Chateau Heartiste: “On most 30% BF girls, losing 5% fat will always look better. 15% BF is uncommon on girls with normal frames. Thin-framed girls pull it off.”
Elsewhere in my twitter feed:
* Those who argue that mass immigration is good for GDP are like Esau, who gave up his inheritance for a mess of pottage.
* School Calls Cops After Kid Makes ‘Racist’ Comment About Brownies…
This is a clueless op-ed. The point of BDS, just like the point of the pro-Israel advocacy that Yossi Klein Halevi practices, is to promote the interests of one group over other groups.
A Jewish state of Israel is great for Jews and it sucks for Arabs and Muslims. The destruction of the Jewish state of Israel would feel great for Arabs and Muslims. The success of the Jewish state of Israel results in shame and mortification for Arabs and Muslims, who can’t keep up due to their low average IQs.
What is good for one group, such as Jews, is often horrible for other groups.
Judaism and Torah do not accord democracy much respect, but democracy is useful when you are arguing the case for Israel to people who believe in democracy.
What would the pro-Israel crowd prefer? That those opposed to them use violence or use the non-violence of BDS? Or dream that people opposed to Israel do not assert their own interests?
Jews would support a Jewish state even if it was not a democracy, even if it had no Muslims and no freedom to practice any religion but Judaism, and no free press and no universal healthcare. Why? Because a Jewish state is good for Jews.
As far as what is moral here, as far as who God has given the land to, that’s a matter of faith and it is silly to argue about faith.
As the Middle East devours itself, leaving behind the worst human devastation since World War II, an international movement seeks to delegitimize Israel, the region’s only intact society. Israel alone in the Mideast has an independent judiciary, a free press, universal healthcare and religious freedom. Yet the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, or BDS, has singled out the Jewish state as the world’s most pressing problem in the early 21st century.
BDS is at once immoral and a threat to peace. Immoral, because it perpetuates the lie that Israel is solely or even primarily to blame for the absence of a Palestinian state — rather than the repeated rejection by Palestinian leaders of peace plans presented over the decades. Immoral, too, because it ignores the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hate education on which generations of Palestinians have been raised, an education that denies any place for a Jewish state in any borders.
From Steve Sailer’s new column in Taki’s Magazine:
The near universal response of the punditry to a majority of Brits voting to leave the E.U. has been so enraged that the average voter must have begun by now to notice that their furious elites just plain don’t like them. As a Bizarro World Sally Field might have exclaimed in wonder, “You hate us, you really hate us!”
The past week has been the mirror image of the Stale Pale Male taunting and touchdown dances that followed Obama’s reelection. Then, it was Democracy Rules (because we’ve imported millions of ringers). Now, it’s Democracy Sucks (because voters are stupid).
I’ve long been suggesting that it would be prudent for elites to moderate the policies under which they’ve flourished, such as by scaling back mass immigration. … What has ruined the E.U. is the ideological momentum of elites. Now that the public has twigged to the fact that globalism is basically a scam to allow those who would do pretty well in life anyway to do even better, the globalists have doubled down on their claims to be justified by their more advanced morality of universalism.
Amidst the admittedly very important events of the Orlando shooting and the Brexit, the Australian election is set to take place in 4 days and has gone overlooked on iSteve. This election is of both the House and Senate, so this is as big as it gets. I spent 2-3 hours writing a post to explain everything, but unfortunately the browser died. (!!!)
In a nutshell, my idea is that Australia lacks a “Numbers USA” style website or ratings of individual Australian politicians on the basis of legal immigration, and needs that and a similar election guide by electorate. There is a “Sustainable Population Party” (formerly Stable Population Party) but they only have 4 candidates. There are about 76 seats in the Senate and 150 seats in the House, so something more extensive is really warranted. The beauty of this approach is that politicians are not monolithic on immigration, and similar approaches have been used to considerable success by Numbers USA, the NRA, AIPAC, etc. Apply the filter and let the politicians get the message. This is the best and quickest approach in a country where both major parties want (on average) high levels of immigration, for who knows what reason.
I am not sure whether something of value might be crowdsourced in 2-3 days, but who knows what is possible. If we could get someone on Breitbart onside it would help a lot, if not in the actual help with the guide, at least with the publicity. The largest countries of origin for immigrants to Australia are China, India and then it trails off after that. These are not majority Muslim countries, so whoever helps would need to understand that it is the overall immigration level that is the problem, not just the Muslim issue.
Australia ties Canada in net migration rate, equal first in the Anglosphere in immigration rate. Amongst white countries, only Spain has a higher level of immigration and population. Australia is a valuable ally of the USA and it would be a shame to let it slip out of the Anglosphere through rapid demographic change.
Unlike the USA, Australia’s primary source of immigration has been legal immigration, not illegal immigration. While Australia has been offered a real choice on illegal immigration which to their credit the Liberals were effective in halting, there has been no choice offered on legal immigration by either of the major parties or for that matter, the Greens.
The government media outlet, the ABC, does not even list immigration as a major policy.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-13/election-2016-policy-big-issues/7387588
The Australian Labor Party (ALP) in particular does not want to debate immigration.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/federal-election-2016-coalition-labor-back-away-from-health-immigration-debates-20160623-gpqil1.html
In terms of the world, there are few white countries taking in more migrants per capita than Australia. Of white countries above Australia’s population, there is only Spain ahead of Australia (would make a good story as to who they are taking in and why). Australia is next and practically tied with Canada. Australia is first in the Anglosphere of its size or greater.
Country | Net migration per thousand p.a. | population
Luxembourg 17.16 0.5M
Spain 8.31 47M
Norway 7.25 5M
Belgium 5.87 11M
Canada 5.66 35M
Australia 5.65 23M
…
United States 3.86 319M
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate
As I said before, most of the immigration is non-white. Most is from India, China and the Phillipines, with some white refugees from the UK and South Africa.
http://blog.id.com.au/2011/population/australian-demographic-trends/australia-newest-migrants/
https://www.border.gov.au/about/corporate/information/fact-sheets/02key
Really, we should be aiming for an immigration moratorium to at least halt the demographic change. There is no white country producing much in the way of surplus, so there is no real point to keeping the borders open in the hope we get some compatible immigration. Taking in more Euro migrants only robs Peter to pay Paul. The only white countries breeding at above replacement levels are Israel at about TFR of 3 depending on source, and Argentina at 2.3. It’s very sad.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate
Unfortunately, history shows there is no real difference between the major parties on immigration. Liberal Howard’s tenure oversaw a doubling of the immigration rate. Liberals have been in power from 9/2013, previously ALP from 12/2007, previously Liberals from 3/1996, previously ALP from 3/1983, previously Liberals from 11/1975.
https://www.border.gov.au/Factsheets/PublishingImages/02key-graph-2008-12.gif.jpg
Even Liberal Cory Bernardi, who has good views on Muslim immigration, is either not particularly strong on the legal immigration question, or it is not overly evident where he stands.
http://www.corybernardi.com/learning_from_british_mistakes_on_islamic_migration
http://www.afr.com/news/politics/cory-bernardi-branded-an-embarrassment-for-refugee-comments-20150907-gjhb4h
So, while I am not overly hopeful of finding that much difference between candidates, perhaps there will be some and where there is some, that is a start. I am not sure whether it has merit but since Numbers USA has merit, it seems relatively likely that an Australian equivalent may also have merit. Whether this can be done in time… not sure. Perhaps difficult at this late stage. I welcome comment.
Mark Steyn writes: I did check out the action backstage, and I’ll say this: It was unlike any other candidate event I’ve been to. By comparison with, say, presidential campaigns such as Lamar Alexander’s or Orrin Hatch’s, Trump is very lightly staffed, and entirely unmanaged. Twenty minutes before the event, backstage is usually a whirl of activity with minions pretending to look busy and frantically tippy-tapping away on their phones over some vital matter or other. Deputy speechwriters and assistant campaign managers bustle about saying things like, “Mike’s seen the Egyptian Prime Minister’s response to the Secretary of State, so we’re working on a sentence to add to the nuclear-proliferation section.” There’s none of that around Trump. He’s meandering around back there shooting the breeze, posing for pics, totally relaxed – and so are his press secretary and campaign manager, too. If you’ve seen any of those inside-the-campaign movies, from Robert Redford in The Candidate to George Clooney in Ides of March, it looks all wrong: There’s far too few people, and there’s none of the fake busyness.
