In der news. Emphasis added.
While Unz should be happy about this, in reality it is misleading nonsense for several reasons:
1. With respect to illegal aliens, as the name implies, their very presence in this country is a violation of law, so they have a “criminal rate” of 100%, which is higher than that of any grouping of natives (even Blacks, believe it or not).
2. Comparing immigrants to natives is misleading from a racial basis. How about comparing immigrants to White Americans? How about comparing immigrants to Black “Americans?” Hispanic “Americans?” And, I suppose Asians and Jews as well. Let’s have the full data.
3. If you want to know the full impact of immigration on crime, you cannot stop the analysis with the immigrants themselves, but we must consider their descendants. What does the next generation look like?
4. Most important of all, the immigration problem is not really about crime, or “the economy,” or any other such thing, but the genetic and cultural displacement and replacement of native populations. Let’s assume that immigrants really have lower crime rates. Very well. I suppose then we can lower crime in America by replacing the entire native population with immigrants. That would lower the crime rate real well. And the natives benefit how, by that?
5. By the way, although immigration will eventually replace the native population, given carrying capacity and differential birthrates, etc. – the immediate situation, at the national level, is not so much replacement as mere addition. So, even if the crime rate among (legal) immigrants is a bit lower, we are adding that population, and all of its criminal element, to that of natives, are we not? And what about at the city level? If you argue that increased immigration into a city is lowering the crime rate, you logically imply that the immigrants are replacing natives (who are being pushed out) – supporting the “replacement narrative.” You can’t have it both ways. If immigrants are actually lowering crime in an area, rather than just adding criminals at a slightly lower rate, then population replacement is occurring. Or do you claim that immigrants increase total crime, but that the rate is less per capita? Which is it?
I’ve also been asked by other content creators to join the merchant right, because it helps reinforce the notion that a culture war is not won on love. It takes money to run these sites and many of the people doing it have no other way to make a living.
Let’s translate that:
I’ve also been asked by Alt Right grifters who live off of “D’Nations” to join them in their parasitical lifestyle, because when folks like me offer free content, it makes the tin cup panhandlers look bad. If everyone is out for the shekels, then no one stands out as a money-grubbing useless exploiter of the rank-and-file. It takes money to run these sites – except for the people who somehow do it for nothing – and many of the people doing it have no other way to make a living, which is precisely why they are doing it in the first place.
A HBD commentator writes:
Puzzled by this blind acceptance of natural selection. While it seems logical that the fittest will survive to reproduce, just take a look at our species. Do the fittest have the most children?
Excuse me, idiot, but since “fitness” in biological terms means genetic representation in the next generation, and not any of the proximate traits that HBDers and Nutzis hyperventilate over, then, yes, by definition, the “fittest” will have the most children (who survive and themselves reproduce). Having the most children is what makes them “fit.” If you want to make criticisms about circular reasoning, fine, that can be debated among philosophers of scientific discourse, but please stop with the ignorant drivel on how “natural selection is wrong because stupid and useless people have more children.” That’s not how it works.
While the anti-Jewish laws of 1938 had been “a mistake, a shame”…
More recently Matteo Salvini, leader of the League and Italy’s interior minister, has said that “a lot of things got done” under Italy’s Fascist government, hailing Mussolini’s infrastructure projects and pension system while dismissing his race laws as “madness”.
Based Salvini! Cuckadoodledoo! Note picture at bottom. Dem dere Viking Northern Italians. The ultimate Nordic phenotype exemplified in that photo.
Mrs Mason’s had insisted that each son should have a Jewish middle name and her former husband, who now lives with his new wife in Rhos, North Wales, believes this detail could provide a clue to the biological father’s identity.
Now, for the infertile Mason, the damage was emotional and financial. But imagine a fertile man who is tricked into raising another man’s children, while actually having none of his own. That is murder of his genetic continuity; in my opinion, any woman guilty of deceiving about paternity should be subject to the death penalty. The biological father cuckolder should also be subject to that ultimate sanction if he was a willing participant in the deception (however,it is always possible that the woman tricked him into believing she was unmarried and he may not know he fathered a child).
Nice woman, eh? Joan of Arc, eh Greg?
The yeastbuckets are all the same. All “fathers” should genetically test their paternity one way or another. And while 23andMe tests stink for ancestry, they do chromosome matching, so they can be used to confirm paternity if you want to do it in a more indirect, discreet fashion. Indeed, for any SJW polities that outlaw paternity testing, men should see if 23andMe is still available. If the child is yours, you’ll match 50% of chromosomes – if that match does not occur, get a good lawyer, my friends.
Nazi ideology trumped military practicality. Note Japanese betrayal with respect to the USSR (remember my debate with “Kumiko” about that – Sallis right, once again).
Well, who would do better? Brimelow?