Committing PC's Most Mortal Sin

Vanishing American wrote a very long and informative post entitled On political correctness, multiculturalism, and their effects. If you have the time I encourage you to read it as a whole and then skip to my comments near the end of this post.

Here I will pull out what I believe to be the most salient bits. For instance, what is it:

Of course we all have a general idea of how and where these poisonous ideas started. Political correctness is also known as 'cultural Marxism', and it is an attempt to apply Marxist ideas to the social sphere. Economic or political Marxism focus on the means of production and the economic connection between human beings, or more accurately, between classes of people. In fact, the economic nexus is the explanation for everything in the Marxist world view. Cultural Marxism tends to focus, again, on groups of people, and on the power relationships between them. And of course those with power, or apparent power, are cast in the role of villains in the same way that the rich or the bourgeoisie are the villains in the economic view according to Marx. The downtrodden, the 'wretched of the earth', the workers, the exploited classes, are the heroes in that scheme of things. In cultural Marxism, socially 'exploited' or oppressed groups, those who are weak in some way, those who are less successful, those who are outsiders or outlaws are the heroes by virtue of their weakness and ascribed victim status. And the system of speech codes and social hierarchies which we call political correctness is just a way of codifying the social order as seen by the cultural Marxists, with minorities, women, gays, and Third Worlders (not necessarily in that order) as the apex of the pyramid. Members of those groups are to be treated with kid gloves, spoken of in exaggeratedly respectful terms, exempted from criticism and from accountability for their actions, and above all, must not be offended in any way, whether by failing to display proper deference or by using a taboo name to designate these groups.

Who originated it and why:

Much of the ferment in leftist thinking occurred in Europe, with the so-called Frankfurt School (link added) and Critical Theory, which attempted to bring down Western culture simply by relentlessly criticizing every aspect of the culture from the angle of every 'oppressed' or aggrieved group. It was an attempt to discredit the existing order of things and to foment more dissatisfaction and anger to be channeled into revolt. And of course by this time, the ideas of Gramsci, who advocated infiltrating all the existing institutions to bring them down from within, had mostly supplanted the old-fashioned idea of armed revolt.

How it ate capitalism:

There was a kind of collusion of interests: Hollywood and the entertainment industry wanted to sell titillating movies and music to a 'repressed' public, especially to the baby-boom generation, who represented a very lucrative new market. So good old capitalism was happy to collude, wittingly or unwittingly, with the left's desire to alienate and radicalize the young, and thus bring down Western culture.

How it coincided with (and I would say invited) the Turd World invasion:

At around this same time in the United States, we began to see mass immigration, on a scale unknown previously, and almost exclusively from non-Western, non-white countries. Slowly at first, and then more quickly, our cities began to be transformed, as more and more exotic peoples and their enclaves became an accepted part of the American landscape. However, during the early phase, most of the immigration was limited to big cities, while small-town and rural America remained as it had always been.

How under its rules everybody is special - except the white Christians who founded and built the West:

In the wake of the Civil Rights movement, Americans of European ancestry had become accustomed to learning to use appropriate terms for black people . . . Women declared that 'women's libber' was a slur, and 'feminist' was the accepted term. Asians demanded not to be called 'Oriental' . . . Homosexuals were soon demanding special rights, including re-labeling as 'gay' rather than homosexual . . .
And, thanks to the agitation by home-grown black Moslems, the term 'Moslem' was out, and the preferred term 'Muslim' was established . . . But this was the beginning in earnest of politically correct language in this country. One of the things which some people quickly objected to was the arbitrary nature of some of the terminology. The frequent changes of names.

All this analysis is spot on. One of the most identifying traits of PC is the use of constantly shifting meaning and euphemism. In support of which I would cite their obsession with framing, proclivity for deconstruction, and enthusiasm for demented postmodernism.

Vanishing American moves on to address the point that:

the West is being defeated by its own values, its own softheartedness and basically humane sensibilites. The Moslems, in Iraq and everywhere they confront us, are doing the same thing: they are turning our virtues into weaknesses by exploiting them. The Mexicans and other illegals who are invading and colonizing our country have our number, too; they know that for every tough gringo, there are half a dozen soft-hearted ones who want to help them, take care of them, treat them as dependent children. Thus we aid in our own destruction.

