Blog Archive

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Crystallized America:

Changing American demographics are a certainty. At this point, more non-white children are born in America than white children, which means they will inevitably become the majority in the future. Furthermore, immigration doesn't look like it will be stopped by either major party, and no third party looks like it will seize power within any visible length of time. Since birth rates are already in the demographic favor of minorities, and immigration is mostly non-white and completely unstoppable, America will be a non-white country in the near future.

Many people take these facts and run with them, declaring that America is doomed, or that it will fall apart into civil war or economic ruin. They're wrong. Many other countries are already in the position America will soon join -- countries like Brazil, Mexico, and Malaysia. What we see in these countries is yes, an uptick in violence, but nothing so great that it endangers the authority of the state. We also see yes, higher poverty rates, but still a middle class lifestyle for the market-dominant minorities within these countries.

The whites of Mexico and the Chinese of Malaysia aren't particularly suffering. Their quality of life is probably nearly as good where they live than if they had relocated to Europe or China and lived within a homogenous country. It's true that they are dragged down by their peers, but they are also elevated by this fact: Everything is cheaper in their countries, and they have far less competition for the good, high paying jobs. The market dominant minorities of diverse developing countries are probably a little less safe, but statistically they are unlikely to be murdered over the course of their entire lifetime, so it's only a theoretical negative. Their children go to private schools and often their homes are manned by security guards. The market dominant minorities have figured out how to deal with all the problems of living among third worlders and they're doing OK.

The one exception to this rule is if you flood your country with sub-saharan blacks. It appears that if you stoop this far down the barrel, your country really can implode. Zimbabwe and South Africa destroyed its market dominant white minority, and less famously, Kenya drove out its Indian market dominant minority. Nigerians routinely kidnap and take hostage white oil workers trying to work in their country. In all of these countries it is impossible to live a decent, safe middle class life. But America's blacks are 15 IQ points smarter than sub-saharan blacks. Many of them have a good dollop of white blood. More importantly, they are only 13% of the population. The rest of our immigrants are coming from South America and Asia, people with far better track records and far less threatening historical records.

Europe also isn't so dumb that they'd import sub-saharan blacks. Europe is going to be non-white in the future, but it's being populated by immigrants from North Africa, the middle east, South America and South Asia. Only a small proportion of their immigrants are genuine blacks. It remains to be seen whether Islam will tolerate a market dominant infidel minority. The Ottomans tolerated this group for centuries, only to suddenly slaughter all the Greeks, Assyrians, and Armenians they could get their hands on during World War I. Jews lived peacefully in the Middle East for centuries, only to suddenly be rounded up and exiled en masse when Israel was founded. So Islam has a mixed track record. One can hope that Islam will moderate itself at least back to it's earlier norm, which did tolerate market dominant minority infidels, by the time it takes over Europe. It will be in Islam's self interest to retract its fangs for at least a little while until they are securely in control of their new continent, which should buy a couple centuries for European whites.

America's future is brighter than Europe's, however, because the people coming to populate our continent are not adherents of Islam. There is no record of hispanics rising up and killing all of their white minorities in South America. Nor is there a record of say, Chinese in Hong Kong rising up and killing all the British who lived there. ((Whereas in Haiti, the blacks did exactly that, killing all the white French and even all the half-white half-black love children of the French.)) We're in safe hands with our new overlords, who are neither biologically bottom of the barrel blacks nor culturally bottom of the barrel muslims.

America will not descend into civil war, broken infrastructure, lawless streets, vampires and werewolves stalking the night, mass famines ala Ukraine or secession. It's all nonsense. Instead, America will crystallize. What I mean by this is that far from things changing due to shifting demographics, things will Cease to change.

When before anyone could get rich in America, America will become a stratified country where only the children of the rich will ever become rich. When before education could give a way out for any Iowa hayseed, education will be reserved for wealthy scions of already successful legacy families. You will either be 'in' or 'out.' The 'in' crowd, consisting of rich whites, Jews, Indians, Koreans and the like will have their own cities, their own schools, their own colleges, their own everything. And they will have total power over the government, no matter how few votes they hold, because they will have control of the media, which shapes public opinion, and campaign donations, which chooses-ahead-of-time our government representatives. Therefore, the government will never threaten the prospects of the rich or their children, or do anything to help the poor or their children. The middle class will gradually die away and join either the rich or the poor, with nothing inbetween.

The middle class is not a natural effect of market forces, it is an artificial construct of benign laws meant to help the poor. The middle class can only exist in places where demand for labor outstrips supply. If you want a more scientific system, think of the world as having three sources of capital: Labor, Land, and Liquidity. The middle class only emerges when the laws create one precarious balance of these three forces: We need plenty of land, so we can have affordable family formation, plenty of liquidity, so we can afford to go to college and have top of the line infrastructure and technological innovation, but very little labor, so that even unskilled workers and junior college educations are being paid high wages by the rich who can't find anyone else to hire. In a system like this, there is full employment, with good working conditions, and high wages -- it's like 1950, or if you prefer 1300, right after the black plague killed off 1/3 of Europe's peasantry.

