Comments to Steve Sailer:
* I have an idea: squint your eyes and watch those videos again but pretend the White people are Israelis and the brown people are Palestinians. Looks different to you, I bet. Funny thing is the roles of all the actors are similar in the two places, except that White Americans have been in California much longer than the Israelis have been in Palestine.
* You confuse “Mexicans” with the black-bloc specimens on display here. You’re not even taking into account how many of the picante vibrante los stuermers were bused in & paid to do this. On one boundary are the vandals & whoever is proud of that sentiment — maybe 1/10th the Latinx electorate at best? Opposite them are anti-immigrant Hispanico residents — there are lots of these, even if they dislike Trump, it’s still yuge, like 20%-25%. They’re a “swing” group to be sure but not going to be impressed by anarchist street theater. In the great wide middle between these factions is the Slowpoke Rodriguez sleepy majority who probably do feel some raza pride, or maybe they really don’t, but it’s not worth going out and voting on it. In order to turn out those middle reserves to buttress the angry-rock-hurling-tantrum segment, the local ward heelers, union deputies have to expend a lot of effort, and require a lot of walking-around money. Trump doesn’t need to worry about undoing at the hands of a nascent Raza super-bloc (and certainly not in the primary). His problem is the landscaper-patron & libertarian space-cadet whites voting against him. If you thought Wisconsin had a lot of the former, non-coastal California is their home turf; and the Golden State’s libertoid disease is well attested. It’s not the upper East Coast where Ron Pauleteers are automatically dismissed as redneck Southerners. People out west actually believe in that @#$%.
* To all those suggesting Mexico take back California, what are we to do with the infrastructure? For example, do the Mexicans pay us for the Golden Gate Bridge and the aqueducts? Or do we just remove what we can and destroy the rest?
Additionally, what are the Mexicans going to do for water and electricity? Or do they just expect Hoover Dam to continue to make Southern California inhabitable for 15 million people?
* Trump does not need to say a word about this — it speaks for itself, if a picture is worth a thousand words then the video coming of of this is worth a million, etc etc — and that’s about how many votes Trump could gain from this.
* You mean Hitler’s famous “America First” speech at the Reichstag in December, 1935, or the equally famous “Make America Great Again” speech at the Nuremberg Rally in July, 1937?
* Time to retire all the labels.
It’s not about free markets vs socialism.
It’s not about Dems vs Repubs.
It’s not about Liberals vs Conservatives.
It’s not about Progressives vs Libertarians.
It’s not about radicals vs reactionaries.
It’s not about justice vs liberty.
It’s not about big government vs small government.
It’s not about elitists vs populists.
It is REALLY about anti-white vs pro-white.
That’s it.
Call one side ‘anti-whites’. Call the other side ‘pro-whites’.
Maybe just ‘antites’ and ‘proites’ is enough.
All other labels are obfuscations.
Sure, there are whites in the anti-white camp, and there are non-whites in the pro-white camp. But the basic trajectory of anti-white camp is to destroy white civilization while that of the pro-white camp is to save it.
* Flying the Mexican flag is about culture, not nationality, and that’s beautiful. But flying the Confederate Battle Flag is about hate, not culture or nationality.
* When Trump unleashes the Border Patrol on idiots like the ones featured in this story, I hope he has a super majority of agents with last names like Garza, Santiago, and Gomez bringing the hurt to really confuse the hell out of the media in the first go round.
The agency is 52.7% Hispanic. Shouldn’t be too hard.
* America First! was one of the largest mass political movements in U.S. history, with like 800,000 members. But if at least two literal Nazis in America ever used the slogan, then technically the above poster is correct, and is allowed to paint the entire movement that way. Because shut up.
* The Trump rally was at the Orange County fairgrounds. If the Republican frontrunner can’t campaign at the Orange County fairgrounds …
* Aztecs, Toltecs, Mayas etc. have no indigenous claims to USA lands.
Their “reconquista” is incoherent on many levels. The Southwest was very sparsely populated until whitey got here and will be very sparsely populated again if and when whitey ever vacates.
Mexicans would abandon an American Southwest that had no whites. The entire region would wither.
Mexico is a nasty backwater because of the people there. They don’t lead the world in anything except crime. They’re incapable of building/sustaining Western Civilization.
* The amount of actual Mexican settlement in the southwest before whites came in was tiny. The people who owned the land in those days were the American Indians, an entirely different set of people, and the two hated each others’ guts. For example, Texas was the territory of the Apache and Comanche, and Mexican settlement in Texas was limited to small, paranoid, scattered settlements along the Rio Grande River (the water was necessary for farming.) If the Indians caught a Mexican roaming, they’d bury him up to his neck in a fire ant mound.
So the Mexicans think they’ve always owned the state of New Mexico? Ha. It’s like the Navajo and Pueblo Indians never existed. If you read the history of the Southwest, there was constant warfare between Indians and Mexicans, and the Indians saw the Mexicans as every bit the unwelcome interlopers as the whites were.
Technically speaking, if you look at ownership claims of California by longevity, they go like this:
American Indians: Prehistory until 1769, or 10,000+ years
United States: 1848 until present, or 168 years (until 2016)
Spain: 1769 until 1821, or 52 years
Mexico: 1821 until 1848, or 27 years
Mexicans actually have the shortest and weakest claim of the lot. Mexico’s claim to Texas is even more tenuous, because the Republic of Texas ruled the land from 1836 to 1845, when the state voted to join the US. So Mexico’s claim to Texas is actually based on a whole 15 years’ worth of rule.
* I don’t believe there is a city in Mexico which delivers tap water that is drinkable–at least I encountered none in my eight trips there.
Every coastal town I visited was built around a (once pristine) lagoon which was currently being used as the town dump.
Mexicans can’t deliver electricity and clean water to their people. Mexico is for people with low expectations and lower talent.
Mexicans can cook and do laundry reasonably well. Beyond that, I can’t think of much else we could use Mexicans for.
Don’t hire a Mexican to mow your lawn. They impede traffic by parking their trucks in the street and then raise a cloud of dust with their leaf blowers as they blow refuse onto your neighbor’s property or out into the public domain.
Mexicans have no understanding of public space. This is why their behavior is incompatible with European values. Mexicans litter. They throw away what they no longer want and think that they are thereby rid of the problem. Out of sight, out of mind. Mexicans are childlike.
When you travel in Mexico, your trip will go well if you treat the natives as though they were simple children. Impulsive, living in the moment, incapable of reflection and self awareness, unselfconscious. Not evil really, just thoughtless and somewhat conniving. You can count on a Mexican to always do what is in his (naively conceived) self interest. The problem is, they don’t or rather can’t look too far ahead.
* As it’s their state now, these Hispanics are duty-bound to explain why what was one of the country’s top school systems fifty years ago now looks quite different.
* Meanwhile Mark Mazower writes in the FT about the great deconstructor of nationalism Benedict Anderson so as to bash Trump’s “political idiocy”.
Anderson’s “Imagined Communities” book was the epitome of the disingenuous smarty-pants intellectual “gleefully showing up the absurdity” (Mazower’s words) of people who need to feel a sense of kinship and enduring continuity in a place they inexplicably call home.
In the UK politicians – even now – can ruin their careers by calling for Israel to be pulled apart; elsewhere celebrated intellectuals confirm their status by hailing the tearing apart of the West.
(Of course Mazower/Anderson will claim understanding of local sentiment and nation spirit to be distinguished from ugly nationalism but in practice their work reads like prep papers for Davos-style one-world globalism.)
* Spain first moved into California and established the missions to counter the Russians who were coming down the California coast. (The Russians kept Alaska until the US purchased it from them.) Also why there’s a Russian river in California:
“…The earliest European name for the river, Slavyanka, appears on a Russian-American Company chart dated 1817…
…The river takes its current name from the Russian Ivan Aleksandrovich Kuskov of the Russian-American Company, who explored the river in the early 19th century and established the Fort Ross colony 10 mi (16 km) northwest of its mouth. They called it the Slavyanka River (Славянка), meaning “Slav River”. The Russians established three ranches near Fort Ross…”
* In Mexico, there’s no underclass movement and working is proudly seen as the way to get ahead.
You might notice that the agitators are a lot taller and whiter than the gardeners and painters among the Mexican-Americans. That’s because they’re the ruling class Mexicans. They act like that because they aren’t yet the ruling class in the USA and you taught them that this is the way to power. You reward them for it. In Mexico, they’d be learning about life in a Mexican prison or find themselves unable to find a job. There aren’t any diversity coordinator jobs for protestors that didn’t study down south. A much larger share of college kids are studying engineering, medicine, and business than in the USA.
Frankly, I find it disgusting and frightening. Please don’t send any of those SJW race warriors you’re raising and educating in US universities down south. We don’t have them. We don’t raise our kids that way. We don’t want them.
Americans: You broke ‘em, you bought ‘em.
* Mexicans figure they rule, and will make the rules. Young thugs are always up for humiliation and violence against other races, particularly those they figure are weak and wimpy and poor fighters (as Mexicans view Whites).
The Mexican Flag is a symbol of a people conquering. This has been the Third World mode since 1945. Not to compete with atomic bombs or missiles or moon landings, but masses of poor people immavading and demanding to rule over the wealthier Whites.
Already the action is moving towards Cleveland, where Muslims, Blacks, and Mexicans plan to invade the convention and cause maximum damage to the upstart and uppity White people who do not know their place and refuse to grovel and cringe. And in reaction various biker groups, veterans etc. are also heading for Cleveland figuring a fight is on.
Yes California is basically Mexico Norte, in culture, food, politics, power, language, etc. Orange County went from basically all-White to all-Mexican in a heartbeat. Trump nor any White man will not win California in the General Election — its just another part of Mexico.
* In Mexico, Mexicans compete against each other. It’s a level playing field. Everyone is mediocre.
In the USA, though, Mexicans have to compete against Anglo-Europeans and East Asians. It’s the big leagues, and Mexicans are just not smart enough….
* Did you ever stop and think why Trump is holding rallies in California with the primary there more than a month away on June 7 and the Indiana primary a few days away on May 3? Trump is crazy like a fox. Those “demonstrations” by the Mexican hoodlums just assured him of a big victory in Indiana. Do you think the “brilliant” Ted Cruz will partially blame Trump for the violence of the anti-Trump demonstrators the way he did in connection with the Chicago BLM demonstration that caused cancellation of a Trump rally a few months ago? And what is poor Hillary going to do? Side with the demonstrators? That’s why Trump is headed for a big victory in November. I don’t think he is counting on winning California in November, just the rest of the country. I think it is very smart of Trump.
* In order for the demonstrations to hurt Trump the way they hurt Humphrey you need:
1. Demonstrators demonstrating for what the public perceives is a sympathetic cause, e.g. ending the Vietnam War. Turning the American Southwest and California back over to Mexico is not perceived sympathetically by most Americans.
2. A police overreaction – “peaceful” demonstrators are beaten unconscious by thuggish cops.
3. That is linked to the candidate – Mayor Daley was the Democrat in charge who was telling the cops to knock heads.
I know that for American leftist reporters it’s always 1968 or 1964 or some other golden date in leftist history, but they are not going to be able to sell this to the public. Poor little Mariel who came to America at age 2 and just wants to be a pediatrician is a sympathetic “striver” but Juan waving the Mexican flag and breaking windshields is not.
“Trump is such a fascist that people are violently opposed to him” is ultimately a non-sequitur except for the very stupid. The “Heckler’s Veto” may work on college campuses but everywhere else most people realize that all this does is empower the most violent and unscrupulous to decide for the rest of us.
* If Hispanics do not want America to be anything like Mexico, why do they support open borders and amnesty? Why do they support new laws that make it even easier for Mexicans and Central Americans to immigrate to The U.S in mass? As if there weren’t enough of them here already. America needs more Mexicans and Central Americans like Nevada needs more deserts.
* If anybody had any doubt that the Mexican hoodlum “political protests” of Donald Trump were a big deal, I would simply point out that, both on Friday and today, the NY Times print edition did not have an article describing the mayhem and violence going on in California. (If anyone doubts my word, here’s today’s article, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/30/us/politics/trump-campaign.html?ref=politics (“BURLINGAME, Calif. — Donald J. Trump got a taste on Friday of what his next month of campaigning in California could be like. He was forced to exit his motorcade and walk through a field, climbing an embankment with Secret Service agents helping him, to avoid angry demonstrators on the street.” And then, starting at paragraph 17 deep into the article:
“He also attracted hundreds of protesters there, and the demonstrations resulted in 17 arrests and at least one injury.
“The protesters who gathered here on Friday appeared to be smaller in number but equally animated about Mr. Trump. Some waved signs using expletives to denounce him, a group chanted in Spanish while waving Mexican flags, and others burned an American flag. There was also a contingent of topless men and women who repeated, “Make love, not a wall; we want equal rights for all.”
“Several protesters sat on the pavement, forming a chain that stretched across a street by the hotel. At one point, a group of protesters rushed toward the hotel entrance; police officers with riot helmets and nightsticks hurried to corral them and restore order.
“It was enough to prompt the authorities to bring the suit-wearing Mr. Trump through some grass and dirt into the building, a scene that was caught by television news helicopters.”)
Even though the print edition of today’s Times carries no other articles dealing with yesterday’s events in California, the internet edition does carry another article under the internal label “Related News.” What is most interesting is that the internal headline says “Protest Turns Violent at Donald Trump Rally in Cosa Mesa, Calif.” That becomes converted into “Protest Turns Rowdy as Donald Trump Appears at California G.O.P. Convention” as the headline over the actual article. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/30/us/politics/protest-trump-california.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=RelatedCoverage®ion=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article
The Times’ article does make it very clear that the violence (or rowdiness) is all Trump’s fault:
“The protests reflect the provocative nature of Mr. Trump’s candidacy and come as he has sought to re-establish himself as someone who can unite the party and, ultimately, the country. Despite those stated goals, Mr. Trump has continued to inflame the passions of his opponents by using heated language that has offended immigrants and minorities. At his event on Thursday night, he brought the families of people who had been killed by undocumented immigrants onto the stage. [The audacity of that unscrupulous demagogue, to bring actual victims of illegal alien crime to public attention.]
“Mr. Trump was criticized for provoking protesters earlier this year, and he has beefed up his security after his podium was rushed at an event in Ohio. The crowds have generally been calmer since then, but Mr. Trump continues to draw throngs of demonstrators when his campaign visits urban areas with larger populations of Democrats.
“Several activist groups including the Anti Police-Terror Project, Black Lives Matter Bay Area, Black Youth Project 100 Bay Area and the BlackOUT Collective had been awaiting Mr. Trump’s arrival all week and were busy organizing the protests on social media.
“Donald Trump represents the vile underbelly of American democracy by where black people are both disenfranchised and disregarded,” said Robbie Clark, an organizer with Black Lives Matter Bay Area.
“While Mr. Trump is currently leading in recent polls of California Republican voters, the demonstrators made clear that their state was not friendly territory for him.
“Angelica Foreman, 32, a stay-at-home mother, held a sign that said “No haters allowed in the Bay!!”
“I told myself if Trump made his way out here that I was definitely going to go out of my way to show that I absolutely do not appreciate his presence here,” she said, “because his racist rhetoric is not at all what I’m about or what the Bay Area is about.” ”
“We are a very tolerant community and very accepting,” she added, “and so his views are not welcome here.” [The utter lack of irony and self-knowledge is self-evident, as Thomas Jefferson might have put it.]
That seems to amount to an admission that these mini-riots are indeed a big deal if the “newspaper of record,” which brags about “all the news fit to print,” cannot say one word about these despicable events in their paper editions. In my opinion, these stories demanded front page coverage on the print editions. After all, widespread dissemination of the news might further the nomination and election of Donald Trump, whom every informed reader of the Times must consider to be the Anti-Christ and the next Hitler. If Times readers were to read about such destructive riots, they might conclude that Donald Trump has a legitimate point.
* There has never been a non-Ashkenazi Prime Minister of Israel.
There was one non-Ashkenazi President of Israel (born in Iran). He is currently in prison for rape.
The Ashkenazim dominate politics and the media.
Is this the result of of discrimination, or HBD?
The left-wing and peace parties tend to be overwhelmingly made up of Ashkenazim, by the way.
There have been Mizrahi members of the Supreme Court, as well as two Arabs (one Christian). Mizrahi voters overwhelmingly favor right or far-right parties.
