Just how long will the European Union last? Unarguably it is well dug in. Will it hang in there just long enough to condemn an entire continent to a painful and lingering death?
Few people are prepared to confront such a possibility or even entertain any such notion. Fortunately, one of those few is Ruth Lea:
The tectonic plates of the global economy are shifting. After a gap of several centuries, India and China are re-establishing themselves as major economic heavyweights. China, in particular, is becoming the “workshop of the world” and its economic rise will be as significant as the USA’s arrival on the global scene in the 19th century.
We may complain as jobs are “exported” to these emerging colossi but, whether we complain or not, this seismic shift is occurring and we cannot ignore it. The need to remain internationally competitive is becoming ever more critical for all the “western” economies.
I have little doubt that the US, with its “can-do” entrepreneurial attitudes and enormous economic power will continue to make the grade. But I am increasingly unsure that this can be said about the major euro-zone economies or even, in my darkest moments, Britain. After all, over the past five to six years, Britain has been slipping down the competitiveness league tables compiled by the World Economic Forum and the International Institute for Management Development reflecting higher taxes, heavier regulations and poor public services.
Government policymakers, while singing the praises of enterprise, competitiveness and high productivity, have undermined them all. The EU’s regulatory zeal has undoubtedly played a significant role in damaging British competitiveness. Over the past six years, one of British business’s greatest complaints about Government policy has been the rapid increase in the number and complexity of employment regulations.
And, as if right on cue, yet another set of Brussels-mandated employment regulations comes into effect in the UK today. I like to think of myself as a reasonably articulate man but even I am struggling to find the language sufficient to convey the bone-headed stupidity of this:
From 1 December, employers will be liable for tackling discrimination against employees, agency and other workers on grounds of sexual orientation (whether heterosexual, gay or lesbian or bisexual).
From 2 December it will also be unlawful to discriminate on the grounds of religion, religious belief or similar philosophical belief.
Why the one-day delay? Did they think it would provide an opportunity for everyone to shout “You Buddhist bastard” across the office one last time before such uncharitable sentiments become actionable?
And just what are ‘similar philsophical beliefs’ supposed to be? Atheism? Satanism? Communism? I bet capitalism is excluded.
Indirect discrimination can arise if the employer operates working practices or policies or rules which have the effect of disadvantaging people of a particular sexual orientation or religion or belief, unless they can justify them.
Employers who have yet to consider the implications of this new legislation should do so without delay.
They will need to review a range of policies and internal processes (ranging from recruitment through to the provision of remuneration and benefits packages and the conduct of disciplinary and grievance procedures).
Just as important will be to look at the often unwritten rules and arrangements which govern the day to day conduct and management of staff within the workplace.
For example, do catering and social arrangements create any disadvantage for those with special dietary requirements or who do not consume alcohol on religious grounds?
Do holiday arrangements adequately cater for those wishing to take annual leave to coincide with religious festivals and how are these to be dealt with when they clash with business needs?
It will not be enough for employers to pay lip service to these new regulations, by adding references to religion, belief and sexual orientation, in their equal opportunities policies.
Employers should give active consideration to the impact their workplace practices may have on their staff and encourage openness so that concerns may be raised and addressed.
Is that all? Anything else? Are they quite sure they haven’t left anything to chance? As if our commercials concerns aren’t already creaking to breaking point under the weight of bureaucratic red-tape, this whole, heaping, helping of adult babysitting has been shovelled into their laps as well.
If neurotic, hyper-sensitive, mischievous, gold-digging employees are already a ticking bomb in any organisation then the EU has just lit the fuse. Not only have such people been given pretty much carte blanche to wreak their worst but employers (who will, not unreasonably, fear the worst) will have to exercise such despotic control over their own employees words, actions and thoughts that every workplace is going to resemble a re-education camp. And they have they eye-popping nerve to say:
The spirit of the legislation is to encourage tolerance and consideration amongst work colleagues.
Deliberately and wantonly engineered fear and paranoia is much closer to the mark. Which will be followed by poverty and rapid decline as exhausted employers, staring ruin in the face, decide to up sticks and piss off to Asia where they will not be slowly asphyxiated by a permanent ruling class who will sorely miss them once they have gone.
Or perhaps they won’t. Perhaps their myopia is so advanced and deep-rooted that, even while the economy crumbles around them, they will furrow their brows, scratch their heads, shrug Gallically and spend their dying days huddled around candlelight, eating dry biscuits and wondering how on earth it all went so wrong.
But, over to Ms Lea again:
Unless attitudes change, regulatory burdens are lifted and more free market policies are adopted, Europe’s future is bleak, especially when the demographic factors are considered.
A change of attitude?! Don’t anybody hold their breath. The kind of people who cooked up this latest regulatory loon-fest are unlikely to be persuaded by anything as unsophisticated as merciless reality. I do honestly believe that they will go sailing gently into the eternal darkness of oblivion, wailing pathetically about the unfairness of it all and blaming their predicament on capitalism, George Bush and the Jews.
Over to Ms.Lea, finally:
In a recent report, the Paris-based Institut Franais des Relations Internationales concluded that, unless the EU changed its policies, it “will weigh less heavily on the process of globalisation and a slow but inexorable movement on to ‘history’s exit ramp’ is foreseeable.” And the constitution will help it on its way. It really is no laughing matter.
It is for the Chinese and the Indians. They will be laughing all the way to the bank.
… and how long will it be before we, the reviled Americans, have to come back and clean up yet another failed European social experiment?
There are another couple of things that the BBC report didn’t mention but are much more serious than the substantive regulations.
Employers may well be vicariously liable for the behaviour of their staff. And the burden of proof in discrimination cases has just been reversed. Prove the alleged remarks by one employee to another were either forbidden by explicit (fairly enforced) company disciplinary policy; or that they weren’t harrassment; or pay up.
Yep – The EU is going under. And later this month we will be hearing from a certain T. Blair esq that he has successfully batted for Britain, the EU is a fine, upstanding place which is well placed to embrace the future and that he is now ready to graft us onto these losers in perpetuity – a sort of Siamese twins operation in reverse.
If this EU Constitution goes through I shall change my planning for permanent relocation from idle thought into reality. I had a magnificent holiday in Colorado not so long ago – let’s check the online property listings…
Please see also this.
I wonder if there is a French version of the expression: “when you are in a hole, stop digging.” It seems the more the EU economy slows the more they put burdens on business.
