cliché as old as the hills. You deserve the world you are going to inherit, because you did nothing to build the one we are losing.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Did I strike a nerve?

    Fact: all white countries have been given away to non white aliens by traitorous elites, and indifferent plebs.

    The Boomer generation really screwed up and pushed for outsourcing and mass immigration. I agree that many whites of all ages believe the Globohomo nonsense too.

    All I do is build; we have a long road ahead of us but I envision a new world and young white people are slowly putting the pieces together that have been trashed for the past 60 years.

  62. @Twinkie

    as the USA falls down to a Brazil status or worse.
     
    Sounds like a very wishful thinking. I think this says more about the resentments you harbor than about the future of the United States.

    USA (now minority white, full of Indians, Pakistanis, Burmese, Viets, Mexicans, Brazilians, Nigerians, Chinese
     
    Burmese? That’s comical.

    Only one of those groups is demographically significant. Guess.

    Setting aside the that one group, the next largest is Chinese at about 1.5%. Pakistanis, for example, are about 0.15% of the population in the U.S. Burmese are 0.03%.

    Your random list of ethnicities you think are “full of...” in the U.S. reveals your utter ignorance of the United States.

    Couldn’t you find some Québécois equivalent of Stormfront and comment there?

    Burmese? That’s comical.

    Reading about those pythons in the Everglades probably stuck in his mind.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    One of my roommates is Burmese. Closest thing to a snake he's got are some of these really pungent thin chilies that he's promised to show me how to cook sometime.
  63. @nebulafox
    Can't speak for India, but in China, there's definitely a gap between the Hui and Uyghurs.

    As a disclaimer, I was basically a casual observer on this, and I never made it out to the trouble spots in Xinjiang. But my experience seemed to be that the Hui Muslims and the Uyghurs lived quite separate lives, to the point of attending separate mosques, and didn't identify with each other at all: the Hui saw themselves as Chinese. They spoke Mandarin and were basically indistinguishable from their neighbors save the occasional bit of religious attire. The former were basically viewed as Chinese who happened to not eat pork or drink, and engaged in exotic religious rituals. This is different from a place like Singapore where the Indian Muslims are usually fully fluent in Malay, use it for business, and the two Muslim communities are pretty intertwined.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle. But I haven't been back since the CPC took over direct control of religious affairs in 2018: came close a couple of times, but life back in the States intervened. I'd be interested in hearing if it has become a little more about religion and a little less about race in the last couple of years.

    Re, HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it

    The Hui don’t engage in separatist/liberationist struggles. The Uighur do.

    Mind you, I’m not sympathetic to the Chinese government at all, but it is a known fact that its ruling class is extremely allergic to even a hint of separatism from any group, whatever its phenotypical traits or ethnic culture.

    Ethnic Koreans, for example, are an identifiable ethnic minority in China and yet get to keep lots of ethnic goodies (an “autonomous” Korean prefecture, Korean language schools, museum, etc.), because they tend to be highly loyal to the Chinese state and never agitate for separatism.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    True, but I suspect that's because the root issue I mentioned: the Hui see themselves, and are viewed for the most part by other Chinese as Chinese who happen who have weird diets and religious rites. As a result, they have no sympathy for the Uighurs, who are Turkics who got conquered by the Qing and used the first possible chance after the dynasty's fall to gain their freedom, long before the rise of Communism.

    Re, the Koreans: yeah, the Zhuang have a similar setup down south. I have heard that in the 1960s during the height of the Maoist madness, some ethnic Koreans in places like Jilin fled over the border to the DPRK. Kim Il-Sung and Mao had a hostile relationship by point because Kim thought the Cultural Revolution was utterly insane (he wasn't alone, the USSR apparently considered preemptively nuking China in 1969), and I'd imagine this hardly helped matters. But I don't now anything more than that, including if this led to harsher treatment of ethnic Koreans in the 1970s.

    , @Talha
    I think this sums it up fairly well.

    The Hui don’t engage in separatist/liberationist struggles.
     
    Certainly not after the mass depopulation of the Dungan Revolt.

    And there was an unsuccessful revolt attempt in Tibet a while back which was crushed. (Current) Territorial integrity is not up for debate and they are willing to kill (and otherwise) to prove it. My general suggestion; don’t revolt against the Chinese government if you are a minority.

    Peace.
  64. @nebulafox
    There's no question that AA works well for societal elites. Take college admissions as one example: great way of tilting the scales against potentially threatening competition from middle/working class white and Asian kids.

    Whether it works for the people it supposedly advances is another question. Many elite colleges get around the black quota by utilizing high-octane Nigerian immigrant kids, who can hold their own just fine on standardized tests, coursework, etc. So, ironically, you have the descendants of those who sold the slaves to the Europeans taking up AA benefits, rather than the descendants of the actual slaves.

    (Also, I tend to get the impression that real female geeks-my definition tends to lean toward C++ and quantum mechanics, not comic books and video games-aren't too happy that you have tons of female "tech evangelicals" hanging around these days, because they usually tend to be the same kind of girl who would have bullied them in high school.)

    There’s no question that AA works well for societal elites. Take college admissions as one example: great way of tilting the scales against potentially threatening competition from middle/working class white and Asian kids.

    Whether it works for the people it supposedly advances is another question.

    Affirmative Action is a win-win for elite whites (with a disproportionately very high representation of Jews) – they get to suppress competition from Asians and bright flyover country whites AND virtue-signal about blacks and Hispanics, from whom they clearly feel little competition.

    Audacious Epigone and I have discussed it – he even confirmed from a survey that the support for AA increases as income rises among whites. Poor whites don’t care for it at all, even liberal ones.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Truth
    There is no competition. You are either allowed into the club or you aren't. No one in this country gets wealthy by the sweat of his brow.
  65. @Twinkie

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it
     
    The Hui don’t engage in separatist/liberationist struggles. The Uighur do.

    Mind you, I’m not sympathetic to the Chinese government at all, but it is a known fact that its ruling class is extremely allergic to even a hint of separatism from any group, whatever its phenotypical traits or ethnic culture.

    Ethnic Koreans, for example, are an identifiable ethnic minority in China and yet get to keep lots of ethnic goodies (an “autonomous” Korean prefecture, Korean language schools, museum, etc.), because they tend to be highly loyal to the Chinese state and never agitate for separatism.

    True, but I suspect that’s because the root issue I mentioned: the Hui see themselves, and are viewed for the most part by other Chinese as Chinese who happen who have weird diets and religious rites. As a result, they have no sympathy for the Uighurs, who are Turkics who got conquered by the Qing and used the first possible chance after the dynasty’s fall to gain their freedom, long before the rise of Communism.

    Re, the Koreans: yeah, the Zhuang have a similar setup down south. I have heard that in the 1960s during the height of the Maoist madness, some ethnic Koreans in places like Jilin fled over the border to the DPRK. Kim Il-Sung and Mao had a hostile relationship by point because Kim thought the Cultural Revolution was utterly insane (he wasn’t alone, the USSR apparently considered preemptively nuking China in 1969), and I’d imagine this hardly helped matters. But I don’t now anything more than that, including if this led to harsher treatment of ethnic Koreans in the 1970s.

    • Replies: @Talha

    Uighurs, who are Turkics who got conquered by the Qing and used the first possible chance after the dynasty’s fall to gain their freedom
     
    Interesting article on the white convert that the Brits tried to install as that region’s first king/sultan:
    “You may never have heard of Islamestan, in Chinese Turkestan, or its one-time ‘king’, Bertram Sheldrake. Islamestan is long gone, swallowed up in the historical shifts of a turbu­lent region, but for a brief and unlikely moment, an English pickle-factory heir ruled, with his wife, Sybil, over the newly independent Muslim country, to the far west of China. The whole of what was then referred to as Chinese Turkestan, or Sinkiang (now Xinjiang), was, in the 1930s, subject to tribal rebellions and warlord uprisings. It was ultimately concluded by the chiefs of various tribes in the region that only an outsider (but necessarily a Muslim one) could bring unity to the region. Having read news­papers brought by travellers, they sent a delegation to south London to visit an Englishman who had caught their attention. Sheldrake was invited to assume the throne of Islamestan.
    https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/article/2188216/last-king-xinjiang-how-bertram-sheldrake-went

    Peace.
  66. @iffen
    Burmese? That’s comical.

    Reading about those pythons in the Everglades probably stuck in his mind.

    One of my roommates is Burmese. Closest thing to a snake he’s got are some of these really pungent thin chilies that he’s promised to show me how to cook sometime.

  67. @Twinkie

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it
     
    The Hui don’t engage in separatist/liberationist struggles. The Uighur do.

    Mind you, I’m not sympathetic to the Chinese government at all, but it is a known fact that its ruling class is extremely allergic to even a hint of separatism from any group, whatever its phenotypical traits or ethnic culture.

    Ethnic Koreans, for example, are an identifiable ethnic minority in China and yet get to keep lots of ethnic goodies (an “autonomous” Korean prefecture, Korean language schools, museum, etc.), because they tend to be highly loyal to the Chinese state and never agitate for separatism.

    I think this sums it up fairly well.

    The Hui don’t engage in separatist/liberationist struggles.

    Certainly not after the mass depopulation of the Dungan Revolt.

    And there was an unsuccessful revolt attempt in Tibet a while back which was crushed. (Current) Territorial integrity is not up for debate and they are willing to kill (and otherwise) to prove it. My general suggestion; don’t revolt against the Chinese government if you are a minority.

    Peace.

  68. @Talha

    I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as “not one nation, but 32 nations put together” or something of the sort.
     
    That is correct. If you know Indians and have spoke to them on a serious level, you realize how different India is from, say, Malabar to, say, Kashmir. Totally different people, ethnically and language-wise and by religion. Even the local gods are different from one part of India to the other.

    In fact, if you look at the geography and the way the Himalayas and their extensions to the Pamir and Hindu Kush (meaning "Hindu killer" in Farsi - not kidding, those Persianized-Afghans were NOT politically correct) cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don't see why it doesn't get it's own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains...other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff. India is certainly at least as (if not more) diverse as Europe is with respect to genetics and language and religion and I think is a good candidate to be truly looked at as a (sub)continent and not simply one nation.


    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus?
     
    interesting question; you'd have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy - the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.

    As far as I can tell in the West, they hang around with Pakistanis. Pakistanis intermarry with them and generally spend time together. Sure we debate whose version of biryani is better, but in general, I have not seen much bickering over Pakistan vs India (apart from a couple of grumpy uncles). For instance, most of my Islamic studies teachers (as well as the current mufti I'm studying under) have been Indians since Pakistan and India share a general adherence to the Hanafi school. I honestly don't know many Indian Muslims that prefer to hang out with Hindus over Muslims, but then again, I'm mostly around religious folks...so maybe non-practicing Muslims from India prefer the company of Hindus, I don't know.


    Who will they side with if there is a war?
     
    Don't know honestly. They may side with India, but the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people. I honestly don't think there will be a huge war (inshaAllah) now that India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers.

    Why don’t Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?
     
    Well, there was a very serious debate on what course to take (wiht very legitimate points on both sides) and the ones that wanted to, moved out and formed Pakistan. There was East and West Pakistan (one nation), but the West Pakistanis didn't treat the Easterners right and so they split and now we have Bangladesh.

    He said something to the effect of “this (India) is my land. I can’t leave”.
     
    I can understand this. India is unique and has its special qualities like other places do. Even as a person born in Pakistan, I will acknowledge that Pakistan can never truly be fully separated from its Indian heritage (nor should it try to be). If I was to describe Pakistan, I'd say it was a baby with an Arab grandfather and a Persian father and Turkish mother that was nursed by a Hindu foster-mother, I don't know if that makes sense.

    I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racism and chauvinism.
     
    Wa iyyakum. I mean, with something like this; you're either going to lead the data or you're going to let the data lead you. The problem I find is that only a subset of people are willing to touch the stuff because of the politics involved, thus the data and implications aren't even able to be debated in a legitimate public manner. If they were, I think we'd be able to look at it from a holistic and mature perspective. Unfortunately, you get one extreme of racists who worship HBD like some sort of religion-custom-built-for-nerds and on the other side of the spectrum you get fools that don't want to even discuss any data because Nazis-under-my-bed.

    I like Masaman because he is quite accessible to the non-expert and the wide breadth of topics he covers on genetics and HBD always keeps things interesting; everything from ghost DNA to what happened to certain legendary peoples/races to which ethnicities may well die out within our lifetimes.

    Wasalaam.

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbju9As_EWo

    We wuz kangz before you got here. No you weren’t, we wuz always the kangz. Wuz not. Wuz too. Wuz not. Wuz too.

    • LOL: Talha
    • Replies: @Talha
    Kangz...
    https://images.livemint.com/img/2020/02/24/600x338/2020-02-24T121301Z_1407313072_RC207F9KJOFM_RTRMADP_3_INDIA-USA-TRUMP_1582546607196_1582546623712.JPG

    Peace.
  69. @Yahya K.

    My impression of the anti-Uyghur crackdowns in China was that there was a heavy racial, anti-Turkic strain to it, that Western media tended to miss in favor of playing up the religious angle.
     
    Whoa. I haven't heard of the racial angle before. That would just make it worse. It means they are arbitrarily persecuting the Uyghurs for their race.

    I could see a rational reason if they wanted to 'De-Islamisize' the Uyghurs so they could assimilate better or reduce terrorism or something. I mean, I still abhor it because I'm a Muslim. But I could at least see some sort of rational reason. But persecuting them just because they are racially different seems cruel and arbitrary.

    Here is a question: why don't the Chinese rulers just splinter off Xinjiang as a separate country? They don't need the land. And they wont need to deal with ethno-religious problems anymore.


