Blog Archive

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

The West Is Done:

Fjordman has a new article out, deploring the loss of Europe to endless waves of third world barbarians:

For the first time in recorded history, the continent of Africa now has a larger population than the continent of Europe. What’s more, the already unsustainable African population is set to double in the coming two generations.

Of course, if he had been keeping up with the UN, he could have learned that the continent of Africa was actually set to quadruple its population by 2100.  And of course, the population just keeps quadrupling after that date too, so its not like that's the worst part of the news.  But at least he has a dim inkling that the population of Africa is getting too high, and that African immigration to Europe isn't going to work out very well.  I wonder how he'd feel if he knew how truly bleak the situation was?

Meanwhile, the few people of European descent still left in Africa — mainly white South Africans — are being systematically wiped out in the most brutal manner possible. Africans wipe out the few Europeans in Africa, and then promptly follow them to Europe. Africa for Africans, and Europe for Africans, too.

It's good of him to point out the awful torture rape murders going on in South Africa, it's something I wrote about years ago, but of course it didn't do any good then either.  The problem is there's no double standard here like Fjordman makes there out to be.  Liberals have nothing against whites immigrating to Africa if they please, they are for open borders everywhere, it's just that rich, safe people have no reason to emigrate to poor, unsafe lands so such emigration never happens.  What liberals were opposed to wasn't whites immigrating to Africa, but imposing dictatorial rule over majority-black natives.  If they had wanted to serve under the likes of King Ugabugoo or whoever, donned a loincloth and pierced their noses with random needles, that would've been fine.  It's just colonialism that was the problem.  As such, there's no double standard, because no one is calling for Africa to colonize Europe.  They just want to move there and abide by the already established laws and norms.  And if they happen to change those laws over time, well that's just how democracy works, no sin there.  They didn't come as conquerors or dictators, but simply as fellow citizens with the civil right to vote just like anyone else.

This is why liberals always win in the arena of ideas.  Their opponents aren't logical enough to even make their points correctly.  All Fjordman has to argue is that white nations are better than black nations and therefore turning Europe into Africa is a bad idea, and he wins hands down.  However, he can't say that because that would be racist, so instead he makes this silly appeal to fairness and claims liberals have a double standard -- when in fact they don't, and they are being fair, so his argument makes no sense and just comes off as juvenile and shallow.

One of them is the notion that rich countries have a duty to take in all people from other nations that are suffering, either from natural disasters, political repression or overpopulation. According to him, it cannot be considered moral of the cultural, political and religious elites of these countries to allow their populations to grow unrestrained and then push their excess population onto other countries.

However, a liberal does not believe in overpopulation until the whole globe is overpopulated.  Since we should have open borders anyway, there's no such thing as overpopulation until the whole world is starving, not just tiny corners of it where local famines could easily be solved by humane immigration policies.  And since no one else on Earth is reproducing at above replacement birth rates, the whole world is virtually empty, or soon will be, which means it needs these fecund Africans to come in and replace us all.  Since liberals believe in human equality, that everyone is born a blank slate at birth and is exactly as gifted and good as everyone else at birth, it doesn't matter in the least to them who is doing the reproducing, so long as someone is doing it.  Delegating all the breeding to Africa while the rest of us die off, therefore, is as sound an idea as any other.  But talking about overpopulation as a reason why the world can't accept African immigrants is hopeless -- there is no overpopulation outside of Africa when there are parallel articles being written just days before showing that Japan is slated to perish into extinction from cripplingly low birth rates in the near future.  The fact that Africa is kind enough to be quadrupling its birth rates so it can provide new workers for the outside world is a great and noble deed for everyone else.  They can come into Europe with its 1.0 birth rates, Russia with its 1.0 birth rates, China, Korea, Japan, everywhere on Earth needs more Africans, because they all have 1.0 birth rates.  Africans are God's gift to the world, they aren't overpopulation, they're the one and only solution to underpopulation which is currently sweeping the globe.