I've heard it said on numerous occasions that Christianity is to blame for this apparent weakness of Western culture. And I've heard it said on equally numerous occasions that Anglo-Saxons are the most liberal of all ethnic groups in this country. Look at Britain, they say; Britain is farther down the road of national suicide than other European countries. And here in America, they say, it's the WASP elites who sell out their country and advocate multiculturalism and 'diversity'. WASPs invented multiculturalism, I have heard from various people.

. . .

There may be a grain of truth, too, in the charge that Britain and America were more prone to liberalism, given that Britain seems to have more serious problems than say, France or Germany with immigration and multiculturalism. But did the British, or Anglo-Saxons, invent multiculturalism? I see no evidence of that.

All quite right I thought, but there is something to add. Something that is important I restate here for the record because it is something I've been grappling with for some time. It took great effort to think it through, and takes even greater effort say it. To do so requires commission of the most mortal sin there is against political correctness.

I started blogging a little over two years ago with only a vague awareness and revulsion at politically correct dogma and a mild curiousity about its origins and rationale. What I have discovered, slowly, is shocking, and it only gets more shocking with each day's news.

It began with the recognition that the West's education and mainstream media are biased and has progressed to the understanding that they are in fact engaged in mass brainwashing, an indoctrination with PC dogma under the cover of deliberately inverted language such as "free thought" and "fairness". It began with the recognition that this PC dogma interferes with the West's ability to recognize and properly defend itself from the threat of Islamic jihad and has progressed to the understanding that it denies the even larger threat posed by the immigration invasion, which is flooding the West with impoverished, uneducated, dangerous people, including Muslims. It began with the recognition that PC dogma is something believed and propagated by moonbats and progressed to the sad realization that elements of the Right, supposed conservatives, specifically the neocons, are working in concert with the Left in an unholy union called either Globalism or Universalism. It began with an assumption that Jews are white, civilized, and on my side, and has progressed to the tragic and most un-PC of all conclusions that they are indeed my enemy, because their collective words and deeds are destroying my past, present, and future.

As I said, this conclusion has been brewing for a while. Lawrence Auster, a former Jew who often calls out anti-Semitism, helped me recognize the false face of the neocons; and Steve Sailer gave their insane foreign policy a name: Invade the World, Invite the World.

The globalist agenda to erase the world's borders in the name of increasing trade is supported only by promises written on so much toilet paper. The "economy", we are told, requires immigration, because it helps the "economy". Well whatever this "economy" thing is it doesn't seem so important as to negate the obviously horrible effects of the immigration it supposedly requires. What good will any "economy" be when the only people left in the West are Turd Worlders squabbling over its remains? Likewise the Left's pipe dreams of "Civil Rights" and "Universal Healthcare".

Just yesterday I encountered the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. It was a long, dry, scholarly paper by Kevin MacDonald titled Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review. You may not want read the whole thing, but at least you should skim and understand it before dismissing me or the sentiments I'm expressing here as anti-Semitic.

A reader named Emerson left a comment for Vanishing American that connected the dots:

I’ve read sources that attributed the origin of Multiculturalism to a Jewish female sociology professor in Canada. I don’t know if that’s true but it seems plausible, as I see the same alien presence running throughout your essay:
Cultural Marxism, Frankfurt School, Marcuse, Fromm, historical culprits behind the Immigration Act of 1965 (Sabath, Dickstein, Celler, Javits, Jocobstein, Perlman, Lehman), Feminist movement (Stein, Freidan, Abzug), the sexual revolution (Freud), 1960s radicals (Hoffman, Horowitz, Elsberg) the Civil Rights movement (SPLC and the Reds), the militant homosexual movement (ACLU, ADL, SPLC), the Universal Nation (Wattenberg, Podhoretz, Kristol, Jacoby, and Shylock), Aztecs marching in our streets (funding by Soros), culminating with the neoconservative movement to initiate genocide on all those nasty Arabs, Persians, Iraqis, Turks, Syrians and Kurds, using the American gentile military.
They do have a history: Jebusites, Hittites, Ammorites, Philistines…
It almost makes one paranoid, or wise.

I’ve also read that multiculturalism was invented to mask the failure of blacks to rise to white standards, after it was obvious that Zangwill’s melting pot didn’t work for blacks or Emma’s refuse, but only worked for Christian Europeans.

