Steve Sailer: When Did the EU Become Europhobic?

Comments:

* The EU is a recreation of Christendom without the Christianity. Soon enough to be Europe without the Europeans.

* It’s a very obvious but rarely spoken fact, that the main role of the EU is the integration of Germany into Europe, or in other words, the prevention of a German nationalism. This is the real meaning of the often mentioned goal of “preventing war in Europe”. France has been sidelined by events much like after Versailles. When German re-unified, peacefully, rather than through wars of restoration like last time, there was little that France could do to oppose it, even morally. German leadership knew how sensitive this issue was, so it pushed for the Maastricht treaty, firmly binding Germany to a new liberal institutional order, which became the basis of the new EU. So France became stuck in an impossible quagmire: it could not oppose German hegemony through war, but also not through peace. A more robust EU would eventually be dominated by Germany and France could do nothing to help it.

* Visualizing Values Mismatch in the European Union

http://peterturchin.com/cliodynamica/visualizing-values-mismatch-in-the-european-union/

In my July 1 post, Brexit as Destructive Creation, I argued that one significant cause for the European dysfunction was the choice made by the European elites to expand the union too fast too far. Why do I think this was a mistake? […]

The pattern is so striking it almost doesn’t require commentary, but let’s spell it out anyway. The original six (“Core Europe”) group together very closely. There are only two other countries that are part of the same cluster, Austria and Switzerland. Remarkably, the modern territories of both of these countries were encompassed by the boundaries of the Carolingian empire (see Is this the Beginning of the End for the European Union?). It looks like the “ghost” of the Charlemagne’s empire has more influence on today’s cultural values than such later distinctions as Catholicism versus Protestantism.

The current 28 members of the European Union, on the other hand, don’t cluster at all. On the contrary, they span three-quarters of world variation in values. Only African-Islamic countries and central America end up outside the ellipse that encompasses all 28 EU members.

EUROPE’S NORTH-SOUTH DIVIDE—A STUBBORN CHASM

http://www.europeaninstitute.org/index.php/ei-blog/155-european-affairs/ea-august-2012/1614-europes-north-south-dividea-stubborn-chasm

Proponents of the cultural explanation for the North-South divide, like Tino Sanandaji from the Institute of Industrial Economics, are returning to a certain extent to the ideas of 19th century German sociologist Max Weber. The latter had suggested that Protestant countries in Northern Europe outperformed the rest of the continent because of their superior work ethic, because they were thriftier and because they possessed more effective social capital, that is to say the efficacy of social networks. Following in Weber’s footsteps, Sanandaji argues that the current gap in economic outcomes between North and South cannot be explained by differing policies, since both display roughly comparable levels of social expenditures, taxation rates and government sizes. Instead, similar policies are resulting in different outcomes because the latter are ‘mediated through the deeper structures of society’, such as culture, norms, or social capital.

Cognitive emotion regulation and psychopathology across cultures: A comparison between six European countries

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886916302756

Most notably, there were differences on strategies that have been linked to symptoms of psychopathology; overall northern European countries (Germany and Netherlands) made less use of strategies such as rumination, catastrophizing, and other-blame, when compared to southern and eastern European countries (Spain, Italy, Portugal, and Hungary).

* The EU was Europhobic in its origins. The first President of the Paneuropean Union, elected in 1923, was Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. He envisioned the destruction of the existing European races through admixture with Africans. The new mixed race was to be ruled over by a new, primarily Jewish, aristocracy. From his book Practical Idealism written in 1925 (i.e. prior to the rise of National Socialism in Germany):

The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals …

Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process. No wonder that this people, that escaped Ghetto-Prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe. Therefore a gracious Providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit. This happened at the moment when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated, and thanks to Jewish emancipation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi

The Paneuropean Union is the oldest European unification movement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paneuropean_Union

The Coudenhove-Kalergi Foundation awarded its European Prize t0 Angela Merkel in 2010.

https://www.bundeskanzlerin.de/ContentArchiv/EN/Archiv17/Artikel/_2011/01/2011-01-13-merkel-europapreis_en.html

* Juncker seems to be very similar to Yeltsin. The more his project falls apart, the more he drinks. He drinks to avoid the reality of what he has created.

Trump is of course a teetotaller. I wonder if he will impose some of that philosophy on, for instance, the white women and Native Americans who are drowning in drink?

* It is interesting to note the impact of Muslim immigration on Germans. Having lived there for four years in the 1970s and visiting often, it was without question one of the safest places on earth. I’ve found myself in the Red Light districts of many German cities at night before immigration (no aspersions please :-), noting in surprise the number of women walking alone (including little old ladies with canes) and young mothers pushing baby carriages … something you would not dare to do in the United States.