    Re, HBD: one can agree with the premises of the alt-right on the subject without necessarily sharing the attitudes or conclusions.

     

    Absolutely. But its difficult to resist going down that rabbit hole (I personally have fallen into it before). Its tempting to look down on the less intelligent as less worthy. Especially because low-IQ people's behavior (such as crime, welfare use etc.) make it easy to find an excuse to hate. But you have to override that aspect of human nature. I've seen very few use HBD as an impetus to be more compassionate towards less fortunate races/individuals. It takes some moral backbone. That's why I complimented you for it before.

    For the same reason they do what they do in Tibet and they have thrown a hissy fit about the Taiwanese helping combat corona, despite their well demonstrated extreme competence in doing so. This is a Han ethno nationalist party, regardless of what they claim to the world. The CPC gets “triggered”, as they say, about any sort of implications about its borders, de jure or otherwise.

    Re, the rabbit hole: I personally don’t get it. Calling people with an IQ of 90 lazy and bad for not becoming doctors or physicists isn’t just counterproductive, but downright cruel. I’d attribute it to a society that has forgotten that IQ is not correlated with the fundamental character or worthiness of a human being. Nothing that you’ve been given at birth should be. Worthiness must be something you earn.

    And they say I’m not an idealist…

    • Replies: @Talha

    IQ is not correlated with the fundamental character or worthiness of a human being.
     
    IQ-worship is the modern-day religion of nerds that want evidence they were anointed from on-high as the chosen ones.

    Peace.
  70. @nebulafox
    True, but I suspect that's because the root issue I mentioned: the Hui see themselves, and are viewed for the most part by other Chinese as Chinese who happen who have weird diets and religious rites. As a result, they have no sympathy for the Uighurs, who are Turkics who got conquered by the Qing and used the first possible chance after the dynasty's fall to gain their freedom, long before the rise of Communism.

    Re, the Koreans: yeah, the Zhuang have a similar setup down south. I have heard that in the 1960s during the height of the Maoist madness, some ethnic Koreans in places like Jilin fled over the border to the DPRK. Kim Il-Sung and Mao had a hostile relationship by point because Kim thought the Cultural Revolution was utterly insane (he wasn't alone, the USSR apparently considered preemptively nuking China in 1969), and I'd imagine this hardly helped matters. But I don't now anything more than that, including if this led to harsher treatment of ethnic Koreans in the 1970s.

    Uighurs, who are Turkics who got conquered by the Qing and used the first possible chance after the dynasty’s fall to gain their freedom

    Interesting article on the white convert that the Brits tried to install as that region’s first king/sultan:
    “You may never have heard of Islamestan, in Chinese Turkestan, or its one-time ‘king’, Bertram Sheldrake. Islamestan is long gone, swallowed up in the historical shifts of a turbu­lent region, but for a brief and unlikely moment, an English pickle-factory heir ruled, with his wife, Sybil, over the newly independent Muslim country, to the far west of China. The whole of what was then referred to as Chinese Turkestan, or Sinkiang (now Xinjiang), was, in the 1930s, subject to tribal rebellions and warlord uprisings. It was ultimately concluded by the chiefs of various tribes in the region that only an outsider (but necessarily a Muslim one) could bring unity to the region. Having read news­papers brought by travellers, they sent a delegation to south London to visit an Englishman who had caught their attention. Sheldrake was invited to assume the throne of Islamestan.
    https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/article/2188216/last-king-xinjiang-how-bertram-sheldrake-went

    Peace.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    "The man who would be king"
  71. @iffen
    We wuz kangz before you got here. No you weren't, we wuz always the kangz. Wuz not. Wuz too. Wuz not. Wuz too.

    Kangz…

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Truth
    Well there's a Queen and a King in that picture, and His Majesty is wearing white.
    , @iffen
    They just don't make mausoleums like they used to.
  72. @Buzz Mohawk

    ... you start to feel “relief” when you see another white person. A person you would have never thought twice about seeing before. When you meet other white people you become good friends with them more quickly.
     
    That sounds nice, but you are lying.

    You lout, when you encounter an older White man, you insult him. You blame him for your troubles and wish him the worst. You are divisive, and you make White men of your generation look terrible.

    Your general thoughts about demographic change in MY country are correct (though laughably ignorant on details) but the "angry young man" is a cliché as old as the hills. You deserve the world you are going to inherit, because you did nothing to build the one we are losing.

    Did I strike a nerve?

    Fact: all white countries have been given away to non white aliens by traitorous elites, and indifferent plebs.

    The Boomer generation really screwed up and pushed for outsourcing and mass immigration. I agree that many whites of all ages believe the Globohomo nonsense too.

    All I do is build; we have a long road ahead of us but I envision a new world and young white people are slowly putting the pieces together that have been trashed for the past 60 years.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Did I strike a nerve?
     
    No, I am actually looking forward to the fate you have wished upon me. Even though I have always had a weakness for petite, neotenous brunettes, I am something of an ass man, and I dream of getting sponge baths from one of those giant-assed black girls, one who resembles a woman being followed by two balloons. When she has had enough of me, she will smother me by sitting on my face, and I will travel blissfully to heaven.
  73. @Talha

    Uighurs, who are Turkics who got conquered by the Qing and used the first possible chance after the dynasty’s fall to gain their freedom
     
    Interesting article on the white convert that the Brits tried to install as that region’s first king/sultan:
    “You may never have heard of Islamestan, in Chinese Turkestan, or its one-time ‘king’, Bertram Sheldrake. Islamestan is long gone, swallowed up in the historical shifts of a turbu­lent region, but for a brief and unlikely moment, an English pickle-factory heir ruled, with his wife, Sybil, over the newly independent Muslim country, to the far west of China. The whole of what was then referred to as Chinese Turkestan, or Sinkiang (now Xinjiang), was, in the 1930s, subject to tribal rebellions and warlord uprisings. It was ultimately concluded by the chiefs of various tribes in the region that only an outsider (but necessarily a Muslim one) could bring unity to the region. Having read news­papers brought by travellers, they sent a delegation to south London to visit an Englishman who had caught their attention. Sheldrake was invited to assume the throne of Islamestan.
    https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/long-reads/article/2188216/last-king-xinjiang-how-bertram-sheldrake-went

    Peace.

    “The man who would be king”

    • Replies: @Talha
    Well, it certainly gives a fascinating insight into parts of the Ummah before the ethno-nationalism bug bit them. That a coalition of Muslim Turkic tribes would volutarily invite a British convert Muslim, that they found worthy of the station, to lead them as king of a homeland called Islamestan (as opposed to Turkestan) is one for the books of legend.

    As contrasted to the predictable reaction of SJW-polluted Muslims:
    "Oh BuT yOU'rE LetTinG thE WhiTE MAn LeaD YoU!"

    (sniff)
    Dear Islamestan, we hardly knew ye, but as a vanishing dream. May your short-lived king find a more vast kingdom in the Next Life.
    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81sCnbaMv8L._SL1500_.jpg

    (followed by Turkic warriors raising their swords and shouting)
    Sultan Sheldrake! Sultan Sheldrake!

    Peace.

  74. @anon
    Encouraging identity politics in certain races while condemning it in others never permanently works in any multiracial society

    Depends on what one means by "works". You may be assuming that "works" is a functioning industrial country where most people get along well and have a pretty good life. Is that the only model?

    The Aztecs seem to have had a pretty good system going prior to the arrival of the Spanish. As a strong tribe they were in a position to win a war against most of their neighboring tribes, and impose tribute requirements on the losers. So they demanded human slaves from neighbors, and when the neighbors began to get too strong they would up the demands and trigger a war.

    A war that the Aztecs would win. A war that would provide the Aztecs with a good supply of young men to sacrifice to their sun god on a pyramid in Tenochticlan. That tribe could then avoid war for a time by providing more slaves.

    The Aztecs kept their neighbors divided and weak. Their system 'worked' - for the Aztecs. It was metastable, until an exogenous factor arrived in the form of Cortez and smallpox.

    A similar system of playing each minority off against all the others would be somewhat stable in the US and would keep the societal overseers in really posh living. A race or tribal based spoils system, where groups get or do not get goodies/bennies depending on the favor of a tiny minority of people at the financial and power apex of society. Any tribe or group that gets too strong will be denigrated, attacked, kept out of positions of authority, pushed out of certain jobs, in order to weaken that group and make them more easy to control...

    So what you mean by "works" may not be what some others mean by "works".

    tl;dr
    You assume good intentions where none may exist, in fact where malice may be dominant.

    That’s the theory, but you have such faith in the aptitude of the elite for governing a chaotic and inefficient system like that indefinitely?

    If any form of governance was self-maintaining and stable given the right propaganda regime then eastern Europe should be a post-scarcity worker’s paradise now, and likewise I think you’d be a fool to bet that the maian system would have just trundled on as it was forever if no one ever came to the new world.

    The value of “divide and conquer” internal politics is seriously overblown, good rulers sensibly valued creating genuine stability and prosperity for people because a chaotic and miserable society is both unprofitable and difficult to govern (see the third world from which globos want to draw more population, this is your idea of the materials for stable governance?).

    This model also ignores that whatever the elites gain relative to the commoners they lose relative to other elites. Common misery is an awesome pretext to kill the guy in charge and assume command yourself. I’m sure I don’t need to remind you of a modern example of one of the elites leveraging common despair to advance himself and turn on the mainstream body of elites (hint: he’s tall and has a tan everybody loves to talk about). Insurgent elites would be much more common and more extreme under a fully realised dystopian system like that.

    • Replies: @anon
    That’s the theory, but you have such faith in the aptitude of the elite for governing a chaotic and inefficient system like that indefinitely?

    Semantic point: "govern" implies some degree of consent among the governed. Systems with little to no consent are ruled.

    It does not matter what I think. It does matter if there actually are people of wealth and power who have faith in themselves to rule such a system and pass it on to their inheritors. It is difficult to believe that the antipathy and even hatred of wypipo that has grown and grown for years is just happening by some random combination of events.

    No system of governing or ruling is perfect, because humans are not perfect nor are we perfectable. There will always be flaws in any system, therefore no system of governing can last indefinitely.The US system has been turned against its own people, though, and that's going to bring ugly changes.

    It's not an accident. It's purposeful.
  75. @nebulafox
    For the same reason they do what they do in Tibet and they have thrown a hissy fit about the Taiwanese helping combat corona, despite their well demonstrated extreme competence in doing so. This is a Han ethno nationalist party, regardless of what they claim to the world. The CPC gets "triggered", as they say, about any sort of implications about its borders, de jure or otherwise.

    Re, the rabbit hole: I personally don't get it. Calling people with an IQ of 90 lazy and bad for not becoming doctors or physicists isn't just counterproductive, but downright cruel. I'd attribute it to a society that has forgotten that IQ is not correlated with the fundamental character or worthiness of a human being. Nothing that you've been given at birth should be. Worthiness must be something you earn.

    And they say I'm not an idealist...

    IQ is not correlated with the fundamental character or worthiness of a human being.

    IQ-worship is the modern-day religion of nerds that want evidence they were anointed from on-high as the chosen ones.

    Peace.

  76. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    "The man who would be king"

    Well, it certainly gives a fascinating insight into parts of the Ummah before the ethno-nationalism bug bit them. That a coalition of Muslim Turkic tribes would volutarily invite a British convert Muslim, that they found worthy of the station, to lead them as king of a homeland called Islamestan (as opposed to Turkestan) is one for the books of legend.

    As contrasted to the predictable reaction of SJW-polluted Muslims:
    “Oh BuT yOU’rE LetTinG thE WhiTE MAn LeaD YoU!”

    (sniff)
    Dear Islamestan, we hardly knew ye, but as a vanishing dream. May your short-lived king find a more vast kingdom in the Next Life.
    (followed by Turkic warriors raising their swords and shouting)
    Sultan Sheldrake! Sultan Sheldrake!

    Peace.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    You can tell from his teeth that he's British. Thanks for the interesting story. Too bad he never actually became King.
  77. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    Did I strike a nerve?

    Fact: all white countries have been given away to non white aliens by traitorous elites, and indifferent plebs.

    The Boomer generation really screwed up and pushed for outsourcing and mass immigration. I agree that many whites of all ages believe the Globohomo nonsense too.

    All I do is build; we have a long road ahead of us but I envision a new world and young white people are slowly putting the pieces together that have been trashed for the past 60 years.

    Did I strike a nerve?

    No, I am actually looking forward to the fate you have wished upon me. Even though I have always had a weakness for petite, neotenous brunettes, I am something of an ass man, and I dream of getting sponge baths from one of those giant-assed black girls, one who resembles a woman being followed by two balloons. When she has had enough of me, she will smother me by sitting on my face, and I will travel blissfully to heaven.

    • LOL: Mr. Rational, iffen
  78. anon[127] • Disclaimer says:
    @Athletic and Whitesplosive
    That's the theory, but you have such faith in the aptitude of the elite for governing a chaotic and inefficient system like that indefinitely?

    If any form of governance was self-maintaining and stable given the right propaganda regime then eastern Europe should be a post-scarcity worker's paradise now, and likewise I think you'd be a fool to bet that the maian system would have just trundled on as it was forever if no one ever came to the new world.

    The value of "divide and conquer" internal politics is seriously overblown, good rulers sensibly valued creating genuine stability and prosperity for people because a chaotic and miserable society is both unprofitable and difficult to govern (see the third world from which globos want to draw more population, this is your idea of the materials for stable governance?).

    This model also ignores that whatever the elites gain relative to the commoners they lose relative to other elites. Common misery is an awesome pretext to kill the guy in charge and assume command yourself. I'm sure I don't need to remind you of a modern example of one of the elites leveraging common despair to advance himself and turn on the mainstream body of elites (hint: he's tall and has a tan everybody loves to talk about). Insurgent elites would be much more common and more extreme under a fully realised dystopian system like that.