Dishman – I cannot imagine why the American taxpayer should spend one thin dime disencumbering Europe from chains they assumed so eagerly. Let them sink into the failure they so richly deserve and let us look to the energy and intelligence of first India, because it is in the Anglosphere, and China. Europe’s been on a suicide mission for 50 years. Let them get on with it.
Patrick – T Blair, Esq is looking for his reward for chopping Britain into bite-sized chunks, demolishing its ancient legal safeguards and taking the wrecker’s ball to the country’s social structure. He has his greedy eye on the hysterically absurd planned giant EU “foreign ministry” of which he, of course, would become god-king for life. And what a life! Photo ops! Access to the dress-up box for meeting foreign dignitaries in their national dress! (The national dress will be worn by the preening Tony and Cherieee, that is. Heads of state of Africa and Asia will be wearing well cut suits and ties.)
Do any commentators here really believe the EU is close to collapse? It’s creaking and lurching, but they just see that as a reason to put more rules and regulations and laws into effect. And hire more staff. It is beyond lunacy. I’d be interested in reading what other commentators see as the scenario over the next five years, say.
I’m also starting to think like Patrick W. I’ve studied oriental languages and I’m quite keen to put them to good use. Europe is sinking.
From the New rules explained link:
So you’re not allowed to discriminate against gay people unless you’re an organisation that thinks that gay people are evil and are going to hell? And if you’re a gay person you’re not allowed to discriminate against people who think you’re evil and are going to hell? Or are gay organisations exempt from the religious discrimination laws? I’m confused.
Francis,
The leaked report is on Melanie Phillip’s blog, provided by a commenter (Lilith) to her post “Oldest Hatred, Latest Chapter.” The subsequent comment by Trianon is worth a read, too.
I would add that this morning some frog defence analyst was interviewed on Today about “the future”. He says that the in thirty years the US will no longer be a WASP-dominated country and will disengage from Europe. It will look instead to pursue its interests viz-a-vis the emerging economic superpowers of India and China. The only European nation that he predicts will be favoured sentimentally by America is Spain because of the linguistic connection to Chicanos.
What he is saying here is that the Anglosphere may have a future of sorts, but it is not what we like to think.
Verity – for what it’s worth I don’t think the EU is close to collapse. But it is irrevocably launched on a trajectory that will take it under eventually. Depends on your definition of ‘close’. The French and German economies in particular will not compete without major structural reform – reform which is not politically possible absent some unprecedented electoral shift. Demographics will doom the EU to a different future of one kind or another. My prediction is that things will just get shittier and shittier. The welfare states will become unaffordable and reform will be forced. Huge numbers of currently youngish people in the EU have a very grim financial future to look forward to – especially the less well off. Given Europe’s history it also seems to me very unlikely that this will come to pass peacefully. Book a slot in your diary for about 10 or 15 years ahead to watch the mobs running rampage through the streets of Paris and Berlin.
Even if the UK can steer itself largely clear of the impending train wreck (and I vote to leave the EU outright if possible) we will still live next door. We will be affected. I am fiercely proud of the UK but unless we take some serious action ourselves to head this off as best we can NOW I think I’m better off out of it in the future. My own future and that of my wife and daughter would be much brighter in the USA. The saddest thing is that I can do this. I have a very well paid job in Shell and I work overseas now (my third expat assignment) and a defined benefit pension to look forward to. 99% of my countrymen will probably not be able to do the same. I bleed for them. Really.
Patrick – I agree with every word you say. Things will get shittier, they’ll take to the steets and there will be public mayhem. The police, certainly in France, will do nothing but look on as they traditionally have solidarity with the workers. It will be violent. They may storm the Elysée Palace and run through its halls and salons, wrecking things, as the police will be more or less complicit.
Britain ought to jump this sinking ship right now and cleave to the Anglosphere for surivival. You are right, all this violence and mayhem on the continent will affect us, but I hope for once we’ll simply close our eyes and mind our own business.
Guessedworker – It is not like you to take some froggy comentator seriously – especially as he had been hand-picked to be on the Fascism Today Show. Who interviewed him? That great objective seeker after truth James Naughtie?
After we’re out, we would be able to negotiate membership of NAFTA. I have tried several times (well, once) to raise the issue of the future of the Hispanicsphere. Through its linguistic and trade connections with Mexico, Spain might well be invited to join NAFTA. That would be Britain and Spain safe. Plus Spain has its former colonies in S America for trade; we have the Commonwealth/Anglosphere. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that Spain will jump ship if Britain does. We couldn’t abandon Denmark, so they’d have to be let it in too. The rest of them – especially plucky little Belgium – who cares?
Hubris makes me itchy, and I’m not quite so sure the US is in such a favorable position. Anyway, it’s all such a big economic terrarium, isn’t it? If China out-competes the West too far, who’re they going to sell their stuff to? And if Europe falters, one of everyone’s most important markets falters.
I don’t see the US being anything but an Anglo stronghold, though, no matter how many Hispanics migrate in. For the same reason that South American nations have underperformed despite having essentially the same advantages and resources of North America.
What those reasons are, I have no idea.
Verity, i’m curious… I’m certainly no fan of Blair’s, but could you explain how exactly you feel he’s “taking the wrecker’s ball to the country’s social structure”?
A_t – How has Blair damaged the social structure (I should actually have written infrastructure, which I realise denotes a slight but critical difference)? By levelling down in the educational establishment for one thing. The loony destruction of the grading and examination systems. There is now no longer an F grade. Children who fail, even by the most generous of standards, mustn’t be told they’ve “failed” (which, of course, lessens the desire not to fail); instead they are to be awarded an N. N stands for nearly.
Second, by pursuing with such strange vigour the feminist fascist agenda of weakening males. No team sports because that means one side will lose. No striving to be the best because one person shouldn’t be elevated above another.
Generous benefits, including public housing, for unmarried mothers of 15 and 16. Activist judges who inevitably refuse custody to a stable father in favour of an unstable mother, and take fathers’ visitation rights away from them on the uncorroberated word of the mother.
The sneering at our nation’s history, so most children attending state schools have no idea who they are and no knowledge of where they came from and what their country stands for.
The criminalisation of self-defence. Even if you thwack an intruder into your home at 2 a.m. with a baseball bat, and the intruder wasn’t carrying a baseball bat, you will be prosecuted for using excessive force defending your home and family.
Britain’s most senior judge has announced that first time (first time caught, that is) burglars will no longer be sent to prison.
The refusal to back up teachers in the classroom. The insistence that badly misbehaving little yobs be allowed to physically attack and abuse teachers rather than have them run the trauma of being expelled. The exalting of one trashy little bully in a classroom above the interests of the 30 children who want to learn. And parents encouraged to attack teachers who reprimand their children.