From the news, many German girls and women today find it too dangerous to venture out of their homes to visit the town square during the day or leave their homes at night without male escorts. What a contrast as German cities areas start to reflect the seedier aspects of decaying urban ghettos in the United States and the generally degenerate conditions in underdeveloped countries.

It is difficult to comprehend the argument that the solution to the social decay in Germany caused by Third World immigration is more Third World immigration. “Quick, my house is on fire … quick, more fuel for the fire!”

* How did the US go from being a country founded by slave owners, to a country willing to send 600,000 to their deaths to end slavery? How did the UK Liberal party go from wanting to abolish the income tax in 1882 to introducing the welfare state in 1906? How did the Israeli Labour party go from “There’s no such thing as the Palestinians” in 1969 to Oslo in 1993? The list goes on and on. The basic point seems to be that liberalism should not be understood as a set of beliefs, but as a process, the telos of which is always receding into the future. The best work on unwrapping this remains Moldbug, but, of course, he never systemized his observations. Part of the problem is that much of basic mental equipment we use to understand politics itself comes out of the liberal tradition and is thus delusory. More recently, the blogger doing the most to carve out something like an explanation is the recently defunct Reactionary Future, but I’m not sure if he’s insane or not. It’s hard to tell when you lose your bearings.

In the specific case of the EU, though, it’s worth noting that it was constructed by liars – Leftist radicals working with the State Dept – who at every stage dissembled about their true intentions. It’s basic purpose has always been to destroy pre-WW2 conservative Europe.

Posted in Europe | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: When Did the EU Become Europhobic?

“California’s Birthrate Falls to Its Lowest Level on Record”

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* I have relatives in an affluent West Los Angeles neighborhood. Twenty-five years ago, Halloween was a significant neighborhood event, with regular trick-or-treating, Halloween parties, and the like. According to my relatives, this year, they had exactly one trick-or-treater the entire night. Prime neighborhoods in the area are graying as people hang on to their houses until they die (California’s Proposition 13, which caps increases on property taxes until the house is sold, is a big factor), and few households can afford both children and a house in these neighborhoods.

* The Roma are typical of a small tribe of low-trust people who have grafted onto a larger, high-trust society for sustenance. This has occurred throughout world history. Unfortunately for them, because of their natural sociopathy/low-trust tendencies make it impossible for them to run their own nation. When such people do get ahold of their own nation, the nation quickly falls into internal squabbling/strife/civil war as the various low-trust members stab each other in the back and ally with foreigners over their own countrymen.

* If you want to take this full-circle to the California example, you can. You have two very different models of immigration, exemplified well by the Bay Area versus LA. In the Bay Area, the tech industry draws (relatively) high-education/high-skilled people mostly from East or South Asia. There are issues with this type of immigration, in particular that they’re effectively indentured servants of the companies sponsoring their visas and they keep wages down for native workers doing the same work. But well educated and skilled people with an incentive to keep a steady job and not rock the boat make for relatively placid immigrants.

Los Angeles is the alternative. There, yes, you have a continual stream of Latin-American illegal immigration feeding the local labor economy. Problematic in a few respects, but hardly the worst category of immigrants you can find locally. That distinction belongs very much to immigrants from low-trust societies in the Middle East, the former Soviet Union, Central Asia, and (to a lesser extent) some parts of South and East Asia. The “Silk Road people,” as I call them. You find these folks very well represented in dodgy and often questionably-legal small businesses, if not running outright scams or involved in organized and white-collar crime. Many of them have figured out how to rig the game to a tee – a perverse version of the immigrant success story – insinuating themselves in apparently legitimate activities like charitable organizations and politics, and making use of ethnic affinity links to find victims as well as co-conspirators (e.g., shady professionals in various fields, like lawyers, doctors, or real estate brokers who are in positions to facilitate various fraudulent schemes).

* We lived in Southern California as a family in the mid-1980s and returned again in the 1990s. By the late 1990s, I thought we were living in Mexico. By 1996, we were refugees en route to Oklahoma. California wasn’t safe for adults or children. I felt my choice was either to buy a gun or leave; we left.

Our take was the the social contract in California was breaking down — wide-spread crime as the “have nots” looted the “have” communities at night, violent gangs with shootouts and carjackings, and extremely low-performing PC schools proselytizing multiculturalism, feminism, and other relativist anarchy. My perception was that the schools were psychologically damaging the kids, not educating them. Our recourse was private schools.