    That’s the theory, but you have such faith in the aptitude of the elite for governing a chaotic and inefficient system like that indefinitely?

    Semantic point: “govern” implies some degree of consent among the governed. Systems with little to no consent are ruled.

    It does not matter what I think. It does matter if there actually are people of wealth and power who have faith in themselves to rule such a system and pass it on to their inheritors. It is difficult to believe that the antipathy and even hatred of wypipo that has grown and grown for years is just happening by some random combination of events.

    No system of governing or ruling is perfect, because humans are not perfect nor are we perfectable. There will always be flaws in any system, therefore no system of governing can last indefinitely.The US system has been turned against its own people, though, and that’s going to bring ugly changes.

    It’s not an accident. It’s purposeful.

  79. @Twinkie

    as the USA falls down to a Brazil status or worse.
     
    Sounds like a very wishful thinking. I think this says more about the resentments you harbor than about the future of the United States.

    USA (now minority white, full of Indians, Pakistanis, Burmese, Viets, Mexicans, Brazilians, Nigerians, Chinese
     
    Burmese? That’s comical.

    Only one of those groups is demographically significant. Guess.

    Setting aside the that one group, the next largest is Chinese at about 1.5%. Pakistanis, for example, are about 0.15% of the population in the U.S. Burmese are 0.03%.

    Your random list of ethnicities you think are “full of...” in the U.S. reveals your utter ignorance of the United States.

    Couldn’t you find some Québécois equivalent of Stormfront and comment there?

    Only one of those groups is demographically significant.

    This idea that almost no group of immigrants is demographically significant unless they are double digits of the population is obvious folly. They are all demographically significant.

    Jews make up around 1.7% and 2.6% of the total U.S. population. Are you going to tell us that they aren’t demographically significant?

    In 1948, Windrush carried only about 802 blacks. Last census, they were about 3% of the population, and the British people are already being rewritten out of their own history and mythology.

    In Bavaria, many of the schools used to have crosses on the walls of the classrooms. The rule is that only one person has to complain before they are taken down. There’s no rule for putting them back up, once they have been taken down.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    Are you going to tell us that they aren’t demographically significant?
     
    Correct. They aren’t demographically significant. They are in other ways. If you’ve been reading me you know that I am an immigration restrictionist and have a dim view of even high IQ immigrants if they are not highly assimilative (e.g. Chinese and Indians).

    unless they are double digits of the population
     
    Some of the groups that commenter cited are not even single digit. Burmese? Really? At 0.03%? There are good reasons to oppose immigration (of the Burmese or other groups), but it’s not because the country is “full of” them.

    As I alluded, the only demographically significant minority group he listed is Mexicans. Indeed, when you look at the most obvious demographic change in the U.S. over the last 20 years or so, it is the decline of the white percentage and the increase in Hispanic percentage. Black percentage is more-or-less stuck. Asian percentage has increased tremendously as a rate of change, but not in absolute terms because the earlier base number was so small.
  80. “It is worth noting that most Democrats do think their party is better for white men than the GOP is. The idea that Democrats by and large are motivated by anti-white animus is overblown. Some certainly are, but most are not.”

    A non-sequitur. What the Democrats think it good for whites (subjugation, servitude, and elimination, basically) is not what is necessarily actually good for whites. Certainly it is not good for whites to become a hated and exploited minority in the nation built by their ancestors, but virtually all Democrats will tell you that it is. What’s more, even if an individual Democrat doesn’t approve of whites becoming a minority, or of the open racist hatred being spewed by the left, he puts his little bit of influence behind an establishment that beyond argument is dedicated to white-hating racism; that is, he is objectively racist against whites just for voting Democrat.

    I should say that the Republican party (really just a business lobby masquerading as a political party) is not much better. Their M.O. over the last few decades is to take the votes of whites fleeing the racism of the Democratic party but do nothing for those refugees in order to ensure more refugee votes in the future. Eventually, like the school system, they’ll run out of whites, but they’re just a rump of the liberal establishment and will except extinction rather than go against that establishment. In the mean time, they party like it’s Berlin in 1945.

  81. @songbird

    Only one of those groups is demographically significant.
     
    This idea that almost no group of immigrants is demographically significant unless they are double digits of the population is obvious folly. They are all demographically significant.

    Jews make up around 1.7% and 2.6% of the total U.S. population. Are you going to tell us that they aren't demographically significant?

    In 1948, Windrush carried only about 802 blacks. Last census, they were about 3% of the population, and the British people are already being rewritten out of their own history and mythology.

    In Bavaria, many of the schools used to have crosses on the walls of the classrooms. The rule is that only one person has to complain before they are taken down. There's no rule for putting them back up, once they have been taken down.

    Are you going to tell us that they aren’t demographically significant?

    Correct. They aren’t demographically significant. They are in other ways. If you’ve been reading me you know that I am an immigration restrictionist and have a dim view of even high IQ immigrants if they are not highly assimilative (e.g. Chinese and Indians).

    unless they are double digits of the population

    Some of the groups that commenter cited are not even single digit. Burmese? Really? At 0.03%? There are good reasons to oppose immigration (of the Burmese or other groups), but it’s not because the country is “full of” them.

    As I alluded, the only demographically significant minority group he listed is Mexicans. Indeed, when you look at the most obvious demographic change in the U.S. over the last 20 years or so, it is the decline of the white percentage and the increase in Hispanic percentage. Black percentage is more-or-less stuck. Asian percentage has increased tremendously as a rate of change, but not in absolute terms because the earlier base number was so small.

    • Replies: @songbird
    Well, seems as though we differ on definitions, with you favoring a constrained definition relating to tallies. In this sense, I prefer the word "numerically."

    The study of demographics originated in a different historical era, before mass migration, so it wasn't a significant concern at the time. I think our understanding of the term should be adjusted to the modern historical era of mass migration, as in the phrase "Demographics is destiny." By which I mean that trends and implications are more important than the numbers themselves, and that definitions should strive to articulate the more impactful ideas, or be future-orientated.

    Anyway, I don't think there is another word that can serve the same purpose, to the same effect.
  82. @Twinkie

    There’s no question that AA works well for societal elites. Take college admissions as one example: great way of tilting the scales against potentially threatening competition from middle/working class white and Asian kids.

    Whether it works for the people it supposedly advances is another question.
     
    Affirmative Action is a win-win for elite whites (with a disproportionately very high representation of Jews) - they get to suppress competition from Asians and bright flyover country whites AND virtue-signal about blacks and Hispanics, from whom they clearly feel little competition.

    Audacious Epigone and I have discussed it - he even confirmed from a survey that the support for AA increases as income rises among whites. Poor whites don’t care for it at all, even liberal ones.

    There is no competition. You are either allowed into the club or you aren’t. No one in this country gets wealthy by the sweat of his brow.

  83. @Talha
    Kangz...
    https://images.livemint.com/img/2020/02/24/600x338/2020-02-24T121301Z_1407313072_RC207F9KJOFM_RTRMADP_3_INDIA-USA-TRUMP_1582546607196_1582546623712.JPG

    Peace.

    Well there’s a Queen and a King in that picture, and His Majesty is wearing white.

    • LOL: Talha
  84. @nebulafox
    It speaks volumes about the GOP Establishment's relationship with reality that they genuinely seem to believe that their free market fantasy world is in the interests of most Americans. More populist insurgents are coming.

    As far as the Democrats go, for all their supposed willingness to stick it to the rich, the DNC doesn't seem too eager to scorn Silicon Valley's crony capitalists or banksters. Irish Paleo's comments about the internal split between the MBA and Trigglypuff Party must be quoted.

    It speaks volumes about the GOP Establishment’s relationship with reality that they genuinely seem to believe that their free market fantasy world is in the interests of most Americans.

    If they genuinely believe that then they’re certainly deluded. I’m sceptical as to whether they actually believe it though. I suspect that they’re very much aware that their policies are screwing a lot of people but they won’t publicly admit it. They won’t publicly admit that Trump could possibly be less than perfect. They’ve developed a full-blown Trump Personality Cult.

  85. anon[201] • Disclaimer says:

    A lot of D’s are over 60 and mentally living in Reagan’s America. They really, truly believe in the blank slate. They are convinced that any inequality of result is solely due to raycism. They’re sure Trayvon and Brown were innocent schoolboys murdered by evil whites. I’m talking neighbors and relatives. Heck, there’s an old lady down the street who put up “Hate has no home here” sign in her yard, she’d agree with this poll all the way down. Last year when the Mexicans were letting Central Americans swarm the border she was concerned. Not about the country, but about how the US could help all those people right now, right now!

    Same same Republicans, I know some of them and they are old Jack Kemp “Rising Tide!” types. They don’t get that the D’s like Ocasio Cortez and Omar are serious about their race-war talk They’re sure that all we got to do is get enough mutual funds into enough hands and everyone will become a moderate Republican.

    None of these people have ever walked a Chicago street at night, or at least not in the last 40 years. None of them have set foot in Detroit. Bubble world.

    • Agree: Mark G.
  86. @Twinkie

    Are you going to tell us that they aren’t demographically significant?
     
    Correct. They aren’t demographically significant. They are in other ways. If you’ve been reading me you know that I am an immigration restrictionist and have a dim view of even high IQ immigrants if they are not highly assimilative (e.g. Chinese and Indians).

    unless they are double digits of the population
     
    Some of the groups that commenter cited are not even single digit. Burmese? Really? At 0.03%? There are good reasons to oppose immigration (of the Burmese or other groups), but it’s not because the country is “full of” them.

    As I alluded, the only demographically significant minority group he listed is Mexicans. Indeed, when you look at the most obvious demographic change in the U.S. over the last 20 years or so, it is the decline of the white percentage and the increase in Hispanic percentage. Black percentage is more-or-less stuck. Asian percentage has increased tremendously as a rate of change, but not in absolute terms because the earlier base number was so small.

    Well, seems as though we differ on definitions, with you favoring a constrained definition relating to tallies. In this sense, I prefer the word “numerically.”

    The study of demographics originated in a different historical era, before mass migration, so it wasn’t a significant concern at the time. I think our understanding of the term should be adjusted to the modern historical era of mass migration, as in the phrase “Demographics is destiny.” By which I mean that trends and implications are more important than the numbers themselves, and that definitions should strive to articulate the more impactful ideas, or be future-orientated.

    Anyway, I don’t think there is another word that can serve the same purpose, to the same effect.

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    The study of demographics originated in a different historical era, before mass migration, so it wasn’t a significant concern at the time.
     
    I don’t think this holds. One would think the study of demographics becomes more salient when there is mass immigration.

    trends and implications are more important than the numbers themselves
     
    Both matter, as do qualitative factors.

    Either way, I favor having accurate information in order to have meaningful conversations, not resorting to slogans based on vague personal feelings, which is the MO of that commenter and that of many other commenters.
  87. @Buzz Mohawk
    We're all going to be fine, you lout. That's the laugh, but the future will come, after I am gone and you are living in Hell -- well deserved, judging from your cruel comment.

    What this overblown event has done is bring out the rats like you from behind the walls, the creepy bugs from under the rocks.

    You just revealed your true self, and it is as ugly as the dirty, faux-French linguistic division brought on in my lifetime in your province.

    Enjoy your future, your dirty, low-French Quebec life in the brown toilet bowl as a hated minority after I am gone. The thought beings me consolation. You earned this scorn with your comment, not I.

    Down here, we say, "Go to Hell." That is where you will live.

    Well.

    It’s nice to see this CV thing is bringin’ crackaz together.

  88. @songbird
    Well, seems as though we differ on definitions, with you favoring a constrained definition relating to tallies. In this sense, I prefer the word "numerically."

    The study of demographics originated in a different historical era, before mass migration, so it wasn't a significant concern at the time. I think our understanding of the term should be adjusted to the modern historical era of mass migration, as in the phrase "Demographics is destiny." By which I mean that trends and implications are more important than the numbers themselves, and that definitions should strive to articulate the more impactful ideas, or be future-orientated.

    Anyway, I don't think there is another word that can serve the same purpose, to the same effect.

    The study of demographics originated in a different historical era, before mass migration, so it wasn’t a significant concern at the time.

    I don’t think this holds. One would think the study of demographics becomes more salient when there is mass immigration.

    trends and implications are more important than the numbers themselves

    Both matter, as do qualitative factors.

    Either way, I favor having accurate information in order to have meaningful conversations, not resorting to slogans based on vague personal feelings, which is the MO of that commenter and that of many other commenters.

  89. @Talha
    Well, it certainly gives a fascinating insight into parts of the Ummah before the ethno-nationalism bug bit them. That a coalition of Muslim Turkic tribes would volutarily invite a British convert Muslim, that they found worthy of the station, to lead them as king of a homeland called Islamestan (as opposed to Turkestan) is one for the books of legend.

    As contrasted to the predictable reaction of SJW-polluted Muslims:
    "Oh BuT yOU'rE LetTinG thE WhiTE MAn LeaD YoU!"

    (sniff)
    Dear Islamestan, we hardly knew ye, but as a vanishing dream. May your short-lived king find a more vast kingdom in the Next Life.
    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81sCnbaMv8L._SL1500_.jpg

    (followed by Turkic warriors raising their swords and shouting)
    Sultan Sheldrake! Sultan Sheldrake!

    Peace.

    You can tell from his teeth that he’s British. Thanks for the interesting story. Too bad he never actually became King.

  90. @Talha
    Kangz...
    https://images.livemint.com/img/2020/02/24/600x338/2020-02-24T121301Z_1407313072_RC207F9KJOFM_RTRMADP_3_INDIA-USA-TRUMP_1582546607196_1582546623712.JPG

    Peace.

