Blog Archive

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Why 90%?

There's always an urge, in the racialist community, to one up each other by being even more extreme and more devoted to the cause. There is also an urge to stay 'moderate' and 'respectable' so as to appeal to more people. Both of these urges should be suppressed, because they are not dedicated to the service of truth, which simply follows where the logic leads without bias or rebellion. There is a narrow region of thought, that is extreme enough, but not too extreme, which is the only workable path towards a white homeland, and that is -- 90%.

100% whites, no non-whites allowed, is a simple and direct solution to our problems. But it is not the best solution. In fact, it's not even a workable solution.

First, it's not the best solution. There are non-whites who are superior to whites. Genetically, they represent a valuable addition to the white gene pool. For instance, the ability to drink milk was introduced into England, if current studies are correct, by way of the Roman empire garrisoning some sarmatian cavalry there. As people are wont to do, inevitably the soldiers mixed with the native populace, and the gene had such a great natural selection value, that it soon swept all of England. The rest of the sarmatian gene pool had little going for it, and natural selection rendered it invisibly small -- but almost every single Englishman came with a lactose tolerance gene from there on. This is just one example of how interbreeding creates progress, and at a tiny, minuscule, invisible expense to the larger genome of whites. This isn't the only possibility though. It's a flat fact that jews are much smarter than whites, Asians also seem to have some capabilities we lack, for instance, they have larger brains than us. In an age dedicated to technology, every scrap of intelligence we can get is useful. Eugenics works by promoting good genes in the struggle for survival, but if we don't have access to those intelligence genes, we can never spread them to the rest of the populace, no matter how many generations of eugenics we use. Therefore we should be overjoyed to interbreed with a select group of smart people from any race -- note, I don't include blacks as human so they don't count. Again, good genes have natural selection value and spread like wildfire, whereas bad genes disappear into the giant majority or go extinct for lack of success. This means being an open country with access to good people, with their good genes, from all around the world, is the only way to continue improving. America is very wise to allow smart university students or professors to come from all over the world to study and live here. Ideally, we could contain, as a people, every intelligence gene in existence, evolved over tens of thousands of years independently in each region -- but if their powers were combined, and some lucky schmoe were to hit the jackpot with every single one? The Indian intelligence genes, the asian intelligence genes, the white intelligence genes, the jewish intelligence genes, the amerindian intelligence genes -- they would be smarter than the smartest person of any possible 'pure' breed could be. The same is true for disease resistance and health in general, it helps to widen your gene base.

It's not just genes though. Some non-whites have a superior culture to whites. If they adhere to our objective, absolute, and universal values better than we do, there is no sense in rejecting them. This is a tough act, because it requires non-whites revere white society and culture, and the white race, as much as we do. But it's entirely possible, and requiring these people miscegenate to avoid the creation of any diverse ghettos will make their descendants as white as our own. Many non-whites specifically moved here to live in a white populated and white dominated society. They like the white man's laws, the white man's ways, more than any other on earth. They know that everything good comes from whites staying in power and staying the majority, and they could be more fervent supporters of white rule than whites themselves. Famously, in Raspaille's Camp of the Saints, one of the lone holdouts to the tide of non-white invaders, one of the twenty or so people in France willing to fight for their homeland, was a black. The black loved France and didn't want to see it destroyed by non-whites. Such a person is not our enemy, he's a hero.

Furthermore, racism is so instinctual that a pure white homeland would just sub-divide again and again, nords vs. meds, italians vs. irish, croats vs. serbs, slavs vs. germans, all the way back down to 'the hatfields vs. the mccoys.' We don't need that kind of divisiveness. Tolerance and diversity are extremely valuable traits, they're the only path to peace. WW II should stand athwart any intolerant philosophy for the rest of time. The moment you mention being intolerant, everyone should pipe in -- "That's what people thought before WW II and look what happened." They are correct. They are precisely correct. We can not afford another WW II. Expanding the frontiers of tolerance helps build peace and harmony within the nation, as well as with the outside world. By pushing tolerance even past the frontier of whites, and stressing that we are a community of values, not gene-lines, we destroy all possible ethnic rivalries before they're born. No one cares whether you're Polish or French, we're all Americans -- or in the case of a future nation, we're all Vinlanders.