Almost every gringo we knew at the time was plotting an exit strategy. Those who did leave fueled real estate bubbles in Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Arizona, and Colorado as people realized they could sell their four-bedroom ranchers in LA for “mcmansions” outside the state and still put a couple of hundred grand in the bank.

California — a safe environment for raising children? You’ve got to be kidding! We still have family there. We avoid visiting on their turf. We encourage them to fly and “Great Flyover” and visit us on the East Coast.

Posted in California | Comments Off on “California’s Birthrate Falls to Its Lowest Level on Record”

Amazing Racist

These skits are racist enough to be funny, but not too racist so that you feel uncomfortable, because the star is Ari Shaffir, who’s Jewish, and as an oppressed person of color, the Jew cannot be racist.

According to Wikipedia: “Shaffir was born in New York City, and was raised as an Orthodox Jew.[1] His father and grandmother were holocaust survivors.[2][3] Soon after his birth, his family moved to North Carolina, followed by Maryland.[4][5] He attended high school in Rockville, Maryland, followed by time at Yeshiva University in New York City,[6] where he accepted to study abroad in seminary in Israel for around three-and-a-half years. He added: “There was no test, there was nothing to memorize, so I just poured myself into it … one day I realized I didn’t really believe any of that stuff, so I stopped it.”

Posted in Comedy | Comments Off on Amazing Racist

The Alt Right & The Jews – A Dialogue With Joshua Seidel

Joshua Seidel writes:

It’s time for liberal Jews to stop. We know you are angry that you lost. We know you don’t like Trump, but claiming that America has become anti-Semitic, or that it’s not a friendly country for Jews, is a slap in the face to the country that, besides Israel, has been the best home for Jewish people in thousands of years. Americans have again and again expressed support for Israel, particularly Conservative Christian Americans. America remains largely free of the violent antisemitism sweeping Europe. What’s the problem?

As a postscript, it’s interesting to point out that while Trump reaches out to Israel and works with Jews on a daily basis, the DNC might put anti-Israel Rep. Keith Ellison in charge.

But hey, Bannon said Jewish girls were whiny, so I guess getting stabbed in the back by the DNC is less important… right?

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on The Alt Right & The Jews – A Dialogue With Joshua Seidel

When Anti-Semitism Strengthens Group Identity

When most people, Jew or gentile, hear the term “anti-Semitism”, they immediately assume it is a bad thing, an ignorant prejudice, and a type of mental virus that leads to gas chambers.

I am not so sure. From my perspective, only anti-Semitism that leads to physical violence is always a bad thing for Jews (the reality of life is that physical violence against competing groups is sometimes a good thing for your group). On the other hand, a moderate amount of “anti-Semitism” is often a good thing in that it keeps group identity strong.

I believe in freedom of association. Gentiles should be able to gather at a restaurant or country club or hotel without the presence of Jews if that is their wish, just as Jews should have their own institutions free from goyim if that is their wish.

If you have a strong in-group identity, be it Jewish or Christian or Muslim, you are likely to have negative views of out-groups. It is a weird and unhealthy proud Jew or proud Christian or proud Muslim who does not have some negative views of out-groups.

An Arab or Muslim who is just fine with the Jewish state of Israel is cucked. A Christian with no negative feelings about Jews is cucked. A Jew with no negative feelings about Christians and Muslims is cucked.

If you are honest to your religion, you are going to find other religions at best weird and at worst evil.

Anti-Semitism increases Jewish solidarity and esprit de corps. Jews bond with each other and help each other more when there is anti-Semitism as opposed to when there is little anti-Semitism. Under anti-Semitic conditions, Jews feel more urgency to create their own institutions. Today most Jews in America marry non-Jews, while in a more anti-Semitic America, this was rare. Intermarriage destroys Judaism. Ergo, a more anti-Semitic America was better for American Judaism than today’s philo-Semitism.

When Napoleon swept through Europe, most Jews embraced him, but many Orthodox rabbis did not, because they thought the barriers he was breaking down between Jew and gentile would do the Jews more harm than good.

When Jews have had a choice, they have overwhelmingly chosen to leave Orthodox Judaism and to assimilate. In America and Western Europe, Jews have usually liked and admired their fellow gentiles. Only in Eastern Europe did most Jews detest the goyim (and were in turn hated by the goyim) and only in Eastern Europe did Orthodox Judaism reign among Jews.

Orthodox Judaism means separatism. All proud in-groups must separate from out-groups if they are to develop their in-group way of life.

Home Owner Associations that don’t want to admit Jews or blacks or Muslims should be allowed to do what they like. Businesses should be allowed to hire who they like. Different groups have different gifts and the more homogeneous your company or neighborhood, the more likely that people there will get along. I guess you can call that “anti-Semitism,” but to me it is commonsense.