    They just don’t make mausoleums like they used to.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Yeah, but some try. I don't know if you ever came across this one, I posted it a while back; very touching story about a man and the love of his life:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxL7g1t_Ra8

    Peace.
  91. @iffen
    They just don't make mausoleums like they used to.

    Yeah, but some try. I don’t know if you ever came across this one, I posted it a while back; very touching story about a man and the love of his life:

    Peace.

  92. @Talha

    I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as “not one nation, but 32 nations put together” or something of the sort.
     
    That is correct. If you know Indians and have spoke to them on a serious level, you realize how different India is from, say, Malabar to, say, Kashmir. Totally different people, ethnically and language-wise and by religion. Even the local gods are different from one part of India to the other.

    In fact, if you look at the geography and the way the Himalayas and their extensions to the Pamir and Hindu Kush (meaning "Hindu killer" in Farsi - not kidding, those Persianized-Afghans were NOT politically correct) cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don't see why it doesn't get it's own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains...other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff. India is certainly at least as (if not more) diverse as Europe is with respect to genetics and language and religion and I think is a good candidate to be truly looked at as a (sub)continent and not simply one nation.


    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus?
     
    interesting question; you'd have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy - the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.

    As far as I can tell in the West, they hang around with Pakistanis. Pakistanis intermarry with them and generally spend time together. Sure we debate whose version of biryani is better, but in general, I have not seen much bickering over Pakistan vs India (apart from a couple of grumpy uncles). For instance, most of my Islamic studies teachers (as well as the current mufti I'm studying under) have been Indians since Pakistan and India share a general adherence to the Hanafi school. I honestly don't know many Indian Muslims that prefer to hang out with Hindus over Muslims, but then again, I'm mostly around religious folks...so maybe non-practicing Muslims from India prefer the company of Hindus, I don't know.


    Who will they side with if there is a war?
     
    Don't know honestly. They may side with India, but the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people. I honestly don't think there will be a huge war (inshaAllah) now that India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers.

    Why don’t Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?
     
    Well, there was a very serious debate on what course to take (wiht very legitimate points on both sides) and the ones that wanted to, moved out and formed Pakistan. There was East and West Pakistan (one nation), but the West Pakistanis didn't treat the Easterners right and so they split and now we have Bangladesh.

    He said something to the effect of “this (India) is my land. I can’t leave”.
     
    I can understand this. India is unique and has its special qualities like other places do. Even as a person born in Pakistan, I will acknowledge that Pakistan can never truly be fully separated from its Indian heritage (nor should it try to be). If I was to describe Pakistan, I'd say it was a baby with an Arab grandfather and a Persian father and Turkish mother that was nursed by a Hindu foster-mother, I don't know if that makes sense.

    I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racism and chauvinism.
     
    Wa iyyakum. I mean, with something like this; you're either going to lead the data or you're going to let the data lead you. The problem I find is that only a subset of people are willing to touch the stuff because of the politics involved, thus the data and implications aren't even able to be debated in a legitimate public manner. If they were, I think we'd be able to look at it from a holistic and mature perspective. Unfortunately, you get one extreme of racists who worship HBD like some sort of religion-custom-built-for-nerds and on the other side of the spectrum you get fools that don't want to even discuss any data because Nazis-under-my-bed.

    I like Masaman because he is quite accessible to the non-expert and the wide breadth of topics he covers on genetics and HBD always keeps things interesting; everything from ghost DNA to what happened to certain legendary peoples/races to which ethnicities may well die out within our lifetimes.

    Wasalaam.

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbju9As_EWo

    cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia

    I agree with this.

    I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains…other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff.

    Oddly enough, I actually kind of blame Indians for this. The way I see it is that Indians and East Asians are both fighting for pride of place – each wants to be called “Asian.” Indians are used to it because of the British calling them “Asians.” East Asians are used to it because of Americans calling them “Asians.” Neither wants to cede it to the other. I think some don’t like the term “subcon” or “sub-continent” as the prefix “sub” often has a negative connotation, as does “con.” Meanwhile, people from Pakistan might not like being called “Indians.”

    Could be wrong, but that’s how I interpret it. I’d like to suggest that there be some sort of symposium, where representatives from different parts of the subcontinent meet and are forced to agree on a name. Preferably a short one. And I want to see it updated on all forms and surveys in order to give AE material for another bar on his charts.

    • Replies: @Talha
    You make some good points here all around about the fight for "Asian" identity.

    Meanwhile, people from Pakistan might not like being called “Indians.”
     
    They might be assuaged if the line goes through the country and thus they have "plausible deniability" as bonafide "Indians".

    I’d like to suggest that there be some sort of symposium, where representatives from different parts of the subcontinent meet and are forced to agree on a name. Preferably a short one. And I want to see it updated on all forms and surveys in order to give AE material for another bar on his charts.
     
    LOL! Would love to see that happen. Sri Lankans and Maldivians should not be left out.

    Anyway, something to think about.

    Peace.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    Hear hear the last sentence!

    A three-way subdivision is already pretty serviceable when used colloquially:

    East Asians -- Chinese, Korean, Japanese
    Southeast Asians -- Filipino, Vietnamese, Malaysian
    South Asians -- Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi

    Why didn't it ever catch on?
  93. @songbird

    cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia
     
    I agree with this.

    I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains…other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff.
     
    Oddly enough, I actually kind of blame Indians for this. The way I see it is that Indians and East Asians are both fighting for pride of place - each wants to be called "Asian." Indians are used to it because of the British calling them "Asians." East Asians are used to it because of Americans calling them "Asians." Neither wants to cede it to the other. I think some don't like the term "subcon" or "sub-continent" as the prefix "sub" often has a negative connotation, as does "con." Meanwhile, people from Pakistan might not like being called "Indians."

    Could be wrong, but that's how I interpret it. I'd like to suggest that there be some sort of symposium, where representatives from different parts of the subcontinent meet and are forced to agree on a name. Preferably a short one. And I want to see it updated on all forms and surveys in order to give AE material for another bar on his charts.

    You make some good points here all around about the fight for “Asian” identity.

    Meanwhile, people from Pakistan might not like being called “Indians.”

    They might be assuaged if the line goes through the country and thus they have “plausible deniability” as bonafide “Indians”.

    I’d like to suggest that there be some sort of symposium, where representatives from different parts of the subcontinent meet and are forced to agree on a name. Preferably a short one. And I want to see it updated on all forms and surveys in order to give AE material for another bar on his charts.

    LOL! Would love to see that happen. Sri Lankans and Maldivians should not be left out.

    Anyway, something to think about.

    Peace.

    • Agree: songbird
  94. anon[176] • Disclaimer says:

    India is classified as a subcontinent. This has been the case for a century or more.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_subcontinent

    According to Oxford English Dictionary, the term “subcontinent” signifies a “subdivision of a continent which has a distinct geographical, political, or cultural identity” and also a “large land mass somewhat smaller than a continent”. It is first attested in 1845 to refer to the North and South Americas, before they were regarded as separate continents. Its use to refer to the Indian subcontinent is seen from the early twentieth century.

    The term Indian subcontinent also has a geological significance. Similar to various continents, it was a part of the supercontinent of Gondwana. A series of tectonic splits caused formation of various basins, each drifting in various directions. The geological region called “Greater India” once included Madagascar, Seychelles, Antarctica and Austrolasia along with the Indian subcontinent basin. As a geological term, Indian subcontinent has meant that region formed from the collision of the Indian basin with Eurasia nearly 55 million years ago, towards the end of Paleocene.[2][14]

    The geographical region has historically simply been known as “India” (in antiquity referring to the Indus Valley region, not the entire subcontinent). Other related terms are Greater India and South Asia.[15][16] And the terms “Indian subcontinent” and “South Asia” are sometimes used interchangeably.[7] There is no globally accepted definition on which countries are a part of South Asia or the Indian subcontinent.[9][11][10] The less common term “South Asian subcontinent” has seen occasional use since the 1970s.[17]

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    There was a survey database I used for a series of posts last year that separated Indians from other Asians. I used "subcontinentals" without intending it to be condescending or perceived as derogatory and I think it was mostly received that way. That probably wouldn't fly outside of these virtual walls, unfortunately.
  95. @Talha

    I once heard Lee Kuan Yew describe India as “not one nation, but 32 nations put together” or something of the sort.
     
    That is correct. If you know Indians and have spoke to them on a serious level, you realize how different India is from, say, Malabar to, say, Kashmir. Totally different people, ethnically and language-wise and by religion. Even the local gods are different from one part of India to the other.

    In fact, if you look at the geography and the way the Himalayas and their extensions to the Pamir and Hindu Kush (meaning "Hindu killer" in Farsi - not kidding, those Persianized-Afghans were NOT politically correct) cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don't see why it doesn't get it's own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains...other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff. India is certainly at least as (if not more) diverse as Europe is with respect to genetics and language and religion and I think is a good candidate to be truly looked at as a (sub)continent and not simply one nation.


    I have a question: do Indian Muslims identify more with Pakistanis, or with their fellow Indian Hindus?
     
    interesting question; you'd have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy - the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.

    As far as I can tell in the West, they hang around with Pakistanis. Pakistanis intermarry with them and generally spend time together. Sure we debate whose version of biryani is better, but in general, I have not seen much bickering over Pakistan vs India (apart from a couple of grumpy uncles). For instance, most of my Islamic studies teachers (as well as the current mufti I'm studying under) have been Indians since Pakistan and India share a general adherence to the Hanafi school. I honestly don't know many Indian Muslims that prefer to hang out with Hindus over Muslims, but then again, I'm mostly around religious folks...so maybe non-practicing Muslims from India prefer the company of Hindus, I don't know.


    Who will they side with if there is a war?
     
    Don't know honestly. They may side with India, but the Hindutva may give them no choice if they try to do something stupid-on-a-galactic scale like try to expel 200 million people. I honestly don't think there will be a huge war (inshaAllah) now that India and Pakistan are both nuclear powers.

    Why don’t Indian subcontinent Muslims form one nation to combine their strengths?
     
    Well, there was a very serious debate on what course to take (wiht very legitimate points on both sides) and the ones that wanted to, moved out and formed Pakistan. There was East and West Pakistan (one nation), but the West Pakistanis didn't treat the Easterners right and so they split and now we have Bangladesh.

    He said something to the effect of “this (India) is my land. I can’t leave”.
     
    I can understand this. India is unique and has its special qualities like other places do. Even as a person born in Pakistan, I will acknowledge that Pakistan can never truly be fully separated from its Indian heritage (nor should it try to be). If I was to describe Pakistan, I'd say it was a baby with an Arab grandfather and a Persian father and Turkish mother that was nursed by a Hindu foster-mother, I don't know if that makes sense.

    I always admire people who can handle HBD truths without falling into the rabbit hole of racism and chauvinism.
     
    Wa iyyakum. I mean, with something like this; you're either going to lead the data or you're going to let the data lead you. The problem I find is that only a subset of people are willing to touch the stuff because of the politics involved, thus the data and implications aren't even able to be debated in a legitimate public manner. If they were, I think we'd be able to look at it from a holistic and mature perspective. Unfortunately, you get one extreme of racists who worship HBD like some sort of religion-custom-built-for-nerds and on the other side of the spectrum you get fools that don't want to even discuss any data because Nazis-under-my-bed.

    I like Masaman because he is quite accessible to the non-expert and the wide breadth of topics he covers on genetics and HBD always keeps things interesting; everything from ghost DNA to what happened to certain legendary peoples/races to which ethnicities may well die out within our lifetimes.

    Wasalaam.

    Also, on Syrians and how they can look quite white; Chicago is blessed to have some great Syrians leading a lot of the nasheed/mawlid efforts in our area. The two brothers in lead here are the sons of Shaykh Samir Nass (a master and teacher of the Hanafi school in Damascus). I love this nasheed:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbju9As_EWo

    interesting question; you’d have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy – the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.

    This isn’t even unique to Muslims– my Goan relatives come from a family which also moved to Pakistan after Goa was absorbed into India. Why they chose Pakistan I’m not sure, it seems like a strange choice, but times were different then.

    Who will they side with if there is a war?

    There have been wars and so far as I know Indian Muslims haven’t shown notable disaffection. (In the ’47 war the highest-ranking Indian officer killed was Muslim, for instance.) Granted that might change, but there hasn’t been evidence of this happening so far as I am aware. As you mentioned large-scale wars don’t seem likely now anyway.

    • Replies: @Talha

    Why they chose Pakistan I’m not sure, it seems like a strange choice, but times were different then.
     
    Interesting. Are they still there?

    There have been wars and so far as I know Indian Muslims haven’t shown notable disaffection.
     
    This actually reminds me of one of the most interesting photographs I ever came across. During the Kargil Conflict. Pakistan denied it had official soldiers involved and thus refused to acknowledge the deceased as theirs. It was Muslims in the Indian army that prepared the bodies of the dead Pakistani soldiers for burial (washing and putting them in a white shroud and burying them properly facing Makkah after offering the janazah prayer over their bodies - as is obligatory). The photograph was of Muslim Indian soldiers standing and offering the prayer over the wrapped up deceased bodies. It really was an incredible thing. I felt very proud of those Muslims that didn't forget the last rites of their Muslim brothers, even though they fought them in conflict* and I was very impressed by India for allowing it to happen.

    The Pakistani Army has very recently allowed Hindus and Sikhs to serve in the military, but Christians have been serving for a while and at times with distinction or in leadership (you hear of them mostly in air force positions), like Cecil Chaudhry, Eric Hall, Mervyn Middlecoat, etc.


    Granted that might change, but there hasn’t been evidence of this happening so far as I am aware.
     