Also, your observation is true that the West is being defeated by it’s own values and humane sensibilities. American Christians just don’t grasp the fact that white altruism (Do unto others…) is not a trait of the other races, not even the race that passes itself off as white.

The comment I then left sums up my reasoning and makes the point I wished to reiterate and record here:

I agree with Emerson. And I'd also point out that to criticize Jews is to break the most fundamental of all PC strictures.

Isn't it absurd that anyone would even think to blame Christianity or WASPs for the rise of PC and its catastrophic consequences? Isn't this in fact a reversal of the truth? Hasn't the rise and spread of PC eroded the power of Christianity, WASPs, and whites in general? Blaming them is in effect blaming the victim.

Yes, there are Christians, WASPs, and whites who have fallen for the PC brainwashing. Yes, there are some who have taken it so deeply to heart that they work to expand and protect it. That's the nature of PC. That is its purpose. To control the minds of the people it seeks to destroy. The left, at its root, is all about destruction.

You don't have to be an anti-Semite to notice where these ideas originate from and who benefits. But you do have to violate PC to say: Jews. Why is that? Is it factually incorrect to note that the West's entertainment, mass media, and banking systems are disproportionately controlled, even dominated, by Jews? Am I imagining their inordinate sway in academia? Is it pure speculation to note that these institutions overwhelmingly favor everything PC - they are the very tools by which PC is spread?

If we are going to break the chains of PC then we must not be afraid to speak such truths. The very idea to blame WASPs and Christianity, while ignoring the role of Jews, is an indication just how powerful PC is. But it can and must be broken if we are to fix what is wrong with Western civilization.

Jews are not the only enemy, and not all Jews are enemies. I'm not going to sugar coat what I have to say any more than that.

New York to License Invaders

The mind reels:

They were celebrating outside the governor's office Friday as Eliot Spitzer handed a landmark victory to a half-million illegal immigrants.

The state will no longer require proof of citizenship for driver's licenses.

"We're changing our policy with respect to getting more people out of shadows and into the system so people don't hide they're here," Spitzer said.

He said the current restrictions on non-citizens have filled the roads with unlicensed drivers five times more likely to get into accidents.

But the also called it a matter of justice.

"As long as I'm governor we won't pretend they don't exist, cut them off from society," Spitzer said.

A matter of justice? In what way is this just, and to who? Who besides Spitzer is trying to pretend these invaders don't exist? We the People know very well they exist. We want them deported. Sending the invaders home is the only true solution to all the problems they cause, and is the only thing that would be just to the tax-paying law-abiding citizens of this country. We the People are the ones whose welfare and interests Spitzer should be primarily concerned about. And We the People does not include illegal alien invaders.

It is hard to believe there are any states that issue driver's licenses to invaders, but there are. In the past few years several states have stopped, and for good reason:

The recommendation of the 9/11 Commission led to the adoption of the REAL ID Act in early 2005. It is a measure designed to encourage the states to change their lax driver’s license standards over the next few years. The REAL ID Act provisions established national standards for the issuance of driver's licenses that will effectively bar people who are in the country illegally from obtaining them, barred people who have ties to terrorist organizations from taking advantage of our political asylum process, and provided for completion of the border security fence along the Mexican border.

New York is ignoring this good sense and has decided instead to aid and abet the invaders. Invaders that even the mainstream media reporter quoted above points out are far more likely to get into accidents. Is giving them licenses going to significantly reduce their accident rate? Of course not. Is it going to reduce road congestion? No. Is is going to reduce gas prices? No. New York can expect all of these problems to get worse. This is the price tag for Eliot Spitzer's ignoble efforts to bring the invaders "out of the shadows".

More importantly, what it will do is make it more difficult to identify invader-drivers in New York, and thus it will mask their deadly driving habits from public scrutiny. The effect is very much like the LAPD's recent decision to stop impounding cars driven by unlicensed drivers. Contrary to Spitzer's claim that he wants to stop pretending the invaders don't exist, that is exactly what giving them licenses allows him and the police to do. Ignore them.

Except issuing them a license is even worse than simply ignoring them. A valid drivers license is the most valued form of identification in this country - having one makes it much easier for invaders to pretend they are here legally and live normally. Giving them a license is much worse than looking the other way. It gives them something they deperately want. That's why the invaders and their supporters are celebrating in New York.

