Israel's Supreme Court has upheld a law banning Palestinians who marry Israelis from gaining Israeli citizenship.Note that, considering this issue, Judge Grunis appears to be sound on what exactly constitutes a nation, that is, it consists of a people, not anyone who can manage to get to a physical location.
Civil rights groups had petitioned the court to overturn the law, saying it was unconstitutional.
"Human rights do not prescribe national suicide," Judge Asher Grunis wrote in the judgement. [emphasis added]
In other developments, Israel is pulling out all the stops in its effort to deport illegal immigrants. The efforts include what we here stateside might call racial profiling. Prime Minister Netanyahu supports the new laws, and he's characterized the influx of non-Jewish immigrants as an existential threat to Israel. He's an intelligent man - supposedly with an IQ of 180, making him perhaps the smartest world leader since Frederick the Great - but the key point is that he appears to be allowed to say things like that because of the absence of certain restraints. While there are indeed people in Israel who want the country to refrain from expelling the illegals, another, perhaps widespread attitude is the following:
"Go to south Tel Aviv and you'll see people there living in fear," Cohen said. "Anyone who wants to steal a wallet from a person, or a box of goods from a store or a bike from a private garden just does whatever he wants. If we don't put an end to this, the issue will not stop."One wonders also whether Israel got serious on this issue because the new arrivals are Africans.
The mainstream media in the US doesn't even consider the maintenance of our historical population a fit topic for national discussion, yet in Israel they're not only discussing it but doing something about it.
(PS: Comments will be moderated for awhile.)
(PPS: That's over. Comment at will.)
This is too much...who will make the first move?
ReplyDeleteDoing in the US what Jews do in Israel would be anti-Semitic.
ReplyDeleteInveighing against ethnic profiling is inane.
ReplyDeleteThe US Supreme Court has held that it’s not illegal or unconstitutional, so long as it isn’t the sole factor used in searching someone, etc. It’s legal to make it a contributing factor.
Comments will be moderated for awhile.
ReplyDeleteYou're expecting this post to unleash a torrent of unpublishable comments?
"Doing in the US what Jews do in Israel would be anti-Semitic."
ReplyDeleteIs there *anything* beneficial to ourselves whites can do that isn't anti-semitic? or racist? or bigoted? or nazi-like? How do these words still get taken seriously by such a broad audience when they clearly don't mean anything?
One wonders also whether Israel got serious on this issue because the new arrivals are Africans.
ReplyDeleteIt's worth noting that this isn't the first time Israel has been inundated with black Africans.
There was a time in the 90's when lots and lots of foreign labor arrived on Israel's shores - from Romania, Turkey, East Asia, and also from West Africa (especially Nigeria). The difference is that these blacks arrived legally, but tended to overstay their permits. They also arrived on airflights, not by crossing Egypt and the Sinai desert. There were a lot fewer of them, although they seemed like a lot at the time.
This earlier black presence was decimated by the Immigration Police under Avigdor Liberman in the early 2000's. Probably the Africans also didn't want to be around during the Second Intifada. Unfortunately, the police don't have the authority to effectively stymy this new East African black exodus.
There still are a lot of East Asians - Thais, Chinese, Philippinos - in Israel, but they have a much lower profile, for reasons well known to readers of this blog.
Addendum: Actually, I don't think Lieberman had much to do with the immigration crackdown of the early 2000's. I'm not sure why I remembered it that way. In any case, it was PM Ariel Sharon's project.
DeleteJews don't express reciprocity and acknowledge and respect the basic nationhood of other peoples, especially of those peoples they have invaded or are invading, and especially of white nations.
ReplyDeleteIt's basic hypocrisy and double standards. It's no surprise when you consider the kind of evolution and selective pressures that diaspora groups with long histories migrating among various hosts are likely to endure. Jews don't accept this though, and they either attack sociobiological reasoning altogether (e.g. most liberal/leftist Jews, Auster, etc.) or they're into HBD and pick and choose the things from it they like or find advantageous while denying or ignoring what they don't like.
Well at the very least this gives us another example of a sane country. Japan can't be our only example. Check out the comments on those articles mostly supportive, and not in a "good for Israel bad for the US", but "why aren't we doing that, its common sense!".
ReplyDeleteReactionary_Konkvistador
It's no surprise when you consider the kind of evolution and selective pressures that diaspora groups with long histories migrating among various hosts are likely to endure.
ReplyDeleteGroup hypocrisy has been selected for.
By that I don't mean merely behaving contrary to your beliefs but rather preaching to non-kin groups contrary to the behavior of your kin group. This means your kin-group's preachers-to-others may behave quite selflessly and non-hypocritically. The key is their ability to spread biologically toxic memes to non-kin groups to which the kin group is relatively immune.
IHTG: How common are sentiments like the ones quoted in the articles about "human rights violations" and the like? Is it a tiny minority and are most Israelis behind expelling illegals? Or is there a more equal divide?
ReplyDeletePretty common among the young, upper-middle class Tel Aviv SWPL set. However, they don't have the political muscle to do anything about it. (They pretty much burn themselves out protesting about real estate last year)
DeleteIt helps that these black Africans are displacing poor dark-skinned Mizrahi Jewish proles in Tel Aviv's crappy southern neighborhoods. Helps neutralize the "white racism" narrative.
I must disagree with you. The SWPL set does a lot to prevent deportation. Israel and Netanyahu are good at making statements but little is done in reality. Remember the decision to deport 400 illegals with their children. Mangan wrote about it on this blog. How many have been deported? Maybe one family and only after receiving consent. Building a barrier is within the consensus, but actually deporting people usually requires their consent after being bribed, especially where children are concerned.
DeleteYou have a point, but it remains to be seen whether they missed the forest for the trees by getting so excited over a mere 400 children.
DeleteThat's not the main issue here. The main issue is tens of thousands of Africans, with thousands more streaming in every month.
Prime Minister Netanyahu supports the new laws, and he's characterized the influx of non-Jewish immigrants as an existential threat to Israel.
ReplyDeleteIs it too late for him to enter the Republican primary? I mean now that we've established the "you don't have to be an American to President" precedent and all.
"Is there *anything* beneficial to ourselves whites can do that isn't anti-semitic? or racist? or bigoted? or nazi-like?"
ReplyDeleteOf course not, and the same holds true for Jews. Israel is constantly being accused of being Nazi-like; of being an "apartheid state"; and so forth.
Which is why Israel is treated like white American are by the US government, right?
DeleteIn what respect?
DeleteFor a different take on immigration, see Mr. Pavan Rao's letter in yesterday's FT: "Multiculturalism cannot be called a failure".
ReplyDeleteIt's no surprise the academic left is so hostile to Israel. They operate as an ethno-state with (gasp!) theocratic elements as well! They even have policies to encourage Jewish births and encourage non-Jews to leave.
ReplyDeleteThey seem to have been highly successful at fixing their demographic problem. Which makes the defeatism (triumhalism?) you hear in mainstream conservative circles all the more galling.
It would be more correct to say that Israel has effectively done what it can to prevent its demographic problems from growing even larger.
DeleteThe problems, however, remain.
The Arabs still breed prodigiously, and it's not clear what will be done with those tens of thousands of East Africans that have already settled in our cities. Or even if this new plan will work without being screwed up by lawsuits from EU-funded human rights organizations.
IHTG:
DeleteSee Andrew Jackson, the US Supreme Court, the Cherokee Nation, and the Trail of Tears. If Netanyahu has the will, well . . . .
Of course not, and the same holds true for Jews. Israel is constantly being accused of being Nazi-like; of being an "apartheid state"; and so forth.
ReplyDeleteThere are plenty of whites who support the right of Jews and Israel to exclude gentiles.
Are there any Jews who support the right of white nations to exclude out-group members including Jews?
"Of course not, and the same holds true for Jews. Israel is constantly being accused of being Nazi-like; of being an "apartheid state"; and so forth."
ReplyDeleteThe only difference, of course, is that whites as a group (i.e., not the fringe academics, the general population) are supportive of Israel's right to exist as an explicitly jewish state, while jews aren't so quick to afford whites that same privilege in their nations.
"Diversity for thee but not for me" seems to be the prevailing ethos. After all, diversity is great in theory--who doesn't like more dining options? What are you, a bigot?--but unfortunately lofty theories and biological realities aren't always compatible, as Israelis may be discovering.
The whites who are most supportive of Israel's right to exist are Evangelicals, who don't look at things with a racial lens. They would be happy to have more African immigrants/refugees in the US, as long as they are Christian.
DeleteI go quite frequently to Israel on business and I can confirm they have their local priorities right, in terms of their demographic future.
ReplyDeleteOne of their national characteristics is that they believe that the future is actually going to happen, and spend what to (most of)us would be an inordinate amount of time investing in it.
Not only will the future actually happen, but they intend to be there when it does, so it is their duty to shape and influence it in a manner that is conducive to their interests.
Amazing.
Anon.
"(i.e., not the fringe academics, the general population) are supportive of Israel's right to exist as an explicitly jewish state"
ReplyDeleteCan you give me a few specific examples of this?
There are plenty of non-evangelical whites who support the right of Jews and Israel to exclude gentiles.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I've ever come across a Jew who supports the right of white nations to exclude out-group members including Jews, even among Jews who consider themselves to be conservative, subscribers to HBD, sympathetic to the alternative right, etc.
"Protocols," a nice little ditty.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XrRyqses5U
""Protocols," a nice little ditty.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XrRyqses5U"
*sigh* Sabril, if you want to be viewed as anything besides a flippant buffoon, you need to learn not to tip your hand so early.
re ditty
ReplyDeleteNice tune for just 3 billion a year.
Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you.
ReplyDeleteJust because you are not white doesn't mean the Jews are not out to get you.
I would ask, why did it have to come to this? Why not act earlier? Why allow major parts of Tel Aviv to be no-go for Jews? After all, that's the point of Israel (Jews can go anywhere in it). It is not like the US, where you can flee California for Utah, or Colorado, or the Pacific Northwest. So why so long, a delay?
ReplyDeleteIMHO even a place like Israel, with essentially ZERO margin, has so deeply bought into the Colors of Benetton that they believe in it. Politics is not really ideology, those decrying "Zionists" and "Jews" pushing Immigration of non-Whites ought to ask themselves, why so long did Israel fail to stop Africans and others from coming in mass waves to Israel? Because the emotional power of "anti-racism" is so strong, it is basically like "Witchfinding" in the late Middle Ages.
Please don't compare a trickle of Africans in Israel with the mass immivasion of the USA. The difference between Israel and the USA is that after a trickle of non-Jews has come in, the political system is working to get them out.
DeleteAfter America has gone from 89% European to 70%, the political system has not even kicked in. If anything, it is actually facilitating the replacement.
Israel still occupies a few million Palestinians who have no political rights. We are on the verge of giving illegal aliens political rights and they already have the rights to education, welfare, healthcare and everything that comes with birthright citizenship.
So please quit trying to use the example of a few illegals in Israel to rebuke the alt-right position that Jews push the multi-cult in the West. From where I stand, I see the good folks in Israel seeking to protect the identity of Israel and only wish we could do the same here.
He's an intelligent man - supposedly with an IQ of 180....
ReplyDeleteHis dad wrote a book that I've cited many times, and I would expect him to be highly intelligent. The source that you linked, however, has no credibility.
After America has gone from 89% European to 70%, the political system has not even kicked in. If anything, it is actually facilitating the replacement.
ReplyDelete70%? It's 61% European.
69% non-Hispanic white in the 2010 census. 12.3% black, 16.5% Hispanic, 3% Asian.
DeleteJews don't express reciprocity and acknowledge and respect the basic nationhood of other peoples, especially of those peoples they have invaded or are invading, and especially of white nations.
ReplyDeleteWhile I won't argue about the percentage of Jews the above statement applies to, everyone must admit that plenty of Jews do hold this opinion.
And I just don't get it. In a general context as well, I just don't get how you can give freedoms to one group that you refuse to give to another. I believe Sailer has referred to this as "who? whom?" It just really confuses me.
Maybe I'm really the ultimate liberal, huh?
"*sigh* Sabril, if you want to be viewed as anything besides a flippant buffoon, you need to learn not to tip your hand so early."
ReplyDeleteLol, I take it that means you decline to provide any actual examples of "not the fringe academics, the general population) [who] are supportive of Israel's right to exist as an explicitly jewish state"
Are you kidding? Basically every Evangelical Christian. (Or at least right Evangelical, probably not "emerging church" type folks.)
DeleteNames: Sarah Palin. Every major Republican candidate for president, excepting perhaps Ron Paul. (And really Paul just doesn't want to be involved, not tell Israel what to do.)
Can you please provide (1) a quote from Sarah Palin where she endorses Israel's immigration policy, or at least Israel's right to enact policies aimed at preserving its Jewish majority; and (2) evidence that her views are representative of that of the general (Gentile White) population?
DeleteTIA
"While I won't argue about the percentage of Jews the above statement applies to, everyone must admit that plenty of Jews do hold this opinion."
ReplyDeleteCan you give a few examples, with quotes? That way I can see exactly what opinion you are referring to.
"Nice tune for just 3 billion a year."
ReplyDeleteSure, he admits right in the song that his plan to "milk all the money from you." And he's a Real Jew with payos and stuff.
Maybe soon the US will enter a mutual defense pact with Israel. And build large military bases there. That would be unprecedented, right?
sabril is just another Jew who denies self-determination for white nations.
ReplyDelete"Of course not, and the same holds true for Jews. Israel is constantly being accused of being Nazi-like; of being an "apartheid state"; and so forth."
ReplyDeleteBut not by the Jewish political and media elite in America who have used those very same words to engineer the displacement and replacement aka stealth genocide, of White Americans.
This proves beyond any doubt that the Jewish political and media elite in America are ethnic nationalists who use liberal arguments solely as a weapon of ethnic warfare.
They don't believe in that stuff themselves they just use it to manipulate white liberals into assisting in their own genocide.
I would ask, why did it have to come to this? Why not act earlier? Why allow major parts of Tel Aviv to be no-go for Jews? After all, that's the point of Israel (Jews can go anywhere in it). It is not like the US, where you can flee California for Utah, or Colorado, or the Pacific Northwest. So why so long, a delay?
ReplyDeleteAnd this fella is Scots-Irish. Sheesh.
This is from an interview with James Rickards: War with Iran?:
ReplyDeleteThe fact that we, meaning the United States, are on a path to a war with Iran is very clear at this point. It does seem the countdown has begun and it’s coming to a head sooner rather than later.
“Things are moving very quickly. General Martin Dempsey, who is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has arrived in Israel and Israel is integrating itself with the U.S. European Command or EUCOM. So, at this point, the integration of the Israeli and the US operational capability, including NATO based in Europe, is very far along.
There are an enormous number of US troops in Israel. I don’t know if people realize that, but they are operating the THAAD system (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense). They oversee weapons that will shoot down incoming Iranian missiles.
There are joint exercises going on between the US and Israel. At the same time Iran is conducting war games. There are a lot of moving pieces on the chessboard at this point. This is not just war gaming or thinking about what might happen, the pieces have actually begun to move on the chessboard.
I have a friend who liven in Japan legally eight years, had a legal business paying taxes, etc. and his visa was not renovated. Simply they didnt want foreigners in Japan.
ReplyDeleteIf he had a good business, why didn't he apply for permanent residence status (eijuu)?
Delete"sabrilJan 12, 2012 11:09 PM
ReplyDelete""While I won't argue about the percentage of Jews the above statement applies to, everyone must admit that plenty of Jews do hold this opinion.""
Can you give a few examples, with quotes? That way I can see exactly what opinion you are referring to."
Sabril puts on his Socratic fake-obtuseness act - the typical disingenuous tactic of his "engagement" in bad-faith.
Here's one - Bill Kristol - even Sabril may have heard of him. He's kind of prominent in American Politics. He's also a founder and board member of the Emergency Committee on Israel.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/04/fns_roundtable_april_2.html
KRISTOL: "I'm a liberal on immigration. ....... Look, I'm not cavalier about illegal immigrants. I know that we need to have a serious debate about it. What damage have they done that's so great in 20 years? The anti-immigration forces said 20 years ago, there was an amnesty, which there sort of was, the Simpson- Mazzoli bill, which was pushed by the anti-immigration people, that Ronald Reagan signed. What's happened that's so terrible in the last 20 years? Is the crime rate up in the United States in the last 20 years? Is unemployment up in the United States in the last 20 years?"
KRISTOL: "I am pro-immigration, and I am even soft on illegal immigration."
And before the lying propagandist known as Sabril pulls his usual "I don't engage....." crap, he can save it - he can stuff it. I ain't talking to him. It's perfectly obvious that he is nothing but a partisan who will say anything, or deny anything, to further his cause. And his cause is not our cause. And our cause is certainly not his cause.
By the way, I do not engage with "Martin B" or "Anonymous" due to their past dishonesty in debates.
ReplyDeleteHere's an excerpt from a recent NYT editorial critizing Romney for his immigration stance:
ReplyDeleteMr. Romney has flipped and flopped all over on immigration, but in allying himself with Mr. Kobach he has lurched toward the extremist right. “Kris has been a true leader on securing our borders and stopping the flow of illegal immigration into this country,” Mr. Romney said.
....
Now let me make a few subtle changes:
Mr. Romney has flipped and flopped all over on immigration, but in allying himself with Mr. Netanyahu he has lurched toward the extremist right. “Netanyahu has been a true leader on securing Israel's borders and stopping the flow of illegal immigration into his country,” Mr. Romney said.
....
I wonder when we'll see this version in the NYT?
For that to happen, Romney will have to actually say that.
DeleteBy the way, I do not engage with "Martin B" or "Anonymous" due to their past dishonesty in debates.
ReplyDeleteHa ha, what complete and utter dickhead.
Sorry, a dickhead. Repeat, what a complete and utter dickhead.
ReplyDelete"Ha ha, what complete and utter dickhead."
ReplyDeleteLol, a stunning rebuttal.
"By the way, I do not engage with "Martin B" or "Anonymous" due to their past dishonesty in debates."
ReplyDeleteWe, in turn, don't engage with sabril due to anticipated future dishonesty from him in debates.
(signed by) The Union of Anonymous Posters
Here are three more quotes for Sabril, courtesy of Paul Gottfried:
ReplyDeleteQUOTE ON
One feature piece in the New York Times (13 December 1992) by Deborah Sontag, describes the oppositions in California to illegal immigration as “rudeness goes public.”… A leading advocate of increased American immigration, Julian Simon, observes in the Economic Consequences of Immigration his own “delight in looking at the variety of faces I see on the subway when I visit New York.”… On an equally personal note the director of Brandeis University’s Institute for Jewish Advocacy and an early sponsor of the Studies in Prejudice, Earl Raab, notes with pleasure that “half of the American population will soon be non-white and non-European.” Raab expresses relief that “we have topped the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.”
QUOTE OFF
Gottfried's paleo views are extremely exceptional in the Jewish community. The three quotes provided are very mainstream Jewish opinion.
Tim Howells
Sorry - in the previous post, an important bit of one quote was left out. Here's the full thing:
ReplyDeleteQUOTE ON
One feature piece in the New York Times (13 December 1992) by Deborah Sontag, describes the oppositions in California to illegal immigration as “rudeness goes public.”… A leading advocate of increased American immigration, Julian Simon, observes in the Economic Consequences of Immigration his own “delight in looking at the variety of faces I see on the subway when I visit New York.” So great is Simon's delight in the diversity of New York that, in recalling the sight, "I get tears in my eyes." On an equally personal note the director of Brandeis University’s Institute for Jewish Advocacy and an early sponsor of the Studies in Prejudice, Earl Raab, notes with pleasure that “half of the American population will soon be non-white and non-European.” Raab expresses relief that “we have topped the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.”
QUOTE OFF
Tim Howells
Here's what "the first jewish president" says about Israel:
ReplyDelete"Now let me be clear. Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is non-negotiable."
. . .
"Any agreement with the Palestinian people must preserve Israel's identity as a jewish state, with secure, recognized, defensible borders."
This is the same president who has directed his administration to prevent Arizona from trying to secure and defend its borders.
IHTG: It's worth noting that this isn't the first time Israel has been inundated with black Africans.
ReplyDeleteAnd the US has been inundated with Mexicans yet at your blog you've said they are no threat to the US. You also have a hate-on for Hungarian right wingers who are nowhere near as extreme in their treatment of Gypsies as Israel is with the Palestinians they cleansed.
sabril: Israel is constantly being accused of being Nazi-like; of being an "apartheid state"; and so forth.
Yet where are the sanctions against Israel? Jewish Americans and their Gentile conservative sycophants keep claiming that Europe is anti-semitic yet Israel actually does more business with Europe than the US. European sporting bodies allow non-European Israel to participate in European contests. The people (correctly) accusing Israel of being Nazi-like have little influence.
I don't have a blog.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIsrael doesn't even need to be a state - it has the political power of at least a dozen, gets all the federal aid it needs, has control of our military ... and it doesn't have to put up with nondiscrimination bullshit ... not a bad deal.
ReplyDeleteMy god, what pussies our nation is made up of, all these "conservative" Christian bottoms with torn anuses, pleased to be abused by their Jewish masters.
And now! The march to yet another twenty trillion dollar war, which if it doesn't lead to WW3 outright will create even more animosity in billions of Muslims the world over, whose animosity will then continue to be blamed by Jews and their cretinous Christian dupes on "dar al islam" or some shit, which will then eventually lead to increased terrorism, martial law, greater oppression (of guess who?), more immigration (to prove to our jewish masters we aren't racist), accelerating moral degeneration, and cataclysmic financial bankruptcy. Onward, ye counterjihadi soldiers!
Onestdv said,
ReplyDeleteI just don't get how you can give freedoms to one group that you refuse to give to another. I believe Sailer has referred to this as "who? whom?" It just really confuses me.
Maybe I'm really the ultimate liberal, huh?
I don’t know about the ultimate title, though if you believe it wrong to grant one group the freedom to immigrate to your country while denying it to other groups…then a liberal you are, alas.
"Yet where are the sanctions against Israel?"
ReplyDeleteWhy would you expect sanctions? If the US passed laws ending birthright citizenship and giving immigration preference to Europeans, we wouldn't get sanctioned.
"The people (correctly) accusing Israel of being Nazi-like"
Lol, they must base their accusations on the fact that Israel systematically rounds up Arabs and puts them to death in concentration camps.
And the fact that Israel constantly demands land in exchange for peace.
And the fact that Israel rejected the UN partition plan in hopes of going to war and conquering its neighbors.
Yes, Israel is just like Nazi Germany.
Some Jews say that without support of Israel, Jews would be migrating all over the world. But most Jews already live outside Israel, and they still migrate all over the world and don't move to Israel. They want a home base of Israel and unfettered access to every country and society. And as Israel becomes more Orthodox, migration is not likely to subside, but continue and even may increase as non-Orthodox Jews desire to get away from the Orthodox, and as the population increases due to Orthodox birth rates.
ReplyDeleteHere's a recent article on the growing influence of the ultra-Orthodox in Israel:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,808252,00.html
Some of these women wear full head and body coverings, like fundamentalist Muslims. They'll never show that on the MSM in the US though. They won't want the rubes to start thinking that maybe some of these people aren't that different from the hated Muslims.
Obviously Israel is like Nazi Germany in that it's a nationalist state.
ReplyDeleteWhether true or not, I don’t think it necessary to prove jewish conspiracies, malice, or any other character aspersions. A person only must acknowledge one prosaic and timeless aspect of the human condition: tribal warfare. And tribal warfare will exist until man does not.
ReplyDeleteThat these operations are now conducted through the media, academia, and judicial system rather than the phalanx, bow, or rifle apparently renders them undetectable to some. Though refusing to believe you are being pummeled will not deflect the blows.
And those thinking that the absence of mortar shells is tantamount to peace will find in the belief cold comfort when they realize their nations have been dissolved and they are soon to follow.
False Flag
ReplyDeleteA series of CIA memos describes how Israeli Mossad agents posed as American spies to recruit members of the terrorist organization Jundallah to fight their covert war against Iran.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/13/false_flag
It's nice to see America's best friend in the Mideast looking out for our interests once again...
DeleteOn a gifted man, they offered the grandmother of the new-born baby a DNA test to ensure she was not raising someone else's child.
ReplyDeleteSomething that is rarely offered to a man!
What hypocrisy.
are jews not white (i.e. say Netenyahu)?
ReplyDeleteI'm jewish and I'm for bringing this stuff to America.
ReplyDelete"AnonymousJan 13, 2012 08:59 AM
ReplyDelete"On an equally personal note the director of Brandeis University’s Institute for Jewish Advocacy and an early sponsor of the Studies in Prejudice, Earl Raab, notes with pleasure that “half of the American population will soon be non-white and non-European.” Raab expresses relief that “we have topped the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.”"
Tim Howells"
It's nice to know that Mr. Raab views the people of this country - the nation least threatened by Nazi Germany, and which none-the-less took up arms against it, and whose actions were therefore the most discretionary of any nation - that he views us as nothing more than latent Nazis, brain-washed Brandenburg candidates who are just one solitaire hand away from setting fire to a synagogue - a potential threat to be neutralized and nothing more. Thanks alot. And yet jews who think this way are mystified why some people develop a dislike for them (and no, that is certainly not all jews, or perhaps even most jews, though it certainly does seem to be many prominent ones).
By the way, your reply to Sabril will go unremarked by him. He doesn't ask questions to inform himself. He asks them to stall, dissemble, and obfuscate. He doesn't want to engage in a discussion in good faith. He is just here to insure that nowhere, not even in this little corner of cyber-space, can any two like-minded people get together and discuss the possibility that Israel's interests and America's are not one and the same.
And while I'm on the topic, in my own post, I was not replying to Sabril. I don't bother talking to him anymore. I don't appreciate him routinely calling me a liar, when in fact he is a lying weasel. Although I find Mr. Hannagan's assessment of him to be equally apt.
"It's nice to know that Mr. Raab views the people of this country"
DeleteThey project their own ethnic hostility onto the host which leads them to attack the host which eventually provokes a reaction which prevents assimilation - so as an anti-assimilation strategy their extreme levels of ethnic hostility works.
Unfortunately the invention of television seems to have short-circuited the reaction part of the sequence which means they'll have to do something extremely nasty to generate some new hate.
Reporting from the battleground itself, I see "slave-markets" in every industrial zone in Israel and even in downtown in the Southern citiers such as Ashkelon, Ashdod and Eilat. "Slave markets" are hundreds of Africans sitting or standing early morning (from 4 AM) roadside. The cars or the vans of the contractors drive by slowly and stop and select the workers according to their trade and looks and negotiated salary. Frequently I see police cars stationed on the other side of the road, never getting out of the car into the cold morning.
ReplyDeleteSo Bibi Netanyahu's proclamations are one thing, reality is completely other. I think we are near the tipping point where building is based so much on African illegals that throwing them out will paralyze the building industry. And the country needs cheap housing for young couples, so the Government needs African manpower. The Chinese are much superior workers, but they are unmanageable in the sense that they make themselves invisible, start businesses, get rich and settle in permanent chinatowns. Africans may be rounded up later, may be. I dont know.
On August 17, 2010 Mangan wrote "We Wanna Be Like Israel" after Israel's decision to "deport hundreds of migrant workers' children". Over one year later, December 4, 2011, ynet reports: "Israel deports 4 migrant workers, 3 children to Philippines" and "Since the government decided to take action to deport illegal migrant workers, 30 people have been removed from Israel."
ReplyDelete30 people
out of hundreds which they decided to deport, and thousands that are in Israel which they decided not to deport.
Isn't it amazing that the social policies that Jews advocate for the United States - such as unlimited Third World immigration - are the same ones that Jews oppose in Israel? Apparently, it is only racist when a white gentile does it.
ReplyDelete"Isn't it amazing that the social policies that Jews advocate for the United States - such as unlimited Third World immigration - are the same ones that Jews oppose in Israel?"
ReplyDeleteSure, because each and every Jew is responsible for the opinions advocated by every other Jew.
"Apparently, it is only racist when a white gentile does it."
Lol, Israel is constantly accused of racism. In fact, every year or so the UN holds an anti-racism conference which typically degenerates into an anti-Israel hatefest.
"Human rights" groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are constantly beating up on Israel.
Sure, because each and every Jew is responsible for the opinions advocated by every other Jew.
ReplyDeleteI'm curious who said that. Can you point to the exact quote, or are you constucting a straw man?
"I'm curious who said that."
ReplyDeleteNobody said it, it's the reasonable conclusion from "Average Joe's" implicit assumption that "Jews" are a monolithic group which, for example, advocates "unlimited Third World immigration" in the United States.
Unless of course Average Joe actually meant "some Jews," in which case his statement is correct but not amazing.
Why don't Jews in the US think this? Where's Kahane when you need him? Seriously, how long do US Jews think living in gated communities and the Upper East Side is going to help them?
ReplyDeleteI'm an individual of Jewish heritage, and I can speak to Sabril's comment. My Dad supports what they're doing in Israel AND supports whites not marrying other races and restrictive immigration laws. Mickey Kaus has been writing about immigration at Daily Caller for ages. Dan Stein is the head of FAIR. But to most people who have read MacDonald, this doesn't matter, because his literally unrefutable hypothesis allows for ANYTHING jews do to be interpreted as group evolutionary strategy. See Robert Pois here. http://www.ideajournal.com/articles.php?id=18 I on the other hand, wish everyone would stop being so tribal, even if that means most countries will end up like Brazil.
ReplyDeleteIt would be great if more jews in positions of influence believed as do you, your Dad, Mickey Kaus, and Dan Stein. Unfortunately that does not seem to be the case. I've no doubt that many jews believe as you do. But the fact that they vote overwhelmingly liberal and democratic indicate that most do not.
DeleteAlso, another thing that pisses off many of us gentiles is the double standard involved; sure, Mickey Kaus and Dan Stein can publicly advocate immigration restriction (and don't get me wrong, I'm glad if they do and good for them), but if anglo-saxons - those of us whose roots go back to the founding and before - do so, then we're just racists. Only those whose ancestors came through Ellis Island seem to be entitled to say that the tap should be turned off.
In reply to your other point: I am not particularly enamored of tribalism, but if tribalism is the price for not having my country turn into Brazil, then it's a price I'll gladly pay. I have no objection to jews looking out for their own tribe. I simply want the courtesy extended to my tribe as well.
Hey Martin. Thanks for your kind response. I think a lot of Jews would be much more sympathetic if they didn't sign onto websites like Kevin MacDonald's and see quotes like "THE ONLY SOLUTION IS EXTERMINATION." Furthermore, they would have been more sympathetic in the past if they hadn't been beaten up on the way to school three days a week like my dad, or relegated to sleeping in their car on camping trips because hotels were restricted. I just want a normal life man, it's hard for me to be sympathetic when people want to kill me.
ReplyDeleteAlso voting liberal and democratic doesn't mean we're opposed to "white" interests. The democrats are the party of unions, which should be sympathetic to less immigration. (Samuel Gompers, a Jew, sticks out here). In case you haven't noticed, the Republican Party are corporatists, and like the WSJ, don't give a rats ass about whites.
Delete"As a white person"
DeleteStep back from that psychotic self-deception for a moment and watch yourself lie, deceive and betray with every word almost as if it was some kind of innate evolved characteristic.
The democrats are the party of unions, which should be sympathetic to less immigration.
Delete"Should be" and "is" are not the same.
"The democrats are the party of unions, which should be sympathetic to less immigration."
ReplyDeleteKey word: "should." And nothing says unions like Goldman Sachs!
I just wanted to finish up with one thing. I fully support a full end to immigration to the US, and so do the majority of Jews (66% in a recent pole). But I don't think it's going to happen, and its NOT because of us. Think about what MacDonald writes in chapter 7 of CoC. Organized Jewery (not "The Jews") was trying to get rid of the National Origins system ever since the 1890s. Why did it suddenly change in 1965? MacDonald doesn't talk about it, but if you read any balanced history its because Teddy Kennedy decided he could find an ally in the black ethnic vote and other minorities by pushing through the immigration bill, which was in the spirit of the civil rights era which was being waged concurrently. It's hard to even say that Jews were a necessary factor, considering they had been pressing just as hard back in 1952 and nothing happened. Obama just appointed Cecelia Munoz to the department of domestic affairs, so like any politician, he's pandering to the Hispanic vote. Votes and Labor, in my opinion, seems to be what drives immigration policy. A belated Happy New Year and Holidays to all of you.
ReplyDeleteif they hadn't been beaten up on the way to school three days a week like my dad, or relegated to sleeping in their car on camping trips because hotels were restricted
ReplyDeleteAnonymous, I’d like to ask your opinion regarding the whites who you say treated your father so inhospitably…With the benefit of hindsight, do you think those whites have been proven right or wrong in their obvious belief that jews posed a threat to White America?
You obviously can't understand what I'm saying. If you are hostile to a people expect them to be hostile back.
DeleteYou obviously can't understand what I'm saying.
DeleteWell of course I can’t understand. Though be that as it may, you didn’t offer a response. I’ll try again: do you think the whites who were inhospitable to jews have been proven right or wrong in their belief that jews would have a negative impact on white America? I’m certain that you can understand what I’m saying.
If you are hostile to a people expect them to be hostile back.
What a very interesting theory. Have you promulgated it to the ADL, SPLC, ACLU, or AJC?
Anon 4:32 said
ReplyDelete"My Dad supports what they're doing in Israel AND supports whites not marrying other races and restrictive immigration laws. I on the other hand, wish everyone would stop being so tribal, even if that means most countries will end up like Brazil."
So you're not our friend. Your own dad was, but you're not.
For every Jew who is our friend, like your dad, it is *astonishingly* easy to come up with a counter example, like yourself, for example.. For it to be so astonishingly easy to come up with these counter examples is proof that the number of Jews not the friend of us American-Americans is vastly larger than those who are.
So Jews were pushing for it for 70 years - nothing happened.
ReplyDeleteThen white president comes into office and does it for his own political gain.
Conclusion - Jews did it.
As a white person, what has always disturbed me about the narrative of blaming Jews for our immigration woes is that it is obviously an attempt to avoid taking responsibility for our own failings. The main problem with that is not just that it is pathetic to blame others for things you have done, but that if we don't admit to our own failings, we will never be able to correct them. But it so much more emotionally gratifying to just scapegoat, isn't it?
Anonymous,
DeleteKindly explain your theory, because it's pretty goofy-sounding to me.
How, exactly, was the 1965 Immigration Act, enacted with the intent to rescind the existing limitations on the numbers of Eastern and Southern European immigrants, supposed to curry Black support?
Kennedy was moving on the Civil Rights act in 1963, so naturally thought to couple such legislation to immigration policy that was "discriminatory." Similar to Obama's slogan of hope, Kennedy sought to capitalize on fairness and non-discrimination. Make no mistake, Jewish organizations supported it. But as I've said quite a few times on this thread now, they had been doing so for seventy years! Why 1965?
DeleteYeah, yeah, I get it that Kennedy was saying "be nondiscriminatory."
DeleteBut that STILL doesn't explain why Kennedy's act would get BLACKS to support him more. Why would Blacks care about discrimination against EUROPEANS?
Fact is, they wouldn't have.
They'd have cared about ending discrimation against THEMSELVES, sure.
But against Eastern Europeans? Nah. Your theory doesn't hold water.
The only ones who would care about discrimination against immigrants from Eastern Europe would be people with relatives / friends in Eastern Europe -- that is, Jews. So, it's clear it was Jews pushing for 1965 immigration reform, and it was Jews that Kennedy was pandering to, saying "be nondiscriminatory" in regards to immigrants; it was Jews that Kennedy was trying to garner support from by allowing more of their relatives to immigrate, NOT BLACKS.
No, it wasn't Black support Kennedy was hoping to gain by the 1965 immigration act -- it was Jews'.
This dispute is literally unresolvable. I wasn't alive then and I assume you weren't either so we'll never know. As I said, donate to Numbers USA and call your local Catholic Church. I'll keep supporting the Jews I know to cap down.
DeleteBy the way, it wasn't just Eastern Europe, it was Eastern and Southern Europe (Italy). It's not like the whole population of Eastern Europe were Jews. Many of your fellow "whites" today are Pollacks, Italians, Slavs etc. Not White enough for you? http://tinyurl.com/84954sa
Delete"Organized Jewery (not "The Jews") was trying to get rid of the National Origins system ever since the 1890s."
ReplyDeleteYes. That would be "jewry". Jews also commonly refer to themselves collectively as "the jews". If you have a problem with that you should take it up with them.
"Why did it suddenly change in 1965? MacDonald doesn't talk about it"
MacDonald outlines a relentless, decades-long, multi-front jewish campaign that finally suceeded.
Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review:
"The AJCommittee made a major effort to keep the immigration issue alive during a period of widespread apathy among the American public between the passage of the McCarran-Walter act and the early 1960s. Jew- ish organizations intensified their effort during this period (Cohen, 1972, pp. 370-373; Neuringer, 1971, p. 358), with the AJCommittee helping to establish the Joint Conference on Alien Legislation and the American Immi- gration Conference (organizations representing pro-immigration forces) as well as providing most of the funding and performing most of the work of these groups. In 1955 the AJCommittee organized a group of influential citizens as the National Commission on Immigration and Citizenship "in order to give prestige to the campaign" (Cohen, 1972, p. 373). "All these groups studied immigration laws, disseminated information to the public, presented testimony to Congress, and planned other appropriate activities. . . . There were no immediate or dramatic results; but AJC's dogged campaign in conjunction with like-minded organizations ultimately prodded the Kennedy and Johnson administrations to action" (Cohen, 1972, p. 373)"
The PDF goes into more detail on who, what, and when.
I did read it, as was made clear in my earlier comment. You just obviously don't understand what I'm saying. "Cohen", a Jew obviously, self servingly claims that they pushed the Kennedy and Johnson administrations to act, but thats not surprising because hes bragging. The AJC's "dogged campaign" had been going on for seventy years, as MacDonald himself says. What should be obvious then, and which is supplemented in various other unbiased accounts of the course of events, is that Teddy Kennedy (coming off the heels of JFK's book entitled "A Nation of Immigrants") sought to enlarge his voting bloc by recruiting minorities and began his signaling by spearheading "just" immigration policy with fellow Catholic Phillip Hart. That is the reason the bill went through, but had failed for seventy years prior, most recently in 1952!
DeleteYes. The jewish campaign finally succeeded, in part because they broadened their coalition.
DeleteI understood you perfectly. You claimed MacDonald had nothing to say about why the immigration law changed. You were implying that the jews were not responsible, and somebody else was. That's certainly how it was understood by the Anon who wrote:
"So Jews were pushing for it for 70 years - nothing happened.
Then white president comes into office and does it for his own political gain."
He thought you were blaming Whites.
Now I understand you're conceding that MacDonald did explain. Understand?
No, because you're not making any sense.
DeleteLook I'm going to bed. In any case, my family nor any Jews I know I had anything to do with it. I'm not happy about it, but I'm not about to go holding all Catholics accountable either. Have a good night.
Delete"As a white person, what has always disturbed me about the narrative of blaming Jews for our immigration woes is that it is obviously an attempt to avoid taking responsibility for our own failings. The main problem with that is not just that it is pathetic to blame others for things you have done, but that if we don't admit to our own failings, we will never be able to correct them. But it so much more emotionally gratifying to just scapegoat, isn't it?"
ReplyDeleteA) You're blaming the victims, scapegoating "us" for "our immigration woes" which you attribute to "our own failings", and you do it while accusing "us" of scapegoating "the jews" for it. What you're doing is blaming "whites" collectively while excusing the jews collectively. Nice.
B) I don't believe you're White. At any rate, you don't speak for me. You don't speak for any "us" that I'm part of. You're obviously more interested in blaming "us".
C) I didn't have anything to do with opening the borders. The people and organizations listed in the PDF I linked above did. Deal with it.
Dude the act was passed by 85% of the Senate and a similar percentage in the house.
DeleteDude you should reply to the pathetic dude who is scapegoating "us" for it.
DeleteI don't think it does very much good anyway. If you guys are all HBDers you're probably determinists as well, so in that light it couldn't have happened any other way. The question is how to stop it now, if you're interested. I'd start by writing the Chamber of Commerce and your local Catholic Church. http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=395
DeleteTaanstfall, why do you enjoy victim status so much? In this you display a striking a striking similarity to certain other groups who have not been conspicuous for success.
DeleteAs a white person, I quite simply reject victim status. It is pathetic and unmanly. No one victimized us. We did it to ourselves. You might want to grow a bit of spine instead of wallowing in self-pity.
Recently I've been reading through the great 19th century novelists and I am struck by the great disgust and weariness they have with being white and being Western. No, the disease is our own. We invented it. If anything, the Jews caught it from us. We need to take responsibility for being the first race/people to invent and institutionalize the philosophy of self-hatred and radical xenophilia.
Maybe we can atone for this crime against humanity by being the first people to come down the disease and then recover from it? But wallowing in self-pity won't help us. Blaming others won't help us. Seeking victim status won't help us.
Anonymous,
DeleteThis, your 41st comment in the thread, could have been more succinctly written as: Because traitors exist, enemies must not. And I read Game blogs.
Once again, what you're doing is blaming Whites collectively while excusing jews collectively, with some ad hominem aimed at me for pointing that out.
DeleteOh, so your objection is that I blame whites collectively. A-ha. Somehow this objections loses its logical force when it comes to the Jews, huh?
DeleteI'm not blaming whites collectively, to clear that up. What I am saying is that there is some essential poison in Western civilization, that has been there since at least the 16th century, and that has its basis in the white genetic make up (just as the glories of Western Civ have their basis there too), and that that is what is responsible for the suicide of the West today, and that other peoples, including the Jews to some extent, have been infected with this poison.
Obviously I don't think every single white has these kinds of suicidal tendencies. But unless we as whites accept that the poison is something we created for ourselves, we will never be able to get over it. We will just flail about in the dark trying to blame Jews or any other convenient scapegoat.
I don't believe that you're White. You are however clearly anti-White.
Delete"You obviously can't understand what I'm saying. If you are hostile to a people expect them to be hostile back."
ReplyDeleteOh, please. Americans liberated the camps in WWII. That's pretty non-hostile.
Jews, for that thing alone, OWE us utter loyalty, even DESPITE some (alleged) beatings or rude refusal to rent motel rooms.
But, since we don't get that loyalty as a matter of course, but rather hostility, as evidenced by ADL (funded by the donations of average Jews) bringing suit against Arizona for wanting to enforce immigration laws, and myriad other examples of Org Jewry (funded by average Jews) taking anti-American-American actions, then by YOUR OWN METRIC that hostility in return is fully expectable, you shouldn't be here lecturing US, but should be SYMPATHIZING, and, better yet, lecturing your own coethnics to KNOCK IT OFF.
By the way, it's not like it was just "you" liberating the camps. 500,000 Jews served in World War 2. As long as you keep referring to us as an "other" how are we supposed to be patriotic?
DeleteJSM. I sympathize with your anger. I love this country and would be telling my fellow Jews to knock it off if I knew any. The three of my nine cousins in their twenties just married out of the faith and are raising their kids Christian, my mom is a Social Worker for a local parish. I haven't a damn thing to do with the ADL.
ReplyDelete"By the way, it's not like it was just "you" liberating the camps. 500,000 Jews served in World War 2. As long as you keep referring to us as an "other" how are we supposed to be patriotic?"
ReplyDeleteAs long as ADL (supported by the donations of average Jews) continues to act in ways anti-American-American, YOU Jews are the ones making yourselves "other."
Tell your coethnics to KNOCK IT OFF, to start defending the rights of American-Americans to our own country. That is, if you really are our friend.
And, YOU are supposed to be loyal to us American-Americans even IF I call you other, because had MY OWN DADDY and a whole lot more American-American boys like him not gone to Europe and liberated the camps, all paid for by many millions of American-American taxpayers, the Germans would have made mincemeat of your mere 1/2 million Jews.
For those MILLIONS of American boys who made liberating the camps possible YOU OWE us, their descendants, your undying loyalty.
Or leave.
-- And, at that, I've seen analyses that your 1/2 million were UNDERREPRESENTED as casualties, as compared to American-American boys.
I already am. Dropped off my hundred dollar donation to NumbersUSA today. Have a good night.
Delete"By the way, it wasn't just Eastern Europe, it was Eastern and Southern Europe (Italy). It's not like the whole population of Eastern Europe were Jews. Many of your fellow "whites" today are Pollacks, Italians, Slavs etc. Not White enough for you?"
ReplyDeleteI'm not aware of any American Polish Conference or American Italian Conference or American Slavs Conference filing lawsuits to prevent Arizona from enforcing immigration laws.
Until ADL, et al, are disabled due to lack of donations from ordinary Jews, I have to assume that their actions are supported in the main by most Jews.
Jews are the most affluent people, as a group, in America, as well as being exceedingly active in politics, and are eminently capable of making their views known. If Jews as a whole REALLY are against immigration, then we should be seeing some impressive evidence of it already; this is, after all, an election year.
The glaring lack of a massive movement by Jewry to stop immigration, on a scale equal to their massive support for mass immigration evidenced, by Anon's own admission, during the 1965 act, is evidence enough that Jews as a group are happy with the status quo.
This MUST change. And no more bullying or guilt-tripping American-Americans.
AnonymousJan 15, 2012 12:19 AM
ReplyDeleteRe: Your pictures of Maria Sharapova: I'm not sure what your point is. I'm guessing you think I'm a man, and therefore you can get my big head to stop thinking why to stop immigration, by appealing to my little head with some photos of a young Russian lady tennis player.
Wrong. I'm a gal, so that ploy doesn't work on me.
In fact, those pictures just ADD to my resolve there should be no more immigration, period. Because I have a beautiful daughter, and just like men don't like male immigrants competing for jobs and women, I don't want my daughter to have to compete with lady immigrants for eligible American bachelors.
Friedrich Nietzsche, wrote the following long before the 1965 Immigration Act, the Frankfurt School, the Boasian School, the New York Intellectuals of the 1940s, etc.,:
ReplyDelete“The Jews, that priestly people, who in opposing their enemies and conquerors were ultimately satisfied with nothing less than a radical revaluation of their enemies’ values, that is to say, an act of the most spiritual revenge…It was the Jews who, with awe-inspiring consistency, dared to invert the aristocratic value-equation (good=noble=powerful=beautiful=happy=beloved of God) and to hang on to this inversion with their teeth…saying the wretched alone are good; the poor, impotent, lowly alone are the good; the suffering, deprived, sick, ugly alone are pious, alone are blessed by God, blessedness is for them alone—and you, the powerful and noble, are on the contrary the evil, the cruel, …the godless to all eternity; and you shall be in all eternity the unblessed, accursed and damned!” [On the Genealogy of Morals, First Essay, Section 7, 1887]
Honestly, screw you. Christianity and the west wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for the Jews. You're not entitled to your alternate history where you get all of history excepting us. We're perfectly happy to stand by whites and the working class, but its not going to happen if you keep picking out individual things that some Jews do and hating us all for it.
DeleteI am going to concur by the way with the previous poster too. If you think the New York Intellectuals and the Frankfurt school had such a great effect than you only have yourselves to blame. They consisted of less than twenty people.
Delete"Christianity and the west wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for the Jews."
DeleteSince you read a site such as this one, I think we are agreed that the West is in a very sorry state. Do you really want to take credit for its state of disrepair personally?
"We're perfectly happy to stand by whites and the working class, but its not going to happen if you keep picking out individual things that some Jews do and hating us all for it."
DeleteI don't hate you whatsoever. Zero animosity. That you read or visit a site such as Mangan's suggests to me that we likely agree on many, if not all issues.
I know Jews in my personal life and they DO fit the stereotype. Stereotypes stop being stereotypes only if they lose all predictive power. The Jews I know are bright and gregarious. They also are strong supporters of ethno-nationalist Israel while simultaneously being strong supporters of divisive multiculturalism and massive third-world immigration for Europe and the Anglo world. But I do not hate them. Most people believe what they are taught to believe and never examine their beliefs. These Jews that I know personally are no different. They are not part of Organized Jewry, they are just regular Jews, but again, they DO fit the stereotype in their beliefs. You, however, ARE different because you read sites such as this one.
Having written that, I would like to briefly address your reaction to Nietzsche's quote. A quote which incidentally was lifted from a Jewish woman's article in VDare who quoted him approvingly. An article by Susie Green.
Apparently, it was good enough for a Jewish woman to quote approvingly but it is beyond the pale (pun) for a non-Jewish person to quote it. But I digress.
Your reaction suggests to me that although we likely agree on many issues, we are not quite on the same page. Your reaction tells me that you self-identify as a Jew and not as a white, or person of European extraction and heritage, or as an American. See, if someone here left a quote unfavorable to Ukrainians, or Poles, or Finns, or the French, or the Germans, or the Scots, or the Irish and my parents and grandparents belonged to one of these ethnic groups, I would NOT take it personally. Why?
One, because I would be smart enough to know that a generalization does not pertain to ALL members of the group under discussion. An eggregious example of extending a generalization to all members of a group would be Daniel Goldhagen's "Hitler's Willing Executioners"which argues that all Germans were culpable. Although both you and Goldhagen self-identify as Jewish, I do not lump you into the same category as him. After all, you didn't write the book.
DeleteSecondly, because I am no longer part of that ethnic group! This is true geographically (not born or raised there) but also true emotionally and spiritually.
The European debt crisis, for example, is interesting but I do not live in Greece or Italy or Iceland and so this does not affect me directly.
If for example, I was an American of Spanish descent and someone here made a disparaging comment about the Visigoths, would I take it personally?
What do the now-mythical Visigoths have to do with me? Insult them to your heart's content -- see if I care. What do Spanish bond values have to do with me? Will I take it personally if Moodys and Standard & Poors downgrades the credit rating for Spain? Or Austria? Or France? You, however, seem to think: Jewish yesterday, Jewish today, and Jewish tomorrow. Make any comment about a group of Jews (the Freudians or the Frankfurt School) and you seem to take it personally. If Tacitus made a disparaging remark about the Jews and it was quoted here would you would take offence? Therein lies a fundamental difference between you and me.
Thirdly, someone here wrote that his father (not him, but his father) was assaulted as a boy because he was Jewish. Well, I'm not Jewish but I lived in a predominantly Ukrainian neighborhood when growing up. I was assaulted and had eggs thrown at my house and walked through a gauntlet of spitting boys on my way home from school on more than a few occasions. Somehow, I didn't grow up with an animosity toward Ukrainians. Somehow, I didn't draw the conclusion that as an adult Ukrainians want to harm me or kill me. I knew that the behavior exhibited by these boys would not carry forward to their adult lives. The Jewish poster drew the complete opposite conclusion from his father's experience. Why is that?
If the European press claimed that America is responsible for the debt crisis, the war crisis, the pollution crisis, the [fill in the blank] crisis will you become uncontrollably irate? Because your "team" has been insulted? Or will you shrug your shoulders and say "whatever". But a remark against Jews and it's WW3? Why is that? Is it because you have not fully assimilated despite protestations to the contrary? Because if you have fully assimilated than you would not angrily write back "screw you" because you would have self-identified as American and not as Jewish.
"If you think the New York Intellectuals and the Frankfurt school had such a great effect than you only have yourselves to blame. They consisted of less than twenty people. "
DeleteSurely you must concede that most people living today don't believe that the earth is the center of the universe. Who is responsible for this widely held belief? There's Kepler and Copernicus and throw in a few more names. Does this group of highly influential men who have shaped our views consist of more than 20 people?
How about feminsim? You know, when that social plague called feminism really took off: in the 1960s. How many feminist authors can you count in the 1960s and early 1970s? More than 20?
Freud's inner circle consisted of less than 20 people. Surely Freud has not made a (negative) impact on this culture? Because, after all, we have only ourselves to blame.
Look, as I wrote at the top, we are both drawn to sites such as this one so it is likely that I have far more in common with you than with my TV-watching next door neighbor. Let us agree to disagree on the issue of apportionment of blame for the West's demise. Especially since you seem to take it so personally.
We must possess some serious voodoo mind power if we were able to have that much of an effect. By the way, you'll note that the most lefty Jews are now greatly assisting in Israel's demise and that we are out marrying at 50%. So much for group evolutionary strategy.
ReplyDelete** Look I'm going to bed. In any case, my family nor any Jews I know I had anything to do with it. I'm not happy about it, but I'm not about to go holding all Catholics accountable either. Have a good night. **
ReplyDeleteThat kind of discourse reminds me of what John Derbyshire said about people and statistics :
" Statistical truth is extraordinarily difficult for untrained minds to grasp. I know what I am talking about, for I was once a teacher of statistics. "
" I use a different thought experiment to illustrate this sad truth. Imagine you are addressing a room full of people. We can let them be quite well-educated people, so long as they are not trained statisticians. A room full of students from some university Humanities department will do nicely. Now say the following thing to the room: “Men are, on average, taller than women.” I can almost guarantee—it is nearly a dead certainty—that someone in the room will stand up and say something like: “What about Sally? She’s taller than any of us. Taller than you, for sure—Ha ha ha ha!” The room will then consider your thesis to have been decisively exploded. Men taller than women? Nonsense! Look at Sally! "
I'm sure that not every Jew is an anti-White pro-immigration activist, but that is irrelevant. What's interesting is that the ring-leaders behind the ideology of mass immigration are Jewish. And the media are under the domination of pro-immigration Jewish circles. Unfortunately, most Jews who write comments on WN forums pretend that they don't understand statistics.
K.MacDonald likes to take the example of Zionism: not every Jew is a Zionist, but Zionism has always been a Jewish movement.
J: "The Chinese are much superior workers, but they are unmanageable in the sense that they make themselves invisible, start businesses, get rich and settle in permanent chinatowns. Africans may be rounded up later, may be. I dont know."
ReplyDeleteIsrael is also importing workers from Thailand to do farm work. The contract they have to sign probably says that they have to come without their families, be sexually abstinent, and go back to Thailand after one year or so. Under those conditions, some immigration may actually be financially beneficial to the country.
Jews who visit WN forums often write things like "There is no Jewish problem since I'm Jewish and I'm against immigration - Why do you have to blame all the Jews?".
ReplyDeleteThey present themselves as counter-examples to the claim that there is a Jewish problem. But in doing so, they actually illustrate Jewish duplicity: they add more evidence to our case. Jews do not behave as we do. That is obvious even on an internet forum. They don't care about the truth.
It is true that some Jews actually think that immigration from the third-world to Europe and America isn't all that good for the Jews. That doesn't mean that Jewish circles do not have a crucial role in the immigration crisis. Anyone can understand that.
"I'm not blaming whites collectively"
ReplyDeleteyeah you are
"What I am saying is that there is some essential poison in Western civilization"
so true
"that has been there since at least the 16th century"
earlier
"and that has its basis in the white genetic make up"
This is where you're going wrong. Western peoples on average are more outbred - unlike Jews who've been closely inbreeding for 3000 years - this creates higher trust societies which leads to easier cooperation which leads to greater economies of scale which leads to greater surplus and wealth. The downside of a higher trust society is it's greater openness makes it vulnerable to very tightly-knit bands of inbred nepotistic desert naz...nomads.
"and that that is what is responsible for the suicide of the West today"
genocide
"But unless we as whites accept that the poison is something we created for ourselves, we will never be able to get over it. We will just flail about in the dark trying to blame Jews or any other convenient scapegoat."
Except, if you were Jewish pretending to be on the same side as us then you and every word you're saying is proof of the opposite.
"What's interesting is that the ring-leaders behind the ideology of mass immigration are Jewish."
ReplyDeleteWould you care to name 3 of these "ring-leaders"? Because I have a feeling that they are "ring-leaders" in the sense that Teller, Ulam, and Einstein were "ring-leaders" of modern science. i.e. they were prominent, influential, and Jewish. Of course, nobody seriously claims that Jews collectively deserve the credit for modern science.
But maybe I am mistaken about these "ring-leaders." Can you please name the 3 biggest (Jewish) "ring-leaders" behind the ideology of mass immigration?
There is no use with people who are convicted anti-semites They conveniently ignore facts that don't fit their preconceptions. One of them, which I noted today, is that Steven Rose and Richard Lewontin, who KMac and his followers accuse of being crypto Jewish racists trying to obscure their group evolutionary strategy, have publicly boycotted Israel and called for a one state solution.
Delete"AnonymousJan 16, 2012 10:17 AM
DeleteThere is no use with people who are convicted anti-semites...."
Convicted? Really? Who convicted them? Is anti-semitism now illegal?
Here are some facts that don't fit your preconceptions: Emma Lazarus, Emanuel Cellar, Abe Foxman. For starters.
I'm sorry those Jews did things you don't like.
DeleteI don't expect you to be sorry as whatever they did is not your fault. Neither do I believe that I am at fault for pointing out what they did, and that they share something in common.
DeleteOf course, nobody seriously claims that Jews collectively deserve the credit for modern science.
ReplyDeleteI recall having this discussion with you last year, Sabril. Good science is essentially objective, such that success is based on possessing truth. Public policy is essentially subjective, such that success is based on possessing power to promote your interests. Apples and oranges. Did Henry Ford change his stance on immigration because he realized he was wrong, or because Jews started using their growing financial clout to threaten his business?
Success in science depends to a very large extent on pure IQ. If my house is overrun with mice, and I ask ten equally intelligent people from ten races to solve the problem, each has an equally likely chance of getting it right. Race or any other trait doesn't matter. If on the other hand, one of those 10 people caused my house to be overrun with mice, the culprit becomes not at all equally likely and I need to ask "who had a strong interest in breaking up the integrity of my home," "who had the power to do so," "who has done stuff like this to their host in the past?" etc.
Moreover, just because a coalition of five people caused the damage, doesn't mean one can't be singled out to take the lion's share of blame. You have to do the thought experiment: who is the keystone without whom the enemy coalition could never have been built, around whom the enemy coalition gathered strength, and without whom the enemy coalition would quickly come crumbling down)?
I and others here maintain that modern Jewish power is the keystone in a firewall preserving the "prevailing structure of taboos" (among other things). You can disagree, but the science example is neither here nor there.
Generic comment about Jewish hypocrisy wrt multiculturalism and Israel
ReplyDelete"Sabril. Good science is essentially objective, such that success is based on possessing truth. Public policy is essentially subjective, such that success is based on possessing power to promote your interests. Apples and oranges. "
ReplyDeleteAnother difference is that "science" starts with the letter "s" and "policy" starts with the letter "p."
In other words, so what? The fact is that scientific advances don't come from nowhere. People have to come up with them.
Let me ask you this: Do you think that left to their own devices, African Blacks would have invented nuclear bombs?
Do you think that Europeans deserve most of the credit for modern science?
"If on the other hand, one of those 10 people caused my house to be overrun with mice, the culprit becomes not at all equally likely and I need to ask 'who had a strong interest in breaking up the integrity of my home,' 'who had the power to do so,' 'who has done stuff like this to their host in the past?' etc."
That's a different argument from the "ring-leader" argument. The example of science shows that the "ring-leader argument" is flawed.
Anyway, long before Jewish people had any significant influence in the US, Gentile Whites brought in hundreds of thousands of Blacks to labor and subsequently gave them citizenship and voting rights. Since then, the country has been moving steadily to the Left.
Anti-Semites would have us all believe that whatever has been pushing the country to the Left since the 19th century magically stopped around 1950 and from then on it was the Jews. This defies common sense and Occam's Razor.
"Anti-Semites would have us all believe..."
ReplyDeleteSabril would have us all believe that those who oppose jewish anti-White aggression are a bigger problem for us than jewish aggression is. I'd say that's for us to decide.
Incidentally this means deciding who us is. The harder jews like Sabril try to dictate a morality for Whites in terms of what's best for jews, the clearer they make it that jews aren't us.
"I'd say that's for us to decide."
ReplyDeleteSure, you are of course free to blame your problems on Jews, just like many Blacks believe that AIDS and crack cocaine are part of a White plot to genocide them. (Actually you remind me of a Black activist author I read who was always very careful to capitalize "Black" but not "White.")
Sabril: "Anti-Semites would have us all believe that whatever has been pushing the country to the Left since the 19th century magically stopped around 1950 and from then on it was the Jews."
ReplyDeleteI think the ideology of race-replacement is Jewish, not left-wing.
How do you define "left-wing"?
More big government? More redistribution?
How is that compatible with supporting race-replacement?
"Sure, you are of course free to blame your problems on Jews, just like many Blacks believe that AIDS and crack cocaine are part of a White plot to genocide them."
ReplyDeleteYou blame your problems on "anti-semites", just like many jews do. A "convenient scapegoat" is what the Anonymous who was blaming Whites called it. Nobody gets fired for blaming "anti-semites". Or Whites. As far as genocide plots go, why don't you tell us what you believe about the jewish soap and lampshade stories.
Sabril routinely conflates pointing out bad behaviour by certain jews with anti-semitism. He pops up the instant anyone questions the motives of any jewish organization or nationally prominent jew. Now I can certainly name any number of white gentiles who are hostile to the interests of white gentiles. Given that Sabril is fond of issuing diktats (name three "X"s before I will reply to you; name 37 "Y"s or I shall not take you seriously; name four "Z"s and make an anagram out of them in spanish, etc.). Why doesn't someone issue Sabril a challenge: name three jews who are prominent on the national scene, who you will concede are hostile to white gentile interests. If he refuses to do so, I maintain that he is nothing more than a deceitful dissembler, not handling in good faith, and no better than Whiskey or Yan-Shen, who should not be taken seriously.
ReplyDelete"You blame your problems on 'anti-semites', just like many jews do"
ReplyDeletePlease quote me where I have done so. Your choice.
"I think the ideology of race-replacement is Jewish, not left-wing."
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly do you mean by the "ideology of race-replacement"? Would it include the idea of giving citizenship, freedom, and voting rights to black laborers in the United States?
"How do you define 'left-wing'?"
For purposes of this discussion, I would define it (roughly) as advocating the use of government to give more and more rights and privileges to people who are not straight Christian White men, middle class or higher.
What exactly do you mean by the "ideology of race-replacement"? Would it include the idea of giving citizenship, freedom, and voting rights to black laborers in the United States?
ReplyDeleteClearly no. Giving voting rights etc. to a group already present in the US doesn't involve replacing anyone.
"Giving voting rights etc. to a group already present in the US doesn't involve replacing anyone."
ReplyDeleteSo if a bunch of Jewish intellectuals push for amnesty, that fact will not support a claim of Jewish involvement in the "ideology of race replacement"?
Many intellectuals, Jewish and otherwise, are adamantly opposed to the idea that the people of the US should have any say in who gets to live in their country. That's an ideology of race replacement. Clearly that's different from giving civil rights to blacks, who have lived here for generations and are a part of the American population.
ReplyDeleteI would define it (roughly) as advocating the use of government to give more and more rights and privileges to people who are not straight Christian White men, middle class or higher.
ReplyDeleteThat's an inaccurate definition of "left-wing", one which would count the Founders as left-wingers.
So if a bunch of Jewish intellectuals push for amnesty, that fact will not support a claim of Jewish involvement in the "ideology of race replacement"?
ReplyDeleteWhy do you spend so much time and effort making arguments in bad faith? Is this what passes for intellectualism among Jews?
Basic civil rights for former slaves does not equal "must forever give US citizenship to everybody who illegally crosses the border". And whatever your other faults, I'm sure you're smart enough to understand that. So why act so dumb?
sabril Jan 16, 2012 06:53 PM
ReplyDelete"Anyway, long before Jewish people had any significant influence in the US, Gentile Whites brought in hundreds of thousands of Blacks to labor and subsequently gave them citizenship and voting rights. Since then, the country has been moving steadily to the Left.
Anti-Semites would have us all believe that whatever has been pushing the country to the Left since the 19th century magically stopped around 1950 and from then on it was the Jews."
My mistake. Sabril blames his problems on "anti-semites" and Whites, by way of excusing the jews of course.
By the way, the emancipation of blacks was preceded by the emancipation of jews in Europe. That is the precedent, the template for granting citizenship and voting rights to non-Whites. In Europe it was imposed from above, in part by dictat from Rothschild-backed autocrats. In the US it was imposed from above as an ironic expedient of the war to put down Southern self-determination.
In both cases the emancipation was rationalized based on the presumption that non-Whites were willing and capable of sharing a government with Whites. As is obvious now, this was wrong. In the case of jews the quid pro quo of citizenship was that they were to drop their particularist, tribal, nation within a nation identity and activities. They were supposed to stop being jews. That didn't happen, as Sabril and the other more or less belligerent advocates for specifically jewish interests well demonstrate here.
long before Jewish people had any significant influence in the US, Gentile Whites brought in hundreds of thousands of Blacks to labor and subsequently gave them citizenship and voting rights. Since then, the country has been moving steadily to the Left
ReplyDeleteYou are reciting "Jewish history". Jewish history is history every Jew learns as a child from other Jews. Objectively speaking, it is made up of half-truths and untruths. The US did not move steadily to the Left between 1865 and 1950.
You are also attempting to stage a diversion from the topic at hand, which has nothing to do blacks.
Recently I've been reading through the great 19th century novelists and I am struck by the great disgust and weariness they have with being white and being Western.
ReplyDeleteI'd have to see some examples supporting this claim.
I can give you a counter example though. In the late 19th century an Australian traveled through China and wrote an account of his journey and impressions. You can read the full book at this link.
[The Cantonese are] the class of Chinese who, emigrating from the thickly-peopled south-eastern provinces of China, already possess a predominant share of the wealth of Borneo, Sumatra, Java, Timor, the Celebes and the Philippine Islands, Burma, Siam, Annam and Tonquin, the Straits Settlements, Malay Peninsula, and Cochin China. "There is hardly a tiny islet visited by our naturalists in any part of these seas but Chinamen are found." And it is this class of Chinese who have already driven us out of the Northern Territory of Australia, and whose unrestricted entry into the other colonies we must prevent at all hazards. We cannot compete with Chinese; we cannot intermix or marry with them; they are aliens in language, thought, and customs; they are working animals of low grade but great vitality. The Chinese is temperate, frugal, hard-working, and law-evading, if not law-abiding - we all acknowledge that. He can outwork an Englishman, and starve him out of the country - no one can deny that. To compete successfully with a Chinaman, the artisan or labourer of our own flesh and blood would require to be degraded into a mere mechanical beast of labour, unable to support wife or family, toiling seven days in the week, with no amusements, enjoyments, or comforts of any kind, no interest in the country, contributing no share towards the expense of government, living on food that he would now reject with loathing, crowded with his fellows ten or fifteen in a room that he would not now live in alone, except with repugnance. Admitted freely into Australia, the Chinese would starve out the Englishman, in accordance with the law of currency - that of two currencies in a country the baser will always supplant the better. "In Victoria," says Professor Pearson, "a single trade - that of furniture-making - was taken possession of and ruined for white men within the space of something like five years." In the small colony of Victoria there are 9377 Chinese in a population of 1,150,000; in all China, with its population of 350,000,000, there are only 8081 foreigners (Dyer Ball), a large proportion of whom are working for China's salvation.
There is not room for both in Australia. Which is to be our colonist, the Asiatic or the Englishman?
Read the whole thing, it's very interesting and, perhaps, worth discussing in a separate thread.
That is an interesting subject; similar arguments were put forth in the U.S. at the time of the Chinese Exclusion Act.
DeleteFascinating how our ancestors understood "diversity", and appreciated its consequences, so much better than our modern posers. Did they think "the Other" was "just like us, really", or "just like us, really, only inferior in culture", or "just like us, really, only superior in culture", as modern multiculturalists, with whiplash inconsistency, seem to believe? No, what you often get is a vastly more objective appraisal, disapproving and admiring, of the qualities and culture of "the Other". Best of all is the utter lack of the morbid modern premise that renders culpable the natural preference for living in a society best suited to one's own nature and nurture. There is nothing here of the alleged ignorance of, or irrational "phobia" toward, alien cultures, but rather the straightforward, unapologetic, and common sense conviction that a people would build the sort of societies that they wanted to live in, and had no obligation to re-arrange what they had wrought into a form that did not suit them.
How refreshing, in contrast to the modern mental pathology that dictates that certain people have to hand their countries over to others on silver platters, because...well, we all know the rationales, which are as various as they are contradictory.
Svigor, in a comment several months ago at my blog, had this to say about blaming Whites:
ReplyDelete"I like the "whites have only themselves to blame" thing. And I agree. Whites have only themselves to blame for trusting Jews. Whites have only themselves to blame for thinking Jews were anything at all like themselves. Whites have only themselves to blame for putting up with Jews' shit, trusting them, allowing them into their institutions, and thinking Jews would play fair. And they have only themselves to blame for water-carrying stooges like you, who put Jews ahead of their own folk. I hope whites wake up, decide to stop acting stupidly, and kick you and the Jews to the curb. Then they won't have themselves to blame anymore, because they'll have solved the problem."
It's easy enough to hold Whites accountable without excusing the jews.
Jewish Republicans concerned that Romney's immigration stance is "to the right of every Republican presidential nominee in recent history". Seth Mandel at Commentary
ReplyDelete"Many intellectuals, Jewish and otherwise, are adamantly opposed to the idea that the people of the US should have any say in who gets to live in their country. That's an ideology of race replacement. Clearly that's different from giving civil rights to blacks, who have lived here for generations and are a part of the American population."
ReplyDeleteActually there was a lot of opposition to importation of black laborers back in the 18th century. I'm speculating a bit, but I would guess that your average American was opposed to it but the elites at the time, for example Southern plantation owners, wanted it to happen.
Similarly there was a lot of opposition at the turn of the last century to opening the doors to Italians, Irish, and Jews. Again, I would guess that your typical American at the time was opposed.
I recall from history class that earlier in the 19th century, Irish immigration was a great source of tension between the North and South; the Southerners being (correctly?) concerned that Irish immigrants were enhancing the North's political power.
So it looks to me like these issues have been around for a loooong time.
"That's an inaccurate definition of 'left-wing', one which would count the Founders as left-wingers."
ReplyDeleteThere's no need to quibble about semantics; what matters is the underlying phenomenon. I imagine that the Founders would have been considered "left-wing" by King George. The point is that the general political trend has been Leftward for a long time now. Disagree?
"Why do you spend so much time and effort making arguments in bad faith? "
ReplyDeleteIf by "arguments in bad faith," you mean "rational, cogent arguments which happen to contradict the positions of anti-Semites," the answer is that I do it because I enjoy it.
"Basic civil rights for former slaves does not equal 'must forever give US citizenship to everybody who illegally crosses the border'"
Agree. Nice strawman, though.
"Sabril blames his problems on 'anti-semites' and Whites, by way of excusing the jews of course."
ReplyDeleteLol, again please quote me where I have done so. Your choice.
"The US did not move steadily to the Left between 1865 and 1950."
ReplyDeleteFemale suffrage (1920); minimum wage laws (1930s); unemployment insurance (1930s); National Labor Relations Act (1930s); Civil Rights Act of 1866; and Interstate Commerce Commission (1880s) spring to mind.
"SevernJan 17, 2012 10:29 AM
ReplyDeleteWhy do you spend so much time and effort making arguments in bad faith? Is this what passes for intellectualism among Jews?"
No, it's what constitutes intellectualism for Sabril. By the way, in addition to being a petty, deceitful little weasel, he is also a lawyer - kind of completes the package, doesn't it? The consumate dickhead.
I imagine that the Founders would have been considered "left-wing" by King George.
ReplyDeleteI disagree. And not merely because the term would have been unfamiliar to him.
The point is that the general political trend has been Leftward for a long time now. Disagree?
I disagree with that also. This "inevitable march of history to the left" stuff makes it sound as though some Marxism rubbed off on you. We're living through an unusually lefty period at present though, no question.
Actually there was a lot of opposition to importation of black laborers back in the 18th century. I'm speculating a bit, but I would guess that your average American was opposed to it but the elites at the time, for example Southern plantation owners, wanted it to happen.
The opposition was to slavery, not to importing black citizens, since they were not actually importing black citizens.
Similarly there was a lot of opposition at the turn of the last century to opening the doors to Italians, Irish, and Jews.
But the doors were not "opened" to Italians, Irish, and Jews. The doors at the time were open to everyone, by virtue of not being closed. And the Irish were already here by 1900. You spend a lot of time repeating the lefty lessons you learned in high school.
Female suffrage (1920); minimum wage laws (1930s); unemployment insurance (1930s); National Labor Relations Act (1930s); Civil Rights Act of 1866; and Interstate Commerce Commission (1880s) spring to mind.
ReplyDeleteSetting aside for a moment the fact that I don't see many of those things as being "left wing" at all, I could give you a similar list showing how right-wing the country was. The Chinese Exclusion Act, the immigration restriction law of 1921, Operation Wetback, etc.
"I disagree. And not merely because the term would have been unfamiliar to him."
ReplyDeleteWell for purposes of this discussion, how would you define "left-wing"?
"This 'inevitable march of history to the left' stuff makes it sound as though some Marxism rubbed off on you."
That'a another strawman. I'm not claiming that anything is "inevitable," simply that that's been the trend for a long time now.
"The opposition was to slavery, not to importing black citizens, since they were not actually importing black citizens."
Any way you slice it, they were importing people to compete with Americans for jobs. Besides which, a significant part of the abolition movement were people who wanted to get the blacks out of the US. That's how Liberia got founded.
"The doors at the time were open to everyone, by virtue of not being closed."
Are you saying that legally in 1900, it was just as easy to immigrate to the US from Europe as China?
"Setting aside for a moment the fact that I don't see many of those things as being 'left wing' at all"
Again, how would you define "left wing" or "left" for purposes of this discussion?
"The Chinese Exclusi