Bulletproof glass at the reception counters in hospital emergency rooms.
Such is the sense of lawlessness that some doctors are now holding their consultations inside police stations rather than at their practices.
Like that. They’re all socialist levelling down policies and many of them are driven by this rogue feminist agenda to destroy men’s self worth.
I don’t know what Blair’s game is, but he is one eerie dude.
I think those that believe that the EU is on the point of collapse engaged in wishful thinking. So the ever-increasing weight of regulation will kill it eventually- so what? Proving that it doesn’t work doesn’t prove that it won’t carry on happening.
The Soviet Union didn’t work, but it happened for seventy years. Most of us may not live to see the end of the EU, even though it falls apart eventually.
Before it falls apart, expect to see things get a lot worse, and expect to see much more represive action against its critics. It isn’t even illegal to call for secession yet, so we’ve still got some ways to go.
There’s an awful lot of ruin in a modern first-world nation.
Of course, I wouldn’t have called the end of the USSR either, so what do I know?
What those reasons are, I have no idea.
The reason that the USA continues to perform whilst Europe and others including South America doesn’t is actually quite simple.
The Rule of LAW
Ok so even in the US of A things are not what they should be, but the citizens of Europe are seen as playthings for the elites to enjoy. Properties rights are seen as a bad thing compared to a planned future of “equality and happiness.” The law a tool of government not the guarantee of freedom.
EU leaders are actually preparing to sign a constitution, the main purpose of which is to destroy the concept of the rule of law throughout Europe. Without any freedom of individual action, nothing can then stop the plans of the Brussels elite, who know so much more than the plebs about how to spend their money and run their lives.
The future of the EU will become a struggle between individuals and the collossus of state for which there can only be one ending. 1989 – 1991 all over again. The only questions are these…
Who will take the place of Boris on the tank, and which politicians will follow in the footsteps of the unlamented Romanian president.
Hello Verity,
I realise that being supportive of any opinion emanating from across the Channel is nothing short of treachery. But I fear that this particular frog gentleman’s analysis is all too correct.
Samizdatistas are, almost by definition, devotees of the American Way. It is incovenient to have to acknowledge that America is changing, and not at a manageable speed. The American Way is not very likely to survive intact.
The facts are incontrovertible. America – a creation of the British, supported exclusively up to 1965 by a few not bad European types – is well in advance of us and even the French in demographic change. I believe US government statistics posit a white minority by 2050. The frog thinks 2030. America is going to be a country with a majority of black and third world peoples, ruled (as now) by an WASP-Jewish political, financial and media elite.
The Chicano component, already 40 million strong, is the noisiest of the new population. It does not even enjoy the “IQ filter” advantage of most immigrant peoples. On the contrary, Mexico has intentionally exported its Indian peasants, not its Hispanic wealthy. Whether or not Atzlan becomes a reality – and I guess it’s unlikely – America will pay a terrible price for believing that peoples are interchangeable, that it’s all a matter of assimilation and that the heritability of IQ is too politically incorrect to contemplate. An American population dominated by, say, an IQ 90-average, third world caucus will deliver the same Anglospheric delights as one dominated by a 100-average caucus with European roots.
Yes, this is racist. But so what? Where’s the advantage in pussy-footing around with PC on issues as important as this?
Just the other day I exchanged a few comments with Perry about the worth of white Europeans. He thinks peoples are interchangable, too – and there is something in that economically (but not genetically) if one is discussing only the cultured and urbane. But whole populations are another and more serious matter.
I think there is a distinct possibility that those who would jump ship from Europe for America are heading out of the frying pan, Better to stay here and fight for what we’ve got – and who we are.
Damn! Blast! Always in a hurry. I meant, of course, to say that an IQ 90-average third world caucus will NOT delivery the same Anglospheric delights as a 100-average caucus with European roots.
Goddam, preview , preview.
Guessedworker,
While I greatly admire the USA for its civilisational vigour and can-do spirit, I regard myself as a devotee of the classical English liberal (properly stated) way.
If we spend what may appear to be an inordinate amount of space extolling the virtues of the USA over those of Europe, it is only because America does still possess many of those qualities of individuality, creativity and self-confidence that were once in the gift of the British but lately seem to have all but perished.
That this lamentable state of affairs has come to pass in this land is the matter of the utmost chagrin for us all and I will yield to no man in my ambition to see our country rediscover its sanity and restore the rapidly tattering philosophical underpinnings of its remarkably successful civil society.
The Americans may or may not be able to assist in this task (assuming that task is possible at all). In the meantime, they remain our only reliable strategic ally and a continuing source of hope and inspiration.
Bureaucracies have lives of their own, like corporations absent capital. But I admit the emergence of the EU has been as surprising to me as Scandinavia turning into “Mobilephonation”. A continent has been conquered by a bureaucracy. Wow.
I think the EU will limp along longer than I will but I hope there is a perch somewhere in the afterlife where I can see how it all comes out.
The US doesn’t have a WASP majority. The largest ethnic group is German-Americans.
Who do you think the Angles and Saxons were, Joseph?
Guessedworker:
Interesting thesis re: the “latinizing” of the US. I live in Chicago, a city very arguably in the forefront of this phenomenon- believe the last census here listed hispanics as the most populous minority in Chicago, overtaking blacks. While I agree with your assertion that we are getting the “dumb” ones from latin america- or more specifically those in Mexico and other points south with no wealth and minimal education, I’d ask when in my nation’s history that wasn’t largely the case. We’ve been taking on the refuse and malcontents from around the world for a couple centuries now, and apparently something’s going right for us- maybe it’s the water. Another poster pointed out rule of law, I’d add a relatively unobtrusive gov’t in the realm of business (the anti-EU if you will).
The interesting part of your post to me is what you didn’t mention- at the same time the US is latinizing, Europe is “islamizing” at a furious rate. And while your assertion that the latinos are blessed with IQs of 90 may or may not be correct, I will assert that these hispanics are here to work their arses off within the system of the US- like the dumb bohunks and polacks and micks (my people) and eye ties before them. Do take note of the recent purchase of a professional baseball team by a Latino in California- the asking price was several hundred million bucks- believe that makes my point.