    Yes, well a lot of it depends on if India goes further down the Hindutva route where Muslims are made to feel they are not a part of India, in which case I could see Muslims in India refusing to join the military...which may be exactly what the Hindutva are looking for.

    Peace.

    *One of the more interesting angles on this is the approach the Indian Muslims took. That they washed and shrouded the bodies is an indication that they weren't considered martyrs in battle; martyrs in battle are buried as they are without preparation and in their clothes (and they will be resurrected with their wounds as marks of honor on the Day of Judgment). And the fact that they prayed over them indicates that they weren't considered criminal elements like highway robbers or rebels who are deprived of last rites.

  96. @RSDB

    interesting question; you’d have to ask one of them. My family made our decision by voting with our feet. When the central government of India invaded and absorbed the state of Hyderabad (and dissolved its monarchy – the Nizam), my family eventually moved to Pakistan.
     
    This isn't even unique to Muslims-- my Goan relatives come from a family which also moved to Pakistan after Goa was absorbed into India. Why they chose Pakistan I'm not sure, it seems like a strange choice, but times were different then.

    Who will they side with if there is a war?
     
    There have been wars and so far as I know Indian Muslims haven't shown notable disaffection. (In the '47 war the highest-ranking Indian officer killed was Muslim, for instance.) Granted that might change, but there hasn't been evidence of this happening so far as I am aware. As you mentioned large-scale wars don't seem likely now anyway.

    Why they chose Pakistan I’m not sure, it seems like a strange choice, but times were different then.

    Interesting. Are they still there?

    There have been wars and so far as I know Indian Muslims haven’t shown notable disaffection.

    This actually reminds me of one of the most interesting photographs I ever came across. During the Kargil Conflict. Pakistan denied it had official soldiers involved and thus refused to acknowledge the deceased as theirs. It was Muslims in the Indian army that prepared the bodies of the dead Pakistani soldiers for burial (washing and putting them in a white shroud and burying them properly facing Makkah after offering the janazah prayer over their bodies – as is obligatory). The photograph was of Muslim Indian soldiers standing and offering the prayer over the wrapped up deceased bodies. It really was an incredible thing. I felt very proud of those Muslims that didn’t forget the last rites of their Muslim brothers, even though they fought them in conflict* and I was very impressed by India for allowing it to happen.

    The Pakistani Army has very recently allowed Hindus and Sikhs to serve in the military, but Christians have been serving for a while and at times with distinction or in leadership (you hear of them mostly in air force positions), like Cecil Chaudhry, Eric Hall, Mervyn Middlecoat, etc.

    Granted that might change, but there hasn’t been evidence of this happening so far as I am aware.

    Yes, well a lot of it depends on if India goes further down the Hindutva route where Muslims are made to feel they are not a part of India, in which case I could see Muslims in India refusing to join the military…which may be exactly what the Hindutva are looking for.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    *One of the more interesting angles on this is the approach the Indian Muslims took. That they washed and shrouded the bodies is an indication that they weren’t considered martyrs in battle; martyrs in battle are buried as they are without preparation and in their clothes (and they will be resurrected with their wounds as marks of honor on the Day of Judgment). And the fact that they prayed over them indicates that they weren’t considered criminal elements like highway robbers or rebels who are deprived of last rites.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Also, many people don't know this, but a cadre of Polish pilots, especially Air Commodore Turowicz who was a WW2 pilot that decided to serve in Pakistan after Poland was taken over by Communists. He was instrumental in some of the aerospace programs for the country. This is a good article that reviews his life and the failed attempts of Polish intelligence to recruit him as an asset in the country:
    "But the RAF no longer needed them after the war. Neither did Poland. Many pilots who returned after the war were imprisoned by the new communist regime. The government of Pakistan chose 30 Polish officers from the RAF, offering them three-year contracts and a home when they could not return to their land of original belonging...He then raised his voice: 'I will never become one of them.' The file ends with signatures, stamps of senior officers and a note that the operation was aborted since all further attempts to recruit Turowicz would be to no avail. "
    https://www.dawn.com/news/1287122

    Peace.
    , @RSDB

    Interesting. Are they still there?
     
    Not to my knowledge (I don't know where all the different branches are; I know some members are in Sri Lanka and Australia and I recently heard of one in Canada), though I think my great-aunt's nephew in the Emirates still has Pakistani citizenship.

    Thanks for the moving story about the Kargil war.

    India certainly knows, when it likes to, how to do effective propaganda. (Not that the funeral itself was propaganda, but releasing the story when they did). And for a very diverse nation, and a very ham-handed nation at times when it comes to using the military, they haven't been bad at retaining the allegiance of all kinds of people; even with the Hindutva thing, for instance, the anti-CAA protests and so on have been emphasizing the "we are all part of India" angle. Also, the more emphasis on some sort of Sanskrit tradition there is, the more the South will tend to pull away from such ideologies.
  97. @Talha

    Why they chose Pakistan I’m not sure, it seems like a strange choice, but times were different then.
     
    Interesting. Are they still there?

    There have been wars and so far as I know Indian Muslims haven’t shown notable disaffection.
     
    This actually reminds me of one of the most interesting photographs I ever came across. During the Kargil Conflict. Pakistan denied it had official soldiers involved and thus refused to acknowledge the deceased as theirs. It was Muslims in the Indian army that prepared the bodies of the dead Pakistani soldiers for burial (washing and putting them in a white shroud and burying them properly facing Makkah after offering the janazah prayer over their bodies - as is obligatory). The photograph was of Muslim Indian soldiers standing and offering the prayer over the wrapped up deceased bodies. It really was an incredible thing. I felt very proud of those Muslims that didn't forget the last rites of their Muslim brothers, even though they fought them in conflict* and I was very impressed by India for allowing it to happen.

    The Pakistani Army has very recently allowed Hindus and Sikhs to serve in the military, but Christians have been serving for a while and at times with distinction or in leadership (you hear of them mostly in air force positions), like Cecil Chaudhry, Eric Hall, Mervyn Middlecoat, etc.


    Granted that might change, but there hasn’t been evidence of this happening so far as I am aware.
     
    Yes, well a lot of it depends on if India goes further down the Hindutva route where Muslims are made to feel they are not a part of India, in which case I could see Muslims in India refusing to join the military...which may be exactly what the Hindutva are looking for.

    Peace.

    *One of the more interesting angles on this is the approach the Indian Muslims took. That they washed and shrouded the bodies is an indication that they weren't considered martyrs in battle; martyrs in battle are buried as they are without preparation and in their clothes (and they will be resurrected with their wounds as marks of honor on the Day of Judgment). And the fact that they prayed over them indicates that they weren't considered criminal elements like highway robbers or rebels who are deprived of last rites.

    Also, many people don’t know this, but a cadre of Polish pilots, especially Air Commodore Turowicz who was a WW2 pilot that decided to serve in Pakistan after Poland was taken over by Communists. He was instrumental in some of the aerospace programs for the country. This is a good article that reviews his life and the failed attempts of Polish intelligence to recruit him as an asset in the country:
    “But the RAF no longer needed them after the war. Neither did Poland. Many pilots who returned after the war were imprisoned by the new communist regime. The government of Pakistan chose 30 Polish officers from the RAF, offering them three-year contracts and a home when they could not return to their land of original belonging…He then raised his voice: ‘I will never become one of them.’ The file ends with signatures, stamps of senior officers and a note that the operation was aborted since all further attempts to recruit Turowicz would be to no avail. ”
    https://www.dawn.com/news/1287122

    Peace.

    • Replies: @songbird
    So, what you're saying is that there will be a warm welcome for us Euros in Pakistan, if we can assist to build-up its air force AND its nuclear weapons program?

    I don't know if I could cut it with both of those things. Maybe, the one or the other... What if I said India offered me a statue that was 200 cm tall? Do you think Pakistan would go 210?
  98. “The Boomer generation really screwed up and pushed for outsourcing and mass immigration. I agree that many whites of all ages believe the Globohomo nonsense too.”

    Ohh why be modest most of the most destructive policies for US citizens have been designed, advocated and implemented by whites.

    Which is exactly how the pet whipping boy AA in less than five years became a white benefiting programs. Even the much touted New Deal — whites only in nearly every state or at least whites first.

    Laughing still slobbering over Indians and Pakistanis as some kind of US salvation — good greif.

    I thought my time away would be a enlightened rethinking — but the same error of complaint remains the error of salvation.

    We have our own caste system in the US without importing those with a belief system of existential justification.

  99. @peterike
    For many Democrats, "the wealthy" and "big business" are proxies for white males. Keep that in mind when interpreting these results.

    Except that the poll found that Democrats think the Democratic candidate is better for Whites.

  100. @Talha
    Also, many people don't know this, but a cadre of Polish pilots, especially Air Commodore Turowicz who was a WW2 pilot that decided to serve in Pakistan after Poland was taken over by Communists. He was instrumental in some of the aerospace programs for the country. This is a good article that reviews his life and the failed attempts of Polish intelligence to recruit him as an asset in the country:
    "But the RAF no longer needed them after the war. Neither did Poland. Many pilots who returned after the war were imprisoned by the new communist regime. The government of Pakistan chose 30 Polish officers from the RAF, offering them three-year contracts and a home when they could not return to their land of original belonging...He then raised his voice: 'I will never become one of them.' The file ends with signatures, stamps of senior officers and a note that the operation was aborted since all further attempts to recruit Turowicz would be to no avail. "
    https://www.dawn.com/news/1287122

    Peace.

    So, what you’re saying is that there will be a warm welcome for us Euros in Pakistan, if we can assist to build-up its air force AND its nuclear weapons program?

    I don’t know if I could cut it with both of those things. Maybe, the one or the other… What if I said India offered me a statue that was 200 cm tall? Do you think Pakistan would go 210?

    • Replies: @Talha

    So, what you’re saying is that there will be a warm welcome for us Euros in Pakistan, if we can assist to build-up its air force AND its nuclear weapons program?
     
    Possibly, it certainly happened before, but I don't live there anymore so you'd just have to try your luck at it and see which way the wind blows.

    I don’t know if I could cut it with both of those things.
     
    Yeah, then it may not work. I don't think Pakistan wants to (or has the capacity to) follow Europe's lead and simply invite people that may not be of much benefit but pay them welfare anyway.

    Do you think Pakistan would go 210?
     
    If you are looking for a statue, I don't think that has much of a chance in Pakistan. There are some statues left over from the time when the Brits were in charge, but I don't think they have made statues for many (if any) after independence. So you'd better try India instead...they love statues.

    If you are lucky (well, it's probably going to hurt real bad in the next world, but) and prove your worth, you could maybe submit a formal application for deification:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyyeppGXazw

    Peace.
  101. @songbird
    So, what you're saying is that there will be a warm welcome for us Euros in Pakistan, if we can assist to build-up its air force AND its nuclear weapons program?

    I don't know if I could cut it with both of those things. Maybe, the one or the other... What if I said India offered me a statue that was 200 cm tall? Do you think Pakistan would go 210?

    So, what you’re saying is that there will be a warm welcome for us Euros in Pakistan, if we can assist to build-up its air force AND its nuclear weapons program?

    Possibly, it certainly happened before, but I don’t live there anymore so you’d just have to try your luck at it and see which way the wind blows.

    I don’t know if I could cut it with both of those things.

    Yeah, then it may not work. I don’t think Pakistan wants to (or has the capacity to) follow Europe’s lead and simply invite people that may not be of much benefit but pay them welfare anyway.

    Do you think Pakistan would go 210?

    If you are looking for a statue, I don’t think that has much of a chance in Pakistan. There are some statues left over from the time when the Brits were in charge, but I don’t think they have made statues for many (if any) after independence. So you’d better try India instead…they love statues.

    If you are lucky (well, it’s probably going to hurt real bad in the next world, but) and prove your worth, you could maybe submit a formal application for deification:

    Peace.

    • LOL: songbird
    • Replies: @songbird
    I don't know... they have some pretty big statues in India - I don't want one that looks like a gnat compared to Sardar Patel.
  102. @Talha

    So, what you’re saying is that there will be a warm welcome for us Euros in Pakistan, if we can assist to build-up its air force AND its nuclear weapons program?
     
    Possibly, it certainly happened before, but I don't live there anymore so you'd just have to try your luck at it and see which way the wind blows.

    I don’t know if I could cut it with both of those things.
     
    Yeah, then it may not work. I don't think Pakistan wants to (or has the capacity to) follow Europe's lead and simply invite people that may not be of much benefit but pay them welfare anyway.

    Do you think Pakistan would go 210?
     
    If you are looking for a statue, I don't think that has much of a chance in Pakistan. There are some statues left over from the time when the Brits were in charge, but I don't think they have made statues for many (if any) after independence. So you'd better try India instead...they love statues.

    If you are lucky (well, it's probably going to hurt real bad in the next world, but) and prove your worth, you could maybe submit a formal application for deification:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyyeppGXazw

    Peace.

    I don’t know… they have some pretty big statues in India – I don’t want one that looks like a gnat compared to Sardar Patel.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Talha

    compared to Sardar Patel.
     
    Even the statue of Lincoln in DC looks like a gnat compared to that one. You could live in one of his nostrils.

    Peace.
  103. @songbird
    I don't know... they have some pretty big statues in India - I don't want one that looks like a gnat compared to Sardar Patel.

    compared to Sardar Patel.

    Even the statue of Lincoln in DC looks like a gnat compared to that one. You could live in one of his nostrils.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @songbird

    statue of Lincoln in DC
     
    A sacrilegious monument complete with its own temple - not built by charitable subscription. I would ship Lincoln off to India, as a diplomatic initiative, and turn the structure into a museum showcasing Greek art and history.


