Listen here and here.
I am interviewed by a Los Angeles Jewish friend who’s been Modern Orthodox all of his life.
Topics revolve around sex and include:
* How should a healthy society respond to homosexuality
* Sex, love and porn addiction
* Can religion solve addiction?
* Jews, Judaism, rabbis & sex
From VDARE: Donald Trump has the usual suspects in shrieking hysterics because of one of his latest Instagram ads.
The ad is being compared to the “Willie Horton” ad famously run by Jeb’s father George H.W. Bush in his campaign against Michael Dukakis.
You might not remember the Dukakis Administration. That’s because it didn’t happen. George H.W. Bush easily defeated Dukakis, winning 40 states and a majority in the popular vote.
However, somehow, the sober and factual “Willie Horton” ad is invariably described as “infamous,” and Trump’s ad about illegal immigrant criminals (well, illegal immigrants who committed more than one crime) is also being described as offensive [Donald Trump Releases Fearmongering Willie Horton-Style Ad About Undocumented Immigrants, by Esther Yu-Hsi Lee, ThinkProgress, August 31, 2015]
The Left’s approach towards the Trump campaign is much the same as the Beltway Right’s. It’s simply concern trolling. Ads like these are seen as bad not because they are ineffective, but because they are too effective, and might get the peasants riled up. Pointing out that illegal immigrants are committing crimes is a hatefact. It’s true, but you aren’t supposed to say it.
Dawn M. Turner, Chicago Tribune, August 31, 2015:
When I finished speaking with Richard Spencer on Sunday afternoon, I better understood why he vehemently opposes immigration, feels the white race will soon be a “hated minority” in America, and supports Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump even though he never imagined he would.
I talked to the 37-year-old University of Chicago grad, who now lives in Montana, because I know that Trump has tapped into a fear that’s deeply felt by people near and far. It’s just that most folks wouldn’t articulate it in the same way, or as willingly, as Spencer, especially to someone like me.
Spencer is president of the National Policy Institute, a think tank. On its website under the name is the creed, “For our people, our culture, our future.” He doesn’t want to be called a “white supremacist” because although he’s a staunch believer in the separation of the races, he says he doesn’t believe in the superiority of the white race.
{snip}
Spencer also doesn’t want to be called a “white nationalist,” because “nationalism is about chauvinism.” Instead, he considers himself a European “identitarian,” which he says is based on white people of European descent understanding who they are as a people and uniting along the lines of their shared historical experiences.
{snip}
“I call myself an identitarian and not an American,” he said. “I think whites will need to be post-American and rediscover our identity as Europeans.”
{snip}
Spencer rails against consumerism, and wants the country to return to a “spiritual dimension.” He describes an America–or any country–that’s racially and ethnically diverse as one in which people are “all thrown into this flat world where they don’t have a historical or emotional connection to the nation.”
He believes America has been a “failed experiment” and that by 2044, when the U.S. Census Bureau predicts people of color will outnumber whites, they will be “a defeated people.”
“But won’t a lot of white people still be in power?” I asked him.
“I don’t doubt that white people will still hold power,” Spencer said. “But those are the managers of white decline.” He referred to Hillary Clinton, whom he called “pathetic.”
{snip}
To be clear, not all of Trump’s supporters share Spencer’s extreme views. But there is a disaffected, angry knot of folks who are afraid they will be and have been steamrolled by immigrants and affirmative action. They wholeheartedly believe a particular way of life continues to be under threat.
So in walks a bold and brash presidential candidate who gives voice to their fears while trumpeting the idea of making America great again.
Although Spencer likes Trump, he doesn’t believe America can be great again.
“That’s backward-looking,” he said. “We want to look forward and think about who we’re going to be. People want to know everything is going to be OK, that my grandchildren are going to be OK.
“Donald Trump is not a white nationalist, or an identitarian. But he’s giving people a sense that ‘your fears are real and we can find a way out’ and this contrasts with other Republicans who say, ‘Your fears are not real.’ ”
Spencer–who has no ties to Trump–said he thought the candidate’s statement on America not being a nation unless it has borders was powerful. And, he’s deeply inspired by the way Trump has gained traction without the conservative establishment.
“If identitarians are going to have a future, we have to operate outside those paradigms,” he said. “Trump is demonstrating the bankruptcy of the GOP and Fox News, and showing you don’t need the Bush family.”
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.
Story: More than half of the nation’s immigrants receive some kind of government welfare, a figure that’s far higher than the native-born population, according to a report to be released Wednesday.
About 51% of immigrant-led households receive at least one kind of welfare benefit, including Medicaid, food stamps, school lunches and housing assistance, compared to 30% for native-led households, according to the report from the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates for lower levels of immigration.
Those numbers increase for households with children, with 76% of immigrant-led households receiving welfare, compared to 52% for the native-born.
The findings are sure to fuel debate on the presidential campaign trail as Republican candidates focus on changing the nation’s immigration laws, from calls for mass deportations to ending birthright citizenship.
REPORT: Donald Trump is not only the Republican frontrunner by a large margin, but his dominance and unscripted talk has also earned him some fans in the Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods in Brooklyn.
A recent Siena poll showed that Jewish voters in New York – by a 69-27 percentage point margin – view Trump as unfavorable. The poll also showed that only 13% of Jewish voters want to see Trump become president.
Nonetheless, among Orthodox Jews, the chatter around Trump, especially after his performance at the first prime time televised debate, has been largely positive.
The comments in Shul went from “Trump is smart” to “only Trump has the gutz to say what others are afraid to say out loud.”
One such vocal supporter is Larry Spiewak, a successful businessman and chairman of the Council of Jewish Organizations (COJO) of Flatbush.
“I like Trump because he speaks from his heart, from what he believes in, and he doesn’t owe anything to anybody,” Spiewak told Haaretz. “He really is a good guy. He really is a mensch if you sit down and talk to him. Is he abrasive sometimes? Yeah, but that’s what people like, that’s what people need. Why is he still ahead in the polls? Because he’s the Howard Stern of politics. He speaks the truth.”
Trump’s daughter Ivanka converted to Judaism in 2009, and her observance of Shabbat with her husband Jared Kushner (a well-known real estate developer as well as the owner and publisher of the New York Observer newspaper) is well-documented.
“I have great respect for [the Shabbat traditions], and I see Ivanka during Saturday, and from Friday evening on through Saturday night, she won’t take phone calls and they live a very interesting life,” Trump said in a recent interview with JNS. “And it’s actually a beautiful thing to watch, with Jared and Ivanka. In a very hectic life, it really becomes a very peaceful time. So there’s something very nice about it.”
Trump is also known as a strong supporter of Israel. He was honored to be the Grand Marshal at the Israeli Day Parade in 2001 and in 2004.
Last year, he donated over $100,000 to Israeli emergency rescue service United Hatzalah for the purchase of new ambucycles.
In April, before he announced his candidacy, the former reality TV star tweeted, “Nobody but Donald Trump will save Israel.”
“The only [candidate] that’s going to give real support to Israel is me,” he told JNS. “The rest of them are all talk, no action. They’re politicians. I’ve been loyal to Israel from the day I was born. My father, Fred Trump, was loyal to Israel before me. The only one that’s going to give Israel the kind of support it needs is Donald Trump.”
“Israel was sold out by Kerry and Obama,” Trump said at an Iowa campaign event this Saturday. “You cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. You can’t have it. When they march down the street saying ‘Death to Israel. Death to the United States.’ You can’t let that happen.”
Only a tiny number of Jews engage in radical politics, but when they do, they wreak immense destruction (communism and its genocides, for example, as well as the end of prayer in public American schools, the removal of Christianity from America’s public spaces, etc). The goyim who are racially aware hate organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which are waging war on non-Jewish forms of nationalism.
* Why don’t the Southern Law Poverty Centre (the name apparently derives from government funding lawyers could get to sue on behalf of poor people) mention Harpending’s explanation for the obvious superiority of Ashkenazim over gentiles and non-Ashkenazim. The SPLC are conflating the views of Harpending with those of Kevin MacDonald. MacDonald is the one who talks about Jewish intelligence being the result of eugenic practices, Harpending’s book is arguing the opposite.
* They make most of their money scaring old Jewish ladies into giving money so the SPLC can prevent the next Holocaust.
* The SPLC is a hyper-ethnic Jewish Organization waging hyper-ethnic Jewish warfare against The Historic Native Born White Christian American Majority.
* Dees was brought up by a radical-Left Jewish family, and got the usual hardLeft, anti-White socialization therefrom. In fact, he’s primarily a figurehead; the two main movers and shakers at the $PLC are Heidi Beirach and Mark Potok, both Jew-communist lawyers. I exchanged a few e-mails with Heidi B. when she was trying to put the slam on Kevin MacDonald; she’s a nasty piece of work. Then there’s an outer circle of largely symbolic White shabbatz goyim and even a Latino or two, to provide the usual rainbow flavor. Basically $PLC is a Jew-controlled, communist-front hedge fund whose principal purpose (aside from collecting shekels) is to smother White opposition to the anti-White immigration rackets. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Jews do not intend to be pogrom’d. Or ghetto’d. Or holocaust’d. Ever. Again. Low-IQ Blacks and Mestizos they can easily control; Asians – Chinese in particular – are, like the (out-of-Asia ) Ashkenazic Jews – high IQ and savage collectivists. They get along just fine. Whites’ central tendency is (cf. KMac) altruism + individualism, making of them a potential lethal threat to the Jews’ age-old universalist goal of the Destruction of the Nations. So they must be eliminated, and the $PLC (and hundreds of other Jewish Tribal organizations) is here to help. Not to mention our entire, Zion-owned political and chattering class.
* Societies succeed because they’ve built up, usually over centuries, a widely accepted and practiced set of behaviors; social capital built up of predictable actions and attitudes and beliefs. The core of the culture.
Immigrants who do not have that ingrained culture are likely to be destructive of social capital and destructive to the host society. Despite the gibberish of the lunatic left most people recognize this and quite rightly reject the attempt to destroy their society in pursuit of a crazed political fantasy.
* The Fraser Institute came out with their Human Freedom Index, using 76 distinct indicators of personal and economic freedom. All 17 Anglo-Germanic nations (not including Liechtenstein) finish in the top 22. This is how the 7 nations in question ranked:
#3. Finland
#8. Ireland
#12. Austria
#25. Portugal
#33. France
#34. Italy
#37. Spain
1. Melbourne
2. Vienna
3. Vancouver
4. Toronto
5. Calgary
5. Adelaide
7. Sydney
8. Perth
9. Auckland
10. Helsinki
10. Zurich
All 11 cities are in the Anglo-Germanic world, including one each from Austria and Finland. Needless to say, no Latin cities made the list.
These two studies add to the mountain of evidence that the Anglo-Germanic countries (and cities) totally dominate all international standard of living/quality of life rankings. And Ireland, Finland and Austria consistently cluster with the rest of the Anglo-Germanic world, while France, Italy, Spain and Portugal don’t.
* Northwest Europe has Nordic-Germanic-Protestant core that consists of Scandinavia, Germany, Holland and Britain, and a periphery that includes Finland, the Alpine States, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland and the Anglo settler societies. So even though Finland, Ireland and Austria are partial outliers in a cultural sense, they clearly belong to the Anglo-Germanic family of nations in a way that the Latin countries don’t.
I’m arguing that the Hajnal line divides Eastern Europe from Western Europe as a whole, not just Northwest Europe. You say that there is variation within the Hajnal line region. Absolutely. Above all, there is a major cultural fault line that divides Nordic-Germanic-Protestant Northwest Europe from Mediterranean-Latin-Catholic Southwest Europe, and the Hajnal line divides both from Alpine-Slavic-Orthodox Eastern Europe.
One major difference between Northwest and Southwest Europeans is racial phenotype. The latter are generally shorter and darker than the former. All of the Anglo-Germanic nations average 50% or more of their native (or white in the case of the Anglo settler societies) population having either light-coloured hair (blond, red, light brown) or light-coloured eyes (blue, green, grey). None of the Latin nations do.
Of the 7 nations in question, the percentage of each having light-coloured hair or eyes is:
Finland: 85%
Ireland: 60%
Austria: 54%
France: 43%
Italy: 23%
Spain: 19%
Portugal: 16%
As for average height (in this case for 20 year-old males), the Anglo-Germanic nations all fall between 174.3 and 181 cms. The tallest Latin nation is shorter than the shortest Anglo-Germanic nation. Here’s how the 7 nations in question fared:
Finland: 178.4 cms
Austria: 177 cms
Ireland: 175 cms
France: 174.1 cms
Italy: 173.2 cms
Spain: 172 cms
Portugal: 170.5 cms
A couple more economic lists, both taken from Wikipedia, showing that Finland, Ireland and Austria cluster with the other Anglo-Germanic nations near the top, and consistently beat France, Italy, Spain and Portugal in these crucial indices.
Per Capita Income:
Ireland: $53,462
Austria: $51,307
Finland: $49,497
France: $44,538
Italy: $35,823
Spain: $30,278
Portugal: $22,130
Unemployment Rate:
Austria: 5.7%
Finland: 9.4%
Ireland: 9.7%
France: 10.5%
Italy: 12.4%
Portugal: 13%
Spain: 22.7%
And finally, from your post on the worldwide distribution of personality:
The Anglo-Germanic nations, including Finland, Ireland and Austria, all cluster near the Linear-Active cultural type, while the Latin nations lean towards the Multi-Active node.
So in terms of racial phenotype, linguistic group, religious heritage, history, geography, culture, politics, economics, intelligence, trustworthiness, personality, temperament etc etc, Finland, Ireland and Austria are clearly part of the Anglo-Germanic/Northwest European world. And–just as clearly–the Latin nations are not. There is not just one meta-culture inside the Hajnal line, but two: the Anglo-Germanics in the northwest and the Latins in the southwest.
* Psychometrics is a mathematically centered field dealing with issues of measurement. [Richard] Lynn has not, to my knowledge, made contributions to that field.
Psychologists who studies group, particularly racial, differences, yes, he is the last of the three grand old men (Jensen and Rushton being the other two).
Lynn’s style is a broad stokes style (see the interview of Lynn by Nyborg). His focus is on the big picture. His books contains loads of errors, many of which has been pointed out on the internet. With errors corrected, the big picture remains the same however. For some more even-handed dealing with the errors, read the works by Jason Malloy. Malloy have done a series of high quality reviews of IQ and achievement scores by country. Malloy’s style is clearly that of a perfectionists. The problem is that Malloy is such a slow worker that his reviews cover only a small fraction of nations.
* Prof. Richard Lynn seems to have published a vast number of scholarly articles and books on IQ issues, and indeed Prof. Helmuth Nyborg described Lynn and his frequent collaborator Prof. Tatu Vanhanen as “undisputed and widely respected leaders of the field” of IQ studies. A few years ago, a scholarly journal devoted its entire issue to his lifelong achievements in that topic, and last year John Derbyshire published a long article summarizing his long career as part of a Festschrift. Among numerous other things, Lynn seems to have been the original discoverer of the very important “Flynn Effect,” which is therefore sometimes also called the Lynn-Flynn Effect.
So Lynn certainly seems one of the world’s leading scholars in IQ studies, and being ignorant of the nuances of that field, I tend to call him a “psychometrician,” but perhaps there’s a more appropriate term to use.
* I love the New Yorker’s cartoons, but I’ve long had the impression when reading its articles that I’m spying on some Upper West Side conversation that wasn’t meant for me. I get the strange feeling that I’m eavesdropping.
One off-putting characteristic of media coverage of immigration-related issues in general is the passive attitude toward demographics. The displacement of natives by millions of foreigners with strange customs is just something that kind of happens, the way a thunderstorm happens. To the extent the issue is discussed, it’s always in feckless, reactive terms. “Have the French adapted their secular values to the needs of Muslim youth?” “Have you made sure your gutters are clear of leaf clutter?”
Every article about immigration-related problems should have stamped across the top, “Why did we even allow this to become an issue?!”
* So alienation causes Immigrants in France to start hating Jews? Also why does this article not get specific and name which Immigrant communities in France hate the Jews? Is it France’s Japanese Immigrant community? Is it France’s Icelandic Immigrant community?
* When those blacks and Muslims hate whites, Jews cheer it on as ‘anti-racism’.
When blacks and Muslims eventually notice that Jews are even more powerful in proportional terms than white gentiles, that is ‘antisemitism’.
* Three good Jewish atheist/agnostic British-American lawyer friends pointed this article out to me a few days ago. Several things to note:
– The article’s general survey of France and of the French banlieue is quite accurate. When I step into one of these neighborhoods I have the vague feeling of having walked into a creepy foreign movie with no subtitles. Even when the people around me speak French at least 80% of them do not think or reflect or respond to the same instinctive “cues” we and most of the people we know do – including most of the people of color we encounter in what we would consider “normal” quarters.
– The article is also correct that the most passionate jihadists seem to come from more “educated” backgrounds. This belies the common notion that the ISIL nutbags “don’t know their religion” – on the contrary, they know it better than most, which is why they follow the lead of the Prophet (insulting whom would be punishable by death, a sentence any Muslim in good standing is competent to carry out) – and also belies the notion that education and opportunity will result in better integration of disaffected (mostly Muslim by confession) communities.
– The article is however quite facetious in portraying Ben Ahmed as a hometown hero worthy of civic respect. Were he at all integrated or even desirous of integration he would have left those quarters as soon as he could…
As the example of the United States shows, no one can do more damage than an uppity ghetto community organizer, especially when the media covers for him. Brace yourselves if anyone ever starts murmuring about a Président Ben Ahmed of France.
Manhattan Beach is Venice if it went to college, an idyllic Los Angeles suburb that anyone can enjoy if they’re willing to brave the traffic. Well, maybe not anyone. The city has made it illegal to eat in your car, the idea presumably being to exclude undesirable hungry people from savoring the welcoming ocean breeze.
Live Oak Park, an eerily pristine, family-friendly public enclave just blocks from the Pacific Ocean, sports warning signs that read: “NO SLEEPING NO EATING, IN VEHICLES ON STREETS, PARKS, PARKING LOTS OR OTHER PUBLIC PROPERTY 10PM TO 6AM M.B.M.C. 3-1.1.”
Other exclusionist popped-collar communities around California have laws targeting the homeless, but this may be the only one to bar the essential human act of consuming nutrients. The code referenced, 3-11.1, is not even on record at Manhattan Beach City Hall, which would make enforcement problematic.
It apparently was repealed years ago, although the signs appear to be freshly minted.
The statute Manhattan Beach officials may have been looking for when they erected the signs is 14.36.160. The statute is known as the No Overnight Camping Ordinance. Indeed, being homeless is a form of camping. Conversely, camping is a means of being temporarily homeless for those who aren’t.
That statute is on the books, and it reads, “It shall be unlawful for any person to use or occupy, permit the use or occupancy of any vehicle for human habitation, including but not limited to sleeping or eating, on any street, alley, park, beach, public parking lot or parking structure, or any public property within the City of Manhattan Beach between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.”
…Stephanie Martin, a spokeswoman at the Manhattan Beach Police Department, denies the law is a thinly veiled method for displacing people of whom the 84.5 percent white town doesn’t approve, yet conversely confirms it’s not meant to apply to locals (who, by the way, enjoy a median household income of $140,000 a year, while Beverly Hills trails at $87,000.)
“Doesn’t matter if you’re in an Aston Martin or a Ford Pinto, we don’t police that way,” Martin says. “We get a call that someone says it’s 2 o’clock in the morning, somebody’s parked on Valley Drive in violation of the sign, then we’re going to go respond and investigate, and if a citation is warranted then it’s warranted. It’s not there designed for the locals. I don’t think any of the locals sit there and park their cars there at 10 o’clock at night and sleep or eat.”
* That song has been played at several Trump rallies.
It is revealing to observe how the MSM tries to tell us that Trump does not appeal to this or that demographic group, ethnicity or race. In fact, he has broad appeal across lines — while still having the respect of the base you identify.
I know several, legitimate immigrants and naturalized citizens who like candidate Trump. These people came here legally, with skills and culture. They jumped through all the hoops our laughable immigration system put in front of them. They paid all the fees, met every requirement, attended every appointment, took every test, and waited through every long step in the process. They resent anyone who cuts in line. They hate those who come here for a handout. They learned and speak English. They admire independent business owners.
Trump will win votes from the base and much more, particularly LEGAL immigrant naturalized citizens of every race — and their American friends and families.
Yeah, people respect strength. I think that if white conservatives demonstrate some self-respect and determination, they will find they have friends in some surprising places. I’m pretty sure my immigrant dad would vote for Trump if he were the GOP nominee.
The message our society currently sends to immigrants and minorities is, “Come dance on Whitey’s grave!” If that message were changed to, “We’re taking our country back; is your loyalty to us or to your old country?” there would be nothing to lose and a lot to gain. To put it differently, immigrants and minorities are currently spoken for by (as Steve recently observed) Jewish liberals in the media. If immigrants/minorities were put on the spot and made to speak for themselves, it could only be an improvement. At the very least we’d know whose side they’re on; one could no longer finesse tribal conflicts of interest with BS about dreams and propositions.
* I think Steve is hitting on something important here – Spanish really isn’t as cool as it used to be.
Back when Jeb!’s brother was selling himself as fluent in Spanish 15 years ago, it arguably was cool.
But I think a combination of the The War On Terror and the rise of China kind of put a kibosh on that. It looked cosmopolitan to brush up on your Spanish fifteen years ago, now it looks parochial.
Mandarin or Arabic, that’s where the smart kids are heading.
* Yeah, Jeb seems to be operating on the theory that the United States is just Florida writ large, so the approach he used successfully in Florida will translate seamlessly to the national stage.
In Florida’s political climate, seeing politicians switch effortlessly between Spanish and English is seen as no biggie, even for redneck voters, because everybody just writes it off as “oh, they’re pandering to the Cuban vote again.” Since Cubans aren’t (yet) seen as a wholly owned and operated subsidiary of the Democratic party, Republicans here don’t mind it that much. Jeb doesn’t seem to get that this sort of thing plays very differently in Iowa.
On the other hand, it does suggest that ethnic grievance groups who want real political power would be advised to spread themselves a little more widely across the political spectrum. Cubans, like Jews, have been very successful in getting their policy preferences set in stone precisely because they’ve been so good at avoiding being tied exclusively to one party — thus a Republican who panders to Cuban donors isn’t seen as “selling out” his redneck constituents.
The non-Cuban “Hispanic vote,” though, is still seen as monolithically Democratic and leftist, despite the best efforts of lobbyists — therefore, a GOP candidate who openly panders to Hispanics gets tagged as a Democrat in sheep’s clothing.
Or to put it in a way that iSteve readers might appreciate: While everybody knows most Jews are Democrats, everyone also knows there are some very loud, red-meat right-wing Jewish Republicans, so most white, Christian Republican voters aren’t terribly threatened by a Republican who talks up Jewish issues. There’s a similar dynamic at work in Florida with politicians pandering to Cubans. But where are all the loud, red-meat, right-wing Mexican-American activists and intellectuals? Where’s the Mexican-American version of Rush Limbaugh that Hispanics can point to and say, “see? Letting us have our way doesn’t have to be so bad.”
If La Raza or Black Lives Matter want to take it to the next level, maybe they need to develop their own neocon wings…
* Wanna know a big fat irony?
Bush 41 criticized Michael Dukakis in the 1988 campaign for campaigning to Hispanic voters in Spanish.