The way to have achieved this would have been to cut off immigration, restrict population growth, and invest deeply in education and scientific research. But this doesn't benefit the rich, so they decided on a different course. Innovation is dangerous because it creates new winners and losers. For the rich, stagnation is the best. The nobility of the middle ages kept power for hundreds of years because there was never any change that would allow some new upstart class to upstage them. The rich are ensuring a repeat of this scenario, by making education too expensive for anyone but themselves to afford, and then requiring credentials for all high-paying jobs. Likewise, the rich have no interest in paying high wages for unskilled workers. They'd prefer to pay next to nothing for everything, pocketing the savings themselves, which is possible with free immigration that makes people's labor virtually worthless it is such a supersaturated commodity. Everything about America today plays out in favor of the rich. The rich are currently paying the lowest tax rate in 60 years. They are barely paying more in taxes than a flat tax would have provided. Meanwhile, government spending is just as often directed towards the rich (medicare, social security, mortgage interest tax deductions, bank bailouts, corporate subsidies) as the poor, who get a pittance for food stamps and are actually required to buy their own health insurance.

Look around you at the current elites. Note how dynastic our politicians have become. Almost everyone in office today is the son of someone else who was previously in office, or a brother or a cousin. Affirmative action displaces actual rivals to the people in power with people who pose no threat whatsoever to the power elite. If you take a chess or a bridge tournament and deliberately seed the strong players against 'affirmative action' opponents who weren't strong enough to merit their place in the tournament, the strong players are bound to win. They'll never have to face talented but unknown competitors who have yet to prove themselves, because all of those players will have been disqualified by 'affirmative action' quotas. Affirmative Action was never to help the poor, it was solely to benefit the rich, by destroying the upward mobility of the young and middle class.

Crime never impacts the rich, so they don't worry about crime. Unemployment never impacts the rich (they can always provide cushy jobs for their children working at the head of a non-profit foundation or the like), so they don't care about unemployment. Every problem we currently blame on the poor rightfully should be blamed on the rich, for having the power to cure the issue but deliberately keeping things as they are for their own narrow benefit. Blaming the powerless is exactly what the rich want us to do, it's a divide and conquer strategy that goes nowhere. No matter what happens inside a country, the responsibility is always on the rich and powerful. They are the ones who created this world the way it is, so everything that happens inside it is their choice, no one else's, and the blame should fall on their heads, no one else's. Rather than railing against demographics in America, we should be talking about class warfare. In essence, the communists were right and it was always about class. Class is a deeper dividing line than race. The upper class consists of all races, but they universally love each other and hate the poor. The poor consists of all races, but they remain splintered and divided -- which is why they remain conquered. If they ever once united against the rich, in a democracy, their voting strength could instantly reform the country in their favor. We could achieve a citizen's dividend overnight, instead of jealously sniping over medicaid and food stamps that benefits one race over another. That's just what the rich want to see, the poor refusing to give each other social benefits on account of prejudice and jealousy, when in actuality no one is receiving enough redistributed wealth from the rich and money continues to concentrate more and more narrowly among the top 10%.

Crystallized America is our future, where the middle class is replaced with a Mexico like upper class and lower class, because the poor were too stupid to work together to prevent it. The poor have only themselves to blame in a democracy. They could vote themselves money whenever they wanted -- like Denmark does, one of the richest and most equal societies on Earth, which has government spending at over 50% of GDP. Denmark is generally considered the happiest country on Earth, and it doesn't rely on windfall oil wealth like Norway, it's simply a place full of good people who get along. The source of its happiness is its laws, nothing else. Because we didn't pass similar laws, we get to be Mexico. Don't say we weren't warned. For decades people have been talking about the war on the middle class, but they were dismissed as 'losers' and 'extremists.' Now, with the unions demolished, immigration non-stop, unemployment at 20% and wages still stuck at the same place they were in 1970, all their warnings have come to fruition. Now the wealthy own the largest proportion of America's wealth since the early 20th century and pay the lowest taxes since the early 20th century while the poor suffer through the worst depression since the early 20th century. It's basically never been so bad in a century, but still the poor do nothing. Still the poor rally around false prophets like libertarians (who would only exacerbate the plight of the poor and enhance the power of the rich yet more) and resort to insane measures like austerity and deficit reduction in a time of massive unemployment, the exact time government needs to be spending the most to revive demand in the economy.

Nevermind. The poor have dug their own graves, let them lie in them. Why have sympathy for such utter losers? The rich played a good hand, while the poor couldn't beat a handicapped grandma. So to hell with them and let's break out the champagne. To the upper class, may they reign forever.



Anonymous said...

You said the rich created this world and they are wholly to blame. Then in the next paragraph you blame the poor for uniting against the rich.

Diamed said...

I blame the poor for *not* uniting against the rich. In a democracy, it's crazy that the 90% should be ruled by the 10% with laws favorable only to the upper classes. I think you misread a sentence somewhere. ^^