    You could live in one of his nostrils.
     
    Honestly, I'm a bit afraid of heights, once you start going twice as high as where eagles nest.
  104. @songbird

    cut off the India from the larger mass of Asia, I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia
     
    I agree with this.

    I don’t see why it doesn’t get it’s own designation as a legitimate continent apart from Asia when Europe does so by defining the boundaries using the Ural and Caucasus mountains…other than maybe Europeans wanted their own special continent when they were defining all this stuff.
     
    Oddly enough, I actually kind of blame Indians for this. The way I see it is that Indians and East Asians are both fighting for pride of place - each wants to be called "Asian." Indians are used to it because of the British calling them "Asians." East Asians are used to it because of Americans calling them "Asians." Neither wants to cede it to the other. I think some don't like the term "subcon" or "sub-continent" as the prefix "sub" often has a negative connotation, as does "con." Meanwhile, people from Pakistan might not like being called "Indians."

    Could be wrong, but that's how I interpret it. I'd like to suggest that there be some sort of symposium, where representatives from different parts of the subcontinent meet and are forced to agree on a name. Preferably a short one. And I want to see it updated on all forms and surveys in order to give AE material for another bar on his charts.

    Hear hear the last sentence!

    A three-way subdivision is already pretty serviceable when used colloquially:

    East Asians — Chinese, Korean, Japanese
    Southeast Asians — Filipino, Vietnamese, Malaysian
    South Asians — Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi

    Why didn’t it ever catch on?

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Talha
    Maybe for the same reason Europeans didn’t want to be called West Asians.

    Peace.
    , @songbird

    Why didn’t it ever catch on?
     
    That I can't say, but, to me, as major categories, they feel a bit cold and impersonal, almost like globalist terms, where everything is reduced to geography, and the people don't matter. I think it is especially true when they are written side-by-side. I guess that's really why I don't like the term "Asian" as a catch all: It is too globalist.

    I like a bit of mythology or adventure.

    Almost wish that the term "Far East" would be brought back. There's a kind of mystical element which comes from it being the opposite cardinal direction to the West. That's why I think "East Asia" sort of works, though it might not be as taxonomically desirable as NE Asia and SE Asia. As to South Asia, I feel like it doesn't work because it is not south of me, and so it doesn't have that mystical quality of following the compass to its limit.

    I know it's a small category, but I'm also a bit turned off by the term "Central Asian." I feel like there must be some really cool word that the Mongols used or something.

    , @nebulafox
    The Vietnamese would take major issue with that particular categorization for the same reason that Poles and Magyars really don't like being called Eastern Europeans (Central, damn it!), but otherwise, yeah. Indians and Chinese have far more differences, racially and culturally, than, say, Russians and Irishmen do.

    (Not as if the Viets are wholly wrong, their culture is pretty embedded in the Sinic/Confucian sphere.)

  105. @anon
    India is classified as a subcontinent. This has been the case for a century or more.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_subcontinent

    According to Oxford English Dictionary, the term "subcontinent" signifies a "subdivision of a continent which has a distinct geographical, political, or cultural identity" and also a "large land mass somewhat smaller than a continent". It is first attested in 1845 to refer to the North and South Americas, before they were regarded as separate continents. Its use to refer to the Indian subcontinent is seen from the early twentieth century.
     

    The term Indian subcontinent also has a geological significance. Similar to various continents, it was a part of the supercontinent of Gondwana. A series of tectonic splits caused formation of various basins, each drifting in various directions. The geological region called "Greater India" once included Madagascar, Seychelles, Antarctica and Austrolasia along with the Indian subcontinent basin. As a geological term, Indian subcontinent has meant that region formed from the collision of the Indian basin with Eurasia nearly 55 million years ago, towards the end of Paleocene.[2][14]
     

    The geographical region has historically simply been known as "India" (in antiquity referring to the Indus Valley region, not the entire subcontinent). Other related terms are Greater India and South Asia.[15][16] And the terms "Indian subcontinent" and "South Asia" are sometimes used interchangeably.[7] There is no globally accepted definition on which countries are a part of South Asia or the Indian subcontinent.[9][11][10] The less common term "South Asian subcontinent" has seen occasional use since the 1970s.[17]
     

    There was a survey database I used for a series of posts last year that separated Indians from other Asians. I used “subcontinentals” without intending it to be condescending or perceived as derogatory and I think it was mostly received that way. That probably wouldn’t fly outside of these virtual walls, unfortunately.

  106. @Audacious Epigone
    Hear hear the last sentence!

    A three-way subdivision is already pretty serviceable when used colloquially:

    East Asians -- Chinese, Korean, Japanese
    Southeast Asians -- Filipino, Vietnamese, Malaysian
    South Asians -- Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi

    Why didn't it ever catch on?

    Maybe for the same reason Europeans didn’t want to be called West Asians.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    Broad European regionalism isn't that objectionable--northern European, southern European, central European, eastern European, etc--though.
  107. @Talha

    compared to Sardar Patel.
     
    Even the statue of Lincoln in DC looks like a gnat compared to that one. You could live in one of his nostrils.

    Peace.

    statue of Lincoln in DC

    A sacrilegious monument complete with its own temple – not built by charitable subscription. I would ship Lincoln off to India, as a diplomatic initiative, and turn the structure into a museum showcasing Greek art and history.

    You could live in one of his nostrils.

    Honestly, I’m a bit afraid of heights, once you start going twice as high as where eagles nest.

    • Replies: @Talha

    A sacrilegious monument complete with its own temple...I would ship Lincoln off to India
     
    I'm not a fan of statues, for obvious religious reasons. One can readily honor a legacy without them. I can't think of a single place with a statue of Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), and yet people name their kids after him from Senegal to Malaysia, say a prayer after mentioning his name, still look to some of his precedence for rulings, and refer to him as "rightly guided" 14 centuries later.

    And, with reference to your comment, they seem to inevitably become the center of an ideological battle; someone like yourself wants to ship Lincoln off to India (though it is an interesting thought experiment to wonder what they'd do with it) if given the chance while some others would love to melt down all remaining statues of General Lee and make a giant statue of Aretha Franklin or whatever out of them.


    I’m a bit afraid of heights
     
    You could probably also find a nice spot between his toes.

    Peace.

  108. @Audacious Epigone
    Hear hear the last sentence!

    A three-way subdivision is already pretty serviceable when used colloquially:

    East Asians -- Chinese, Korean, Japanese
    Southeast Asians -- Filipino, Vietnamese, Malaysian
    South Asians -- Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi

    Why didn't it ever catch on?

    Why didn’t it ever catch on?

    That I can’t say, but, to me, as major categories, they feel a bit cold and impersonal, almost like globalist terms, where everything is reduced to geography, and the people don’t matter. I think it is especially true when they are written side-by-side. I guess that’s really why I don’t like the term “Asian” as a catch all: It is too globalist.

    I like a bit of mythology or adventure.

    Almost wish that the term “Far East” would be brought back. There’s a kind of mystical element which comes from it being the opposite cardinal direction to the West. That’s why I think “East Asia” sort of works, though it might not be as taxonomically desirable as NE Asia and SE Asia. As to South Asia, I feel like it doesn’t work because it is not south of me, and so it doesn’t have that mystical quality of following the compass to its limit.

    I know it’s a small category, but I’m also a bit turned off by the term “Central Asian.” I feel like there must be some really cool word that the Mongols used or something.

    • Replies: @anon
    Almost wish that the term “Far East” would be brought back.

    Ed Said indirectly killed that off.

    As to South Asia, I feel like it doesn’t work because it is not south of me,

    It isn't south of me, either, but it is accurate enough to work.

    it doesn’t have that mystical quality of following the compass to its limit.

    Are you Justice Kennedy now with this mystical meandering emotional stuff? Feelze over realze, really?

    Feelze over realze, everywhere I look. Sometimes it's as if the entire planetary population is on the verge of menstruation. Or menopause.

    gah.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    I feel like there must be some really cool word that the Mongols used or something.

    Steppeians.

    ... or bring back "the golden horde".
    , @dfordoom

    Almost wish that the term “Far East” would be brought back.
     
    Agreed. It was clear-cut and accurate.

    I'm quite fond of the term oriental. And no, I'm not being a knuckle-dragging racist. I don't think there was anything inherently racist about the term.
  109. @songbird

    statue of Lincoln in DC
     
    A sacrilegious monument complete with its own temple - not built by charitable subscription. I would ship Lincoln off to India, as a diplomatic initiative, and turn the structure into a museum showcasing Greek art and history.


    You could live in one of his nostrils.
     
    Honestly, I'm a bit afraid of heights, once you start going twice as high as where eagles nest.

    A sacrilegious monument complete with its own temple…I would ship Lincoln off to India

    I’m not a fan of statues, for obvious religious reasons. One can readily honor a legacy without them. I can’t think of a single place with a statue of Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), and yet people name their kids after him from Senegal to Malaysia, say a prayer after mentioning his name, still look to some of his precedence for rulings, and refer to him as “rightly guided” 14 centuries later.

    And, with reference to your comment, they seem to inevitably become the center of an ideological battle; someone like yourself wants to ship Lincoln off to India (though it is an interesting thought experiment to wonder what they’d do with it) if given the chance while some others would love to melt down all remaining statues of General Lee and make a giant statue of Aretha Franklin or whatever out of them.

    I’m a bit afraid of heights

    You could probably also find a nice spot between his toes.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @songbird
    I think the Lincoln monument is particularly in bad taste on multiple levels. IMO, it is very un-American in form and substance to start with: it is like he is sitting on a throne, in a temple. And if you read anything critical about him, he comes across quite easily as a dictator.

    Of course, I'm being kind of tongue and cheek, when I say get rid of it. I think DC is a kind of Sodom and Gomorrah rolled into one, so I don't really think of bettering it. Kind of like that "Fearless Girl" on Wall Street - bad taste, but bad place.

    I really do like some statues. Art, like the Dying Gaul, or mythological figures like The Dying Cuchulain, at the GPO, Dublin. Name of the second is a bit derivative, but the theme is culturally unique. I mean, I don't want to seem morbid, but I think they are both pretty good. I know George Washington wasn't perfect, but I accept statues of him on a kind of national mythic level - that is the sort of thing I approve of. I don't think other pols in the US should be given statues though. Lee is interesting to me because he stood up for states' rights, and fought a losing war.

    There's definitely a turf war going on over statues, and not just in America, but also in Europe. In Copenhagen, there is a statue of a black lady on a throne with a killing implement in one hand in a torch in the other. It is called "I am Queen Mary."

    It's interesting because pulling down statues is definitely something exacerbated by diversity, but a lot of the people tearing them down are very white. It is not a bunch of Mexicans.


    Since Scary Lucy became a local tourist attraction after receiving media attention, it was placed 75 yards from its original location so visitors could visit both statues.
     
    I don't know if you ever saw that hideous statue of Lucille Ball, but I liked the idea of melting it down into cannonballs, or artillery shells for the navy.
    , @nebulafox
    'Abd al-Malik had no objections to being placed on money before he started his campaign of Islamization/Arabization throughout the caliphate. This was over a half century later.

    Depending on who you believe, the issue of people vs. Qu'ran verses being inscribed on money might have sparked off the renewed war with Byzantium, though I strongly doubt this was al-Malik's real motive: he had every political incentive to go back to war with New Rome after the civil war.

  110. anon[388] • Disclaimer says:
    @songbird

    Why didn’t it ever catch on?
     
    That I can't say, but, to me, as major categories, they feel a bit cold and impersonal, almost like globalist terms, where everything is reduced to geography, and the people don't matter. I think it is especially true when they are written side-by-side. I guess that's really why I don't like the term "Asian" as a catch all: It is too globalist.

    I like a bit of mythology or adventure.

    Almost wish that the term "Far East" would be brought back. There's a kind of mystical element which comes from it being the opposite cardinal direction to the West. That's why I think "East Asia" sort of works, though it might not be as taxonomically desirable as NE Asia and SE Asia. As to South Asia, I feel like it doesn't work because it is not south of me, and so it doesn't have that mystical quality of following the compass to its limit.

    I know it's a small category, but I'm also a bit turned off by the term "Central Asian." I feel like there must be some really cool word that the Mongols used or something.

    Almost wish that the term “Far East” would be brought back.

    Ed Said indirectly killed that off.

    As to South Asia, I feel like it doesn’t work because it is not south of me,

    It isn’t south of me, either, but it is accurate enough to work.

    it doesn’t have that mystical quality of following the compass to its limit.

    Are you Justice Kennedy now with this mystical meandering emotional stuff? Feelze over realze, really?

    Feelze over realze, everywhere I look. Sometimes it’s as if the entire planetary population is on the verge of menstruation. Or menopause.

    gah.

  111. @Talha
    Maybe for the same reason Europeans didn’t want to be called West Asians.

    Peace.

    Broad European regionalism isn’t that objectionable–northern European, southern European, central European, eastern European, etc–though.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Sure, they get their own continent. I don't think northern, western, eastern and southern Indian continent would be objectionable to the folks that live there either. If Pluto can be demoted from a planet in my life time, India can be promoted to a continent (it's all a game of definitions)...at least that's how I see it.

    Peace.
  112. @songbird

    Why didn’t it ever catch on?
     
    That I can't say, but, to me, as major categories, they feel a bit cold and impersonal, almost like globalist terms, where everything is reduced to geography, and the people don't matter. I think it is especially true when they are written side-by-side. I guess that's really why I don't like the term "Asian" as a catch all: It is too globalist.

    I like a bit of mythology or adventure.

    Almost wish that the term "Far East" would be brought back. There's a kind of mystical element which comes from it being the opposite cardinal direction to the West. That's why I think "East Asia" sort of works, though it might not be as taxonomically desirable as NE Asia and SE Asia. As to South Asia, I feel like it doesn't work because it is not south of me, and so it doesn't have that mystical quality of following the compass to its limit.

    I know it's a small category, but I'm also a bit turned off by the term "Central Asian." I feel like there must be some really cool word that the Mongols used or something.

    I feel like there must be some really cool word that the Mongols used or something.

    Steppeians.

    … or bring back “the golden horde”.

    • Agree: songbird, Talha
  113. @Audacious Epigone
    Broad European regionalism isn't that objectionable--northern European, southern European, central European, eastern European, etc--though.

    Sure, they get their own continent. I don’t think northern, western, eastern and southern Indian continent would be objectionable to the folks that live there either. If Pluto can be demoted from a planet in my life time, India can be promoted to a continent (it’s all a game of definitions)…at least that’s how I see it.

    Peace.

  114. @Talha

    A sacrilegious monument complete with its own temple...I would ship Lincoln off to India
     
    I'm not a fan of statues, for obvious religious reasons. One can readily honor a legacy without them. I can't think of a single place with a statue of Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), and yet people name their kids after him from Senegal to Malaysia, say a prayer after mentioning his name, still look to some of his precedence for rulings, and refer to him as "rightly guided" 14 centuries later.

    And, with reference to your comment, they seem to inevitably become the center of an ideological battle; someone like yourself wants to ship Lincoln off to India (though it is an interesting thought experiment to wonder what they'd do with it) if given the chance while some others would love to melt down all remaining statues of General Lee and make a giant statue of Aretha Franklin or whatever out of them.


    I’m a bit afraid of heights
     
    You could probably also find a nice spot between his toes.

    Peace.

    I think the Lincoln monument is particularly in bad taste on multiple levels. IMO, it is very un-American in form and substance to start with: it is like he is sitting on a throne, in a temple. And if you read anything critical about him, he comes across quite easily as a dictator.

    Of course, I’m being kind of tongue and cheek, when I say get rid of it. I think DC is a kind of Sodom and Gomorrah rolled into one, so I don’t really think of bettering it. Kind of like that “Fearless Girl” on Wall Street – bad taste, but bad place.

    I really do like some statues. Art, like the Dying Gaul, or mythological figures like The Dying Cuchulain, at the GPO, Dublin. Name of the second is a bit derivative, but the theme is culturally unique. I mean, I don’t want to seem morbid, but I think they are both pretty good. I know George Washington wasn’t perfect, but I accept statues of him on a kind of national mythic level – that is the sort of thing I approve of. I don’t think other pols in the US should be given statues though. Lee is interesting to me because he stood up for states’ rights, and fought a losing war.

    There’s definitely a turf war going on over statues, and not just in America, but also in Europe. In Copenhagen, there is a statue of a black lady on a throne with a killing implement in one hand in a torch in the other. It is called “I am Queen Mary.”

    It’s interesting because pulling down statues is definitely something exacerbated by diversity, but a lot of the people tearing them down are very white. It is not a bunch of Mexicans.

    Since Scary Lucy became a local tourist attraction after receiving media attention, it was placed 75 yards from its original location so visitors could visit both statues.

    I don’t know if you ever saw that hideous statue of Lucille Ball, but I liked the idea of melting it down into cannonballs, or artillery shells for the navy.

    • Replies: @Talha

    There’s definitely a turf war going on over statues, and not just in America, but also in Europe.
     
    Not surprising. This seems to be part of normal human history; when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it - Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.

    I don’t know if you ever saw that hideous statue of Lucille Ball
     
    Yup, you cannot unsee it. I’m actually hoping someone will make a B-horror movie where it comes to life with the spirit of Lucille Ball and stalks and kills everyone involved in its making and funding.

    Peace.
  115. @Audacious Epigone
    Hear hear the last sentence!

    A three-way subdivision is already pretty serviceable when used colloquially:

    East Asians -- Chinese, Korean, Japanese
    Southeast Asians -- Filipino, Vietnamese, Malaysian
    South Asians -- Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi

    Why didn't it ever catch on?

    The Vietnamese would take major issue with that particular categorization for the same reason that Poles and Magyars really don’t like being called Eastern Europeans (Central, damn it!), but otherwise, yeah. Indians and Chinese have far more differences, racially and culturally, than, say, Russians and Irishmen do.

    (Not as if the Viets are wholly wrong, their culture is pretty embedded in the Sinic/Confucian sphere.)

    • Replies: @Twinkie

    The Vietnamese would take major issue with that particular categorization
     
    I think not since Vietnam seems to have zero problem belonging to ASEAN - Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
  116. @songbird
    I think the Lincoln monument is particularly in bad taste on multiple levels. IMO, it is very un-American in form and substance to start with: it is like he is sitting on a throne, in a temple. And if you read anything critical about him, he comes across quite easily as a dictator.

    Of course, I'm being kind of tongue and cheek, when I say get rid of it. I think DC is a kind of Sodom and Gomorrah rolled into one, so I don't really think of bettering it. Kind of like that "Fearless Girl" on Wall Street - bad taste, but bad place.

    I really do like some statues. Art, like the Dying Gaul, or mythological figures like The Dying Cuchulain, at the GPO, Dublin. Name of the second is a bit derivative, but the theme is culturally unique. I mean, I don't want to seem morbid, but I think they are both pretty good. I know George Washington wasn't perfect, but I accept statues of him on a kind of national mythic level - that is the sort of thing I approve of. I don't think other pols in the US should be given statues though. Lee is interesting to me because he stood up for states' rights, and fought a losing war.

    There's definitely a turf war going on over statues, and not just in America, but also in Europe. In Copenhagen, there is a statue of a black lady on a throne with a killing implement in one hand in a torch in the other. It is called "I am Queen Mary."

    It's interesting because pulling down statues is definitely something exacerbated by diversity, but a lot of the people tearing them down are very white. It is not a bunch of Mexicans.


    Since Scary Lucy became a local tourist attraction after receiving media attention, it was placed 75 yards from its original location so visitors could visit both statues.
     
    I don't know if you ever saw that hideous statue of Lucille Ball, but I liked the idea of melting it down into cannonballs, or artillery shells for the navy.

    There’s definitely a turf war going on over statues, and not just in America, but also in Europe.

    Not surprising. This seems to be part of normal human history; when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it – Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.

    I don’t know if you ever saw that hideous statue of Lucille Ball

    Yup, you cannot unsee it. I’m actually hoping someone will make a B-horror movie where it comes to life with the spirit of Lucille Ball and stalks and kills everyone involved in its making and funding.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Talha

    when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it – Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.
     
    Still happens, to be honest:
    https://media.salon.com/2013/04/hussein_statue_flag.jpg
    , @anon
    his seems to be part of normal human history; when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it – Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.

    The ancient world was full of that.

    Then there's the Muslim Taliban. In the current century. 2001.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamyan
  117. @Talha

    There’s definitely a turf war going on over statues, and not just in America, but also in Europe.
     
    Not surprising. This seems to be part of normal human history; when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it - Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.

    I don’t know if you ever saw that hideous statue of Lucille Ball
     
    Yup, you cannot unsee it. I’m actually hoping someone will make a B-horror movie where it comes to life with the spirit of Lucille Ball and stalks and kills everyone involved in its making and funding.

    Peace.

    when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it – Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.

    Still happens, to be honest:

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    It's always liberators doing it. Always!
  118. anon[564] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    There’s definitely a turf war going on over statues, and not just in America, but also in Europe.
     
    Not surprising. This seems to be part of normal human history; when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it - Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.

    I don’t know if you ever saw that hideous statue of Lucille Ball
     
    Yup, you cannot unsee it. I’m actually hoping someone will make a B-horror movie where it comes to life with the spirit of Lucille Ball and stalks and kills everyone involved in its making and funding.

    Peace.

    his seems to be part of normal human history; when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it – Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.

    The ancient world was full of that.

    Then there’s the Muslim Taliban. In the current century. 2001.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamyan

    • Agree: Mr. Rational
  119. @nebulafox
    The Vietnamese would take major issue with that particular categorization for the same reason that Poles and Magyars really don't like being called Eastern Europeans (Central, damn it!), but otherwise, yeah. Indians and Chinese have far more differences, racially and culturally, than, say, Russians and Irishmen do.

    (Not as if the Viets are wholly wrong, their culture is pretty embedded in the Sinic/Confucian sphere.)

    The Vietnamese would take major issue with that particular categorization

    I think not since Vietnam seems to have zero problem belonging to ASEAN – Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    Are non-bumi Singaporeans and Malaysians also Southeast Asians? Politically, yes: this isn't unique to the region or the time period, most Baltic Germans were deeply proud of their service to the Tsarist state and identified with it. But culturally and racially, they are still distinct. Even in Singapore, where the locals genuinely identify with each other far more than with their co-ethnics in China/Malaysia-Indonesia/India, it's not as if there aren't huge differences between the different ethnic cultures.

    Vietnamese culture has more in common with Chinese than Khmer or Thai culture, despite the casual and well-documented antipathy (one that is getting steeper by the day with this pandemic) many Vietnamese display toward China. Even the languages betray this: Vietnamese has its own version of kanji/hanja, whereas Khmer and Thai use a vaguely Indic looking script.

  120. @Twinkie

    The Vietnamese would take major issue with that particular categorization
     
    I think not since Vietnam seems to have zero problem belonging to ASEAN - Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

    Are non-bumi Singaporeans and Malaysians also Southeast Asians? Politically, yes: this isn’t unique to the region or the time period, most Baltic Germans were deeply proud of their service to the Tsarist state and identified with it. But culturally and racially, they are still distinct. Even in Singapore, where the locals genuinely identify with each other far more than with their co-ethnics in China/Malaysia-Indonesia/India, it’s not as if there aren’t huge differences between the different ethnic cultures.

    Vietnamese culture has more in common with Chinese than Khmer or Thai culture, despite the casual and well-documented antipathy (one that is getting steeper by the day with this pandemic) many Vietnamese display toward China. Even the languages betray this: Vietnamese has its own version of kanji/hanja, whereas Khmer and Thai use a vaguely Indic looking script.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    There will always be border peoples who argue one way or another. Be that as it may, phenotypically the Han, the Korean, and the Yamato resemble each other more than they do with the Viet people. And arguably the former have far more in common culturally with one another than they do with the latter as well.

    Ethnic Chinese Singaporeans are from China, so they are East Asian. Singapore is a multi-ethnic state, so it will defy an easy categorization, but it’s clear that East Asians are in charge.
  121. @Talha

    A sacrilegious monument complete with its own temple...I would ship Lincoln off to India
     
    I'm not a fan of statues, for obvious religious reasons. One can readily honor a legacy without them. I can't think of a single place with a statue of Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), and yet people name their kids after him from Senegal to Malaysia, say a prayer after mentioning his name, still look to some of his precedence for rulings, and refer to him as "rightly guided" 14 centuries later.

    And, with reference to your comment, they seem to inevitably become the center of an ideological battle; someone like yourself wants to ship Lincoln off to India (though it is an interesting thought experiment to wonder what they'd do with it) if given the chance while some others would love to melt down all remaining statues of General Lee and make a giant statue of Aretha Franklin or whatever out of them.


    I’m a bit afraid of heights
     
    You could probably also find a nice spot between his toes.

    Peace.

    ‘Abd al-Malik had no objections to being placed on money before he started his campaign of Islamization/Arabization throughout the caliphate. This was over a half century later.

    Depending on who you believe, the issue of people vs. Qu’ran verses being inscribed on money might have sparked off the renewed war with Byzantium, though I strongly doubt this was al-Malik’s real motive: he had every political incentive to go back to war with New Rome after the civil war.

    • Replies: @Talha

    he had every political incentive to go back to war with New Rome after the civil war.
     
    Totally, the Umayyad state was structured on a foundation of ever-expansion. This is probably one of the best reads on the subject:
    “The End of the Jihad State: The Reign of Hisham Ibn 'Abd al-Malik and the Collapse of the Umayyads
    Demonstrates for the first time that the cause of the Umayyad caliphate’s collapse came not just from internal conflict, but from a number of external and concurrent factors that exceeded the caliphate’s capacity to respond.“
    https://www.sunypress.edu/p-1793-the-end-of-the-jihad-state.aspx

    Peace.
  122. @nebulafox
    Are non-bumi Singaporeans and Malaysians also Southeast Asians? Politically, yes: this isn't unique to the region or the time period, most Baltic Germans were deeply proud of their service to the Tsarist state and identified with it. But culturally and racially, they are still distinct. Even in Singapore, where the locals genuinely identify with each other far more than with their co-ethnics in China/Malaysia-Indonesia/India, it's not as if there aren't huge differences between the different ethnic cultures.

    Vietnamese culture has more in common with Chinese than Khmer or Thai culture, despite the casual and well-documented antipathy (one that is getting steeper by the day with this pandemic) many Vietnamese display toward China. Even the languages betray this: Vietnamese has its own version of kanji/hanja, whereas Khmer and Thai use a vaguely Indic looking script.

    There will always be border peoples who argue one way or another. Be that as it may, phenotypically the Han, the Korean, and the Yamato resemble each other more than they do with the Viet people. And arguably the former have far more in common culturally with one another than they do with the latter as well.

    Ethnic Chinese Singaporeans are from China, so they are East Asian. Singapore is a multi-ethnic state, so it will defy an easy categorization, but it’s clear that East Asians are in charge.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    >There will always be border peoples who argue one way or another. Be that as it may, phenotypically the Han, the Korean, and the Yamato resemble each other more than they do with the Viet people. And arguably the former have far more in common culturally with one another than they do with the latter as well.

    No, I wouldn't even think that's arguable. But my comparison wasn't about the degree of proximity, racially or culturally, it was about the general civilizational sphere.