I wonder. Is Spitzer's next bright idea to "solve" the illegal handgun problem by giving out permits, no questions asked?

A message board poster points out that this proposal is not just ill-conceived, it is illegal:

Federal Immigration and Nationality Act
Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

"Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."

Rather than recognizing the clear threat the invaders pose to his countrymen and doing everything in his power to protect them, Spitzer has instead chosen to accept the invaders and permit them, with his blessing, to continue killing his countrymen. New York Governor Eliot Spitzer is a traitor.

It is not sufficient that this proposal be withdrawn. Spitzer must be removed from office and prosecuted. If this does not happen then I sincerely hope some good vigilante takes the law into his own hands and sends a clear message to all of our traitorous leaders. Enough is enough. Stop the invasion. Defend our country. Treason will not be tolerated.

Update: Use this email form to contact Spitzer. Tell him you see through his bullshit excuses and call out his betrayal.

Update, 24 Sept 2007: Here is a link to the US Code section cited above, though it hardly matters what it says. The root of all our problems controlling immigration are precisely that our leaders will not enforce our laws. The law doesn't matter to them. Which is why it's absurd to call for new laws. We don't need new laws, we need new leaders. Leaders who will enforce the laws we already have, fill our treasonous courts with loyal Americans, tell the Latino bigots to shut up, and eject the invaders rather than comforting them.

Read Heather Mac Donald's The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave. Since she wrote that three years ago the number of invaders has only increased, the crime and violence they bring has only worsened, and our enforcement has only weakened. Lots of talk, no action. Kabuki theater while the invasion continues unabated. How much longer can this go on before party-line Republicans and Democrats realize their precious economy and Civil Rights will evaporate as our society disintegrates in the face of the lawlessness and balkanization the immigration invasion brings?

Update, 25 Sept 2007: In North Carolina invaders aren't supposed to get licenses, but according to a loyal American whistleblower they do anyway, and he got fired for having a problem with it:

Brown said in the lawsuit that he repeatedly told supervisors he was issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants or suspected illegal immigrants. He also told them he was issuing standard eight-year driver's licenses to people with visas that expired in as little as six months. State law allows neither.

Via American Renaissance.

Political Correctness + Multiculturalism + Diversity = White Extinction

Only 16 million Hispanic voters will be eligible to cast ballots in next year's election - so why are so many of our politicians acting like they run the country? The politically correct answer: a sign of respect to the fastest-growing segment of American society. The unpleasant truth: it is a craven capitulation to a flood of invaders coming from Latin America to fulfill their dreams of reconquista.

What is reconquista? The politically correct answer: a completely bogus conspiracy theory/fantasy/boogeyman imagined by anti-immigration activists. The unpleasant truth:

"It doesn't end with secession," Norwood wrote. "The final plan includes the ethnic cleansing of Americans of European, African and Asian descent out of `Aztlan.'"

Reconquista is a fantasy, a brown supremacist fantasy that's coming true. The ethnic cleansing is well underway.

Why have European elites invited Muslims to flood their countries? The politically correct answer: there is no danger from Islam, only bigotry. The unpleasant truth: Saying there is a problem with Islam is considered bigotry worthy of repression. As accommodating and tolerant of Islam as Europeans have been, it still hasn't been enough. They have been attacked, by doctors even, and will continue to be attacked until the only diversity that remains will be of the very narrow sort permitted by Sharia, and the only culture that remains will be an Islamic culture.

Throughout the Western world the citizenry sees this growing threat, and implores their leaders to do something. Yet instead of stopping immigration they increase it. Instead of enforcing immigration laws and securing our borders they make excuses why it can't be done and open the gates ever wider.

It is clear our elites put a very high priority on immigration. The media boosts only those political candidates who are pro-invasion. Any candidate who strongly opposes immigration is portrayed as a marginal nutjob who can't possibly be elected. The power of this propaganda is difficult to overestimate. Observe the number of people who regurgitate the media's sentiments with barely any direct knowledge to support them. Do they control your mind? Do you know what Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo stand for or against before you call them kooks and say they have no hope to win an election?

