Open Borders Sophistry

Comically flimsy arguments from the open borders “braintrust.”

When we close borders, we aren’t doing the same thing as putting fences around our houses. Suppose there is a neighborhood made up of 10 landowners. 8 out of 10 of them vote to keep out all foreigners. 1 out of 10, Larry, votes to let them in because he wants to rent his house to them. 1 of them votes to let them in because he’s a decent human being, but he doesn’t himself plan to rent his house. When the 8 put up a fence around the neighborhood, they don’t merely keep immigrants off their own property. Rather, they keep the immigrants off Larry’s property, against his will. 

Far from protecting property rights, immigration restrictions abrogate the rights of property owners who want to rent their property to the excluded migrants, associate with them, or employ them on their land.

Putting aside the judgmental moral posturing that letting immigrants invade your territory makes you a “decent human being” (will Israel become more “decent” and let in the great unwashed from the Third World…or merely some of their Arab neighbors?), this argument can be neatly turned on its head.  Imagine 8 of 10 landowners want to let in migrant invaders, but Larry objects because he doesn’t like aliens, doesn’t want to see them or associate with them, doesn’t want to see them employed to drive down local wages, doesn’t want his property values to decline, doesn’t want to be criminally victimized by aliens, doesn’t want his womanfolk groped (or worse) by them, he just doesn’t want them, no sir, no way.  The other landowner objects to immigrants because, as a decent human being, he opposes genocide against his own people, he doesn’t want the carrying capacity of his neighborhood filled with aliens, he wants to preserve the land for his posterity and that of his co-ethnic neighbors, he doesn’t want his ethnic genetic interests abrogated by a genetically alien influx, and he doesn’t want his civilization ruined by culturally incompatible peoples.  But the other eight get their way!  In come the hordes!  Against their will, Larry and the other landowner see their neighborhood, their way of life, everything they hold dear, submerged under the tidal wave of an alien flood. Thus, far from protecting property rights, mass immigration abrogates the rights of property owners who want to keep their property and surrounding land excluded from migrants, not associating with them, or employing them on the common land.  Far from protecting the common social good, the collective goods, the social common, mass immigration fritters away the fruits of social goods to free-riding aliens and selfish, short-sighted natives who (think they) benefit from the invasion.

Looks like we have a conflict of interests, exactly the kind of thing the state is designed to adjudicate.  There are no unlimited “property rights” in any reasonable organized society, and certainly not in the ”liberal democracies” that open borders fanatics lionize.  Taxation, jury duty and the military draft (or merely selective service registration) – isn’t one’s self, one’s life, and one’s time the highest levels of property? – and laws and restrictions of all kinds, including “fair housing laws” and the like. Whither property rights? Interestingly, freedom of association is abrogated within the nation without question from the Left, but open borders now looms as a freedom of association and property rights issue.  What hypocrites!  What low rent, low life scumbags!  What unmitigated sophistry!

Advertisements

On Sports

Not a fundamental issue but still of interest.

The second half of the talk is consistent with an honest form of HBD/race realism: we are NOT “all the same” and there is inter-population, as well as intra-population, physical differences that make certain people better suited for particular athletic endeavors.

The first half of the talk is entirely consistent with what I wrote here:

Fifth, although I’m not much interested in sports, the fact that reaction times have been slowing over the past century provides food for thought – thought indirectly linked to racial activism since the “bread and circuses” masses love sports, and thus sports, as part of mass pop culture, affects the race-culture problem.

I note there is a rough correlation between sociopolitical views and ideas about athletic performance over time.  Those on the Left are more prone to “overrate the present” and lionize (mostly Colored) modern athletes as far superior to the (mostly White) athletes of the past.  Those on the Right are less likely to casually dismiss the “traditional sports heroes” of the past.

Now, if reaction times are really slowing, then what can we say about athletic performance in sports in which reaction time is important – hitting a baseball for example (or boxing or hockey)?  It puts into question leftist assumptions rooted in jock sniffing the Negro athlete. The components of performance related to reaction time – fundamental for some sports – would seem to be declining, not improving, over time.

Indeed, reaction times differ by race, with Negroes being the slowest, which again makes one question whether the Negro athlete of today is superior to the White athlete of the past (and, of course, intra-racial White-White cross-era comparisons of declining reaction time question leftist assumptions about sports as well).  One can make counter-arguments that athletes do not represent the overall population, and that Victorian England was one specific sample, and that of course other factors than reaction time are important in athletic performance, etc. but still, the idea is provocative.  The Caste Football pro-White sports types probably need to look into the implications of declining reaction times in making cross-era sports comparisons, implications favorable to a narrative of a Golden Age of White American sports.