Diversity and proximity sometimes lead to conflict and tragedy.

When the WASP stopped practicing anti-Semitism, the WASP cucked himself. The WASP used to rule this country and the world but he voluntarily gave up that privilege. Nature is not kind to such self-abnegating groups.

Irwin Stelzer writes in the Weekly Standard:

A sign of what might be called “progress” jogged some memories of battles fought. In reporting Governor Andrew Cuomo’s nomination of a new chief to a state regulatory agency, the New York Times identified the appointee as being a litigator in “the white-shoe law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind,” et al. The reporter seemingly did not know that the designation “white-shoe law firm” was invented to describe firms at the pinnacle of the WASP establishment, no Jews allowed, named apparently for the shoes these WASPs favored in the summer at their restricted country clubs.

In the 1960s, my partners and I were attempting to establish an economic consulting firm that marketed its services to law firms and public utilities. The “white-shoe” firms were off-limits. We identified them by adding up the Roman numerals after partners’ names—I, II, III, etc.—adding to that partners with first and last names that were interchangeable, and dividing by the total number of partners. A high result meant we had no chance.

Then there were cases in which no such arithmetic was needed. A partner in one firm told me at a cocktail party, after his usual consumption of truth-producing alcohol, that he was happy to be living in a New York suburb that did not allow Jews. That firm later merged with another; both went bust. Another pointed out that the new civil rights legislation wasn’t a problem for him because it did not protect Jews, whose upward drive would threaten him and his executives. The general counsel of a public utility invited me to lunch to congratulate me on starting the firm and added what he thought was encouraging news: “If we ever hire a firm with Jews, your firm will be the first.”

We were not the only disadvantaged group. One company CEO told me that he was certain new legislation did not force him to change a company rule that permitted men, but not women, to smoke at their desks. In the early 1960s, women were finding it difficult to procure professional positions, both in law firms and in the consulting field. Our firm took advantage of that market imperfection by hiring the best and the brightest women economics graduates, with emphasis on my mentor’s and my own former students at Cornell. When I was due to testify at an administrative proceeding at a Washington regulatory agency, I brought my assistant along to help check data, refresh my recollection during recesses, find sources, and perform other chores. The hearing officer quietly suggested to me that it was inappropriate to have a woman in the hearing room; I argued that she was entitled to see the fruits of her research and prevailed. It wasn’t easy.

With time and hard work, we managed to build a successful consulting practice. Time, because gradually the law business changed, with the bright young Jewish graduates joining predominantly Jewish firms that prospered, in many instances by accepting cases that the white-shoe firms would not take—contingency fee arrangements, lawsuits against establishment corporations—and prevailing over rivals that had denied themselves access to this portion of the most talented law school output. One WASPy partner in a Pittsburgh firm told me one evening, “We made a mistake discriminating against you guys. We should have hired you instead of giving you an added incentive to beat us.”

Discrimination, especially against a group with no recourse to the law and therefore reliant only on its efforts, can be costly.

We were helped, too, by three events. A metropolitan New York utility hired as general counsel a Jewish lawyer who had an offer from a white-shoe firm rescinded a day later when the firm discovered he was Jewish. He was in the market for what we had to sell, especially in cases in which he was up against the Wall Street WASP law establishment. Second, a patrician partner in a southern law firm had no use for discrimination, interviewed several firms to handle a series of matters, and selected us on merit—for a client group led by a Philadelphia patrician who had somehow found his way into a top executive position in the utility industry. Not all WASPs wore white shoes.

Finally, a group of utilities found itself appearing before a Jewish administrative law judge. The executives in the group who knew that Jews are clannish—after all, there were none in their city and country clubs—thought it best to agree with the meritocrats in the group so they could play the Jew card in the hearing. We did well. It was easier but not storm-free sailing from then on.

I suspect that these horrible white-shoe firms were a little more honest in business than mixed-race businesses and that when they cucked themselves, their moral standards dropped as they brought in people who were not as honest as them. When I read about a scandal on Wall Street, it rarely seems to involve WASPs. Usually its Jews and Indians.

Will there ever be negative repercussions to playing the Jew card? In the rest of life, when you use an unfair advantage, it always comes back to bite you in the ass. Perhaps Jews are immune from this. Or perhaps not.

While discrimination can be costly, lack of discrimination is more likely to hurt you. Only a fool does not discriminate. Discrimination and separation are the very essence of Judaism. The goyim would do well to behave likewise.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, WASPs | Comments Off on When Anti-Semitism Strengthens Group Identity