What is the purpose of the immigration invasion? Does it matter? It is an essential element of the elite's globalist agenda, their pyramid scheme, steroids for their almighty economy. But there is no need to chase them down their rabbit hole, no need to debate how much wealth trickles down or whether Wal-Mart is good or bad. Whatever the justification, whatever the goal, immigration is destroying our culture, our infrastructure, our families, and our quality of life.

Yes, it makes the immigrants very happy. And yes, it makes the elites very rich. But why would the citizenry, the ordinary folk who are being disenfranchised and displaced, why would any of us favor immigration? Having until recently been of that belief myself and to this day encountering many others who still are I can say with certainty that the main reason is delusion.

Every day the news brims with the disastrous consequences of immigration. But most of this isn't seen for what it is, not only because to do so is politically incorrect but also because we are simultaneously fed a constant dose of pro-immigration propaganda. There is a constant stream of statements from people in positions of authority to the effect that immigration is wonderful, it is essential, and without it our economy would collapse. None of it is true. It is a deliberate inversion of reality. It is disinformation.

Upon examination every justification for immigration boils down to either benefits for the elites or benefits for the invaders. There is nothing for the citizenry but the imaginary joys of multiculturalism and diversity. And if you don't enjoy watching your culture be dismantled and your town being overrun by invaders? The explanation for such political incorrectness is that you must be crazy or mean, and probably both. Whether you're a loser who can't stand competition, a paranoid who imagines conspiracies, a racist who just doesn't like brown people, a xenophobe who hates foreigners, a fascist craving boxcars and concentration camps, or all of the above. You are nothing but a hater driven by irrational fear.

Multiculturalism and diversity are lies. When our elites tell us to "celebrate diversity" they're asking us to celebrate our demise.

Am I worried about America and all of its ordinary law-abiding tax-paying Americans? Yes. But I'm also concerned about Europe. And I'm particularly concerned about my race. Under the strictures of political correctness whites aren't supposed to criticize other races, even indirectly, and it is absolutely verboten to consider what might be good or bad for whites. Non-whites are free to think and talk all day long about their race, to dedicate their lives and their fortunes entirely to that cause, and to speculate what is in their own collective best interest. Far from being frowned upon, it's considered noble. It is only fair that the same should be true for whites. Political correctness forbids this. Thus I reject political correctness and everything associated with it. Those under its influence are misinformed. Those who preach it are evil.

I reject the requirement that whites must stand by and watch silently as their race, which is already an overall minority of the world's population, is reduced to minority status everywhere. Minorities are often abused, and whites have been so thoroughly demonized and unfairly tarred with the blame for the ills of the world that we know what to expect wherever we are outnumbered. We are brutalized. The violence begins even before we are outnumbered. Look at our cities. When and where we slip entirely from power we can expect far more grim treatment. Look at South Africa or Zimbabwe.

So I ask, what is it about replacing the white majorities in the US and Europe with non-white aliens that is so good? Can somebody explain this? Why are we blamed for resenting what we didn't ask for and so clearly don't want? Aren't we entitled to protect our ever dwindling homelands?

Of course we are.

Update, 15 Sept 2007: The insane denial continues in Europe:

We have to look at immigration not as a threat but – when well-managed, and that is our new task – as an enrichment and as an inescapable phenomenon of today’s world.

Enrichment? Inescapable phenomena? Unbelievable.

Update, 15 Sept 2007 #2: Two frank assessments of what happened in Brussels this week: Democratic Europe RIP, and And Shariah For All? When US elites announced their collaboration with the invaders we at least had the opportunity to publicly and peacefully rebuke them. Opponents of the European elites will not have that opportunity. If the people cannot get redress via the vote or peaceful demonstrations then only one avenue remains. In the US it's still possible to hope that the treasonous bureaucrats can be deposed in a bloodless reboot. In Europe, it seems clear now, if it happens at all it's going to be bloody.

Sippenhaft: Great Idea

Read about it.

The poster is, according to the United Nations, the sinister symbol of the rise of a new racism and xenophobia in the heart of one of the world's oldest independent democracies.

A worrying new extremism is on the rise. For the poster – which bears the slogan "For More Security" – is not the work of a fringe neo-Nazi group. It has been conceived – and plastered on to billboards, into newspapers and posted to every home in a direct mailshot – by the Swiss People's Party (the Schweizerische Volkspartei or SVP) which has the largest number of seats in the Swiss parliament and is a member of the country's coalition government.