Unless and until you say blacks are worse than the people they are replacing, there is no logical reply to liberalism.  Overpopulation just does not fit the facts.

The point raised by Professor Sigurd Skirbekk is sound and worth repeating: If it was very, very evil by Germans to promote lebensraum in Europe in the 1940s, why is Europe supposed to meekly accept being a laboratory for African, Pakistani or Arab lebensraum today?

Here again Fjordman attempts to create a double standard where there is none.  Nazi Germany wanted to create lebensraum by conquest and genocide.  They were going to liquidate the populations of Eastern Europe and Russia and only then plant their own seeds of good German folk who would go forth and multiply in the new virgin soil.  Their justification for this was that Germans were better than the Slavs they would be replacing, so God/Nature/Fate/Evolution was on their side.  Unfortunately, this overweening confidence in their own greatness came tumbling down at Stalingrad, though not after trying their best by killing over 20 million citizens of the Soviet Union and sending Russia into a permanent population tailspin it has never recovered from since.  Africans and their liberal allies are not proposing anything similar to this plan.   Without any conquest, without any genocide, they plan to peacefully immigrate into a nation and peacefully integrate into the native communities.  They just want some of the economic goodies that the modern world produces, and have nothing against their neighbors who produce all that wonderful wealth for them.  Modern immigrants are not arguing for more lebensraum, they're arguing for higher taxes, so the whole comparison just falls apart.  Now, if you wanted to argue against immigrants coming into nations and taking more in benefits than they are contributing in taxes, that would be logical -- but who needs logic when you can just make bad analogies to Hitler and call it a day?

I’m not thrilled about the Golden Dawn, but I’m not thrilled about Communists, either. Communists have been responsible for about 100 million deaths in the last century. Clearly, they represent a dangerous totalitarian threat. It rings hollow when the authorities target the Golden Dawn, but give a virtually free rein to radical left-wing and Marxist groups who are at least as violent.
Here too is another useless double standard.  Golden Dawn is a party that seems to seek a violent overthrow of the status quo, an overthrow of the democratic regime and its bedrock principles of human rights and equality for all.  Now, many Golden Dawn members say they do not embrace violence, but this doesn't seem to be trickling down to their party membership, which is murdering non-Greeks in the streets for simply the crime of being non-Greek.  Furthermore, how much trust can you put in a party that says it's for non-violence but adopts as its symbol a freaking swastika, thus endorsing the most violently anti-democratic and racist nation in human history?  Left-wing violence is an entirely different breed.  They are targeting only racists, and only because they are evil.  They are not targeting innocent civilians but only people with ideologically toxic beliefs, Nazis, skinheads, fascists, etc, bent on terrorizing and exterminating the innocent.  They are a noble group of heroes who protect the innocent and with vigilante justice condemn the guilty.  Most importantly of all, their violence does not seek the overthrow of the state, but is in fact done in the service of the state, and it does not threaten the state's fundamental principles of human rights and equality, but is in fact violence done in order to protect those very rights.  For the state to crack down on both sides equally is absurd.  One type of violence is probably a good thing, whereas the other is an existential threat to the state's very existence.

Rather than this garbled and illogical article by Fjordman, I think the first bit of wisdom in this post comes from the comments section, by name of 'Lotos':

The West is done, I’ve already accepted defeat. What sites like this are doing is respectable, appreciated, and right, but the only way I see any turn around for the West is government overthrow, rebellion, or military coup d’etate, and I don’t see any of those happening, especially in Western Europe, where people have imo, evolved past war/violence, even if it’s self-defense. Not to mention, only the Swiss have guns. Europe will become a bunch of Islamic states with no actual Europeans left and the US will become another Latin American country, full of lawlessness, crime, and degeneracy.

The good news is, this will not happen in this generation, while we’re around. There are still areas in western Europe absolutely untouched by the foreign blight, while in London the English are a minority now, England as a whole is still 80% English, while countries like Finland or Iceland are still 95%+ native. I’m Canadian, grew up in a area where Europeans were 10% of the population, went to secondary school in an area with 50% Europeans, but then moved to an area with pretty much 98% Europeans, and the differences are unbelievable. You just have to do research.

