* Japan is also plagued by a lack of Islamic terrorism.
* A few years ago the United Nations Development Programme sponsored a study looking at which nations were expected to have the best improvement in their standard of living.
Japan is predicted to have the highest Human Development Index in 2030, up from 11th in 2010.
* The rape kit industry in Sweden is booming, I hear. Almost makes one wish to open a crime lab, too. It’s a bull market, you know.
* “Nearly lost among Unz’s stable of, to put it politely, “tireless critics of Zionism,””
Funny you mention that, because on the topic of Japan, there is one major thing that they don’t have that the Western nations do have.
* Life in Japan is generally awful.
-Castles and historical shrines all over the place
-Clean, safe public transportation
-Women under 30 usually wear bikinis to the beach
-Legal drinking in public
What a barren wasteland. Japan desperately needs some vibrant Muslim refugees.
* In some old National Geographic magazines Japan was described as being densely populated and overcrowded. Yet today some are claiming they should have more people, that population decline is bad. For the past twenty years or so they’ve been portrayed as collapsing, the economy tanking, the place just going downhill. Yet somehow they seem to be getting along. If things were really so bad wouldn’t more of them be trying to emigrate? There’s all these concern trolls everywhere pretending to be worried about the welfare of the Japanese, who like to stick their nose into Japanese affairs.
They’re smart enough to know what they’re doing and don’t need advice from foreigners whose own countries have major problems.
* Japan also has a problem with mass adult male virginity, despite Japan’s normal male-to-female sex ratio, the acceptability of premarital sexual relationships and Japan’s proximity to other Asian countries with sex tourism industries that Westerners like to visit:
Rise of Japan’s middle-aged virgins: a quarter of over-30s have never had sex.
Atheist bloggers write frequently about how sex-negative religious upbringings can result in sexually dysfunctional adults – they have beaten up a lot on the unfortunate Duggar family in Arkansas lately. But for some reason they don’t want to discuss adult male virginity as a secular social phenomenon, probably because they can’t blame it on religion. Instead the secular ideology of feminism plays a role in men’s sexual eviction, alienation and the MGTOW trend.
* The American public has shown no appetite for mass immigration, either. Nor has the European public, for that matter. No, what’s different about Japan is that the elite has shown no appetite for mass immigration.
And you can bet your arse if they ever do, it’ll be composed of populations that look a hell of a lot like the Japanese, and not Africans, Mestizos, or MENAs.
Immigration is the solution in up economies and down economies, in times of war or peace, of fat and lean. In sickness and in health, ’til death do us part. Immigration is a dessert topping and a floor wax. It’s like snake oil; it’s the cure for whatever ails you, and something certainly ails you.
Well, for white countries, anyway. But not in Israel, China, India, Japan, etc., for some strange reason.
* First, the discussion isn’t whether more immigration improves GDP growth per capita. It’s whether a country that chooses to stay ethnically/racially intact by rejecting immigration can have improving material living standards. Japan shows that the answer is a resounding “Yes.” And Japan’s example is all the more relevant given its declining workforce, which also proves that a white country with a declining population (and not just countries with internally growing populations) could enjoy improved living standards.
Second, as we all know, the impact of immigration on an economy (and the country as a whole) isn’t just a short-term affair. The immigrants become citizens, have children and grow old. It’s not hard to see how a poor Mexican immigrant could be a short-term plus for an economy but a long-term drag as he goes on disability due to a bad back and has children unwilling to work as farm laborers but unable to work in high-tech so they become welfare recipients. Therefore, for you to show a few years of slightly better numbers for Germany as compared to Japan as “proof” that immigration improves an economy is silly as best and disingenuous as worst.
Let’s see how those Muslim and black immigrants are helping Germany’s economy a generation or two from now.
* China could easily provide Israel with hundreds of thousands of citizens with IQs far higher than that of the vast majority of Israel’s current population. There are few economic sectors in Israel that they could not improve. Strangely, Israel doesn’t seem interested in this bounteous opportunity.
If you hate white people and diversity and want Germany to be more like Turkey, then Germany is on the path to great success.
* I see mass immigration as a form of national suicide. We tend not to view suicide with a cold eye, I fail to see why we should do so when the stakes are raised to the national level. Quite the opposite, in fact.
We assume people have gone off the deep end when they attempt suicide. We do our best to prevent them from harming themselves until they return to sanity.
I see no reason to do any less for white nations.
* BTW on this week’s McLaughlin Group, Pat Buchanan was making the point that prior to the Immigration Act of 1965 we were “united” as a nation in that 97% of Americans spoke English and that now we have kids in our schools speaking “over 200 languages.” The lovely Eleanor Cliff retorted with the claim that “having 200 languages in our schools is not a bad thing.” http://www.mclaughlin.com/ (at the 9:36 mark). What a clueless dingbat!
* Japan is one of the entities that just drives elites in the media up the wall. It’s clean, ordered without embracing many of the supposed beneficial tenets the West holds dear. They’ll complain about Japan not taking in immigrants or refugees and the doom it will cause. Yet Japan keeps chugging along.
* Libertarian’s individual-centrism means that there is no reason for a nation to militarily defend itself IF the new invading order guarantees individual liberty.
Suppose China is about to invade Japan. According to the rules of libertarianism, there is no need to fear China’s invasion as long as Chinese invaders allow Japanese individuals to indulge in their individual freedom of thrill-seeking, sex, gambling, video games, pop music, and travel.
According to libertarianism, one should defend one’s nation ONLY IF the invaders will take one’s individual liberty away.
If, on the other hand, the invaders may expand individual freedom, they should be welcomed even at the price of national sovereignty. So, never mind national independence and sovereignty. If invaders offer more individual freedom — pot smoking and gambling — , they should be welcomed.
Because of the cult of individualism in the West, there is no resistance to the massive invasion. Germans don’t see themselves as Germans above all and French don’t see themselves as French above all. They see themselves as modern individuals looking for fun. Europeans may be ‘socialist’(or social-democratic), but that too is about individualism since the idea is purely economic: it provides safety nets for individuals so that they can feel secure as individuals. It’s not like the conservative socialist idea of the European Right that stressed unity and cooperation in economic activity as a means of strengthening national bonds.
Since Europeans see themselves as individuals primarily, they tend to see the invaders as ‘individuals looking for a better life’, and why should any individual deny another individual a ‘right to a better life’? This is what happens when identity breaks down.
But there’s yet another problem. Even many of those who oppose the invasion do so on libertarian or individualist grounds, i.e. the newcomers “don’t share our attitudes and outlooks and ‘values’ of individual liberty.” And THAT is why the invasion should be stopped. But using this logic, any amount of invaders should be allowed IF they ‘shared western values’. So, if a 100 million Muslims and a 100 million black Africans were for ‘gay marriage’ and ‘feminism’, they should be allowed in.
A weak argument.
West should be defended because it is racially, culturally, territorially, and historically distinct from other peoples and civilizations. It’s really that simple.
If Westerners are individual-centric, they will not identify with other Westerners. There will be no unity of purpose and survival.
And they will see invaders not as another people but just some other individuals.
* Japan has also apparently been working less and its public sentiment has shifted towards prioritizing happiness over economic growth. This has been criticized by Western economists, who say Japanese salarymen should take fewer golf breaks and accept more immigration. This sounds like Jeb Bush’s economic policy: work more hours, golf less, and accept more immigration.
* If the Japanese population declines by 10 million in the next ten years, that means the Japanese will be better off and less crowded. The imbalance between the young and retirement age Japanese will also go away in about 30 years.
The idea the you should change the demographic nature of your country FOREVER to solve a short term labor shortage is some thing only a stupid Westerner could think of. The USA was the world leader in the is stupidity. They had a labor shortage in the American south and decided to “solve” it with African Slaves. How’d that work out for everyone?
* It seems obvious to me that when family formation becomes sufficiently affordable, families will be formed.
* Whole neighborhoods around Tel Aviv are inhabited by illegal sub-Saharan African migrants. Israel also had a home-grown population of hostiles that makes up a greater fraction of the Israel’s population than the French Muslims are of the French population.