Racism, xenophobia, and extremism! According to the UN! Oh my! The tone of the article is so overwrought I could hardly keep from laughing. To the author, the idea that a nation and its people might have the temerity to act in their own self interest is obviously heretical - why it completely violates multicultural dogma!

The PC police have terrorized us for decades with their grim tone and scary names. Sippenhaft is something the Nazis did, huh? Well then, maybe they had some other good ideas. Give the scaremongering a rest you liberal twits. Some of us are wise to your treasonous tricks and we're conscious of a real threat. You invite barbarian invaders to walk among us and then propose we simply act natural, not panic, and hand over everything with a smile? Jam it.

This article is a very long but informative read. What it makes clear, from a Muslim point of view, is why the Swiss are smart not to follow the path of the Dutch, the path to suicide the preachers of multiculturalism and diversity urge us all to follow.

Update, 15 Sept 2007: Here's the homepage of the Schweizerische Volkspartei, which links to some Swiss alien crime statistics:

Insgesamt (altogether): 52.8%
Koerperverletzung (body-violation): 52.7%
Vorsaetzliche Toetung (premeditated murder): 55.5%
Erpressung (extortion): 66%
Vergewaltigung (rape): 85.5%

From the Independent article:

* More than 20 per cent of the Swiss population, and 25 per cent of its workforce, is non-naturalised.

* At the end of 2006, 5,888 people were interned in Swiss prisons. 31 per cent were Swiss citizens – 69 per cent were foreigners or asylum-seekers.

The aliens, who are only one fifth of the population, are committing more than half the crime!

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the US had a political party, or even one candidate for president, who would face the similar unpleasant reality we have here? Google state most wanted, or sheriff most wanted for a sobering illustration of that problem (thanks to Katie's Dad 2.0).

Invasion Evasion

The most important question of last night's debate:

Lieutenant, give us an idea of what it is you see, and then what it is you are worried about?

J. ROGERS: Well, we're overwhelmed in the street. I mean, just the crimes are getting more violent. They're out of control. We can't communicate with these immigrants. My concern is these illegal immigrants get here, you know -- what makes you think that they're going to follow any of these rules put in place?

They're not. Either you can build all the fences you want. If you don't man them, they're going to go over them, they're going to go under them. They're still going to get in here.

What are you going to do with the illegal immigrants that are already here? How are you going to handle that problem? There's millions of them.

The opportunities I've had to deal with the situation -- you call INS; they won't even come down and talk to you. They're just understaffed, undermanned. What are you going to do about that?

CAMERON: So we're going to spin this one back to both John McCain and Rudy Giuliani and ask the lieutenant's question: How can you not call it amnesty?

Yes, spin away Cameron. The officer said law enforcement and ICE are overwhelmed with immigrants and asked what are we going to do with the ones already here? Watch as the media's top three GOP darlings eagerly talk about anything but the officer's call for reinforcement and leadership:



Guiliani blathers about IDs. Promises to secure the border. Never says what to do with the invaders already here. Can we assume he wants to issue them all IDs? How that will address the threat they pose to our country? What will we do if they refuse to carry the IDs? And by the way, Earth to Rudy...most of the rest of the country doesn't want to be anything like New York City.

McCain blathers about his shamnesty's toothless "enforcement" provisions. Then he talks about how wonderful "these people" are because some of them are working hard and dying in Iraq. Does he think we're all stupid? He must. How else could he answer a question about illegal alien invaders with a story about legal immigrant US soldiers? McCain, like so many invasion supporters, thinks "these people" (you know who he means) are better than his own countrymen. Despicable.

McCain is already toast, but you wouldn't know that from the time they gave him.

Romney chimed in at the end to point out that the Z visa would have legalized all the aliens immediately. He wants to crack down on the magnets: sanctuary cities and employers. He favors legal immigration but not illegal immigration. Sorry. No cigar. He doesn't answer the question: what do we do with the ones already here? Of course we should put an end to the sanctuary cities and crack down on employers. But that won't solve the problems. They don't just come here for jobs and they don't just live in sanctuary cities.

None of these guys comes close to recognizing the invasion for what it is, for the damage it's doing, or the drastic steps that will be required in order for us to keep this country from becoming a balkanized turd world shithole with a banana republic government. With the massive political corruption that tolerates sanctuary cities and a wide open border, despotic judges ignoring the laws and the will of the public, and mobs and gangs running unchecked in our streets we're more than halfway to shithole already.

Who will recognize this madness, face it, and end it?

Of them all Tancredo seems to see it most clearly. Paul and Hunter are also relatively clued in. The crowd rewarded the candor of these three with loud applause. As loud or louder than the media's darlings got. At times the others were chuckling at Paul, laughing at him like stupid jocks. I may not vote for the man, but he at least has a saner position than any of the morons who were chuckling. Our country is in deep deep trouble. And some of these people think it's a laughing matter.

The Democrats are in more or less complete denial, obsessed with climate change and health care. And more than half the Republican candidates are so deeply infected with liberal ideology they can't or won't recognize that America is being invaded and transformed into a place that soon not many of the indigenous people is going to want pay taxes to, live in, or die for, much less be president of.

Interesting Predictions

Steve Sailer wrote an article reflecting on what makes for interesting predictions. I was motivated to make a long comment which instead turned into this post.

I'd like to know why so many predictions of the Latino population in 2050 are in the news. We're told these predictions can be made with confidence because of trends in birth rates. However, this is patently false.

Imagine the utter absurdity of predicting, in the 1950s, what US demographics would look like today. Back then the country was roughly 90% white and 10% black. The trend was toward something like 85% white and 15% black. Less than 2% of the military during WWII (300K out of 16M) was Mexican American. Up until 1980 Latino numbers were so small the census didn't include a category for them.

Realizing the absurdity of predicting populations 50 years in the future, in spite of the trendy trends, makes me wonder why exactly anyone would be trumpeting such predictions now with the benefit of this hindsight. Especially in this case, where the focus on birth trends neglects the factor that invalidated extrapolations from the 1950s: immigration. Who knows what future immigration will bring? Besides that, official statistics massively undercount the mostly Latino illegal invaders. The predictions also disingenuously focus on majority status rather than when you-know-who will outnumber you-know-who. In a multicultural society like the one being forced down our throats that's what really counts. In light of all these factors the prediction that should be in the news is for a Latino plurality in 2020!

So what's behind the population prediction misinformation? Here's what I think:

Let the Pilgrims know what's happening, because after all we can hardly deny it, they have eyes. Convince them however that it is inevitable, but also so far off it won't matter to them personally. In this way we can reconquer Aztlan (and perhaps more!) and do it in a single generation. Viva Raza!

To my fellow Americans I say: this isn't inevitable. It doesn't have to be. We don't have to accept "a path to citizenship" for millions of invaders. They're afraid we'll wake up before they've pushed beyond the point of no return. Our backs are up against a wall. We can wake up and fight back - or we'll watch ourselves and everything that was great about this country get washed away by Turd Worlders and replaced with one or more banana republics with rule alternating between narco-crime gangs, death squads, and mobs - just like the rest of Latin America.

Read here what our new overlords have in store for us. That's also the source of the image above.

Postscript: Shortly after writing this I discovered Vanishing American made a recent post questioning the wisdom of mass immigration. Besides pointing out the outrageous cost of cheap labor she linked to an excellent article by Srdja Trifkovic titled Half a Billion “Americans”? I found the comments there grim but oddly reassuring. It seems there are more and more people who see what's going on and are willing to speak against it.

PPS: Note the new Search fields to the right. The one labeled "Age of Treason" searches just this site. The one labeled "AoT Links" searches all the domains linked under Pundits and Right. I used it to find the Limits to Growth story from which I shamelessly stole the WWII links above. I remembered reading it but couldn't find it again because generic Google often returns boatloads of disinformation, especially for jihad- and immigration-related searches. Problem solved.

Time to Celebrate Fatigue

Is there anything more hypocritical than the New York Times complaining about 9/11 tributes?

Again it comes, for the sixth time now — 2,191 days after that awful morning — falling for the first time on a Tuesday, the same day of the week.

Again there will be the public tributes, the tightly scripted memorial events, the reflex news coverage, the souvenir peddlers.

Is all of it necessary, at the same decibel level — still?

Each year, murmuring about Sept. 11 fatigue arises, a weariness of reliving a day that everyone wishes had never happened. It began before the first anniversary of the terrorist attack. By now, though, many people feel that the collective commemorations, publicly staged, are excessive and vacant, even annoying.