However, from where I sit the children of islam infesting Europe have little or no interest in abiding by much less maintaining an enlightened democracy- witness the “tolerance” of Jews by the peaceful muslims in France, or the peaceful muslims rioters in Antwerp the other day, or the slow usurpation of political power by muslims in the Netherlands, to name a few. This is the young population that is to fuel the fortunes of Europe in the decades to come? You’re backing a double loser my friend- pencil necked bureaucrats in Brussels choking your economy and psychotic muslims intent on instituting sharia law across the continent. Think it’s time to check out Colorado like another poster was talking about. We’ll even take your fancy pants triple digit IQ, if you ain’t too uppity about it.
This is hilarious.
GuessedWorker you might be looking down on 90-IQ hispanics but from where I’m sitting, as an asian, you ain’t so different. 🙂 ROFL! As if IQ tests mattered at all. What nonsense!
Hell I’d take a 90-IQ person with good memory, attention to detail and a decent level of common sense over any eggheaded nugget. It would be refreshing to work with someone with an innate sense that, perhaps, it wouldn’t be wise to stick a finger into a live wall socket. I’ve known any number of extremely bright and intelligent people, who had not a lick of common sense.
The whole genetic/eugenics thing is utterly beyond stupid. Being of a white european stock means nothing. Neither does being asian, black, hispanic or anything else. No race is predisposed to anything except on extremely vague and overly broad terms. Even IQ tests have been largely abandoned since they are mostly incorrect. Tell me. Could a literary genius, who has never learned to read nor write, do well on an IQ test? Of course not. This means that all IQ tests are biased both culturally and educationally. It’s interesting to note that generally those that do the best on any particular IQ test have backgrounds similar to the authors of the IQ test.
it’s all a boatload of poppycock.
Yo ed,
Can you explain the idea of “a literary genius, who has never learned to read nor write.”
Are you talking about a master storyteller in the oral tradition?
Nuh-uh, ed. You disprove your own thesis. If IQ tests were so biased culturally, your Asian self wouldn’t score better than my WASPy self, would you?
Of course, they make some educational assumptions: you couldn’t give me a test in a language I didn’t understand, for example. And god knows what they actually measure.
But they do, in fact, measure something, and it’s a remarkably consistent predictor of performance.
S. Weasel,
You said:
I don’t see the US being anything but an Anglo stronghold, though, no matter how many Hispanics migrate in. For the same reason that South American nations have underperformed despite having essentially the same advantages and resources of North America.
What those reasons are, I have no idea.
Well, from a libertarian perspective, in the USA, I can tell you that I believe those reasons are quite clearly the legal traditions and cultural values that the American colonies inherited from Great Britain.
Honesty, thrift, a commitment to objective truth, science and a private sphere of autonomy which the government has no right to plunder result in innovation and the work ethic.
The governments of South America still neither liberty, nor it’s corrolary, personal economic responsibility are very well developed in South American countries.
Idler,
It is well accepted in psychology circles that emigration filters out a substantial proportion of low IQ individuals. Emigrants, therefore, are the better part of a nation, not the average. In consequence, the difference can average as much as +10 points. The exception is Senor Fox’s dessert hoppers, as I said.
BTW, this statement holds no connotation for individuals. It doesn’t mean that good entrepreneurs, scientists etc will not emerge from a given immigrant population because IQ differences within populations remain substantial. Your point is NOT made, I am sorry.
My question is what will be the effect of all this upon national average intelligence, prosperity (known to be linked to same) and general cultural forms? At present, Americans don’t seem willing to face this question. They cling to the belief that if immigrants, from wherever in the world they originate, will only assimilate in the traditional way American values and a competitive, deregulated economy will win through for everybody. I’m happy to go on record now and state that this is not even wishful thinking. It is ignorance.
It’s no secret that France is heading towards Islaamicisation. It is supposed that there are 10,000,000 already in a population of 60,000,000, although the former figure could include all non-whites, I’m not sure. In any case, birth rate differentials and continuing immigration will effect a white minority perhaps a generation after America’s. France, however, has the massive additional problems of non-assimilation and of an economy thoroughly bureaucratised within the EU.
Let’s say that the average IQ of the population of the US (or elsewhere) declined significantly. So? Is intelligence the meaning of life? What’s so dire about having a bunch of low-intelligence immigrants? Are dull people incapable of happiness? Incapable of generating economic growth?
Colorado is a great place. You guys should definitely check it out. Take it from a native Coloradan. 🙂
Guessedworker, I simply cannot buy your thesis that somehow the Mexican illegals are any dumber than the stock we got at any other time. I mean, if crossing the deserts isn’t pure Darwinism, then what is? Not to mention that it takes initiative to get off your arse and actually do it, knowing that no one is going to give you a hand-out once you get there. Have you even worked with any migrants legal or no?
I must say we have are own fair amount of ill-bread morons anyway and from personal experience I can tell you who works harder.
As for Anglo-Saxons in America, English Anglo-saxons are a minority. Even as we latinize in ethnicity (come-on! 13% of the population,tops!). It is the English-born institutions that matter and they seem farely well entrenched.
Furthermore, if there is a Hispanosphere, then surely it’s capital is Miami, USA.
BTW, Am I correct in my interpretation of these new laws that a Church/Mosque may refuse to hire a person because he is gay, as per law 1; but may not refuse to hire a person because they are of a different religion. Shouldn’t churches be exempted from law 2, but NOT law 1? [accepting that the laws are to exist]
From what I can tell, Hispanics are desperate to try to integrate into American society. Anyone who has watched Spanish TV channels in America like Telemundo can attest to the sheer whiteness pervading the shows. They have the same genres with the same storylines as American TV. Every other commercial is some learn-to-speak English tape. Those that aren’t are commercials for Sears, GE, J.C. Penney, and a hundred other old-line America stalwarts. They look just like American English commercials except the actresses are usually that punch-yourself-in-the-face Latina beautiful.
For anyone who doubts the Hispanics are trying to integrate, they should live in south Arlington, VA, which is crammed full of Central American and South American immigrants. I wouldn’t recommend you lose your job and spend two months sitting around chatting with the locals in the cafes firing off resumes, but get a chance to talk to them. They all sound like advertisements for why America is the best country in the world. It’s like a Frank Capra movie in broken English.
– Josh
Scott,
The filter isn’t the desert any more than it was the Atlantic in the Founders’ days. The filter is the requirement for individual will and enterprise. Those without it stayed at home. Senor Fox’s government is promoting mass emigration, including illegal emigration, as a political policy. The will of the individual is not necessarily absent but it is a secondary factor. I know of no testing of this, but I would predict that average intelligence for South Americans passing through Mexico en route to the South-West is 5 to 10 points higher than Fox’s exportees.
Wild Pegasus,
I am saying that assimilation is not the guarantor of economic and cultural continuity that you suppose it to be (though it promotes social cohesion – somewhat). The guarantor is IQ, and between 60 and 80% of that is heritable.
Now, if you drink up and leave that Latino cafe for Silicon Valley you’ll discover a preponderance of East Asian and “high-caste” sub-continental Indians working there. Why? Ask the Chinese-Americans if they or their folks originate, for example, from Hong Kong (highest national average IQ at 107).
If you still need proof of the effect and heritability of intelligence look at the wealth and influence of America’s Ashkenazic jews (highest group average of 115). Can anyone explain that in purely environmental terms?
On the question of the continuity of Anglo-Saxon values and cultural forms in the USA, look at modern Black America or, indeed, street life in black areas of England. All peoples demonstrate a strong preference to live among their own kind and, of large enough, such concentrations do produce their own distinct cultural expression.
Adam,
I am sure you are not really suggesting that a capacity for fun is a meaningful substitute for intellect. Black Africa can be fun but be aware that its peoples score an average IQ 70. As regards economic prosperity, it has been demonstrated to be linked to average national IQ (see “IQ And The Wealth of Nations” by Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen).
Okay, I’ll go out on a limb and be politically incorrect on this, I’ll grant that just maybe people of African descent have a genetic tendency to lower IQ than other races of the world. But why, even if that were true would it mean that Hispanics as a race have inherited lower IQ than European descended Americans?
After all, if Asians have the highest IQ, then Hispanics ought to be pretty well off because they are genetically closer to the Asians and Pacific Islanders than they are to the blacks and Europeans. The aboriginal American tribes are thought to have colonized this continent through the land bridge from Asia, after all, and today’s Eskimos recognise a connection with Aleutians. Perhaps the connection holds further down the coast.
That latina beauty referred to earlier is very similar to the round-faced and almond eyed Asian beauty everyone is so crazy for these days too.
Some of you are talking as if you understood very well what intelligence is, how we acquire it, how the races of men rank in their posession of it and what good it does us. There have really been very few conclusive scientific findings on this subject, and considering how politically charged the issue is, I should be surprised if we get any straight answers on it in my lifetime.
The fact of the matter is that we do not know what extent culture plays in intelligence. It seems very convincing to me, for example that the Jews rank higher in IQ because of their culture which values education so highly. Genetically, I do not see any reason to believe that they are significantly different from other Eastern European or Semitic peoples.
On the flip side, if the Jews are genetically disposed to be so intelligent why would you fear a drop in IQ in Europe would follow from it’s influx of Muslims? Shouldn’t they be just as intelligent as the Jews? or do you think there has been some selection pressure in the middle east towards stupidity since the jews left?
Beyond that, this idea of the relative intelligence of races seems to be the result of a sort of myopic view of history. In ancient times it was the white races that were barbarians, and the Africans (specifically the Egyptians) who had the awesome civilization, and owned the Jews as slaves. The Greeks learned much of their architecture, literacy and philosophy from Africa. The Islamic empires preserved the knowledge of the ancient world when Europe had forgotten it, and lay in a stagnation that we refer to now as the Dark Ages. Even the aboriginal tribes of Mexico built pyramids, astronomical observatories and had systems of mathematics, even when insulated from the rest of the world. And this was while my ancestors in Ireland still lived largely in mud huts.
With hispanics the reasons for their seeming dullness could well be cultural too, perhaps their way of dealing with alcohol, or other parts of their diet. Assimilated hispanics seem to be as bright and capable of success as any other type of person I come into contact with. They say in America that we have a saying: “From shirt-sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations.” Which describes the fate of the descendants of the dirty peasants that arrive on these shores yearning to breathe free. Because they are poor and believe they have a chance they are industrious and creative, they do well. Their children grow up knowing the language and they achieve even greater success. The third generation which knows neither poverty nor the values of the old country waste the fortune. The same cycle is evident in the immigrant and assimilated hispanics I see every day.
When the Mexican immigrant climbs up out of the Rio Grande riverbed he immediately starts looking for work, and will stand all day at the roadside with other day laborers eager to take any assignment that will give him hard labor for the day. At the nearest intersection in town there is a white guy holding a sign and a cup, begging. He’s sitting in the hot sun too, and appears to be in good enough health, but he won’t put himself to any more discomfort than this.
The Mexican man is short, five feet tall or less. His sons will be between 5’5″ and 6’5″. Why? Cleaner air than in the cities of Mexico, even in Houston, Texas, the citiy in the USA with the dirtiest air of any US city. A much better diet. These things have a profound effect on IQ as well. Ten years ago his son would have grown up speaking English, and would hardly know a word of Spanish by the time he was 18.
But now I’m not so sure. Spanish language television stations outnumber English TV stations in Houston. But of course, most people have cable.
Most signage is in both English and Spanish, and many product lables too. There are even many billboards in Spanish only, in downtown Houston.
America, unlike other nation-states never defined a de-jure official national language. And we don’t police our language the way France, does, for instance, or Japan. We are free to burrow from any other language. Words and phrases too are easily assimilated, this I think is an integral part of the strength of our culture. Stagnation is the result of regulation, but things left to grow organically, thrive and spread.
English was simply the most common and most respected tounge by far, for all of the people of diverse backgrounds. We had a strong culture, everyone wanted to be like us, to become one of us, and we were willing to accept them as one of us, so they assimilated.
Yes, I am an American of European descent, and I find the idea that America can continue to be strong and free if only immigrants will assimilate, to be very convincing. The problem in my view is that we are at or are reaching a saturation point where one people have such strength in numbers that they have a shot at declaring Spanish to be the official language of some major American cities, such as San Antonio. And it is the de-facto second offical language of many other major cities.
I do not blame the hispanics for my own country becoming alien to me. They are, for the most part, just doing their best to better their situation as they should, and as all other immigrants have done in the past.
I think most of the blame must rest with the US government. Why? Well first of all that bit about immigrants not thinking they are going to get a hand-out when they get there, I’m not so sure that’s true anymore. We do have welfare payments in the US. We do have medical assistance, we do have special programs for assistance to pregnant women, and women who give birth on American soil can count on the benefits of citizenship for their children, and probably for themselves as well. There was a story on the radio just last week about how small towns in the Northeast of the US are dealing with an influx of spanish-speaking people. It seems that medical institutions are required to have translators. Why? I mean an official national language that you regulate is one thing, but bending over backwards to accomodate people who take up residence speaking whatever foreign language they want is something else entirely.
The radio station was NPR by the way, and there was no hint in the report that it occurred to anyone that if you want to take advantage of the expertise of a doctor in his own country that yout OUGHT to approach him attempting to speak HIS language.
Greg,
I can answer some of your points.
1. First off, let’s get the terminology accurate. Hispanics in the context you use the word are merely Spanish-speaking. Genetically they are overwhelmingly South American Indians descended from northern mongoloids. You ask why variations in heritable IQ arise between (at least not unrelated) peoples and the answer lies in the demands of their differing geographic regions, determined through natural selection over the millenia.
2. I support the land-bridge thesis. Eskimos, BTW, are sometimes put forward as the fatal flaw in the thesis of the IQ differentials camp. The argument runs: since life was so very harsh for them why didn’t they develop at least the ntelligence of, say, East Asians or even higher? Nutritional limitation is the obvious answer. But it may also be that the super-harsh environment provided too little stimulative potential. The intellectual horizon never got beyond the latest kill and, thus, short-term survival was intellectually sufficient. It may also be that improvement to intelligence requires a minimum population density – most obviously for genetic variation but also for stimulative interplay.
3. I don’t know your age, of course, Gregg. But conclusiveness on matters of human bio-diversity is getting near. Watch out for the genetic Hapmap which is the next staging post.
4. No twin-test of which I am aware has been shown education as such to expand native intelligence. An interest in the home in education produces better educational outcomes. I think you are confusing these two different things.
5. Lynn and Vanhanen note an average IQ score for Israel of only 94, which seems low to me I must say. In any case, the 115 score is peculiar to Ashkanazics. Possibly explanation: too painful to mention but might sound a bit like “huge pfennigs”.
6. Egyptians weren’t sub-Saharan Africans, of course. Nor were they semitic. They were caucasoids. The Greeks and Romans were caucasoids. The mightiest civilation of all is the caucasoid civilisation of the west.
7. Body mass and IQ are unconnected. Nutritional improvement is just about the only known raiser of IQ but this is probably a remedial effect, not a “new build”.
My assertion is that all Americans, especially those like you of European origin, need to move beyond the easy assumptions. Assimilation, individual freedom, hard work … such virtues will remain. But the country will change in fundamental ways, all the same. It may be that only white Americans will regret it. It may be that only some white Americans will regret it, I don’t know. But a brown America is on the horizon and this, believe me, is a big, big event.
Aztecs, Mayas, Incas? Were they the great ‘caucazoid’ civilizations of the Americas?
Guessed: I’m just wondering what’s so incredibly awful that will happen if the average intelligence in the US decreases. Maybe economic growth will be slightly slower. Is the standard of living in the US not high enough yet? How is it that the US’s unique culture will end if it accepts a large number of low IQ immigrants? Only certain genotypes are capable of adopting American culture? IQ may be mostly genetic, but culture certainly is not.
Guessedworker,
I must admit that some of your answers tend to be rather convincing, but I still regard the views on IQ to be largely a matter of an opinion that one comes to on the basis of evidence which may be interpreted many different ways.
Point 1,
I use the term Hispanics to mean the people of the countries from Mexico and South because I simply have no better term for them. That is what they call themselves, Chicano may be a popular term in Chicago, but I’ve never heard anyone refer to themselves that way here. I recognise what you are saying, that they are primarily the descendants of the aboriginal tribes of the American continents, Mayans and what have you.
As to the second part of your point, what environmental factors place selection pressure in favor of higher intelligence, is at best, a theory. You should probably present it as a guess, because that is what I suspect it is.
Point 4, I don’t know what two different things you think I am confusing.
Nor am I necessarily convinced that early childhood preparation for education, and a tradition of high education in the family could not be a strong factor in determining measured IQ.
In the IQ tests that I am aware of what is tested is mostly your general knowledge and categorizing ability. The tests are scored according to your age, the assumption behind them is that children who have a greater capacity to learn will learn more earlier in life than children who have less natural capacity.
Also, people tested at different ages do not maintian the same IQ score. What is being measured is not something that remains static over a person’s lifetime. High-performing children do not always keep pace with their peers later in life.
The second part of point five went completley over my head. Sorry.
One thing I have been puzzling about since I wrote my last post though, is what exactly are the racial characteristics of the Jews? They originated in Isreal, and so, you might think they would be similar in appearance to people in nearby regions of the Middle East who never left. The only thing I can point to as a characteristically “Jewish” feature is the largish eagle beak shaped nose. But not all Jews have it, not by far. I am familiar with Russian Jews, who look like other Russians, with Polish Jews, with Hungarian Jews, and I am even aware of blonde Jews and German Jews who resemble other Germans.
Jewish, is ethnicity in very small part, it is mostly cultural, from what I can see.
I asked my significant sweetie about this, she is Jewish on both sides, (IQ 160) Hungarian and Russian. She has Rand’s eyebrows, Betty Davis’ Eyes, and a nose that is only slightly more prominent than my tiny turned-up French nose. She tells me that there is no test she knows of to perform on someone to determine if they are a Jew. It seems they never taught her the secret handshake.
Point 6,
I am not certain to what extent that is true about the Egyptians. But I consider it plausible.
As for your second point, that may be true, to date, but at dates earlier in history other races could have claimed superiority on the same evidence.
Point 7,
Perhaps I was unclear. I did not mean to assert that there was any connection between height or weight or mass and intelligence. I was trying to allude to the effect of nutrition and clean air on IQ as well as more obvious characteristics.
Granted that it’s a sort of remedial effect, yet it’s hardly fair to compare the undernourished Mayan or the African against the native-born citizens of the US, or Britain, or France.
Even if you can show a connection between the high standards of living of some countries and the IQ of their citizens, correlation does not show causation. It could very well be that our institutions, shaped by cultural evolution, led the increase in our standard of living, and with a better environment IQ followed, and all without any genetic evolution affecting our brains.
This isn’t the discussion I think we really want to be having. I think there is plenty enough to worry about over the future of America already, some new developments that we ought to take into account regarding this wave of immigrants that the “lessons of history” cannot answer for us.
Will they assimilate? Will the American government continue to subsidize those who refuse to do so? Will they form a strong faction that helps to tear this country in two between Anglo/American nationalism and Hispanic cultural chauvanism? Is it even possible for such a foreign-looking race to assimilate? I mean, between the many waves of European immigrants our ancestors found enough foreign in each to be put off by, yet today few Americans care very much what percentage of their ancestors were Italian and what percent German. They may have been blond, and red-headed and brunette, but they were all white. To what extent can a non-white race feel included in, and share and perpetuate our cultural heritage?
Those are the questions that bother me. And yes, that culture is of central importance. Chileans and Peruvians would improve their standard of living by adopting lassies-faire capitalism just the same as Europe and the English-speaking countries would. And America and Europe will find themselves being flushed down the toilet by embracing socialism and the welfare state just as much as Russia, Europe and Cuba.
Gregg,
Thanks for the interesting reply. Brave man to marry a woman with a 160 IQ! The intelligence in our family is only pianistic.
BTW, the jews fascinate on many levels. But I don’t think there’s much profit in studying them a la MacDonald. There is a growing body of interesting genetic evidence about them, and this probably answers the bulk of your questions. You could skip over to Gene Expression and root around their archives.
OK, I will try to tie everything up in a neat bundle.
The IQ debate is important because, like the more general debate over human bio-diversity, it gives the lie to egalitarianism. The unifying imperative of the left is to remove suffering through inequality. Multi-culturalism and, by necessity therefore, high immigration are its policies. For them to succeed and western civilation to be truly egalitarian, the principles and convictions that sustain the white majority’s self-belief have to be delegitimised. Identity politics and political correctness are the methodologies employed to this end.
I should say at this point that the left has no quarrel with western capitalism. The American Way is not threatened. This is a purely cultural (and racial) struggle. Therefore, it’s outcome will be cultural, not economic, which is the point I have been trying to make in this thread.
None of it can be justified, however, if peoples are not all equally blessed with intellectual potential. Every other difference the left allows. The debate, therefore, centres around the competing claims of sociobiology (aka evolutionary psychology though that term includes some leftish interlopers) and environmentalism. By the latter, I mean short-term impact environmentalism, not that on a Darwinian timescale (ie hundreds of generations). Leading environmentalists like Lewontin and Gould are/were pretty much marxists. In my considered opinion these people are anti-empirical, taking their lead entirely from their political preferences. Those preferences, if realised, will lead to much weeping and gnashing of teeth among dispossessed white Americans and, let it not be forgotten, Europeans too. I am in my fifties and may not see the final acts in this tragedy. But if all things remain equal those under thirty probably will.
If this rings any bells at all for you, Gregg, I strongly recommend you take a serious look at sociobiology and at h-bd issues. In the absence of a clear-sighted government of the right they are just about all we’ve got to argue with – short of civil disturbance, of course.
Guessed Worker:
First, kudos for stepping boldly and clear eyed into an opinion that is likely to get you savaged. That said, dunno if I agree with what you’re saying.
You say that according to those in “psychology circles” there is a filtration effect in emigration that ensures higher intellect- except of course when it doesn’t, like in the case of the hispanic influx underway in the US. You’ve not made a convincing case about the lack of ‘filtration’ in the hispanic emigration currently underway, other than saying it was so. Additionally, I find the field of psychology to be woefully short on empirically proven knowledge and extremely long on might bes, certainly shoulds, and indicative ofs- ergo, citing some vague yet authoritive “psychology circle” is just so much eyewash from where I’m sitting.
Next, if I understand you correctly you say that an influx of dummies is harmful to a nation, except when it isn’t, i.e. your statement “holds no connotation for individuals”. So then, in any group of low IQ mopes there exist “individuals” that apparently don’t belong there or something…. what exactly are you saying?
You go on to say that intelligence is known to be linked to prosperity. While I intuitively agree with this statement, just saying it’s so doesn’t make it so- backup please. Also, I can just as easily posit that productivity and/or a business environment relatively free of gov’t meddling are intrinsically linked to prosperity, and perhaps are greater factors contributing to same. Consider the current state of our economy (8.2% gdp growth in 3q of this year), achieved in the face of this influx of dopes- how would you explain it? Myself, I’ll just cling to my outmoded beliefs in assimilation, rule of law, and the like.
Regarding your support of the land-bridge hyposthesis- you might wanna reexamine that one. In the last few years, excavations in North Carolina (east coast of US) have discovered artifacts pre-dating any of those found in the west or southwest of the US. The resulting hypothesis was that there was a “land bridge” or “ice bridge” that allowed your great great great great grandfathers and mothers from over in Europe to make the trip over to North America before anyone else- in essence all those dumb native americans were descended from european genetic material….. tricky stuff, this IQ business, innit?
You also said:
“This is a purely cultural (and racial) struggle. Therefore, it’s outcome will be cultural, not economic, which is the point I have been trying to make in this thread.”
Uh, if that’s the point you’re trying to make, then you’re wrong- it is a statement of ignorance. There is no way to separate a civilization’s culture from it’s economy- I submit that economies evolve directly from culture. Economics is at root people dealing with other people, and culture is what guides and regulates how this dealing takes place. An extreme example of this took place in the old west, where certain plains indian tribes esteemed horse thieves, and the european descendants in the area hung them. Another example taking place as you read this is occurring in the middle east- Israel vs. Jordan, Israel vs. Iran, etc. etc. etc. On this last one, I’m sure you’ll chalk it up to those big brained Joos, but I’ll put my money on the judeo-christian work ethic vs. islam- you know, culture.
I think I understand your view of how the differential intelligence of various races is important to combatting egalitarianism. I have recently had arguments over the claim that women being “underrepresented” in the computer graphics industry must mean there is something unfair about hiring in this industry. My best counterargument I think is to point to recent research that shows differences between male and female brains. Regardless of the tendency of such reports to trumpet those areas in which women excel men, the fact that there ARE differences is enough to make different sex distributions between different kinds of jobs seem more natural, and the argument that it is necessarily a sign of unfairness, ridiculous.
One of the things that makes me think that my position is rather weak compared to yours, regarding the differential intelligence of races, is that evolutionary theory requires variations in traits between populations, not just individuals, for any evolution to be able to take place at all. If intelligence is an evolved trait, then it follows that it, like melanin content of the skin, is unequally distributed among the people’s of the world. To imagine that slanted eyes, hariness and musscle hardness can vary between races, but that intelligence cannot, is rather too convenient to be taken seriously.
However, this still does not tell us WHICH races are blessed with the superior mental ability. And I still must stand by my skepticism of IQ, economic prosperity or world dominating empires as a measure of this, for the reasons I have already expressed.
I confess I am unaware of debates over human bio-diversity, and the concept of bio-diversity I think I understand does not seem to be what you are talking about. Granted that some races and gene combinations are better than others, yet there is a danger in isolation, incestuous in-breeding and “pure blood.” Genetic weaknesses are reinforced along with genetic strengths, and a disease spreads rapidly among populations with very similar immune responses. These are the arguments in favor of biodiversity as I understand it, and they tend to make the case for multiculturalism or at least, the multi-ethnic society, rather than against it.
The fight against capitalism does seem to be close to the heart of the ideology of the political left. Though I will grant you that this is because it inevitably results in unequal distributions of wealth. Capitalism is that economic environment that allows the cream to rise to the top. In the welfare state, by contrast, the more able are burdened with the support of the less able. I think this is the cause of the decline of western civilization, we are forced by government to support the poor and the foreign.
Another good question, at this point might be, if the races and civilization of Europe, England, and America are so superior to those of the Muslims and South American aboriginals, why are they taking over? What went wrong?
On the time scale we are talking about, genetic evolution is ruled out. The descendants of the European colonists haven’t gotten dumber, the South Americans haven’t gotten smarter, neither have the Muslims.
China has been slumbering. Populous, but stagnating under communism. With greater economic freedom, modern technology, and the difficulty of censorship it implies, they are poised to become a world power. Intelligence isn’t doing that for them, they didn’t suddenly get smarter.
What I believe we are witnessing are the clear results of cultural change. Social Darwinism, rather than genetic Darwinism. The cultures of the west have weakened their protection of private property, private domains of the individual into which government may not intrude. They have embraced the IDEA of egalitarianism, various relativisms, of morality of culture. They are falling behind the expanding populations who hold to a stricter morality, and have greater cultural and ethnic chauvanism, even xenophobia.
Culture is important because our races abandonment of it have led us to this.
Thank you for your views, Guessedworker, it has been educational. I have had more than one discussion and some questions lately that lead me to belive it is time to pull Edward O Wilson’s book from the shelf, blow the dust off, and see what I can learn about Sociobiology.
I am curious about some of the other sources and discussions you alude to. How am I likely to make use of “Gene Expression” for instance? Is it a website?
The Idler,
Thanks for the consideration. In stepping into this lions’ den I am asking folk to examine their real desires for the future and contrast them with their expectations. I am asking them to examine their preconceptions about who we all are and what, if anything, that means. I don’t claim to have all the answers myself, my friend, and if I had I wouldn’t necessarily communicate them. I want to see people questing in their own right.
Having said that, as usual I’ll try to answer your points. The filter issue is straightforward. You seem to accept that a difficult task is accomplished in greater numbers by the talented than the untalented. To reach a toy on a high shelf one child will pile up books and make the climb. A second may lack the dexterity and wouldn’t therefore get the toy except that Senor Fox is there to lift him up. A corrobarative example is the differing measure of average IQ between Afro-Caribbeans who have emigrated to Britain and the Afro-American population. It’s about five points in favour of the former.
The IQ/prosperity issue is very intriguing. Google for IQ & The Wealth Of Nations by Lynn and Vanhanen – I mentioned it earlier. You are right, of course, that economic freedom is the key in our time. It’s a crying shame that most of the civilised world still doesn’t understand that.
Has Kenniwick Man been genetically assigned yet? I don’t think so. Will he EVER be assigned. I don’t think so. In any case the native mongoloids of America ARE just that – mongoloid – and crossed the Berent Sea. The Atlantic ice bridge is reckoned to have facilitated a canoe-crossing by tribes from France! There is no genetic record of them at source so if their genes mixed with Mongoloids they are lost forever now.
Last of your points: what is a cultural outcome? The answer is a sociobiological one. Economics has little bearing on this. The big bad wolf of sociobiology is Phillipe Rushton. I would prefer that you check out his work. If you want to communicate with me again (ever!!) I’ll gladly try to answer any points you raise.
Finally, I take present demographics as my best guide to the future. History will judge white Americans and Europeans by what little we have done in our time – today – towards our own salvation. There is no middle position on this matter. Each of us is either for the left’s prescription or against it. The complacent and those who prefer to turn away from controversy are with the left, for the one impossible outcome of their inaction is peaceful change.
I feel bad for Europe’s self-destruction by socialism. It’s like watching an old friend kill himself with alcohol and ignoring all pleas to enter a 12-step program. Worse, it’s as if the alcoholic thinks that the cure for his problem is MORE booze (i.e. socialism), not less, and spends most of his time explaining why he needs to stock up on more Night Train and Thunderbird. It’s very painful to watch from this side of the Atlantic.
I predict that America’s loss of interest in Europe wil have more to do with Europe’s entrenched anti-Americanism than any kind of influx of non-white immigrants. The events of 9-11 and the rise of the Internet have brought many Americans face to face with how the majority of Europeans really think of us, and with the Pravda Lite-style media that seems to envelope Europe like a cocoon.
Those who are posting about the Hispanic immigration to the US need to understand that after a couple generations, Hispanics seem to have a high degree of intermarriage with whites and other ethnic groups. Most after the 3rd generation don’t even speak Spanish. I see Hispanics as much less of a potential “5th Column” than I see some Muslim immigrants.
I agree, however, that closer ties with Spain are in the offing for the US.
But I don’t ever think the US will give up the “special relationship” with Britain unless Britain totally goes off the rails (and it could).
For one thing, English is the business and technological language of the world. That is not going to change — as the Anglosphere races ahead in technological dominance, English will grow in importance, not diminish. The US and Britain will always have the shared ties of the world’s Number 1 language to hold the “special relationship” together.
If the Anglosphere comes together (including India), and forms a trade-political alliance with the Hispanosphere, I agree that we should take Denmark and possibly Holland with us as well as Spain. Maybe most of Eastern Europe as well.
Gregg,
I am grateful for your thoughtful comment. I’m not going to write much this time. I do that altogether too often, considering all I want is to see people think outside the PC envelope.
When I began this little mission of mine I busied myself giving links, raising studies to prove this point and that. But I learnt that it’s best to discover for oneself, not to be told. I learnt that my interlocutors either care about the future of their own people or, for the moment, don’t. The reason so many don’t is because they haven’t yet focussed properly and also because the zeitgeist is so entirely with the anti-racist, multicultural left. Who, anyway, wants to mess with ideas beloved by white nats? What a roadblock.
Well, the guys who run http://www.gnxp.com are brown, free-thinking, very sound right-wingers, and very smart. There are several good blogs covering genetics and intelligence issues. But Gene Expression is king. The content is technical but political – and mind-opening.
Last thought: Wilson is magnificent but Sociobiology/EP is moving on. If you study later developments avoid Tooby & Cosmides – you’ll see why.
Thanks and best wishes