Steve Sailer writes: “Jeb dividing his campaigning up into two separate languages is, of course, not divisive, it’s diverse! As we all known, divisive and diversity are antonyms. Therefore, people like Trump who encourage unity of the American political information sphere are divisive, while Jeb addressing different audiences in different languages brings us together by making it harder for us to monitor what he’s saying. Diversity enables divide and conquer, so diversity is therefore Good; while unifying the public to resist conquest is divisive and therefore Bad.”
Comments to Steve Sailer:
* I agree that having a single national language is unifying (and generally a good idea), but there’s a sense in which insisting on English is divisive.
The NYT types have gone to extraordinary lengths to insulate immigrant populations throughout the West from being confronted with a basic reality of demographics and political economy (and ultimately good old Darwinian biology): you can’t be simultaneously loyal to two distinct peoples that have different interests and identities. A big part of the purpose of all the schmaltz about “proposition nations” and “who we are as Americans” is to protect immigrants from having to pick sides. Immigrants can use all of the smarmy sophistry of the Left (and the neocons) to rationalize to themselves how there’s nothing more quintessentially American than bringing a bunch of subliterate relatives over from Guatemala or whatever. Because huddled masses.
We want to divide minorities inasmuch as we want to make them choose between the historically Anglo-European nation and the Third World non-nation that the continued importation of their kinsmen is creating. That’s a tough call for minorities to make, since one’s own blood and soil are important to pretty much anyone who isn’t a white liberal. Even so, they chose to come to this country, so they should be made to clarify their allegiance one way or another.
This is the wedge we should be trying to widen, deepen, and exploit, and hell yeah it’s divisive. America or anti-America? That’s the question the folks at the NYT don’t want Hispanics to ever have to hear. Much better for media leftists to keep peddling the fairy tale that the anti-white reconquista and its attendant racial socialism are just one more star-spangled chapter in our dreamy American Dream.
* Isn’t politics supposed to be divisive?
If we want a non-divisive political system, get rid of multiple parties and just have a dictator for life.
Politics, especially democratic politics, is supposed to be divisive. Democracy exists because it accepts that people are divided on issues.
Promoting democracy in the Middle East was bound to cause more problems because all the various factions came out of the woodwork.
Generally, divisions aren’t so poisonous if they’re only ideological: social-democrat vs free markets. If all people are white and disagree on some ideological issues, they can make it work.
But when ideological divisions are accompanied by ethnic divisions, that can be poisonous. Yugoslavia. Israel with Jewish vs Arab divide. Turkey with Turk vs Kurd divide. A diverse nation may not be able to handle democracy well if ideology become tribalogy. Some say Erdogan of Turkey is ramping up violence abroad against Kurds because he’s angry with Kurdish gains in Turkish elections. NYT is full of it cuz it approves of Bush playing racial politics with Mexers but attacks Trump for playing same with whites. If all sides agree to give up racial politics, fine. But as long as blacks, browns, yellows, and the rest play racial politics, why shouldn’t whites, especially if they’re headed to minority status?
Another funny complaint from Libs is that The Right plays to certain ‘insecurities’. Well, no shi*. If everyone felt secure, there would be no politics. Politics is about getting people riled up over insecurities that may be economic, political, national, regional, social, moral, sexual, etc.
MORE COMMENTS TO STEVE SAILER:
* Has Obama ever addressed any group in a language besides English? Like, even reading off a prepared passage?
I thought the old Columbia core required you to take at least 1 language year, but most probably did not mandate fluency. If Barry did Latin or koine Greek that would still be something he’d reference at some point (since he enjoys bragging). Despite having the most multilingual collection of parents and step parents this side of Berlitz headquarters it seems not to have rubbed off on him. Also his published poetry was pretty weak.