The bad news is, our children, or our children’s children, are screwed.

I think it’s north-east Asia’s time, namely northern China, Korea, Japan now. Japan just elected a nationalist PM, Japan and Korea have nearly no immigration despite being as rich as western European countries and low birth rates. I think they’ll be leading the world in innovation, science, technology, civilization for the next while now, Europe is done.

Maybe Europe will make a come back in 10,000 years or so when the now Arab/African immigrants when Europe’s climate and environment evolves them back into Europeans, lol. That’s assuming it’s Europe’s normal climate that made Europeans, rather than the Ice Age. In that case, Europe will have to wait until the next Ice Age. Oh well.

This comment is dead-on.  For some reason, whites have evolved this strange love of universalism that means they have no remaining survival instinct.  Or perhaps whites are so selfish they don't care what happens to their children or grandchildren, and as the commenter said there was going to be very little impact on the quality of life of Europe and America's current inhabitants due to the immigration policies we currently have in place.  In any case, the west is done.  The majority of births in America last year were to non-whites.  Once amnesty passes, and it must, in some form or other, sooner or later, that trickle will turn into a flood as half of South America pours across the border and sets up shop breeding yet more kids.  Meanwhile, Europe is completely incapable of preventing either legal or illegal immigration because racism = Nazism and Europe was the birth of Nazism so they can never say anything remotely racist or nationalist ever again.  First off, it's illegal for them to even say anything, since unlike America, they don't even have freedom of speech.  But second off, no one will listen even if you do break the law and say what needs to be said, because they have been taught so thoroughly, their horror of Nazism and Auschwitz is stamped so indelibly into their bones, that they will never, ever rationally consider anything you have to say on the topic.  As penance for Auschwitz, all of Europe has to be handed over without complaint to non-whites, to prove that it is no longer ideologically allied to Nazism, whether they fought on the Axis's side or the Allies it makes no difference -- they're all whites in the end and thus all equally guilty.

The political paralysis of whites whenever they confront immigration is morbidly hilarious.  In fact, all whites know the truth, that whites are better than blacks, and that we don't want blacks to immigrate into our countries.  Or Indians, Muslims, Arabs, Latinos, or whoever else wants to come our way either for that matter.  But none of us can say it, and worst of all, none of us can articulate why we believe this in public.  This is how we get anonymous surveys showing 80% of whites want less immigration into our countries, while there isn't a single elected or famous personage who is willing to agree with the 80% majority.  Because the only logical reason why you would say this is because you think they are inferior, and if you say that you will be ostracized, fired, and probably put in jail.  Furthermore, you will lose all 'credibility' in the public press and thus you will lose all power the moment you voice your opinion.  As such, we can never get anyone in power who will believe what we all believe is true, because they are immediately taken out of power the moment they try to agree with us.

There is no political way for the people's voice to be heard.  And no one is willing to risk fighting a war over it because, like the commenter said, the harm won't come in our generation, it will be something done to our grandchildren.  It's easier to just ignore reality and enjoy our days until we die of old age than go to war to protect someone else.  Furthermore, by the time our grandchildren are dealing with these issues, they'll be a powerless minority so they won't be able to go to war either.  It's just beautiful.  Either it's not a big problem so why fight, or it's too big a problem to possibly fight -- there's never a good time to fight anywhere in the political future.

Hunter Wallace over at Occidental Dissent is making a fool out of himself, rallying a dozen people here and a dozen people there to argue for racism and against democracy on street corners.  What does he possibly think he can achieve?  We can't get a single racist elected to office in America, and racists are banned from being elected in Europe.  There is no hope, absolutely none, that this ship can be turned around.  Even though most people are racists and agree with Hunter Wallace deep down, there's nothing they can do about it because to get rich or powerful in America, you must first be pre-screened as 'not being racist' before you're allowed into the good old boys club.  This screening process takes place during hiring, college applications, the grades you get during school, and while dating.  If you don't toe the line at all times, if they ever catch you even once saying something objectionable, your career and your life are over -- like what happened to Paula Deen, or Trent Lott, or anyone who slipped up and lost everything by even once revealing what they really thought about blacks.