    >I’m afraid we are still waiting for our Marius and Sulla, let alone Cesar and Augustus.

    I'd guesstimate another 16 years.
  123. @nebulafox
    'Abd al-Malik had no objections to being placed on money before he started his campaign of Islamization/Arabization throughout the caliphate. This was over a half century later.

    Depending on who you believe, the issue of people vs. Qu'ran verses being inscribed on money might have sparked off the renewed war with Byzantium, though I strongly doubt this was al-Malik's real motive: he had every political incentive to go back to war with New Rome after the civil war.

    he had every political incentive to go back to war with New Rome after the civil war.

    Totally, the Umayyad state was structured on a foundation of ever-expansion. This is probably one of the best reads on the subject:
    “The End of the Jihad State: The Reign of Hisham Ibn ‘Abd al-Malik and the Collapse of the Umayyads
    Demonstrates for the first time that the cause of the Umayyad caliphate’s collapse came not just from internal conflict, but from a number of external and concurrent factors that exceeded the caliphate’s capacity to respond.“
    https://www.sunypress.edu/p-1793-the-end-of-the-jihad-state.aspx

    Peace.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    What eventually happened to the succeeding Abbasid caliphate reminds me a bit of what happened when the Diadochi split up Alexander's conquests. It was just too big and sprawling to control with the technology of the early medieval era, and it didn't have the Mediterranean to center itself around like Rome did.
  124. @Twinkie
    There will always be border peoples who argue one way or another. Be that as it may, phenotypically the Han, the Korean, and the Yamato resemble each other more than they do with the Viet people. And arguably the former have far more in common culturally with one another than they do with the latter as well.

    Ethnic Chinese Singaporeans are from China, so they are East Asian. Singapore is a multi-ethnic state, so it will defy an easy categorization, but it’s clear that East Asians are in charge.

    >There will always be border peoples who argue one way or another. Be that as it may, phenotypically the Han, the Korean, and the Yamato resemble each other more than they do with the Viet people. And arguably the former have far more in common culturally with one another than they do with the latter as well.

    No, I wouldn’t even think that’s arguable. But my comparison wasn’t about the degree of proximity, racially or culturally, it was about the general civilizational sphere.

    >I’m afraid we are still waiting for our Marius and Sulla, let alone Cesar and Augustus.

    I’d guesstimate another 16 years.

  125. @Talha

    he had every political incentive to go back to war with New Rome after the civil war.
     
    Totally, the Umayyad state was structured on a foundation of ever-expansion. This is probably one of the best reads on the subject:
    “The End of the Jihad State: The Reign of Hisham Ibn 'Abd al-Malik and the Collapse of the Umayyads
    Demonstrates for the first time that the cause of the Umayyad caliphate’s collapse came not just from internal conflict, but from a number of external and concurrent factors that exceeded the caliphate’s capacity to respond.“
    https://www.sunypress.edu/p-1793-the-end-of-the-jihad-state.aspx

    Peace.

    What eventually happened to the succeeding Abbasid caliphate reminds me a bit of what happened when the Diadochi split up Alexander’s conquests. It was just too big and sprawling to control with the technology of the early medieval era, and it didn’t have the Mediterranean to center itself around like Rome did.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Basically or what happened to the Mongol Empire into various Mongol Khanates.

    Peace.
  126. @nebulafox
    What eventually happened to the succeeding Abbasid caliphate reminds me a bit of what happened when the Diadochi split up Alexander's conquests. It was just too big and sprawling to control with the technology of the early medieval era, and it didn't have the Mediterranean to center itself around like Rome did.

    Basically or what happened to the Mongol Empire into various Mongol Khanates.

    Peace.

  127. @songbird

    Why didn’t it ever catch on?
     
    That I can't say, but, to me, as major categories, they feel a bit cold and impersonal, almost like globalist terms, where everything is reduced to geography, and the people don't matter. I think it is especially true when they are written side-by-side. I guess that's really why I don't like the term "Asian" as a catch all: It is too globalist.

    I like a bit of mythology or adventure.

    Almost wish that the term "Far East" would be brought back. There's a kind of mystical element which comes from it being the opposite cardinal direction to the West. That's why I think "East Asia" sort of works, though it might not be as taxonomically desirable as NE Asia and SE Asia. As to South Asia, I feel like it doesn't work because it is not south of me, and so it doesn't have that mystical quality of following the compass to its limit.

    I know it's a small category, but I'm also a bit turned off by the term "Central Asian." I feel like there must be some really cool word that the Mongols used or something.

    Almost wish that the term “Far East” would be brought back.

    Agreed. It was clear-cut and accurate.

    I’m quite fond of the term oriental. And no, I’m not being a knuckle-dragging racist. I don’t think there was anything inherently racist about the term.

    • Agree: Talha, songbird
  128. Assuming that Idris Abdus-Salaam was one of your Muslim brothers, how should he be buried?

    https://wreg.com/news/three-workers-stabbed-to-death-at-tennessee-truck-stop-suspect-shot-and-killed/

    • Replies: @Talha
    You'd have to ask a qualified scholar, which I am not. Could go either way:

    1. If this qualifies as "hiraaba" (which can closely be associated to terrorism or causing fear and chaos in society), then the funeral prayer would easily be refused.
    2. If it was a criminal act, but not up to the level of hiraaba, then there is an obligation that the community owes to the deceased as a fellow Muslim (even if a criminal) to pray for his forgiveness.

    Something similar took place in the UK actually:
    "Imams refuse funeral prayers for 'indefensible' London Bridge attackers:
    More than 130 religious leaders use unusual sanction to express disgust at murders ‘contravening Islam’ and vow to root out extremism"
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/imams-refuse-funeral-prayers-to-indefensible-london-bridge-attackers

    Peace.
  129. @Talha

    when you win or conquer, you often haul away the other team’s statue(s) as spoils or tear it down or deface it – Romans, Persians, you name it, they did it.
     
    Still happens, to be honest:
    https://media.salon.com/2013/04/hussein_statue_flag.jpg

    It’s always liberators doing it. Always!

    • Replies: @Talha
    Well that certainly seems to be the more recent theme, but back in the day, there wasn't any fronting about liberating anything.

    They were more into:
    "Hey, nice statue, mind if we sack it along with the rest of your town?"
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Sack_of_Rome_by_the_Visigoths_on_24_August_410_by_JN_Sylvestre_1890.jpg

    Peace.
  130. @Audacious Epigone
    It's always liberators doing it. Always!

    Well that certainly seems to be the more recent theme, but back in the day, there wasn’t any fronting about liberating anything.

    They were more into:
    “Hey, nice statue, mind if we sack it along with the rest of your town?”

    Peace.

    • Replies: @songbird
    If you ask me, the nakedness of the northern tribes is kind of overplayed. It gets pretty cold north of Italy.

    Don't get me wrong, I think they may have stripped to the waist on certain occasions - perhaps even frequently to save their clothes. Or perhaps, for hygienic reasons - not to get tiny pieces of cloth in wounds. Or perhaps to intimidate their opponents.

    But I have trouble believing that they were running around buck naked with no pants. I won't say it is totally impossible, but in the Middle Ages, "naked" was often clearly a descriptor for people who had no armor.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    I was being facetious. It's what conquerors do. Always has been, always will be.
  131. @anon
    @Talha:

    Assuming that Idris Abdus-Salaam was one of your Muslim brothers, how should he be buried?

    https://wreg.com/news/three-workers-stabbed-to-death-at-tennessee-truck-stop-suspect-shot-and-killed/

    You’d have to ask a qualified scholar, which I am not. Could go either way:

    1. If this qualifies as “hiraaba” (which can closely be associated to terrorism or causing fear and chaos in society), then the funeral prayer would easily be refused.
    2. If it was a criminal act, but not up to the level of hiraaba, then there is an obligation that the community owes to the deceased as a fellow Muslim (even if a criminal) to pray for his forgiveness.

    Something similar took place in the UK actually:
    “Imams refuse funeral prayers for ‘indefensible’ London Bridge attackers:
    More than 130 religious leaders use unusual sanction to express disgust at murders ‘contravening Islam’ and vow to root out extremism”
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/05/imams-refuse-funeral-prayers-to-indefensible-london-bridge-attackers

    Peace.

  132. @Talha
    Well that certainly seems to be the more recent theme, but back in the day, there wasn't any fronting about liberating anything.

    They were more into:
    "Hey, nice statue, mind if we sack it along with the rest of your town?"
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Sack_of_Rome_by_the_Visigoths_on_24_August_410_by_JN_Sylvestre_1890.jpg

    Peace.

    If you ask me, the nakedness of the northern tribes is kind of overplayed. It gets pretty cold north of Italy.

    Don’t get me wrong, I think they may have stripped to the waist on certain occasions – perhaps even frequently to save their clothes. Or perhaps, for hygienic reasons – not to get tiny pieces of cloth in wounds. Or perhaps to intimidate their opponents.

    But I have trouble believing that they were running around buck naked with no pants. I won’t say it is totally impossible, but in the Middle Ages, “naked” was often clearly a descriptor for people who had no armor.

    • Replies: @Talha

    But I have trouble believing that they were running around buck naked with no pants.
     
    Likely. You can't really take some painting done centuries later as a marker for a historical event. Especially from a culture that would be hostile to the subject matter; wanting to show the Germanic tribes in as bad as a light as possible as compared to the classical civilization of Rome.

    Nakedness in those paintings was used to convey what the painter wanted, whether barbarity or even vulnerability*.

    Peace.

    *For instance the earlier sack of Rome by the Gauls as depicted in "Brennus and his share of the spoils":
    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71vOFqAniTL._AC_SY679_.jpg
  133. @songbird
    If you ask me, the nakedness of the northern tribes is kind of overplayed. It gets pretty cold north of Italy.

    Don't get me wrong, I think they may have stripped to the waist on certain occasions - perhaps even frequently to save their clothes. Or perhaps, for hygienic reasons - not to get tiny pieces of cloth in wounds. Or perhaps to intimidate their opponents.

    But I have trouble believing that they were running around buck naked with no pants. I won't say it is totally impossible, but in the Middle Ages, "naked" was often clearly a descriptor for people who had no armor.

    But I have trouble believing that they were running around buck naked with no pants.

    Likely. You can’t really take some painting done centuries later as a marker for a historical event. Especially from a culture that would be hostile to the subject matter; wanting to show the Germanic tribes in as bad as a light as possible as compared to the classical civilization of Rome.

    Nakedness in those paintings was used to convey what the painter wanted, whether barbarity or even vulnerability*.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    *For instance the earlier sack of Rome by the Gauls as depicted in “Brennus and his share of the spoils”:

    • Agree: songbird
  134. @Talha
    Well that certainly seems to be the more recent theme, but back in the day, there wasn't any fronting about liberating anything.

    They were more into:
    "Hey, nice statue, mind if we sack it along with the rest of your town?"
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a0/Sack_of_Rome_by_the_Visigoths_on_24_August_410_by_JN_Sylvestre_1890.jpg

    Peace.

    I was being facetious. It’s what conquerors do. Always has been, always will be.

    • Agree: Talha
  135. @Talha

    Why they chose Pakistan I’m not sure, it seems like a strange choice, but times were different then.
     
    Interesting. Are they still there?

    There have been wars and so far as I know Indian Muslims haven’t shown notable disaffection.
     
    This actually reminds me of one of the most interesting photographs I ever came across. During the Kargil Conflict. Pakistan denied it had official soldiers involved and thus refused to acknowledge the deceased as theirs. It was Muslims in the Indian army that prepared the bodies of the dead Pakistani soldiers for burial (washing and putting them in a white shroud and burying them properly facing Makkah after offering the janazah prayer over their bodies - as is obligatory). The photograph was of Muslim Indian soldiers standing and offering the prayer over the wrapped up deceased bodies. It really was an incredible thing. I felt very proud of those Muslims that didn't forget the last rites of their Muslim brothers, even though they fought them in conflict* and I was very impressed by India for allowing it to happen.

    The Pakistani Army has very recently allowed Hindus and Sikhs to serve in the military, but Christians have been serving for a while and at times with distinction or in leadership (you hear of them mostly in air force positions), like Cecil Chaudhry, Eric Hall, Mervyn Middlecoat, etc.


    Granted that might change, but there hasn’t been evidence of this happening so far as I am aware.
     
    Yes, well a lot of it depends on if India goes further down the Hindutva route where Muslims are made to feel they are not a part of India, in which case I could see Muslims in India refusing to join the military...which may be exactly what the Hindutva are looking for.

    Peace.

    *One of the more interesting angles on this is the approach the Indian Muslims took. That they washed and shrouded the bodies is an indication that they weren't considered martyrs in battle; martyrs in battle are buried as they are without preparation and in their clothes (and they will be resurrected with their wounds as marks of honor on the Day of Judgment). And the fact that they prayed over them indicates that they weren't considered criminal elements like highway robbers or rebels who are deprived of last rites.

    Interesting. Are they still there?

    Not to my knowledge (I don’t know where all the different branches are; I know some members are in Sri Lanka and Australia and I recently heard of one in Canada), though I think my great-aunt’s nephew in the Emirates still has Pakistani citizenship.

    Thanks for the moving story about the Kargil war.

    India certainly knows, when it likes to, how to do effective propaganda. (Not that the funeral itself was propaganda, but releasing the story when they did). And for a very diverse nation, and a very ham-handed nation at times when it comes to using the military, they haven’t been bad at retaining the allegiance of all kinds of people; even with the Hindutva thing, for instance, the anti-CAA protests and so on have been emphasizing the “we are all part of India” angle. Also, the more emphasis on some sort of Sanskrit tradition there is, the more the South will tend to pull away from such ideologies.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS