RSS
Noah Carl writes:
In a paper published in Nature, Leslie et al. (2015) report that there is very little genetic structure (differentiation) within the native British population:
Consistent with earlier studies of the UK, population structure within the PoBI [People of the British Isles] collection is very limited. The average of the pairwise Fst estimates between each of the 30 sample collection districts is 0.0007, with a maximum of 0.003.
This means that native Britons living in one particular area of the country (e.g., Orkney) are not much more closely related to their immediate neighbours than to Britons living in a completely different area of the country (e.g., North Wales). In fact, the largest pairwise Fst values (roughly the proportion of variance between groups) were for Orkney versus North Wales (Fst = 0.003), and for Orkney versus North Pembrokeshire (Fst = 0.003). By comparison, Fst values for major continental groups (i.e., Europe, Africa, East Asia etc.) are in the range of 5–15% (>100 times greater than the average for areas of Britain).
The findings adduced above make sense when one considers the magnitudes of historical migratory flows into Britain. Estimates for the fraction of the population that Normans comprised, following the Norman conquest in 1066, range from 1% to around 5%. Between 1066 and the turn of the 20th century, it is unlikely that the foreign-born fraction of the population ever exceeded 2%. French Huguenots, for example, are unlikely to have constituted more than 1% of the population. …
The magnitude of inward migratory flows increased during the 20th century, and did so dramatically from the 1990s onwards. Between 1900 and 1950, the foreign-born fraction fraction of the population rose, but never exceeded 5%. By the early 1990s, it was well above 5%. In 2011, it was around 13%. And today, it is probably above 15%. Thus, contemporary levels of immigration into Britain are historically unprecedented.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Immigrant Nation is euphemism for Defenseless Nation.
All sane nations try to maintain their race, culture, history, and territory. That’s why Hungary is Hungarian and Sweden is Swedish. Hungary is land of Hungarians, and Sweden is land of Swedes.
As all lifeforms are invasive — and humans are lifeforms too — , every territory, natural or human, has to be defended OR ELSE it will be invaded by others.
Globalism turned the US from an extension of Europe to a ‘proposition immigration nation’ that is defenseless against world invasion(who want to live off the good stuff built by whites). And this New American model is now forced on ALL nations via globalism. All nations must not only be Americanized but New-Americanized. In the past, being Americanized meant drinking coca cola and watching Hollywood movies. Today, being New-Americanized means having your own nation be invaded by masses of foreigners as ‘new countrymen’. Europeans went from the Americanization of drinking coca-cola & watching Hollywood movies to the New-Americanization of ‘electing a new people’.
At least mass immigration made some sense during a part of US history(esp in the 19th century) when the continent had to be filled.
But in the Old World with deep ethnic and historical roots in the soil? It will be loss of rich history and heritage associated with a certain people upon a certain land to waves of invaders.
But then, globalism spread Pop Culture and PC to sever one’s sense of ties to the land and ancestors.
So, Ireland has a month black history month. Irish are to identify mainly with reggae singers and black American athletes than with their own kind. What rot.
Ireland has a black history month? Oh my god! Thought it was nuts that Canada did!Replies: @Dan Hayes
Britain is “a nation of immigrants” in as much as it’s part of “the West”, which is the parts of the world that follow the post-1965 American model. The post ’65 American model is de facto identical to the Canadian multicultural model, which is identical to the French faux republican model, the German model, etc, etc.
A country can be a New World constitutional monarchy, an Old World republic or any other thing; if you’re in the West, you’re living in a “nation of immigrants” and a proposition nation. Denmark is an idea, it’s not a nation. Ditto France and Ireland. That is the official, respectable definition of the West as of this evening. And they wonder where Trump and Brexit came from?
His conclusion:
Britain really is a propositional nation, I think you will all agree. The proposition is “what is mine is mine and what is yours is mine”. So simple.
American style pro immigration BS has been part of British pop culture for at least a few decades – Rowan Atkinson (of Blackadder and Mr. Bean fame) played a doofus policeman in a ’90s britcom called Thin Blue Line. On one of the episodes he said “Britain is a nation of immigrants” as well as Muslims are just as British as anyone, we’ve always been diverse, etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IMudn717oY
All I can say is, Black Agnes…hopefully, will comment on this post. Yeah, the Vikings and all came from the north and all…but, what, next?…and for F’s sake today?
The amount of genetic mixture among Northwest Europeans is one of the things that makes getting your DNA tested so boring.
Smaller Euro populations, like Hungarians, have always been jealous about defending their national identity with good reason, because they are small. Larger nations like UK Germany France US think they are immune. Not so.
Liberals like diversity but they won’t like it when their kids and grandkids are chaiwallahs for non-whites.
But this is how civilizations decline.
The idea of importing masses of Muslims and Africans into Europe, and Britain, is insane even for the rulers. The Dutch elite got a wake-up call — Erdogan has a valid claim to a substantial portion of their citizenry and HE not THEY makes the rules. The time is coming when Erdogan or someone like him simply seizes power. If the Turkish government can rally all that people in a pitched battle with the Dutch Government, what is to prevent them from simply taking power and RULING the Netherlands as the possession of Turkey?
With need I point out, the total removal of the current elite by Erdogan’s cronies. This is like Liberal Jews in the US pushing for more Muslims. Its insane — in a few years the USA could have twenty million Muslims making the US a defacto by street action “Judenrein” not only tolerated but enforced by the government, given all those voter-bombers. There are about 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, most dirt poor, most intent on coming to the US and enjoying the standard of living of the US while enforcing their rules and way of life (TM, James Kirkpatrick, VDARE.com). Liberal Jews can see this, but still push for more Muslims. Why?
Its religious insanity of the kind the West periodically falls victim to — idiotic utopianism again and again: The Children’s Crusade, Albigensian Heretics aka the Cathars (who felt the physical world was evil and everyone should be castrated or enforced celibate to get to the next world –basically Heaven’s Gate morons without the comet or alien spaceship and matching Nikes but with the castration). High IQ people are prone to utopian idealism and denial of reality to further their utopian dreams no matter what — Hitler also comes to mind (a sane realist like Franco would have taken the Czech Republic and retired from the table a winner). Platonic Idealism and the Noble Lie practically embody the Media’s refusal to cover racial crime or Muslim immavader rapes of women and little boys and girls. Its not like this just started happening — it goes back to Plato at least and his Republic, and arguably before that the Spartans and their rigid warrior castes and age segregation by cohort.
Britain is described as an immigrant nation even though it self-evidently is not, because that’s the only way to keep the Dream of a GloboHomo (TM Heartiste) utopian idiot world alive. Even though Erdogan who schemes to conquer has other ideas.
Britains seem to be caving.
"We Were Never Asked"
Neither the English people, nor the American people!
Thanks for bringing this video to my attention. It is very impressive.Replies: @anon, @Almost Missouri
The earliest example of this kind of nonsense that I know of is Defoe’s The True-Born Englishman:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_True-Born_Englishman
Before the Empire Windrush landed in 1948, was Britain’s last large wave of immigrants Jewish? I think Enoch Powell mentioned the difficulties of assimilating early 20th century Jewish immigrants in his TV interview with David Frost.
Btw, doesn’t France have a history of large scale immigration? Didn’t Brimelow write something about France receiving Eastern European immigrants in the late 1800’s as well as a large number of Russian exiles after the Bolshevik revolution? Lots of French with Hungarian and Polish last names.
I took a drive today into the interior of Florida to kayak on a wild and scenic river. I passed through numerous small towns. Mexican stores were everywhere. Painted with the same gaudy colors they prefer in their native land.
I thought I would stop for lunch at a Mexican restaurant so I stopped and asked two 4′ 6″ Mexican guys where I might find a good restaurant. They responded “No English”. Then I stopped at a Mex. grocery store with the same question. No one spoke English except the 250 pound white chick hanging out with the 4′ 8″ Mexican dude who had eyes like an Inuit.
All the Mexicans I saw were sawed off midgets. None spoke English. All dressed like they were back home.
These are not American citizens. They are not American in any meaningful sense of the word. They are utterly alien. They have no more in common with an American than does a resident of Chihuahua.
Yet Liberals insist that we not categorize these people with adjectives like “complete stranger”, which they obviously are. The Do-Gooder mind dwells in a fantasy land.
As the sanctified Bobby K. quipped, “Some people see what is and ask “Why?”; I see what could be and ask “Why not?”.
“Why not?” Because it’s a total fantasy you jackass and you’ll waste an inordinate amount of time, money and effort trying to remake the world conform to your lunatic vision.
The Bobby Kennedy quotation was a direct plagiarization from a G B Shaw play.
This fact was pointed out by the late Justice Scalia in an address to the Jewish Theological Seminary.Replies: @Dan Hayes
syonredux,
“We Were Never Asked”
Neither the English people, nor the American people!
Thanks for bringing this video to my attention. It is very impressive.
It's from the abortive 2002 BBC detective series, NCS: Manhunt. This accounts for the bizarre camera angles and the actor's sullen affect.
There is a less distorted version here:
https://youtu.be/s9QtXiYFLYsReplies: @Bill B.
Bobby K! I wish the traitorous Kennedy clan never immigrated. Amazing the damage those 3 fool brothers inflicted on their adopted country. If they stayed in Ireland they might have sunk the island.
Then again the Kennedy's were just frontmen for the real diversity pushers, the Jews.Replies: @Maj. Kong
ThreeCranes,
The Bobby Kennedy quotation was a direct plagiarization from a G B Shaw play.
This fact was pointed out by the late Justice Scalia in an address to the Jewish Theological Seminary.
As you can well imagine, Justice Scalia really enjoyed pointing out this fact.
All this was probably the purposeful work of one of Kennedy's wise-guy speechwriters.
It may be significant that the first large-scale influx of foreigners into the British Isles in a thousand years just happens to occur at the same time that widespread, inexpensive DNA testing has nourished a popular fad for discovering one’s (putative) ancestry. For wonkier iSteve fans, let us just say that there are some Sapir-Whorf implications to that. A generation ago, average people didn’t know much about their DNA and consequently didn’t think much about it; in any case, there would have been little hope of garnering much useful information by that method, the tests being too expensive and the databases lacking. Today, on the other hand, anybody can spit in a tube for $199 and find out whether they’re descended from Eric the Red.
But the attitude one takes towards his or her newly acquired Sapir-Whorf thought units is another matter altogether. For a cynical, directionless, and morally bankrupt age such as ours, the discovery that one belongs to a population which carries the nearly pristine blood of a great and ancient race seems to inspire the conclusion, “Hey, let’s fuck it up!” There seems to be an almost entrepreneurial and devilish impulse to exploit and experiment upon the White genome—an impulse, moreover, that would not have been conceivable with out the new mental toolkit—as if one were were hacking away at a virgin gold seam in the Yukon, or on the high seas with Captain Ahab chasing the white whale. And by a profoundly tragic twist of irony, this impulse also derives from the very blood which it is diluting. It is part and parcel of that uniquely Western pathos for distance, triumph, and the penetration of recondite secrets.
But this is the kind of attitude that just might swing wildly with the social mood, and on very short time frames. As the nationalist sentiment builds and living conditions deteriorate, and anger is focused most intently on the stream of recent refugees from the Middle East and Africa, one could easily imagine a phalanx of “real Britons,” DNA test results in hand, in the vanguard of a new and expressly nativist politics.
It will be interesting to see what architecture these stones are ultimately marshaled to effect.
.
Future advances in genetic testing will allow for "designer" babies to be brought to term. Every one an Olympic athlete/lingerie model with genius level IQ.Replies: @Opinionator
Steve, I hope you have good lawyer friends. If anyone reads this headline in some parts of Europe or Canada, it can probably be construed as the absolute worst sort of hate-crime. InterPol probably has a file. They’ll probably go after you for trafficking in hate-facts.
why are you guys arguing facts, when results are all your opponents are interested in.
main stream media is rhetoric aimed at idiots, useful and otherwise. no one of consequence or relevance is actually motivated by the arguments trotted out in it, it just cover for something else.
The Bobby Kennedy quotation was a direct plagiarization from a G B Shaw play.
This fact was pointed out by the late Justice Scalia in an address to the Jewish Theological Seminary.Replies: @Dan Hayes
And best of all, in the Shaw play the statement was made by Lucifer!
As you can well imagine, Justice Scalia really enjoyed pointing out this fact.
All this was probably the purposeful work of one of Kennedy’s wise-guy speechwriters.
Americans are cucks.
whats worse is that they think cucking makes them strong and demonstrates moral virtue.
see, america imports Muslims, so muslims in iraq should like us right, right?
dont you see how deferring to others, and cowering from them, gives you power?
us deserves everything that is coming
“Prior to 1950 the foreign born fraction of the population never exceeded 5%”…
Not only that but it was all white too, visually indistingushable from the native British population.
But … but … but … the quality and variety of ethnic restaurants has gotten so much better!
Scientists still haven't published their findings on how this can be. I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't seen it for myself.
One theory is that they aren't actually there but represent a form of 'inter-dimensional leakage' showing a world where the Aztecs adopted European social structures and technology and conquered Ireland along with the rest of Europe like one of those weird EU4 games where Europe starts without a human player.Replies: @The Alarmist
As all lifeforms are invasive -- and humans are lifeforms too -- , every territory, natural or human, has to be defended OR ELSE it will be invaded by others. Globalism turned the US from an extension of Europe to a 'proposition immigration nation' that is defenseless against world invasion(who want to live off the good stuff built by whites). And this New American model is now forced on ALL nations via globalism. All nations must not only be Americanized but New-Americanized. In the past, being Americanized meant drinking coca cola and watching Hollywood movies. Today, being New-Americanized means having your own nation be invaded by masses of foreigners as 'new countrymen'. Europeans went from the Americanization of drinking coca-cola & watching Hollywood movies to the New-Americanization of 'electing a new people'. At least mass immigration made some sense during a part of US history(esp in the 19th century) when the continent had to be filled. But in the Old World with deep ethnic and historical roots in the soil? It will be loss of rich history and heritage associated with a certain people upon a certain land to waves of invaders.
But then, globalism spread Pop Culture and PC to sever one's sense of ties to the land and ancestors. So, Ireland has a month black history month. Irish are to identify mainly with reggae singers and black American athletes than with their own kind. What rot.Replies: @anon, @anon
Great post. But by “all nations” must be Americanized you must know that it is only white nations that are being degraded.
Ireland has a black history month? Oh my god! Thought it was nuts that Canada did!
If you wish to find out how bad things are in Ireland, feel free to type in "Irish Savant" in your search engine!
[Peter Brimelow, the quintessential Englishman, once stated that it was shameful what was happening in Ireland.]
THE THIN BLUE LINE was produced by the BBC, a pure cultural Marxist organization if ever there was one.
"We Were Never Asked"
Neither the English people, nor the American people!
Thanks for bringing this video to my attention. It is very impressive.Replies: @anon, @Almost Missouri
Nor the Canadian people or Aussies either.
By GWB's open pandering in 2000, it should have been clear to everyone. The 2006-07 amnesty battle should have surprised no one.
The uncomfortable fact is that a large majority, but not a supermajority, of the electorate is willing to defer to the ratchet effect on immigration, rather than suffer the badfeels of racism. We may need to debate the question as to whether this should be either allowed, subverted, or countered with force.Replies: @TangoMan, @Bill B.
I have always thought there was something ironic, or perhaps fitting that one of them was assassinated by a foreigner from the very third world they opened the doors too.
Then again the Kennedy’s were just frontmen for the real diversity pushers, the Jews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Nation_of_Immigrants
As all lifeforms are invasive -- and humans are lifeforms too -- , every territory, natural or human, has to be defended OR ELSE it will be invaded by others. Globalism turned the US from an extension of Europe to a 'proposition immigration nation' that is defenseless against world invasion(who want to live off the good stuff built by whites). And this New American model is now forced on ALL nations via globalism. All nations must not only be Americanized but New-Americanized. In the past, being Americanized meant drinking coca cola and watching Hollywood movies. Today, being New-Americanized means having your own nation be invaded by masses of foreigners as 'new countrymen'. Europeans went from the Americanization of drinking coca-cola & watching Hollywood movies to the New-Americanization of 'electing a new people'. At least mass immigration made some sense during a part of US history(esp in the 19th century) when the continent had to be filled. But in the Old World with deep ethnic and historical roots in the soil? It will be loss of rich history and heritage associated with a certain people upon a certain land to waves of invaders.
But then, globalism spread Pop Culture and PC to sever one's sense of ties to the land and ancestors. So, Ireland has a month black history month. Irish are to identify mainly with reggae singers and black American athletes than with their own kind. What rot.Replies: @anon, @anon
By “immigrant nation” they mean a country that has no right to exist, but only to be changed. Note how the term only applies to white countries.
As the passage of time wanders on, the “we were not consulted” argument is growing weaker. While this may have been true in 1965, it wasn’t true in 1986 or in 1990. Around the time when the Wall Street Journal came out for open borders, it should have been clear to anyone politically engaged (maybe 10% of the electorate is well read).
By GWB’s open pandering in 2000, it should have been clear to everyone. The 2006-07 amnesty battle should have surprised no one.
The uncomfortable fact is that a large majority, but not a supermajority, of the electorate is willing to defer to the ratchet effect on immigration, rather than suffer the badfeels of racism. We may need to debate the question as to whether this should be either allowed, subverted, or countered with force.
On the contrary, it becomes a stronger argument because it gives legitimate cover for resistance. Absent this cover, people who wish to resist need to justify their resistance in another way. "Never asked" is a form of righting a wrong done to you.Replies: @Anonym
Ireland has a black history month? Oh my god! Thought it was nuts that Canada did!Replies: @Dan Hayes
Anon,
If you wish to find out how bad things are in Ireland, feel free to type in “Irish Savant” in your search engine!
[Peter Brimelow, the quintessential Englishman, once stated that it was shameful what was happening in Ireland.]
Then again the Kennedy's were just frontmen for the real diversity pushers, the Jews.Replies: @Maj. Kong
Not much of a “frontman” when your work is openly published by the ADL.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Nation_of_Immigrants
By GWB's open pandering in 2000, it should have been clear to everyone. The 2006-07 amnesty battle should have surprised no one.
The uncomfortable fact is that a large majority, but not a supermajority, of the electorate is willing to defer to the ratchet effect on immigration, rather than suffer the badfeels of racism. We may need to debate the question as to whether this should be either allowed, subverted, or countered with force.Replies: @TangoMan, @Bill B.
As the passage of time wanders on, the “we were not consulted” argument is growing weaker.
On the contrary, it becomes a stronger argument because it gives legitimate cover for resistance. Absent this cover, people who wish to resist need to justify their resistance in another way. “Never asked” is a form of righting a wrong done to you.
Step 1. Invalidate the basis of the granting of passports.
Step 2. Invalidate the passports.
Step 3. Export diversity.
I’m an Englishman. I’m from Bermondsey, South-East London.
My father was called George. He was also from Bermondsey.
His father, another Bermondsey man, was called George too.
And his father, my great-grandfather, is from the same place. He was called Edward.
These three generations of my family were in the fish trade. I’m the first member of my family not to work at the market in Billingsgate.
My great-grandfather had eleven brothers and sisters. I don’t know exactly how many of his generation married or exactly how many children they produced. I’ve so far tracked over two-hundred of them.
Many still live in Bermondsey. Some are still in the fish trade.
There are seven called George, and five called Victoria.
I stand here, in front of you, as a representative of all of them. And I ask in their name the great question put by our patron, Mr. Powell.
What do they know of England, who only England know? Or, what can my family, who come from England, who lived in England, who know only England, say of this, our country?
Mr. Powell once spoke of the destruction of ancient Athens and the miraculous survival in the blackened ruins of that city of the sacred olive tree; the symbol of Greece, their country.
And he also spoke of us, the English, at the heart of a vanished empire, seeming to find within ourselves that one of our own oak trees, the sap rising from our ancient roots.
And he said perhaps, after all, we who have inhabited this island fortress for an unbroken thousand years, brought up, as he said, within the sound of English bird song under the English oak, in the English meadow, beneath the red cross of St. George, it is us who know most of England.
And I appreciated him for saying that, because it was as if he spoke for my family, who understand well their own country. Who understand even better their own capital, London town, as we used to call her.
As we strolled in her parks, as we marveled at her palaces, as we did buisness in the city, went west for a dance, took a boat on the river. The pale ale and eel pie of old London. The London of my family for as many generations as I know.
The London that will in less than fifteen years will be less than fifty percent white. London, where in fifteen years a white person will be in the minority.
Am I racist? No. Do I have anything against people of other races? No. So what then is my gripe?
My gripe, and I speak on behalf of seven men called George and five women called Victoria, my gripe is quite simple.
My gripe is that we were never asked. My gripe is that we were told, not asked, and everyday we are told again and again how we are to be and how our country is to be.
We are told by them, and we know who they are, they’re English too. They are the class that has always set themselves apart, they are the class that has always taken what they wanted for themselves, and now they are the class that is giving England away.
They have never asked us, and they never will.
Do we allow them to sell our heritage? Or is it time for us to speak?
To speak, to refuse them the right to give away our holy, or bountiful, our only England that has, that has nurtured us, naked, grown us as the oak.
Is it time for us that England know to come yet again and defend our country? With our fire, our fists?
Is it time for us sons to rise again?
I say yes.
I say yes.
I say… Yes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-s3VDUq3EwReplies: @BrokenSymmetry
The bulk of the increase in the past ten or fifteen years has come from Poland, India, Germany, Ireland, Romania and Bulgaria in recent years. Not sure you could call citizens from there to be threats to British culture.
I could be wrong but there hasn’t been a huge rise in entrants from Muslim countries, the bulk of the entrants would have arrived back in the 60s and 70s.
But even the official figures still show considerable inflows. Here's a graph based on ONS figures showing that the number of Pakistani-born UK inhabitants rose from under 300,000 in 2004 to just over 500, 000 in 2015, though it appears to show a plateau having been reached by 2013-15:
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-country-birth
And of course, as Sailer has repeatedly argued, the issue for those for whom muslims are a particular concern is not just first generation immigrants, but the second and subsequent generations, and the immigrant birth rate is substantially higher than that of the indigenous population.Replies: @Ali Choudhury
On the contrary, it becomes a stronger argument because it gives legitimate cover for resistance. Absent this cover, people who wish to resist need to justify their resistance in another way. "Never asked" is a form of righting a wrong done to you.Replies: @Anonym
Absolutely.
Step 1. Invalidate the basis of the granting of passports.
Step 2. Invalidate the passports.
Step 3. Export diversity.
"We Were Never Asked"
Neither the English people, nor the American people!
Thanks for bringing this video to my attention. It is very impressive.Replies: @anon, @Almost Missouri
Indeed, the more so since the speaker is supposed to be the villain.
It’s from the abortive 2002 BBC detective series, NCS: Manhunt. This accounts for the bizarre camera angles and the actor’s sullen affect.
There is a less distorted version here:
Whatever the context I liked this.
This is the sort of solid man who will fight to the end - given the opportunity. And who the progressive elite have discarded with calumny.
Strange how it all happened in the flickering of eye, in cosmic terms.Replies: @Almost Missouri
I read your post, and liked it. I am not sure exactly why, but I was reminded of this song by Bruce Dickinson of Iron Maiden fame. He put to music the poem by William Blake, “Jerusalem”.
Black Agnes?
I could be wrong but there hasn't been a huge rise in entrants from Muslim countries, the bulk of the entrants would have arrived back in the 60s and 70s.Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Randal, @German_reader, @anon
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3424584/Muslims-UK-3-million-time-50-born-outside-Britain-Number-country-doubles-decade-immigration-birth-rates-soar.html
Scroll down to Table 3 here and you will see 5.9% of UK foreign-born immigrants were born in Pakistan but only 3.2% of migrants hold Pakistani citizenship i.e. the foreign born did not arrive here recently.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-in-the-uk-an-overview/Replies: @anon
I suspect most of the world feels a little Schadenfreude though. It was England after all that decided to export her people and language across the globe. England for much of the last 500 year has been very much an “emigrant nation”, happy to wipe out indigenous languages and culture from Cornwall to Cardiff to Baile Atha Cliath, and then keep going across the ocean to wipe out one kind of Indian, and put another kind of Indian under the yoke. Great Britain for centuries was also the self-appointed judge who stepped in to thwart other nation’s national destinies, first France, then Russia and then Germany. It was Great Britain who decided to carve up the Ottoman Empire, creating a mess that will plague us for centuries.
But the biggest disaster for Great Britain long term may turn out to be that she humiliated China, but didn’t subdue China. That country has a long memory.
Great Britain is resented and distrusted by most of the world. Sadly I doubt many tears will be shed about the extinction of the English race.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_conquest_of_Siberia
A rather nasty business, that.....And then there's the French Conquest of Algeria:General rule: Empires aren't built by being nice......
Come on man. The English didn't wipe out the Indians, nor did they try to. Subcons could hardly be described as being under the yoke of the English. They thrived under English administration.Replies: @PiltdownMan
I’ll let you in on a little secret. In Ireland there are two chains of Mexican restaurants. No Mexicans are employed to run them and the number of Mexicans in Ireland is insignificant and consists of upper class white Mexican professionals.
Scientists still haven’t published their findings on how this can be. I wouldn’t believe it if I hadn’t seen it for myself.
One theory is that they aren’t actually there but represent a form of ‘inter-dimensional leakage’ showing a world where the Aztecs adopted European social structures and technology and conquered Ireland along with the rest of Europe like one of those weird EU4 games where Europe starts without a human player.
I could be wrong but there hasn't been a huge rise in entrants from Muslim countries, the bulk of the entrants would have arrived back in the 60s and 70s.Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Randal, @German_reader, @anon
Part of the problem is precisely that many people simply do not trust the figures, which are generally collected and presented by government and other bodies with a clear ideological or pragmatic interest in understating them. Definitions are easily shifted to produce managed figures (does a refugee with a pending asylum claim count as an “immigrant”? etc). And, of course, there’s a suspicion that a lot of immigration is undocumented.
But even the official figures still show considerable inflows. Here’s a graph based on ONS figures showing that the number of Pakistani-born UK inhabitants rose from under 300,000 in 2004 to just over 500, 000 in 2015, though it appears to show a plateau having been reached by 2013-15:
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-country-birth
And of course, as Sailer has repeatedly argued, the issue for those for whom muslims are a particular concern is not just first generation immigrants, but the second and subsequent generations, and the immigrant birth rate is substantially higher than that of the indigenous population.
I don’t know. Our elites seem to have been very skilled at finding a role for us as lickspittles for the new big dog, the US, since 1945 (that was forgivable imo while the Soviet Union existed, unforgivable since it vanished nearly 30 years ago). Once the evidence is certain that power has shifted from the US to China, I suspect they’ll be just as adept at making whatever’s left of us useful to that new master.
Rather ignoring the fact that Britain’s (it’s hardly as though the welsh, scots and irish are going to survive the repopulating of the UK any better than the English) offspring the US is rightly seen in much the same way as you describe Great Britain having been by most of the world, and faces much the same fate.
The irony is that independence would change this: the "Scottish Independence Party" is rabidly in favour of everything which would destroy Scotland, with non-white and non-Christian immigration at the head of the list.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-s3VDUq3EwReplies: @BrokenSymmetry
Just to let my inner pedant out, it is in fact the preface to “Milton”, Blake’s other long poem. The more well-known setting by Hubert Parry is an unofficial anthem of the Labour Party. Seeing how the current party panders to its Muslim and anti-Zionist constituencies, I wonder if it’s still sung at Labour conferences.
They may as well be called the Foreign Labour Party. They were the ones who wanted to rub the right's nose in diversity.Replies: @anon
I've now listened to the Parry version, and I must say it is pretty weak sauce compared to the rousing Dickinson version.
As far as anthems of the UK go, I like God Save the Queen's second verse.That's the spirit.Replies: @Thea
Come on, this is the part where we get to ignore “Science”.
Even if one were a so-called nation of immigrants, does that meant that one has to leave the door permanently open? Does that mean that one is not allowed to favour certain immigrants over others?
I don’t think that invalidates my point, the Muslim population here has grown as a result of the natural increase of long-term residents, not immigration in the past ten-fifteen years.
Scroll down to Table 3 here and you will see 5.9% of UK foreign-born immigrants were born in Pakistan but only 3.2% of migrants hold Pakistani citizenship i.e. the foreign born did not arrive here recently.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-in-the-uk-an-overview/
But even the official figures still show considerable inflows. Here's a graph based on ONS figures showing that the number of Pakistani-born UK inhabitants rose from under 300,000 in 2004 to just over 500, 000 in 2015, though it appears to show a plateau having been reached by 2013-15:
https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-population-country-birth
And of course, as Sailer has repeatedly argued, the issue for those for whom muslims are a particular concern is not just first generation immigrants, but the second and subsequent generations, and the immigrant birth rate is substantially higher than that of the indigenous population.Replies: @Ali Choudhury
The government introduced a requirement in 2012 that UK spouses hoping to bring over wives who are citizens of countries from outside the EU have to earn a minimum of $22k USD to prevent the husband and wife from being a drain on the benefits system. That will have had a dampening effect.
The more well-known setting by Hubert Parry is an unofficial anthem of the Labour Party. Seeing how the current party panders to its Muslim and anti-Zionist constituencies, I wonder if it’s still sung at Labour conferences.
They may as well be called the Foreign Labour Party. They were the ones who wanted to rub the right’s nose in diversity.
Alan Shatter, the former Minister for Justice and Equality as well as former Minister for Defence in the Irish Republic has taken the opposite tack in Ireland.
He insisted that as the Irish had long been a nation of Emigrants it had a special duty to welcome any and all immigrants who might wish to settle there. Some 70,000 foreign nationals are believed to have been granted Irish citizenship as a result of his efforts.
The Catholic Church in Ireland has a lot to answer for, but Shatter seemed to attack it with unbounded glee.
He did everything he could to destroy the old rural Ireland that so many loved.
I’ll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine what might motivate such actions.
This Shatter fellow, is he a Jew?
That is a policy position that is actually based on principle, at least ostensibly.
The immigration up to 1066 had been all german. The angles, jutes, etc: germans; the vikings: germans; the normans: germans. Heck, even the celts were germanic. The Romans came, saw, conquered and left. They did not leave any roots in Britain.
The more well-known setting by Hubert Parry is an unofficial anthem of the Labour Party.
I’ve now listened to the Parry version, and I must say it is pretty weak sauce compared to the rousing Dickinson version.
As far as anthems of the UK go, I like God Save the Queen’s second verse.
That’s the spirit.
My neighbour here in London is a nice Filipino chap, quite often he says to me “Thank God they taught us English in school”.
Scientists still haven't published their findings on how this can be. I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't seen it for myself.
One theory is that they aren't actually there but represent a form of 'inter-dimensional leakage' showing a world where the Aztecs adopted European social structures and technology and conquered Ireland along with the rest of Europe like one of those weird EU4 games where Europe starts without a human player.Replies: @The Alarmist
I had pretty good Mexican in Edinburgh a while back, and not a Mexican in sight … must be a worm hole or something.
Assuredly Steve has made a name for himself for some time.
Getting back to the article quoted by our host, and away from the Brit bashing in the comments it says the largest difference in genetic structure is between the Orkneys, Scandinavian settled islands, and the very west tip of wales. Both remote areas with a lot of flow out but little inflow for centuries.
In the previous article I said in my comment the cities swallowed and mixed invaders with a steady stream of folk from the countryside. This time the invaders are within a few decades of being the absolute majority in London and a few other cities and unmixed middle england knows they don’t have spare kids to send there anymore.
The funny thing is so many put more on certain votes than is actually deserved. Orkney voted to remain with the rest of Scotland and wales went leave, showing that so many here see all issues thru their issue of importance, which does not always match the real reasons people vote for things, as both these untouched remote areas should be leading the opposition if immigration really was peoples first concern, but it is only one of many issues folk consider.
I like this line:
It’s really a matter of who/whom.
Even if Britain has been a nation of immigrants/invaders, it matters WHO invaded.
Britain was invaded by Europeans, so it remained European.
If Britain had been invaded by Muslims, Chinese, Hindus, and Africans than by Danes, Vikings, Romans, Germanics, and etc., it’d be a very different nation.
It’s like America was a lands of invasions since time immemorial as Indians invaded each other’s territory. But regardless of who won, Indians still ruled. But when America was invaded by whites, the culture totally changed.
So, who/whom matters. Suppose UK were to accept tons of immigration of only Anglos or Anglo-ized whites from America, Australia, and Canada. European Britain can be maintained EVEN IF the new immigrants become the majority of UK.
But if UK brings in tons of Pakistani and black immigrants who become 20% of the population, the nation has drastically been altered.
So, the notion that AMERICA IS A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS… Okay, but WHICH immigrants.
It’s like saying AMERICA IS A NATION OF CONQUERORS. But which conquerors?
Suppose the first wave of Anglos conquer America and take land from Indians. Suppose a second wave of Anglos conquer Anglo-America. Then, suppose third wave of Anglos conquer new Anglo-America. Then,suppose fourth wave of Anglos conquer newer America. So, this America would be a nation of series of conquerors, but since all the conquerors were Anglo, it is Anglo-America even after all those conquests.
But suppose American conquerors were of different stocks.
Suppose first wave of conqueors are Anglos who conquer Indians. Then, second wave of conquerors are hindu. Third wave of conquerors are Chinese. Fourth wave of conquerors are African. Suppose the demographic result is a hodgepodge of various races ruled by the latest conquerors.
So,both Americas would be a nation of conquests, but they would be very different due to dynamics of who/whom.
Palestine was a place of conquests since time immemorial, but it always mattered WHO conquered. Romans didn’t RESTORE Jewishness. They REPLACED it. Muslims didn’t RESTORE Christians. They REPLACED it. Jews/Zionists didn’t RESTORE Arabs. Jews REPLACED them.
Other people’s babies can RESTORE your people ONLY IF they are of same stock and culture. But if they are another race and culture, they will REPLACE your people.
When Bismarck’s Prussia conquered other German areas, it was still service of German identity and power.
So, terms like ‘immigrants’ and ‘conquerors’ miss the point because of their generality. The question is who/whom.
Israel can be said to be a nation of immigrants/conquerors. But which ones? If current Israel were to be conquered or ‘immigrated’ by 5 million new Jews, surely the result be much different than if it were to be conquered or ‘immigrated’by 5 million Arabs or Africans or Hindus or Iranians.
It’s like it’s meaningless to say ‘Hungary is a nation of people.’ Yes it is, but what makes it Hungarian? Just any people? No, it is Hungarian because it is a nation of Hungarian people.
Jews surely know about the power of identity and demographics. Consider elite-demographics or elitographics. Why is the American Agenda so heavily geared to serve Israel, to be hostile to nations hated by Jews, and to serve the Holocaust narrative? Because Jews are heavily represented in elitographics and esp in super-elitographics.
If all those elite Jews were replaced by elite Arab-Americans, would US policy and agenda remain the same? Would Arab-American elites RESTORE or REPLACE the current US policy that is heavily biased toward Jewish concerns? Ruling power is always defined by elites, but which elites?
The generality of ‘elites’ hardly answers this question.
Who/whom clearly matters. Why else are Jews and Democrats flipping out over Trump and Republicans? Because who-controls-the-elite-power matters. Not all elites are interchangeable, just like not all peoples are interchangeable. It’s funny how Jews say white gentiles can be ‘restored’ by other people’s babies but Jewish elites and their cucks cannot be ‘restored’by elites with contrasting agendas and ideas. Suddenly, who/whom matters.
Indeed, Jews call for more non-white immigration not to restore White America but to REPLACE it with Diversity that allowed divide-and-rule by Jews who thus keep their elite dominance.
Btw, William Kristol and David Brooks were saying whites are a bunch of dying losers who should be replaced by immigrants of other races. But after Steven King’s remark, Jews are pretending that non-whites are selflessly coming to america to RESTORE white America that need not worry.
Following this logic, black America can be restored by non-blacks. So, when Mexicans or gentrifiers take over formerly black areas,it has been restored of its blackness. LOL.
He insisted that as the Irish had long been a nation of Emigrants it had a special duty to welcome any and all immigrants who might wish to settle there. Some 70,000 foreign nationals are believed to have been granted Irish citizenship as a result of his efforts.
The Catholic Church in Ireland has a lot to answer for, but Shatter seemed to attack it with unbounded glee.
He did everything he could to destroy the old rural Ireland that so many loved.
I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine what might motivate such actions.Replies: @Dan Hayes, @anon, @Opinionator
JMcG,
You’ve got Shatter down pat. He’s a real despicable character. Worse yet he seems to be on a path to renter Irish politics after a political scandal which would have destroyed anyone else.
Consult the “Irish Savant” for more details on Shatter and his political rehabilitation efforts.
The rise of Shatter is a sad commentary on the current state (or more accurately misstate) of Ireland. The Irish have bought into the “We Are The World” nonsense hook, line and sinker.
This comment is racist rot. It says more about your prejudiced mind than it does about the British (I am Welsh). The British had only small enclaves in China, Shanghai being the main one. The Chinese were often resentful of the British and deplored the fact that the “Gweilo” were running the show. What could be more humiliating than that? Then the Japanese turned up. I defy you to name a single Chinese person who resents the Brits more than they do the Japs. Until then stop talking anti-Brit crap.
Chines remember about opium and opium wars. They teach it in their schools. It is important to them. You probably know nothing about it. It probably doesn't even register in British history books like many other events, say all business of indentured servants and white slavery, that were conveniently whitewashed and purged from British (and American) national memory. This memory purge succeed because British were winner for so long. But Chinese have a long memory. Like Jews. Just the other day Netanyahu in Moscow started with 2500 year old story from the Book of Esther to focus Putin attention on Iran. On day Britain and the US will hear about the opium trade in China. Because they did not forget.Replies: @Floyd R Turbo (American), @Ivy
I could be wrong but there hasn't been a huge rise in entrants from Muslim countries, the bulk of the entrants would have arrived back in the 60s and 70s.Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Randal, @German_reader, @anon
EDIT: nevermind, delete this post.
In other words, open-borders globalism is the worst disaster in British history.
(((Shatter)))
BHM=August!
“But officer, I saw a dog shit on his lawn a few years back. That set the precedent that my dog has been following for years!”
“Wasn’t France invaded before the Germans invaded? France has been invaded over and over throughout history, so why not again? I mean, if you’ve been invaded once, you have a history of invasion!”
“You invited me to stay the night once. Now you have a history of me living here, and I get to stay as long as I like!”
Etc.
Strangely, they seem uninterested in doing good for Israel. And China, and Japan, and India…
Well, you do, anyway.
Well, you did say he was a doofus.
I’ve already debated it. It should be countered, with physical force, if need be. The only remaining obstacle is a sufficient number of like-minded men.
“We were never asked” is good rhetoric, but for an ethnopatriot, that’s all it is. A patriot no more tables the idea of national destruction than a good person allows a beloved family member commit suicide over a fit of pique. He breaks out the straitjacket.
Go home. You won’t be a cancer there.
Pete, you’re an asshole. You need to hear that more often.
I could accept Brits speaking Swahili from now on, if their race is preserved. Russians have little standing to point the finger over wiping out indigenous cultures. Which the Brits did not do, BTW.
Which national destiny did the Brits turn toward race-replacement? Arguably only the Amerinds, and they were doomed anyway, what with having Stone Age cultures in a world a couple of centuries away from the Industrial Revolution. The Amerinds should be thanking the Great Spirit the Russians didn’t get there first.
The hidden strength of the two global semitic cultures - Judaism and Islam - is that both are centred very much around a language. A Jew that doesn't know at least basic Hebrew prayers is not a real Jew. A Muslim who doesn't know at least basic Arabic prayers is not a real Muslim. And without a fixation on an archaic and arcane writing system, the Chinese would long ago have dissolved into 15 or 20 different nations. Don't discount the power of language in preserving a race.Replies: @Ryan C, @Philip Owen
Latin for ‘similar’ is similis.
Latin for ‘different’ is alium.
Britain was a nation of similigration or simmigration. New peoples arrived but they were of same race. As such, they could easily blend into the native Britons and become part of Britannia.
What is happening now is aliumigration, and these people stick out from the natives. They don’t blend in and become invisible. They stand apart so visibly.
And in cases where whites and non-whites mix, they stand apart from whites and non-whites.
Who/whom matters in immigration. Similigration blends with native population. Aliumigration contends with the native population.
You are, one fervently hopes, referring to a culinary experience.
The real danger to America comes from Anti-White-Supremacists.
Outside of Glasgow, Scotland actually has very few immigrants from non-white countries.
The irony is that independence would change this: the “Scottish Independence Party” is rabidly in favour of everything which would destroy Scotland, with non-white and non-Christian immigration at the head of the list.
“As the passage of time wanders on, the “we were not consulted” argument is growing weaker.”
Then how about “We were consulted, but when we told them ‘no’ they lied to us, ignored us, spat in our faces, and did the opposite of what we requested and what they claimed they would do”?
I’m talking about the complete betrayal of the promise for enforcement in the 1986 amnesty bill. I’m talking about judges who repeatedly stand in the way of commonsense enforcement of immigration law. I’m talking about congressmen who run for re-election claiming to oppose amnesty who then turn around and vote for it. And on and on and on.
Rhetoric has this way of ending in results, in the long term. E.g., bringing in warm bodies, who then produce results. Do you suppose it would be better if we said nothing? I wonder if we could persuade Blacks or Jews to that position…
I could be wrong but there hasn't been a huge rise in entrants from Muslim countries, the bulk of the entrants would have arrived back in the 60s and 70s.Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Randal, @German_reader, @anon
Actually you are WRONG. There have been a ton of people from Muslim/third world countries enter Britain in the last fifteen years. Also many of the “Romanians” and “Bulgarians” are Roma Gypsies, not fellow Europeans. I also would think many of the “Germans” are migrants who are “country-shopping” for benefits. Nor do I see Indian immigration as any gain for a white nation.
Lots of that kind of thing going around, dear fellow. Cf, for example, how the Iberians wiped out hundreds of Amerind cultures in Latin America…..and then there’s the Russian Conquest of Siberia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_conquest_of_Siberia
A rather nasty business, that…..And then there’s the French Conquest of Algeria:
General rule: Empires aren’t built by being nice……
You have a point (WHY the British fought two NEEDLESS wars with Germany only to then basically give their country away I fail to understand) but you forget, one, that The English were hardly the only people to do so, or try to. Look at how Islam spread over so many places. Not to mention the Mongol empire etc. Also the English have allowed or at least tolerated their colonization. The other groups simply were UNABLE to prevent it. NONE of what has transpired could EVER have occurred had the British government been SERIOUS about preventing it. (Britain is after all an island and has the continent between it and Africa and the middle east. Also Britain was a developed modern country when the colonization occurred not an unorganized wilderness.
Scroll down to Table 3 here and you will see 5.9% of UK foreign-born immigrants were born in Pakistan but only 3.2% of migrants hold Pakistani citizenship i.e. the foreign born did not arrive here recently.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-in-the-uk-an-overview/Replies: @anon
Whether it is from natural increase or immigration, I find cold comfort in the growth of an alien Muslim population in Great Britain.
He insisted that as the Irish had long been a nation of Emigrants it had a special duty to welcome any and all immigrants who might wish to settle there. Some 70,000 foreign nationals are believed to have been granted Irish citizenship as a result of his efforts.
The Catholic Church in Ireland has a lot to answer for, but Shatter seemed to attack it with unbounded glee.
He did everything he could to destroy the old rural Ireland that so many loved.
I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine what might motivate such actions.Replies: @Dan Hayes, @anon, @Opinionator
Even if that logic is accepted, Ireland only has a “duty” to take in immigrants from the places it emigrated too. How many Irish left for Nigeria in the 1840’s? Zilch!
This Shatter fellow, is he a Jew?
They may as well be called the Foreign Labour Party. They were the ones who wanted to rub the right's nose in diversity.Replies: @anon
It may come back on them someday. When the diversity they imported is big enough not to need them anymore.
Evidence is now emerging to suggest that following a period of a few generations of Romanization, most of the troops in various provinces were locally raised. It seems that the “Roman” troops who besieged Masada were mainly from Syria for example. I would think that perhaps a century after their arrival the great majority of “Roman” legionaries in Britannia were native Britons, albeit thoroughly Romanized.
Btw, doesn't France have a history of large scale immigration? Didn't Brimelow write something about France receiving Eastern European immigrants in the late 1800's as well as a large number of Russian exiles after the Bolshevik revolution? Lots of French with Hungarian and Polish last names.Replies: @Sean
No, he said Jews were a small limited community, Powell said the Commonwealth immigration was different because of the numbers and to him it was was mainly a matter of numbers ( the same number Germans would have been no more welcome to him). In a parliamentary debate Powell responded to a claim that the pool of prospective immigrants was drying up by saying the government were actually engaged in trying to “bail out the ocean”, He left the House to screams of “fascist”. It is important to understand that civil servants were Powell greatest enemies. They concealed the numbers and left loopholes for the inflow to come in through.
Fear of the Germans prompted the French to encourage immigration , including non Europeans, after WW1. They thought and still think it makes them more powerful– up against their scary neighbor. Most immigration has that same motive because economic power is potential military power. Germany’ s productive capacity would enable them to blizt rearm to a terrifying degree, if they thought it suited their purposes. Economic arguments for immigration have more than a little truth in them and state functionaries act to accumulate might.
Nations don’t have the same institutions, but the nations tribunes (Trump for one ) know immigration at replacement levels is weakening more that strengthening because it makes the nation-state less cohesive. The deepest motives of nation versus the deepest motives of the state– in a nation-state. But cognitive dissonance aside, at bottom everyone has the same motive: they want to be the biggest and strongest. Not the most moral.
Fear of the Germans prompted the French to encourage immigration , including non Europeans, after WW1. They thought and still think it makes them more powerful– up against their scary neighbor.
So we would expect to also see pro-natalist policies and propaganda in France at that time. Is that what happened?
Most immigration has that same motive because economic power is potential military power.
So we would expect to see countries in the West heavily promoting natalism?Replies: @Sean
But the attitude one takes towards his or her newly acquired Sapir-Whorf thought units is another matter altogether. For a cynical, directionless, and morally bankrupt age such as ours, the discovery that one belongs to a population which carries the nearly pristine blood of a great and ancient race seems to inspire the conclusion, "Hey, let's fuck it up!" There seems to be an almost entrepreneurial and devilish impulse to exploit and experiment upon the White genome---an impulse, moreover, that would not have been conceivable with out the new mental toolkit---as if one were were hacking away at a virgin gold seam in the Yukon, or on the high seas with Captain Ahab chasing the white whale. And by a profoundly tragic twist of irony, this impulse also derives from the very blood which it is diluting. It is part and parcel of that uniquely Western pathos for distance, triumph, and the penetration of recondite secrets.
But this is the kind of attitude that just might swing wildly with the social mood, and on very short time frames. As the nationalist sentiment builds and living conditions deteriorate, and anger is focused most intently on the stream of recent refugees from the Middle East and Africa, one could easily imagine a phalanx of "real Britons," DNA test results in hand, in the vanguard of a new and expressly nativist politics.
It will be interesting to see what architecture these stones are ultimately marshaled to effect.Replies: @Floyd R Turbo
@Dasein. I think that British men have been going far afield for centuries and impregnating the local floozies (I know I did). What is different this time around is that foreign men have come to Britain in large numbers. There is a big difference between someone going to a sparsely populated country to earn their living by the sweat of their brow and somebody coming to a densely populated first world country and living off the dole.
.
Future advances in genetic testing will allow for “designer” babies to be brought to term. Every one an Olympic athlete/lingerie model with genius level IQ.
What nationality did you end up settling down with?Replies: @Floyd R Turbo (American)
That is a tribute taking model practiced by the Spanish and Russian Empires on the Roman model. Britain was a trading Empire. I’ll swap with you was the principal. Much less expensive than flat out conquest. Everybody wins.
Even if Britain has been a nation of immigrants/invaders, it matters WHO invaded.
Britain was invaded by Europeans, so it remained European.
If Britain had been invaded by Muslims, Chinese, Hindus, and Africans than by Danes, Vikings, Romans, Germanics, and etc., it'd be a very different nation.
It's like America was a lands of invasions since time immemorial as Indians invaded each other's territory. But regardless of who won, Indians still ruled. But when America was invaded by whites, the culture totally changed.
So, who/whom matters. Suppose UK were to accept tons of immigration of only Anglos or Anglo-ized whites from America, Australia, and Canada. European Britain can be maintained EVEN IF the new immigrants become the majority of UK.
But if UK brings in tons of Pakistani and black immigrants who become 20% of the population, the nation has drastically been altered.
So, the notion that AMERICA IS A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS... Okay, but WHICH immigrants.
It's like saying AMERICA IS A NATION OF CONQUERORS. But which conquerors?
Suppose the first wave of Anglos conquer America and take land from Indians. Suppose a second wave of Anglos conquer Anglo-America. Then, suppose third wave of Anglos conquer new Anglo-America. Then,suppose fourth wave of Anglos conquer newer America. So, this America would be a nation of series of conquerors, but since all the conquerors were Anglo, it is Anglo-America even after all those conquests.
But suppose American conquerors were of different stocks.
Suppose first wave of conqueors are Anglos who conquer Indians. Then, second wave of conquerors are hindu. Third wave of conquerors are Chinese. Fourth wave of conquerors are African. Suppose the demographic result is a hodgepodge of various races ruled by the latest conquerors.
So,both Americas would be a nation of conquests, but they would be very different due to dynamics of who/whom.
Palestine was a place of conquests since time immemorial, but it always mattered WHO conquered. Romans didn't RESTORE Jewishness. They REPLACED it. Muslims didn't RESTORE Christians. They REPLACED it. Jews/Zionists didn't RESTORE Arabs. Jews REPLACED them.
Other people's babies can RESTORE your people ONLY IF they are of same stock and culture. But if they are another race and culture, they will REPLACE your people.
When Bismarck's Prussia conquered other German areas, it was still service of German identity and power.
So, terms like 'immigrants' and 'conquerors' miss the point because of their generality. The question is who/whom.
Israel can be said to be a nation of immigrants/conquerors. But which ones? If current Israel were to be conquered or 'immigrated' by 5 million new Jews, surely the result be much different than if it were to be conquered or 'immigrated'by 5 million Arabs or Africans or Hindus or Iranians.
It's like it's meaningless to say 'Hungary is a nation of people.' Yes it is, but what makes it Hungarian? Just any people? No, it is Hungarian because it is a nation of Hungarian people.
Jews surely know about the power of identity and demographics. Consider elite-demographics or elitographics. Why is the American Agenda so heavily geared to serve Israel, to be hostile to nations hated by Jews, and to serve the Holocaust narrative? Because Jews are heavily represented in elitographics and esp in super-elitographics.
If all those elite Jews were replaced by elite Arab-Americans, would US policy and agenda remain the same? Would Arab-American elites RESTORE or REPLACE the current US policy that is heavily biased toward Jewish concerns? Ruling power is always defined by elites, but which elites?
The generality of 'elites' hardly answers this question.
Who/whom clearly matters. Why else are Jews and Democrats flipping out over Trump and Republicans? Because who-controls-the-elite-power matters. Not all elites are interchangeable, just like not all peoples are interchangeable. It's funny how Jews say white gentiles can be 'restored' by other people's babies but Jewish elites and their cucks cannot be 'restored'by elites with contrasting agendas and ideas. Suddenly, who/whom matters.
Indeed, Jews call for more non-white immigration not to restore White America but to REPLACE it with Diversity that allowed divide-and-rule by Jews who thus keep their elite dominance.
Btw, William Kristol and David Brooks were saying whites are a bunch of dying losers who should be replaced by immigrants of other races. But after Steven King's remark, Jews are pretending that non-whites are selflessly coming to america to RESTORE white America that need not worry.
Following this logic, black America can be restored by non-blacks. So, when Mexicans or gentrifiers take over formerly black areas,it has been restored of its blackness. LOL.Replies: @Philip Owen
But we’ve just voted to replace Polish immigrants and return to welcoming Indian ones. That Trade Deal the EU couldn’t sign with India because India wanted Free Movement and Britain objected. Well, getting any trade deal with anyone is now far more important for Trade deal free UK.
The Welsh of the South Wales coalfield were submerged by the dregs of England and Ireland between 1880 and 1914. A million immigrants arrived to join a population of a million. Welsh language and culture suffered damage from which it hasn’t recovered. As the skilled workers, they left disproportionately after coal peaked in 1926. The immigrants who preferentially stayed on still can’t say the names of their villages 137 years later.
Wow, he really hates the English.
I've now listened to the Parry version, and I must say it is pretty weak sauce compared to the rousing Dickinson version.
As far as anthems of the UK go, I like God Save the Queen's second verse.That's the spirit.Replies: @Thea
England turned her collective back on God, so God has likewise abandoned her. And the USA.
The Soviets did pretty well for a while, for god-abandoners. Also the Chicoms.
The way I read the second verse is that it was referring to the UK's enemies rather than God's per se. And in that sense it's pretty awesome.
He insisted that as the Irish had long been a nation of Emigrants it had a special duty to welcome any and all immigrants who might wish to settle there. Some 70,000 foreign nationals are believed to have been granted Irish citizenship as a result of his efforts.
The Catholic Church in Ireland has a lot to answer for, but Shatter seemed to attack it with unbounded glee.
He did everything he could to destroy the old rural Ireland that so many loved.
I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine what might motivate such actions.Replies: @Dan Hayes, @anon, @Opinionator
He insisted that as the Irish had long been a nation of Emigrants it had a special duty to welcome any and all immigrants who might wish to settle there.
That is a policy position that is actually based on principle, at least ostensibly.
going across the ocean to wipe out one kind of Indian, and put another kind of Indian under the yoke.
Come on man. The English didn’t wipe out the Indians, nor did they try to. Subcons could hardly be described as being under the yoke of the English. They thrived under English administration.
civil servants were Powell greatest enemies. They concealed the numbers and left loopholes for the inflow to come in through.
Fear of the Germans prompted the French to encourage immigration , including non Europeans, after WW1. They thought and still think it makes them more powerful– up against their scary neighbor.
So we would expect to also see pro-natalist policies and propaganda in France at that time. Is that what happened?
Most immigration has that same motive because economic power is potential military power.
So we would expect to see countries in the West heavily promoting natalism?
Being pro immigration is a form of natalism, don't you rememberReplies: @Opinionator
.
Future advances in genetic testing will allow for "designer" babies to be brought to term. Every one an Olympic athlete/lingerie model with genius level IQ.Replies: @Opinionator
impregnating the local floozies (I know I did).
What nationality did you end up settling down with?
Come on man. The English didn't wipe out the Indians, nor did they try to. Subcons could hardly be described as being under the yoke of the English. They thrived under English administration.Replies: @PiltdownMan
It doesn’t show up in the numbers.
No? Do you have some you can show me?
Both these are also standard texts.https://ia601903.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.285145/2015.285145.The-Economic.pdfhttps://www.amazon.com/Economic-History-1857-1947-Oxford-Textbooks/dp/0195684303Replies: @Opinionator
England turned her collective back on God, so God has likewise abandoned her. And the USA.
The Soviets did pretty well for a while, for god-abandoners. Also the Chicoms.
The way I read the second verse is that it was referring to the UK’s enemies rather than God’s per se. And in that sense it’s pretty awesome.
I think you are correct and Chines have long memory just like Jews except their are much more tactful about it.
My professor used this standard text when I was a grad student in New York in the 1970s.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/the-cambridge-economic-history-of-india/57937CDBBE6F4B5C474E0A7A59697AF3
Both these are also standard texts.
https://ia601903.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.285145/2015.285145.The-Economic.pdf
“The British had only small enclaves in China”
Chines remember about opium and opium wars. They teach it in their schools. It is important to them. You probably know nothing about it. It probably doesn’t even register in British history books like many other events, say all business of indentured servants and white slavery, that were conveniently whitewashed and purged from British (and American) national memory. This memory purge succeed because British were winner for so long. But Chinese have a long memory. Like Jews. Just the other day Netanyahu in Moscow started with 2500 year old story from the Book of Esther to focus Putin attention on Iran. On day Britain and the US will hear about the opium trade in China. Because they did not forget.
"Wasn't France invaded before the Germans invaded? France has been invaded over and over throughout history, so why not again? I mean, if you've been invaded once, you have a history of invasion!"
"You invited me to stay the night once. Now you have a history of me living here, and I get to stay as long as I like!"
Etc.Strangely, they seem uninterested in doing good for Israel. And China, and Japan, and India...Well, you do, anyway.Well, you did say he was a doofus.I've already debated it. It should be countered, with physical force, if need be. The only remaining obstacle is a sufficient number of like-minded men.
"We were never asked" is good rhetoric, but for an ethnopatriot, that's all it is. A patriot no more tables the idea of national destruction than a good person allows a beloved family member commit suicide over a fit of pique. He breaks out the straitjacket.Go home. You won't be a cancer there.Pete, you're an asshole. You need to hear that more often.
I could accept Brits speaking Swahili from now on, if their race is preserved. Russians have little standing to point the finger over wiping out indigenous cultures. Which the Brits did not do, BTW.
Which national destiny did the Brits turn toward race-replacement? Arguably only the Amerinds, and they were doomed anyway, what with having Stone Age cultures in a world a couple of centuries away from the Industrial Revolution. The Amerinds should be thanking the Great Spirit the Russians didn't get there first.Replies: @utu, @Peter Akuleyev
” Russians have little standing to point the finger over wiping out indigenous cultures. ”
This is debatable. Poles, Fins, Latvians and many others managed to preserve their language while Irish or Scotts did not. Welsh kind of did but it is rather an artificial reconstruction for folk festivals just like Irish music is 19 century reconstruction. After the collapse of the Soviet Union there were many nationalities within it that were ready to claim sovereignty on the basis of their national separate identity. If a region like Chechnya was for over two hundred years within the borders of UK or the US it would not preserve its national identity as it did in Russia and USSR. It is interesting that USSR’s ability to do cultural gleichschaltung was not on par of what America or should I say American culture could accomplish. Compare the native Eskimo cultures in Siberia with that of Eskimo in Alaska. I would rather be Chukchi in Siberia than Innuit in Alaska.
Both these are also standard texts.https://ia601903.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.285145/2015.285145.The-Economic.pdfhttps://www.amazon.com/Economic-History-1857-1947-Oxford-Textbooks/dp/0195684303Replies: @Opinionator
Yikes, okay. Without deciding the question for now, I would point out that India’s population increased during the Raj, and that it is possible that literacy rose and violent crime declined.
It's a very complicated question, and it is possible to hold the seemingly contradictory ideas that the English language was unambigously an asset gained by India, the British system of laws better than the indigenous patchwork of laws in many areas, the railways an asset (but fully paid for many times over by Indian fare-paying passengers), and Pax Britannica and unity a wonderful thing, while still allowing that in terms of raw economic statistics it was a shitshow for 190 years.
What sees to irk knowledgeable Indian economic historians in particular is not "oppression", which is little spoken of, or " imperialist looting of assets", which they tend to discount, but that India's long economic stagnation was presided over by a brilliant people who created the industrial revolution and engineered the greatest economic prosperity the world has ever seen, simultaneously, back home.
I get these sense that it's not the domination they can't forgive. It's the willful economic incompetence in India by people who were otherwise supremely competent on that front.Replies: @Philip Owen
Fair points. No offense. I got into a bit of a hammer-nail mode there!
It’s a very complicated question, and it is possible to hold the seemingly contradictory ideas that the English language was unambigously an asset gained by India, the British system of laws better than the indigenous patchwork of laws in many areas, the railways an asset (but fully paid for many times over by Indian fare-paying passengers), and Pax Britannica and unity a wonderful thing, while still allowing that in terms of raw economic statistics it was a shitshow for 190 years.
What sees to irk knowledgeable Indian economic historians in particular is not “oppression”, which is little spoken of, or ” imperialist looting of assets”, which they tend to discount, but that India’s long economic stagnation was presided over by a brilliant people who created the industrial revolution and engineered the greatest economic prosperity the world has ever seen, simultaneously, back home.
I get these sense that it’s not the domination they can’t forgive. It’s the willful economic incompetence in India by people who were otherwise supremely competent on that front.
What nationality did you end up settling down with?Replies: @Floyd R Turbo (American)
An amazing looking Californian of Italian heritage. I could never have found such a woman in England.
Chines remember about opium and opium wars. They teach it in their schools. It is important to them. You probably know nothing about it. It probably doesn't even register in British history books like many other events, say all business of indentured servants and white slavery, that were conveniently whitewashed and purged from British (and American) national memory. This memory purge succeed because British were winner for so long. But Chinese have a long memory. Like Jews. Just the other day Netanyahu in Moscow started with 2500 year old story from the Book of Esther to focus Putin attention on Iran. On day Britain and the US will hear about the opium trade in China. Because they did not forget.Replies: @Floyd R Turbo (American), @Ivy
Surprisingly the chinese seem to have forgotten that chinese people were consuming opium BEFORE the British got there – and they still consume opium, long after the British have left.
Only ethnic Indians can take Indian citizenship – British need not apply
It's from the abortive 2002 BBC detective series, NCS: Manhunt. This accounts for the bizarre camera angles and the actor's sullen affect.
There is a less distorted version here:
https://youtu.be/s9QtXiYFLYsReplies: @Bill B.
Just for clarification what is the context here?
Whatever the context I liked this.
This is the sort of solid man who will fight to the end – given the opportunity. And who the progressive elite have discarded with calumny.
Strange how it all happened in the flickering of eye, in cosmic terms.
Whether intentionally or not, the screenwriter for the young villain's speech did a good job of framing the natives' resentment of the high-handed globalists, and so this excerpt has been making the rounds on the alt-right.
By GWB's open pandering in 2000, it should have been clear to everyone. The 2006-07 amnesty battle should have surprised no one.
The uncomfortable fact is that a large majority, but not a supermajority, of the electorate is willing to defer to the ratchet effect on immigration, rather than suffer the badfeels of racism. We may need to debate the question as to whether this should be either allowed, subverted, or countered with force.Replies: @TangoMan, @Bill B.
Undoubtedly true for a slice of the population but is it entirely fair to the others? When all parties supported mass migration – openly or effectively – then whom does one vote for?
The situation in the West is finally turning but at least partly thanks to the greed and crudity of progressive ambition.
No, they’re not. And I am not actually happy about the inevitable downfall of England and the rest of Britain, I love British culture to be honest. Britain also has done more to advance human progress than any other civilization on earth. I am just taking the long philosophical view. Empires come and go, and blowback is real.
Well, not really surprising. One constant across human civilizations is the eagerness to blame other people for your own faults.
"Wasn't France invaded before the Germans invaded? France has been invaded over and over throughout history, so why not again? I mean, if you've been invaded once, you have a history of invasion!"
"You invited me to stay the night once. Now you have a history of me living here, and I get to stay as long as I like!"
Etc.Strangely, they seem uninterested in doing good for Israel. And China, and Japan, and India...Well, you do, anyway.Well, you did say he was a doofus.I've already debated it. It should be countered, with physical force, if need be. The only remaining obstacle is a sufficient number of like-minded men.
"We were never asked" is good rhetoric, but for an ethnopatriot, that's all it is. A patriot no more tables the idea of national destruction than a good person allows a beloved family member commit suicide over a fit of pique. He breaks out the straitjacket.Go home. You won't be a cancer there.Pete, you're an asshole. You need to hear that more often.
I could accept Brits speaking Swahili from now on, if their race is preserved. Russians have little standing to point the finger over wiping out indigenous cultures. Which the Brits did not do, BTW.
Which national destiny did the Brits turn toward race-replacement? Arguably only the Amerinds, and they were doomed anyway, what with having Stone Age cultures in a world a couple of centuries away from the Industrial Revolution. The Amerinds should be thanking the Great Spirit the Russians didn't get there first.Replies: @utu, @Peter Akuleyev
I know most people around here like to focus on genetics, but what is a “race” without culture and common language? Brits speaking Swahili would have no connection to Shakespeare, Austen, Waugh, Dickens or even the Beatles or “East Enders”. They wouldn’t be able to read monuments or sing Anglican hymns in the original. When you wipe out a language you effectively destroy the race, which is what happened to the Irish and the Welsh. It is also what is going to erase the Dutch and German races from the world in the next 200 years even if immigration is stopped completely, because more and more English is the language of the elites in those countries.
The hidden strength of the two global semitic cultures – Judaism and Islam – is that both are centred very much around a language. A Jew that doesn’t know at least basic Hebrew prayers is not a real Jew. A Muslim who doesn’t know at least basic Arabic prayers is not a real Muslim. And without a fixation on an archaic and arcane writing system, the Chinese would long ago have dissolved into 15 or 20 different nations. Don’t discount the power of language in preserving a race.
The hidden strength of the two global semitic cultures - Judaism and Islam - is that both are centred very much around a language. A Jew that doesn't know at least basic Hebrew prayers is not a real Jew. A Muslim who doesn't know at least basic Arabic prayers is not a real Muslim. And without a fixation on an archaic and arcane writing system, the Chinese would long ago have dissolved into 15 or 20 different nations. Don't discount the power of language in preserving a race.Replies: @Ryan C, @Philip Owen
So much for the Roman race.
If their memory’s that good, they can remember names like (((Sassoon))).
I was thinking of points east. I doubt the Russians built their empire with unicorns and rainbows. E.g., Russian conquest of Siberia
Much better than a bunch of blacks sitting around, speaking English, and unconnected to Shakespeare et al. I of course agree that Englishmen speaking English is better than either. But a race can have a cultural renewal, happens all the time; genetic renewal, not so much.
You got something against chip shops?
Fear of the Germans prompted the French to encourage immigration , including non Europeans, after WW1. They thought and still think it makes them more powerful– up against their scary neighbor.
So we would expect to also see pro-natalist policies and propaganda in France at that time. Is that what happened?
Most immigration has that same motive because economic power is potential military power.
So we would expect to see countries in the West heavily promoting natalism?Replies: @Sean
Yes there were many measures to boost births in France between the wars including nurseries for working mothers. Some advocates for foreign immigration and inter-marriage between overseas workers and French women included colonial immigrants in the process.
Being pro immigration is a form of natalism, don’t you remember
I don't find nurseries for working mothers to be compelling evidence of pro natalism, because work outside the home seems to be at the save time a deterrent. Were there stipends for families with children, was there pro-natal propaganda?Replies: @Sean
Being pro immigration is a form of natalism, don't you rememberReplies: @Opinionator
You know I’m not talking about foreign births.
I don’t find nurseries for working mothers to be compelling evidence of pro natalism, because work outside the home seems to be at the save time a deterrent. Were there stipends for families with children, was there pro-natal propaganda?
Yes many measures were taken, as I already mentioned--read Europe: The Struggle for Supremacy, 1453 to the Present please.Replies: @Opinionator
I don't find nurseries for working mothers to be compelling evidence of pro natalism, because work outside the home seems to be at the save time a deterrent. Were there stipends for families with children, was there pro-natal propaganda?Replies: @Sean
Neither was Jeb, natalism is births. He was correctly talking about Hispanics giving birth in the US. And Jeb was articulating a received wisdom among the Republican establishment. Their top idealogues wrote his speeches.
Yes many measures were taken, as I already mentioned–read Europe: The Struggle for Supremacy, 1453 to the Present please.
Yes many measures were taken, as I already mentioned--read Europe: The Struggle for Supremacy, 1453 to the Present please.Replies: @Opinionator
You haven’t offered an example of a single unambiguous pro-natal measure in the time period that your claim encompassed.
*The Vichy regieme thought the professional ethic had led to yet another defeat in the German national game, so they outlawed the popular "Union" rules Rugby.Replies: @Opinionator
Whatever the context I liked this.
This is the sort of solid man who will fight to the end - given the opportunity. And who the progressive elite have discarded with calumny.
Strange how it all happened in the flickering of eye, in cosmic terms.Replies: @Almost Missouri
The context is that the BBC/MinistryOfTruth decided in 2002 that the world needed another detective story featuring a shadowy cabal of racist right wing villains. I don’t know if it was the audience or Programming Control who disagreed, but whatever the case, the series was cancelled within one season.
Whether intentionally or not, the screenwriter for the young villain’s speech did a good job of framing the natives’ resentment of the high-handed globalists, and so this excerpt has been making the rounds on the alt-right.
Chines remember about opium and opium wars. They teach it in their schools. It is important to them. You probably know nothing about it. It probably doesn't even register in British history books like many other events, say all business of indentured servants and white slavery, that were conveniently whitewashed and purged from British (and American) national memory. This memory purge succeed because British were winner for so long. But Chinese have a long memory. Like Jews. Just the other day Netanyahu in Moscow started with 2500 year old story from the Book of Esther to focus Putin attention on Iran. On day Britain and the US will hear about the opium trade in China. Because they did not forget.Replies: @Floyd R Turbo (American), @Ivy
Makes you wonder about the enforced amnesia of so much in American education.
It is an established fact which can be found in many academic sources in addition to Simms’s book that anyone can find with a search of relevant keywords. The book I cited (I did not think I was expected to type out pages of it) makes the argument that almost everything about modern France* (in fact the modern West) is due to long standing fear of Germans. You might benifit from reading the book more than a snippet but here is a link http://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_POPU_903_0531--pro-natalism-and-hygienism-in-france-190.htm
*
The Vichy regieme thought the professional ethic had led to yet another defeat in the German national game, so they outlawed the popular “Union” rules Rugby.
Without meaning to be rude, I'd add that I did not expect to have to canvass the book myself to gain a sense of the evidence in flavor of France having been pronatalist during the period. You are in command of the history here, not I, and you did not offer a single example in support, other than the nurseries for working mothers, which arguably are ambiguous.
Free Movement is not citizenship and the Indians are really concerned about India to UK not the other direction. They are willing to consider limitation to people who already have a job offer (rather easy given the UK’s Indian population).
The hidden strength of the two global semitic cultures - Judaism and Islam - is that both are centred very much around a language. A Jew that doesn't know at least basic Hebrew prayers is not a real Jew. A Muslim who doesn't know at least basic Arabic prayers is not a real Muslim. And without a fixation on an archaic and arcane writing system, the Chinese would long ago have dissolved into 15 or 20 different nations. Don't discount the power of language in preserving a race.Replies: @Ryan C, @Philip Owen
It hasn’t quite happened to the Welsh yet. A substantial minority, around 20%, still speak Welsh and many more, like me can read their great grandfather’s diaries to some extent.
But your core point is valid. An Irishman who speaks English isn’t English but he has lost an important part of Irishness. The speed of transition matters. If language change is slow, a lot of culture can shift.
I would actually point to academic education as being a huge culture destroyer for us all. Book learning in social isolation at University far from home is very different from a craft apprenticeship in one’s home town.
It's a very complicated question, and it is possible to hold the seemingly contradictory ideas that the English language was unambigously an asset gained by India, the British system of laws better than the indigenous patchwork of laws in many areas, the railways an asset (but fully paid for many times over by Indian fare-paying passengers), and Pax Britannica and unity a wonderful thing, while still allowing that in terms of raw economic statistics it was a shitshow for 190 years.
What sees to irk knowledgeable Indian economic historians in particular is not "oppression", which is little spoken of, or " imperialist looting of assets", which they tend to discount, but that India's long economic stagnation was presided over by a brilliant people who created the industrial revolution and engineered the greatest economic prosperity the world has ever seen, simultaneously, back home.
I get these sense that it's not the domination they can't forgive. It's the willful economic incompetence in India by people who were otherwise supremely competent on that front.Replies: @Philip Owen
Independent China also stagnated. Indeed it even lost absolute output not merely share. India did better than China.
“Welsh kind of did but it is rather an artificial reconstruction for folk festivals just like Irish music is 19 century reconstruction.” Depends where you live. It is still a living language for many in the North and West. Elsewhere, it can be a language that opens doors into state sector jobs, even if little used outside the home.
*The Vichy regieme thought the professional ethic had led to yet another defeat in the German national game, so they outlawed the popular "Union" rules Rugby.Replies: @Opinionator
Thank you for the additional info. I would like to know more about the period.
Without meaning to be rude, I’d add that I did not expect to have to canvass the book myself to gain a sense of the evidence in flavor of France having been pronatalist during the period. You are in command of the history here, not I, and you did not offer a single example in support, other than the nurseries for working mothers, which arguably are ambiguous.