If you are already powerful or rich, this is still no protection.  This is because your company will be boycotted and your reputation will be destroyed in the press.  Just like what happened to Zimmerman, your wife will divorce you to show that 'she isn't racist like you are' and your whole family will abandon you like rats scuttling out of a sinking ship.  Any business you own will be destroyed via bad press unless you resign from it and hand it over to proper non-racists who vociferously disavow all of your views.  Look what happened to Richwine at the Heritage foundation.  The cost of saying something racist in America or Europe is worse than any political prisoner's fate in the early USSR.  At least back then your family would stay on your side.  Now you lose everything and everyone.  The toxicity of your beliefs is too much for anything to survive them.  You simply become an un-person.

Therefore, nothing you do to 'raise consciousness' or 'win hearts and minds' matters.  Everyone already knows the score and everyone is already racist.  Everyone really knows in their hearts that blacks are inferior, this is why no one marries them and no one lives near any of them.  This is why we put half of black males in prison.  This is why we refuse to provide the same social spending on health care that all other white nations are happy to spend on their fellow whites in places like Sweden, in order to deprive blacks of ever getting any charity.  Everyone knows the score and acts accordingly, they just can't say it.  Consciousness is already raised.  What we need isn't more hearts and minds, but power.  The power to resist the defamation of the press.  The power to resist economic boycotts.  The power of strong families that resist being torn apart when the media jumps on one of its members like it did Zimmerman.  What whites really need isn't to be spoon fed facts they already know in their hearts to be true, they need to be immune to the consequences of believing them.

And the only way you will ever gain that immunity is as a self-subsistent community -- where wealth, status, and mating opportunities are not dependent upon not being racist.  If you could create an entire city, an entire nation of white racists who do not punish each other for being racist, but instead reward members for hating blacks, everything would turn around on a dime.  You would suddenly find that all our celebrities, all our CEO's, all our elected officials would be striving with each other to be the foremost insulter of blacks in the most creative and extreme ways possible.  People would be climbing over each other in order to say the newest dig against the inferior races.  But only once they feel they are safe will they ever tell anyone the truth.  And as North Korea proved, it is damnedly difficult to be self-subsistent in the world today.  Now even being an independent nation of pure racists wouldn't be enough -- we'd still be boycotted, blockaded, and probably invaded by the outside world for our sins.  North Korea is a world pariah that doesn't trade with anyone, and look what happened to them.  They don't even have electricity.  They can't even feed themselves.  Sure, we'd like to have the freedom to call blacks names, but not at the cost of starving to death in the dark.  Ultimately, until the whole world is racist all together, it isn't safe to be a racist, because then you'll be ostracized on the world stage.  In other words, the first and only time racism will work is as a colony ship heading into outer space.  Then and only then will racists be the sole and exclusive owners of an entire world, and then and only then will it be impossible for any anti-racist to punish them for their views.  As such, rather than holding up lame cardboard signs saying "Racist and proud!" or whatever, which serves zero purpose whatsoever, racists should be gathering together to buy themselves a space ship and heading to one of these habitable planets we've already found thanks to the Kepler telescope.  I recall there was a nice blue water world that was the right temperature not far from here, so that seems like a reasonable destination.  It wouldn't take much to succeed.  A population of just 500 breeding stock peopled all the Earth outside of Africa, and we could be even more efficient than that just by having say, two or three actual living humans on the spaceship, and after that just racks upon racks of thousands of fertilized eggs ready to go once we land on the far shore.  There would be no concerns about inbreeding if we used fertilized eggs from all types of folks before even boarding the spaceship, and gave birth to nothing but them for the first few generations, only resorting to natural reproduction once our colony had reached a sufficiently stable and diverse population in its own right.