Six times in 2191 days! The horror!

The virulently anti-American NYT and their loyal readership of holier-than-thou world-saving bleeding-hearts don't have any problem celebrating the anniversaries of Abu Ghraib. In fact they don't need any anniversary as an excuse to pay it tribute. Every day, several times a day. Umpteen days and counting.

Even more frequently the media concocts and then marks a fresh grim milestone of casualties in Iraq. For some reason they and their readers never bore watching a counter tick up.

The anniversary of Hiroshima just passed - 62 tributes in 22630 days - and the anniversary of Pearl Harbor approaches - 66 tributes in 24090 days. No complaints of fatigue from the NYT on these tributes.

There is something I am fatigued with however that I wish the NYT, or anybody with a national soapbox for that matter, would address. That would be the widespread denial of the Jihad, the immigration invasion, and how the two are related.

In the few short years since 9/11 the West has suffered several serious attacks and preempted many more. We have seen enough to recognize a general pattern:

A) The attackers are Muslim. Their rhetoric and rationale arise directly from Islam. They consider themselves jihadis (holy warriors) waging jihad (holy war) in service of their faith.

B) Their organizations are decoupled and command is decentralized. They are legion and they answer to no single man or nation state.

C) They deliberately infiltrate areas they do not control to wage guerilla war and gain control.

On all these points our leaders and the media feed us lies. Why do they try so hard to obscure these objective facts?

First of all they use the generic word "terror". As in "terror attacks" perpetrated by "terrorists". This would be fine if we were faced with a variety of unrelated people working toward a variety of purposes. The threat this situation would pose might then be most accurately described as "terror". On the contrary, the clear and common purpose in all the high-profile attacks (of which 9/11 was only the most severe) is jihad and the attackers are jihadis. If we used the proper words to describe what is really happening, The War on Terror would instead be called The West's Inept and Incomplete Attempt to Counter the Jihad.

Second, whenever a travesty occurs the authorities and talking heads stumble over themselves to quickly assure the public that it couldn't possibly have been a terrorist attack. What's obviously impossible is that they could be so certain of that so quickly.

Then, as soon as the facts indicate it is an attack, the very next thing we hear are questions whether the attackers were tied directly to Al Qaeda. If they aren't card-carrying Al Qaeda, the thinking seems to be, then the attack has nothing to do with 9/11. Ergo there's nothing to worry about, it's just another random terror attack in no way whatsoever related to that imaginary War on Terror. Decentralization, infiltration, and other sneaky tricks are classic jihadi tactics. They are also the best means the jihadis have at the moment to attack the West. If our talking heads studied Islam, or history, or the history of Islam they might know and share this information instead of spreading the mistaken idea that these jihadi attacks are random.

When the attackers turn out to be undeniably Muslim, the next thing we hear is how they are "home grown" - a description directly at odds with reality. Virtually nothing about Islam or its jihad philosophy has its roots in the West, and the jihadis perpetrating these jihad attacks are predominantly here on visas or are the children of immigrants. They are often here illegally. The only thing "home grown" about these attacks is perhaps their planning and funding.

Finally we hear, for the zillionth time, the "terrorists are a tiny minority" lie. They hate us. We know they hate us. And still our leaders let them come here. Still our leaders deny that a wide open Mexican border makes no sense, not only because it allows in a flood of poor, uneducated, unskilled, reconquista-seeking Mexicans, but also because the jihadis can so easily join them. After so much terror perpetrated by Muslim immigrants why do our leaders continue to insist that multiculturalism, diversity, and immigration are good? Doesn't diversity just make it harder to spot them? Doesn't multiculturalism just make us hate and distrust each other? How much would it cost the West to eject all Muslims? At what point will it become clear that the costs of pretending that we need alien Muslims with heads full of hate walking among us and the internal security we require to defend against them far outweigh any contribution they make?

I think these thoughts every time I take my shoes off at the airport, every time I look around and see myself surrounded by aliens, and every time the news starts buzzing with the latest travesty. I'm getting pretty fatigued.

Note: I downloaded the image above several years ago from a jihadi site discovered by Tracking Al Qaeda, an amateur obviously more skilled and motivated to expose the truth of the jihad than the NYT or anyone else in the mendacious MSM.