It would seem that Sallis is right once again.  A significant portion of the “vast improvement” in athletic performance over time is due to improved technology, training, nutrition, and drugs, not innate ability.  As to that portion that may be innate, the second half of the talk, alluded to above, explains much – not an overall population improvement in innate ability, but better selection within population of outliers best suited for particular sports.  For the most part though, it’s better technology and training masking degenerating reaction time and degenerating IQ (some sports require some degree of intelligence for optimal success).

Behold the Negro, 7/10/18

Two stories.  

First, read this, emphasis added:

At a timeout late in his team’s victory over Chicago’s Raw Athletics on Sunday morning, Houston Raptors coach Bobby Benjamin sensed that an already contentious basketball game might soon turn violent.

The opposing team had become increasingly frustrated at its inability to cut into a double-digit deficit, so Benjamin warned his players to be prepared to exit the floor without shaking hands at the final buzzer rather than risk potential fisticuffs.

“Their players started fighting amongst each other and they were arguing with their coach,” Benjamin said. “That’s when I knew it was about to get bad. I figured if they’re going to fight with each other, they might be willing to fight anybody.”

Proof that Benjamin was right to be worried arrived a few minutes later when an otherwise typical grassroots basketball game devolved into a series of wild brawls between Raw Athletics players and the referees. Raw Athletics players threw a flurry of punches at one referee during the mayhem and surrounded him as he lay prone on the court. The same players also tackled another referee to the floor after he sprinted over from an adjacent court in an attempt to intervene.

Then, watch this.

An innate tendency toward violence.  Now, SJWs will chime in and talk about “White mass shooters” or “millions dead in White wars” (thanks, ethnonationalists).  But we see differences here.  Mass shooters are a very rare occurrence; all races have unstable outliers among their population.  All races fight wars as well, although one would expect that the better organized, more disciplined, and more technically competent races would result in wars that are more destructive.  Some races use trained mass armies, tanks, and bombers and others use spears.  Naturally, the death toll of the wars of the former will be greater than that of the latter.  War is a natural human condition.  Violence is as well, but it is the nature of Negro violence that separates it from that of Whites and some other races.  Negro violence is very spontaneous, uncontrolled, mindlessly lashing out over the most trivial reasons.  And not only is Negro violence differently qualitatively but also quantitatively – compare rates of violent crime between racial groups.

Think about it.  You hear that players attack referees at a basketball game.  Did you have any doubt as to the racial provenance of the players?  A video clip of a traffic light road rage incident – by female attackers no less and with one wielding a baton – did you think they would be anything other than Negro?

Most honest people have an innate sense that a large fraction of the Negro population are on a hair-trigger, ready to engage in violence for the slightest reason – or sometimes, no reason at all.  That’s a difference: while all races have rare outliers that exhibit hair-trigger violent outbursts, in the Negro race, such volatile and dangerous individuals make up a very significant fraction of the population, so much so that one is justified viewing the typical member of that race with prudent suspicion.


As to mechanisms?  Likely differences in brain structure and function, levels of neurotransmitters and hormones, and how all those physiological factors interact to respond to environmental stimuli.  The evolutionary explanation has already been given by others many times, to summarize: in the Negro’s tropical homeland, food is plentiful year-round, there’s no winter to speak of and seasonal variation is mostly the amount of rain that falls, yet there are predators, diseases, and parasites galore.  Thus, there was little or no adaptive value for prudent foresight, self-control, planning, and discipline. On the other hand, being impulsive to take advantage of opportunities, a readiness for instant violence against predators, and a r-selected lifestyle to make up for losses due to diseases and parasites – that was all adaptive.

Fortress North or Asian Imperialism?

It’s the latter.

Derbyshire obviously has a strong personal interest in obfuscating the Asian threat to Whites, in promoting pro-Asian attitudes among Whites, and to make Whites accept Asians living amongst them.  In addition, HBD is a radical political movement dedicated to enslaving Whites to Jews and Asians, and not let us not forget that Derbyshire is a prominent HBDer; thus, personal and ideological motivations are intertwined.

I’ve long attacked the “Arctic Alliance” nonsense, and I will do so again.  You do not make alliances with deadly enemies who are bent on your destruction.  The existential meaning of Asians is hatred of Whites – is that the foundation of a White-Asian alliance?  Asians are part of the Rising Tide of Color invading White lands (“immigration”) and engaging in anti-White pan-colored activism once infested in White living spaces.

If Asians were really “allies” of Whites, then they would agree with the premise that Asians no more belong in, say, San Francisco, New York, Vancouver, etc. than the British belonged in Hong Kong.  If Asians were “allies” then they would support the repatriation of Asian-“Americans” and Asian-“Canadians” and Asian-“Australians” and “British Asians” etc. back to their homelands.  They would oppose Asian immigration to the West.  But they do not do these things because the “Arctic Alliance” – just like HBD and “Silk Road White nationalism” – is nothing more than sugarcoated ruthless Asian imperialism.

Yes, Derbyshire says he doesn’t want an “Arctic Union” (except in his own household, which forces Asians into White living space), but note how he slyly equates a Euro-Asian union with an all Euro union.  And this quibbling aside, my main point remains – the Asian “Arctics” (that of course include “Rosie”) are part of the anti-White colored alliance.  Derbyshire can pontificate an opposition to the free flow of people across “Arctic” nations (while hypocritically facilitating it in his private life) but mass Asian immigration to the West is a fact.  The Asian Invasion is ongoing and there can be no talk of an “alliance” until that ruthless invasion is stopped and then reversed through the repatriation of all persons of full or part Asian ethnic origins back to their homelands.

Another Movement Lie About Race

Endless lies from the fundamentally dishonest Type I Nutzis of Der Movement.

Not surprisingly, this latest lie comes from the Alt Wrong.

Alexander and his men captured much of Asia and left behind blond, light-skinned descendants…

That concerns the Kalash, a South Asian people long the target of fascination from sweaty ethnic fetishists.

The reality, emphasis added:

The Kalash represent a unique branch in the South Asian population tree and appear to be the earliest population to split from the ancestral Pakistani and Indian populations…Whereas the Kalash have recently been reported to have European admixture, postulated to be related to Alexander’s invasion of South Asia, our results show no evidence of admixture.

Outright lying by Der Movement is nothing new.  Two relatively recent examples that I exposed:

Note the second “They Wuz Dumb” lie is from the same “Sinclair Jenkins” lying to you about the Kalash.  A particularly unfortunate specimen, no?

The facts that refute “movement” lies can be easily found with only a few minutes of online searching. That the “movement” nevertheless persists in lying to you tells you all you need to know about its mendacity (or stupidity or laziness).

Summary: Lie, lie, lie…all they do is lie.  Do you think they are being honest with their HBD pseudoscience either? 

Comments on Comments: It’s Der Alt Right

When the comments section is better than the original article.

Comments and my riposte.

This is a sad truth we need to face. I cannot recall any revolutionary movement of any consequence, no matter how radical and underground, that did not have the backing of moneyed people.

Yes, it is a shame that wealthy Whites don’t cough up money.  But you know, there IS money in the “movement” and it is wasted.

Correct insofar as the Alt Right needs a supporting infrastructure:

* Info ops

* Self defense

* Legal defense

* Cultural-social activities

* Building fronts with allied groups

* Fundraising (especially, as money drives everything else!)

I’ve been saying this for years.  Although I do think the “movement” is doing OK with respect to the tin cup panhandling (“fundraising”).  It’s everything else that they have trouble with.

I’ve often wondered where are the older, mature and more balanced leaders of the Alt-Right? 

Don’t you know the Millennials have disdain for such people?  And some of these older people don’t pass the Quota Test of Der Movement’s ultra, ultra official affirmative action policy.

There are a few that I’m aware of (e.g., Jared Taylor and others), but I’m not so sure they would identify as Alt-Righters. 

You would be more sure if you had bothered to do a little research.  Here is Taylor describing himself as a “long-standing member of the Alt Right.”  Although, certainly, after Heilgate, the enthusiasm for the Alt Right brand in certain quarters took a precipitous drop.  We wouldn’t want to offend a certain high, high-IQ Levantine tribe now, would we?

They’re also not as perceptive on the ‘Jewish Question’ as many of us would like.

But they are marvelously perceptive on the ‘Hora-Romanian’ question, never mind the dreaded ‘dumb Afrowop question.’

The Left is very good at building such infrastructure, and this pays off in their successful street actions.

The Left, which supports affirmative action in the broader society, practices meritocracy in its leadership.  The Far Right, which opposes affirmative action in the broader society, practices the most ruthless ethnic quota system in its leadership.  And so the Left “is very good at building infrastructure.”  And the Far Right most definitely is not.  Surprise!

(1) In terms of leaders, we need men, not women. Race-conscious White women have their place in our movement (mostly in the realm of support), but they should not be the leaders in it. Any movement that has women as the core of its leadership will not generally attract and inspire men. We need strong, masculine men whom other men will look up to, who will model their ways and conduct before other men who have the potential to serve as future leaders.

Agreed.  No yeastbuckets.

(2) We need men who are older and decidedly more mature than the likes of Richard Spencer and others. This is not meant as an attack on Spencer, but it’s hard to deny that his immaturity has shown through on several occasions with him at the helm. Much of this, I believe, is due to his age and lack of maturity at times. The mistakes of our movement would likely not have occurred as frequently had we started with older, wiser and more seasoned men. Regardless of what has been done in the past, this is something we should at least work toward.

If Spencer wants to challenge his ban from Europe, probably that needs to be done through the courts, rather than trying to sneak in and having Poland’s “right, right, right-wing government”  (it’s all “Visegrad” you know, and all so “based!”) telling him to leave. That’s the maturity problem I guess, similar to what happened several years ago with the Budapest conference (another example of the “based” Visegrad group, I suppose) that was the ostensible impetus for the Spencer-Johnson feud.  Unable to challenge it in court?  Then don’t go.  You’re banned.  Yes, I know, not good.  But maybe if all the Beavis-and-Butthead/cosplay Charlottesville, etc. antics never happened, then things would be different.

(3) We need men who are married (and who have stable marriages especially!) and who have children. This is the ideal, and I recognize that it’s not always possible. Men who are leaders in their home, and who are not ruled by women. I know this will not go over well, but it seems to me that far too many of those on our side are young, unmarried men. A good many are against marriage altogether, and are not particularly keen about having children either. I believe this is the wrong attitude. It is healthy and natural for us to want to marry and procreate, and in this way we will increase our racial numbers and secure a future for our posterity. Condemning the institution of marriage and remaining childless will not be good for our people in the long run. Yes, I know a whole lot of American women are disgusting and rabidly feminist, but there are still some good White women out there. Where there is a will, there is way.

In general, agreed. But we need to solve the social pricing problem if you want more stable family men involved.  That goes back to infrastructure and the lack thereof, which is a failure of leadership.

(4) We need men who are moral and circumspect in life. This means they don’t say one thing and live completely opposite to it. They have consistency in both word and deed. They don’t have to be perfect (none of us are!), but only that their lives are not marked by deviancy, gross immorality, drunkenness, dishonesty, unethical business practices, nor the kind that would turn off the very people we want to reach with our message.

This would seem to eliminate a large fraction of activists, a majority of the leaders, and something like two-thirds of the Type Is.  And the madness of “White nationalists” with yellow fever fetishism is completely absurd.

(5) We need men who fully abstain from mind-altering drugs, marijuana and alcohol. Yes, I know there are some folks who can handle their alcohol and drink moderately, but my message is primarily directed to those who think they can be effective leaders while still consuming products that threaten their mental clarity and decisions. At this stage in our fight against White genocide, we ought to be the most mentally clear, careful and strategic thinkers out there. But this will not likely happen if we are alcoholics or addicted to marijuana. This is not the time to ‘party,’ but to be sober and wise.

The fact something like this has to be written tells you how pathetic Der Movement really us.  But then, again, given that some Alt Right “leaders” and their stepandfetchits make alcohol-enriched half-drunken Beavis-and-Butthead podcasts, this advice is all too necessary.

More:

Spencer has belatedly come to certain conclusions that I’ve been advising for many months – that is, to step back, make a strategic retreat, and build some sturdy infrastructures before stepping back into the public fray.  Now, I don’t believe it will be done right, and have no confidence for success, but at least he has minimally realized the necessity.

Another long Counter-Currents essay that boils down to…Richard Spencer: bad.

Hey, no attacks against Tommy Robinson too?  They’re slacking off over there!

The elements of National Socialism (NS) selected for emphasis by the enemy—military expansionism, Nordicist racial supremacism, sub-Nietzschean megalomania, genocide—were mostly conditional to 1930s Germany, the idiosyncrasies of Hitler, and the fighting of the Second World War. These negative phenomena may have been strongly represented in NS, but they are not the “essence” of the Right…

Really?  I thought these, at least the Nordicism, was at the core of at least the American “movement.”

A Mix of Good Sense and Cluelessness

A quick look at a relatively interesting essay.

Read here.

The Left has set in motion events that cannot be reversed. 

This is true.  Unfortunately, there is no one around to effectively take advantage of this opportunity.  We have the greatest outburst of political chaos and political violence since the 1965-1975 period, and the “movement” has (predictably) shown itself to be incapable of working with the sociopolitical material at hand.  Future activists will look back with shock and disgust at the lost opportunity of today.

The Left’s lack of control is pushing the Overton Window in the direction of the Alt Right.

In theory.

Every time Antifa attacks some guy who only wants to recite the Pledge of Allegiance and say a prayer in a public park there are many Normies who begin to make the journey to the Alt Right. Every time a politician of the Left makes an anti-White utterance the beliefs of the Alt Right are normalized a thousand-fold. And every time the Left makes excuses for the bad behavior of aspiring rappers, third-world miscreants, and European-style socialists, the closer we get to having the 14 Words enshrined as the First Amendment of a New Bill of Rights.

This is typical “movement” – to be more specific, Type I activist – bombastic certitude.  Is there any evidence – any evidence whatsoever – that any of the above is correct?  I’m not saying it is not correct, but I see no clear evidence that it is.  This is borderline Lathe of Heaven Syndrome – a common malady of Der Movement – assuming something is true because you believe it to be true.

First of all, if you cannot organize a conference and bring it to a successful conclusion, you are not going to be able to bring about a political revolution. The logistical incompetence of the Alt Right is staggering, to put it bluntly.

Two words: Hermansson.  Lewis.

Secondly, for a movement driven in large part by young people who were born during the computer age, it is more than mildly amusing at how many of them continue to ignore the inherent security risks of internet-based communications and fund-raising.

That’s true.  Is there any of them who do not fall into this description?

Thirdly, Boomers are not the enemy. The idea that all Boomers are squandering their children’s inheritances and living it up in their second and third vacation homes is a canard. Many Boomers have been fighting the battle against the Left and degeneracy in general since the 1960s when this nonsense first started. More than a few prominent young members of the Alt-Right seem to be afflicted with “Daddy” issues and have transferred their parental animus to their fathers’ generation.

Well said.  This “Boomer” nonsense is part and parcel of typical Alt Right Beavis-and-Butthead sniggering.

And finally, the Alt Right is in desperate need of political leadership. 

If I say that, I’m crazy and bitter.

On the intellectual and metapolitical fronts, the Alt Right has an abundance of well-read, articulate, and extremely intelligent individuals doing amazing work. 

Translation: the author means Greg Johnson.

The intellectual leadership of the Alt Right is second to none…

Literally, second to none.  I suppose that the only thing less effective than “movement leadership” would be, literally, nothing.  So, ranking degrees of uselessness, we would have (1) nothing/none, and (2) “movement leadership.”  It’s second to none!

…but it is ironic in a movement in which hierarchy and traditionalism are so important …

Traditionalism.  It’s the Kali Yuga!  The Men Who Can’t Tell Time!

…that political leadership has gone wanting. 

Here’s some advice.  Want real and effective leadership?  Ditch the “movement’s” ethnic affirmative action program.  What is really ironic in a “movement” in which hierarchy is important and affirmative action is so criticized is that “leaders” are accepted based on the same fundamental principle as the elevation of some clueless Negro to a position of importance.

The Alt Right desperately needs a serious political leadership that can match the seriousness of its intellectual leaders.

Translation: Greg Johnson (intellectual leader) good, Richard Spencer (political leader) bad.  That’s the implication, isn’t it?

Meme-making is important in any revolution, but meme-makers do not a revolution make. I seriously doubt that we would remember Betsy Ross today if George Washington had decided to remain a loyal British subject. For the Alt Right to succeed it needs political leadership and it needs structure.

For the Far Right to succeed it needs to forget about the stupid Alt Right brand (still being promoted at Counter-Currents, I see) and to end the affirmative action program.  Also stop favoring incompetent Type Is over more competent Type IIs (although the Type I preference may be at least in part a quota queen issue already discussed, but it is also independent of ethnicity – a memetic affirmative action policy).