For economic reasons as well, it's best to keep our borders open to non-whites. Being allowed here for tourism, trade, as students, or whatever their purpose, helps improve our own economy and raises the living standards of the whites living here. We are a global economy and it's hopeless to resist this. We need to be shipping products overseas, and we need overseas products to be shipping here. That requires at least a modicum of tolerance and respect for the people of the outside world.

Graphs by La Griffe de Lion show that diversity in a neighborhood has no ill side effects, vis a vis the crime rate, until around 20% of the people are non-white. By 50% the crime becomes noticeably high, and by 90% it becomes unlivable, it becomes South Africa. Though crime and 'all other matters' probably shouldn't be conflated, I will do so anyway. A little bit of diversity never hurt anyone, it has no impact on the neighborhood or society, it has no impact on the gene pool (except a good one, since natural selection favors good genes, not bad ones.) it has no adverse impact on anything.

Second, 100% homogeneity, even if it were desirable, is unworkable. This is because America has become so mixed that the laws of entropy do not allow the blended to ever unblend. Millions of whites, if not the majority of them, have non-white friends, lovers, or relatives. They have grown up with these non-whites, they went to each other's weddings, they have formed inseparable bonds. They would rather the white race went extinct, some abstract theoretical worry, over losing the real and concrete bonds they have formed with friends and family. It isn't just the race-mixers, it is everyone involved with the race mixer. There is now such a 'frission' of integration that you would have to pry people from their particular non-white 'best friend' with a crowbar. When you back people into a corner, they have no choice but to fight. But if you tell them, "don't worry, if your non-white friend, family member, or lover, really is as great as you say he is, he'd be welcome to come live with us, just like you are." Suddenly, a gasp of relief -- "I don't have to disrupt my personal life to join the cause!" And "There are no personal costs and there are huge societal gains, sign me up!" Everyone is relieved that somebody ELSE'S non-white friend, lover, or family member is being kicked out, but not their own. Their non-white friend, lover, or family member, is obviously in that 'top 10%' bracket that relieves them of all worries, and disarms all opposition. Whites will never rally behind an all-white ethno-state, because too many whites have lived, for generations now, a diverse experience for so long, that they have adapted to it. There's no use proposing all the benefits of a white homeland, if it starts with, like Jesus said, "he who does not hate his father, his mother, his wife, and his children, can not love me." I don't know how Christianity did it, but they really did sell that message. We cannot. We cannot sell the message, "Join the revolution, lose all your family and friends!" Join the revolution, and show all those illiterate non-english speaking strangers the door --> that sells. Join the revolution, and wash the depravity out of hollywood and restore our education to pro-white history and literature classes --> that's appealing to a huge number of people. Join the revolution, and gain for the first time a minimum standard of living and a wife and children, to have and to hold, forever and ever --> that's something worth fighting for.

If whites are in sufficient power to pass the laws that need to be passed to improve our lives, I don't really give a damn who lives five blocks down the way. The important thing is the law code, the way society is structured. Once power is given only to those who deserve it, a custodial class of nobility who defends our law code like the Spartans and Athenians did ages ago, it will be impossible for non-whites to sabotage our country from within like they did this time. It was democracy's fault, not jews, that allowed them to donate over 50% of campaign funds to the democratic party. It is the first amendment's fault, not jews, that allowed them to control our TV, newspapers, and movie screens and fill us with lies. It is capitalism's fault, not hispanics, that made the importation of low wage workers the burning desire of all employers. Set up the correct system, the correct law code, and non-whites have no way to take advantage of it or to harm us. If non-whites are harming you, it is because there is still a chink in your law code's armor, and rather than be angry at the non-whites, we should be thanking them for pointing out such a huge flaw in our system so that we could correct it. Whatever abuses non-whites can make of our system, whites can make of it too. A system that is flawed is flawed. Correct the system, and the people will be incapable of doing evil, no matter what they desire. Just as good crime prevention can lower the murder rate to 1/10 what it used to be in New York City, without changing any of the demographics, a lack of crime prevention can create anarchy and looting in the streets overnight, where people who abided by the law their entire lives are suddenly ravening monsters.

This elasticity of the human psyche is phenomenal, but what it means, is that everything is about System. System, System, System, is the absolute focus of people's decisions. If the system is out of order, the people become dissolute and violent, immoral and evil. If the system is in order, the people become wise, courageous, temperate, and pious. Everyone is born a helpless child, they look to the SYSTEM to raise them into adulthood. With the right system, they will be raised correctly. Without it, they will look like Theodore Dalrymple's "Life at the Bottom." The british night life. Who cares that they're white? They're scum. Pure scum. And they're scum because the system failed them, there's nothing wrong with their genes. It's a cancer in their laws, devouring them from the inside out.

Whites need a nation of their own, not to just have a smorgasbord of whites so they can hang out and swap tales, but so that whites who want a certain SYSTEM put in place can have a nation of their own. There are certain laws that need passing, for the betterment of all people living within our borders. The possibility of a better life than this is so blatantly obvious, given how swiftly life has gone from Norman Rockwell America, to Dalrymple Britain. We are in desperate need of the power of sovereignty, so that a few desperately needed laws can be passed into our society, and save us from ourselves: The citizen's dividend replacing all unworkable and unjust social systems, mandatory marriage, the death penalty for crime, a new education, abolishing consumption-oriented debt and the Federal Reserve, a virtuous leadership, eugenics and space flight. A few brown or yellow or red or even black faces (if that's what it takes!), intermixed and intermixing with all the whites around us, is a small price to pay for ANY of those laws being advanced. Jews are the enemy not because of who they are, but because they won't let us pass these laws. If jews tomorrow became the biggest supporters and campaigners for these changes, I would cease to be an anti-semite the day after. it's the same for all the other racial groups, if they want to help create a better society, I have no objection to them either. I set the limit to non-whites at 90% so that I can be doubly, super sure that whites will never lose power to non-whites and the laws be changed again. I set it so that the white genome can't be flooded to extinction. I set it so that white culture can't be flooded to extinction. I also suspect that 10% of the population is about all one can expect to harvest from the outside world, that would have sufficient qualifications anyway. But I don't need 100% to accomplish any of those goals.

The BNP recently said it no longer aims for an all-white England, that this was simply not possible, it was a pipe dream, given how integrated England has become. The best they could manage is to limit immigration, deport troublemakers, and try to create a new law code that favors their white populace in general, and improves their lives. The BNP keeps stressing that it has more plans than just 'greater homogeneity,' it wants to improve the welfare laws, change the schools, get out of foreign wars, and so on. The BNP is right. That is the mature, responsible way to push for a white homeland. America is even more mixed than England, if it's no longer possible to convince whites in England to abandon their non-white friends, coworkers, lovers, and family members, then just consider the case of America! Hopeless! It will never happen. The sooner we reassure people they won't lose anyone dear to them, the better. The sooner we shoot for 90% instead of 100%, the better. The BNP got one million votes, there were one million people willing to set up the society the BNP wished for. There aren't a million people who want a 100% white country, or if there are, they sure aren't very vocal or active. It's simply a non-starter.

We shouldn't waste our effort pursuing non-starters with only 30 years left in our country's life. We just don't have that luxury.

1 comment:

Rollory said...

Now THIS is heretical truth. Keep it up and you'll have everybody pissed at you equally.

Some of the minor supporting points I disagree with but that's not too important.