We aren't talking about Battlestar Galactica or anything.  Just a ship with sufficiently good shielding from radiation and enough supplies and a robust enough frame/spare parts to last us a couple hundred years to land a few people on the far shore, and a biosphere that can isolate a portion of the planet and create via chemical reactions the atmosphere we need using machines.  From there we can slowly terraform the planet as our population grows over the course of centuries.  Honestly, I think all the technology necessary for this venture is already sitting around and we could do this tomorrow.  But for those leery about taking risks, just wait until NASA demonstrates this technology on Mars a century from now or whatever.  Then do it yourself just by copying them, and boom, done.  This is the one and only way racists will ever score a political victory for the rest of time.  Cardboard signs just don't cut it.

However, even this plan makes no sense because in a century we'll all be robots anyway, and this whole biodiversity debate will become moot.  Once we can program our children to be whatever we want, possess whatever godlike abilities we desire, it doesn't matter at all that whites have 15 IQ higher than blacks.  Since there are still millions of intelligent people all around the world studying artificial intelligence and computer programming, and there will be for at least the next century, by the time you could get spaceflight to run away from blacks, we won't need to anymore.  Neither blacks nor whites will even exist anymore.  We'll all be godlike beings of pure information.  Some people are predicting AI by 2025.  2025!  Even if they're wrong and it's 2100, who cares?  It's all over but the dancing.  Once we hand the world over to robots, all our problems will disappear overnight, and immortality and abundance for all will be the end of history.

What's the point of planning out the future in the midst of such revolutionary technological innovation?  At this point nothing humans do anymore matters.  Everything is going to be swept away by AI, genetic engineering, or whatever.  If you have even a ten year plan, it will probably be obsolete by the time the tenth year arrives, due to changing technology.  There is nothing you can rely on anymore.  Nothing.  Not even death is certain anymore, with the invention of stem cells.  The idea that you can make political plans that germinate for 50 years in order to counter political threats that will occur a century from now is absurd.  It's just a waste of time.  Therefore, all political speech, all attempts to improve the world politically or educationally, are a complete waste of time.  It doesn't even matter if you're right and they're wrong.  Everything is obsolete.  Thought itself is obsolete.  Action is obsolete.  Computers will be better than us at everything.

That's why, whether you're a racist or not, whether you're a sexist or not, whether you're an atheist or not, whether you're a homophobe or not, everyone should be doing the exact same thing right now, and that's just enjoying themselves.  The future is going to take care of itself, via revolutionary technological innovation -- this isn't my prediction, this is the prediction of the people who know the field best, are billionaires, and have all sorts of fancy degrees.  They are the ones telling us AI is inevitable.  They are the ones saying they can automate all work.  They are the ones saying they can make computer models of the human brain.  And the best way to enjoy yourself is via entertainment, and therefore, the only thing worth writing about anymore is entertainment.  The West is Done, but entertainment is still thriving -- we've never had a better year in anime, and it doesn't matter anyway, because we can still enjoy everything that came before this year too.  Video games, music, books, visual novels, spectator sports, and anime, playing out right before our eyes, and stretching all the way back to 500 B.C..  There is so much entertainment available now, and high quality entertainment, I'm not talking drivel here, so much human excellence that's at the very pinnacle of its field, that everyone could be happy for life.  If you really want to debate politics, then endorse a policy that would spread entertainment to all -- a relaxation of copyright laws so that everyone can enjoy any digital product, and a citizen's dividend so they can afford food, shelter, health care, electricity, a computer and an internet connection with which to enjoy all said content.  It wouldn't take much money to cover the basics, and America is earning $50,700 per capita.  Somehow I think we could cover people's bills for them, if we ever wanted to try.

A citizen's dividend until the age of robots, and then immortality and omnipotence afterwards.  A very simple, very easy, and very popular political platform anyone could get behind.  Racist or not, the solution is the same either way.

No comments: