Archive for the 'Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem' Category

Keep America .x White is Racist for all x?

November 1, 2007

Is there any x such that Keep America .x white is not racist in the view of the critics? What value will satisfy their demands? Is it always a little less than the current value?

When x was approximately 9, so .x was .9, Kennedy said it had to go down. That was in 1965. For Kennedy, immigration quotas intended not just to preserve .x as .9 for whites but also preserve white ethnic group percentages was unacceptable. Well that issue is now gone.

Although .x is not yet below .5, Bill Clinton has already said he wants it below .5. When it is .45 will Clinton want it below .4? When its .35 will he want it below .35? Will Clinton say when its .45 that we have to stop non-white immigration to keep it from going below .4? Will SPLC say that? Will Charles Johnson say that at LGF? Bush? Hillary Clinton?

Will the RINO 4 say that? The RINO 4 are Fred Thompson, John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Rudi Giuliani. Giuliani has already called Tancredo a know-nothing for opposing any restrictions on legal immigration below what they are now.

Isn’t that the formula? Whatever it is now, restricting it from that is racist, nativist and Nazi? Which means when it was less in the past, it was racist, nativist and Nazi?

Where you draw the line is Racist Hypothesis.

Any thing bad for whites or any harm to whites that you say is the limit will be called racist, Nazi, bigoted and unacceptable to the liberals. This applies to white birth percentages, immigration quotas, white percentage in society, etc. There is no point you can make a stand that they won’t call white nationalist.

White Zeroist Corollary

If we aren’t called white nationalist, the white percentage will decline to zero.

Proof.

It takes an effort to stop the excess immigration, affirmative action, ER and welfare mandates that are substituting non-white births or immigration for white births. (See other articles on this.)

At any level the positive effort is made to halt the decline, those doing it and supporting it will be called white nationalist, Nazi, white supremacist, and bigot. (Especially if its a measure that works instead of a band aid for votes that doesn’t work.)

What works hypothesis, name calling as bad as what doesn’t.

If we pursue policies that actually retain the white ratio above 0, then we will be called racist, Nazi, white nationalist, white supremacist etc. as much as if we pursue policies that in fact simply slow the approach to zero, but don’t alter the convergence to zero.

==Vanishing Survival Example

Assume US population at 300 million was the maximum. If people live 75 years, then 4 million die per year. If 2 million enter then births = 4million deaths – 2 million entrants = 2 million.

The ratio of births to deaths is 2/4 or 1/2. The time from birth to parent is roughly 25 years. So in 50 years, one has 1/4, and in 75 years 1/8 of the starting genes.

Even if population went to 450 million, deaths per year are 6 million. With even one million entrants that gives a survival ratio of 5/6. So the number left after 25*n years is (5/6)^n which goes to zero as n goes to infinity.

It goes to zero rapidly in fact. Note that we can substitute an onshore source group for immigration if its fertility is pushed above replacement by affirmative action in education and employment, welfare, ER mandates, permitted verbal and physical violence against whites, etc.

==

http://www.vdare.com/rubenstein/070524_nd.htm

Edwin S. Rubenstein

The number of non-white Americans exceeded 100 million for the first time in 2006, according to a just released Census Bureau report.

According to the latest figures, non-Hispanic whites accounted for 66.4 percent of U.S. population on July 1, 2006. Minorities were 33.6 percent of the total. As recently as 1990, 76 percent of Americans called themselves non-Hispanic white. In 1965, the American population was 88 percent white.

In 2006 white, non-Hispanics accounted for:

bullet 56 percent of persons 9 and younger


bullet 60 percent of persons 10 to 19


bullet 67 percent of persons 20 to 64


bullet 81 percent of persons 65 and older

Based on 2004 fertility rates (the latest available), non-Hispanic white women will have 1.847 children; non-Hispanic Black women, 2.02 children; and Hispanic women, 2.82 children.[PDF]

In 2006 45.9 percent of live births were to minority mothers. That was up from 45.0 percent in 2005.

By 2021 more than 60 percent of births will be to minorities (Table 2.)

Of course, if immigration were completely cut off now, the date at which minorities would become the U.S. majority would be greatly postponed—probably into the 22nd century.

==The Wright Island Model Theorem

In population genetics, the case of one way migration is often treated in what is called the “Island Model”.

Genetics. 1979 January; 91(1): 163–176.

The Island Model with Stochastic Migration

Thomas Nagylaki

Department of Biophysics and Theoretical Biology, The University of Chicago, 920 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1213928

The island model with stochastically variable migration rate and immigrant gene frequency is investigated. It is supposed that the migration rate and the immigrant gene frequency are independent of each other in each generation, and each of them is independently and identically distributed in every generation. The treatment is confined to a single diallelic locus without mutation. If the diploid population is infinite, selection is absent and the immigrant gene frequency is fixed, then the gene frequency on the island converges to the immigrant frequency, and the logarithm of the absolute value of its deviation from it is asymptotically normally distributed.

The above implies that if you have two genes in some frequency in the immigrant population, that under one way migration that frequency becomes the frequency on the island.

From PDF, conclusion:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1213928&blobtype=pdf

We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.

==Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem

Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem

This adds to and is actually easier to understand than the Wright Island Model papers.

This is draft and preliminary. Although whites used, the same applies to all genes in the country at any point in time. Comments welcome. This is offered as science and math related to reform in US legislation on immigration, affirmative action and welfare transfers. This is subject to revision. All other disclaimers apply.

Amnesty and legal immigration expansions are going on all the time at Congress. Stopping it once doesn’t stop it. Please keep up to date.

http://www.numbersusa.com/faxcenter

==Added

“Keeping America White” at SPLC. Comments on Peter Brimelow and Vdare whom SPLC doesn’t want to Keep America White or Keep America .x white for any x greater than zero?

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=152

==Asymptotic Zero

Immigration bounded above zero does not produce a mixture of genes present or arriving at any time and later genes. The result is not a mixture, its asymptotic extinction of every gene at any point in time, and any gene arriving in any year. There is no mixture of genes now and genes to come. Immigration is a genetic graveyard, all genes that are here or come here go extinct.

The extinction isn’t pleasant for the people here or coming here. Every one is subject to wage and economic pressure and uncertainty to eventually substitute immigrants for births. This is why men’s median wages are what they were in 1973 and headed down for the last several years. This is why women’s wages are lower than men’s in 1960 and headed down for the last several years. See page 16 for the graph of men’s and women’s median wages since about 1960:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf

Going extinct in America isn’t pleasant for all but the rich. But even the rich are frogs in the water, slowly being cooked without knowing it. Millions without health care, oppressive bosses, repetitive motion injuries at work, lack of workplace dignity and security, lack of bargaining power, out of work relatives, loss of dignity for men, loss of meaning for men, crime and drugs, failing schools, know-how transfer to competing or enemy states, etc. are all the means by which the theorems are achieved.

This happens for more and more people, not just whites. All but a thin wedge at the top suffer this. More and more families find that Thanksgiving and Christmas are meeting places for the unemployed, discouraged, underemployed, and fearful. Men lack dignity and women lack men with dignity. This is what its like to live in a genetic graveyard, for all but the very rich and those with tenure at Harvard or think tanks or wealthy public interest law firms. In the SPLC version, Martin Luther King’s dream is we all go extinct together in a genetic graveyard, miserable and fearful and afraid to speak out.

This is speculation, hypotheses, opinion or tentative debate or analysis points. This is subject to revision. All comments welcome. All statements should be restated as questions. All criticism is rhetorical and to be restated as hypotheses or questions. All other disclaimers apply.

==Added 4:31 PM 1 Nov 2007

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/10/caucasophobia-accepted-racism.html

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2613

Noel Ignatiev, former professor at Harvard University, now teaching at the Massachusetts College of Art: “The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race.”

Some of the inventors of Whiteness Studies have stated their goals quite openly: “Abolitionism is also a strategy: its aim is not racial harmony but class war. By attacking whiteness, the abolitionists seek to undermine the main pillar of capitalist rule in this country.” And: “The task is to gather together a minority determined to make it impossible for anyone to be white.”

AEI for Genetic Replacement Immigration not Mixture

October 5, 2007

The American Enterprise Institute, AEI, supports genetic replacement immigration not mixture immigration. The immigration plan supported by AEI will, with probability one, result in the extinction of all genes in the US at any point in time. This follows from the extension of the Wright Island Model setup to the Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem setup.

Vanishing American reviews the AEI position that was outlined in a Washington Times article.

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/10/third-great-revolution.html

“This will arguably be the third great revolution of America, if we can prove that we literally can live without having a dominant European culture.” – Bill Clinton

Actually, its a revolution either way. Its a bigger revolution for the testers if the proposition is proven false. We show below that non-zero annual immigration causes not a mixture but complete genetic replacement. Since genetic replacement is a harsh outcome and takes harsh conditions to achieve, the probability of preserving any type of good culture is very low. To achieve zero genetic survival, conditions have to become harsh enough to induce below replacement fertility on an indefinite basis.

If there is replacement fertility and immigration, the population will grow without bound which is impossible. Thus immigration and a bound on population imply instead fertility is below replacement and this, together with some mild relative survival rate conditions, implies that the survival rates of stock and each year’s cohort of immigrants all go to zero as the horizon recedes. Thus for stock and immigrant cohorts, conditions are harsh.

More from VA:

Who eliminates us, even if they do it ever so gently by encouraging us to blend in with the immigrants who have been picked to replace us, is destroying one unique piece of the human mosaic, which can never be replaced.

We must not let America vanish.

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/fishwrap/2007/09/the_changing_face_of_america_1.html

In less than a century, America will no longer be a majority-white nation, David Coleman, professor of Demography at Oxford University, explained Tuesday at a Hudson Institute forum.
A decline in U.S. fertility rates, in combination with increased immigration, will change the ethnic makeup of America, Mr. Coleman said.
This transition is affecting many other countries, Mr. Coleman said. Throughout Western Europe, populations are being inundated by new immigrant populations, he said. The native-born British, Scottish and Irish populations are also becoming minorities in the United Kingdom.

American Enterprise Institute scholar Nicholas Eberstadt said “the United States, for all its flaws, has a pretty workable formula.”

Sustained immigration causes genetic replacement not a mixture as the asymptotic state. The following is from Nagylaki’s paper, see reference below:

“We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.”

The asymptotic state, i.e. long run equilibrium, is not a mixture of the influx and stock gene pool, it is completely the influx gene pool. The assumptions of the Wright Island Model can be relaxed substantially. As long as population is bounded, and there are some mild asymptotic bound conditions, we get the result that each individual gene in the stock at any time goes extinct without daughter genes surviving. This also applies to any set of genes in the stock at any point in time. This is true both as an ex-ante probability and as an ex-post convergence in probability result on the ex-post genetic survival factor.

This applies to each year’s immigrant cohort. Thus America is an asymptotic genetic graveyard. Every year’s genes that come here eventually go extinct. Genes come here to die. It is like the Elephant Graveyard.

== A numerical example shows what happens.

Assume US population at 300 million was the maximum. If people live 75 years, then 4 million die per year. If 2 million enter then births = 4million deaths – 2 million entrants = 2 million.

The ratio of births to deaths is 2/4 or 1/2. The time from birth to parent is roughly 25 years. So in 50 years, one has 1/4, and in 75 years 1/8 of the starting genes.

Even if population went to 450 million, deaths per year are 6 million. With even one million entrants that gives a survival ratio of 5/6. So the number left after 25*n years is (5/6)^n which goes to zero as n goes to infinity.

It goes to zero rapidly in fact.

Population is bounded above. This means that sustained immigration and some mild assumptions on relative survival rates implies that the genetic survival rate of each individual gene, each group of genes, the stock at any point in time, and each year’s immigrant cohort all asymptote to zero. Thus we have rolling genetic extinction. America, and Europe and Canada and Australia and New Zeeland are all genetic graveyards. Every gene that goes to any of them goes extinct.

==

For the non-technical reader, the discussion in the following article will be easier than the standard literature results. It will still require some work.

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/06/04/immigration-vanishing-survival-theorem/

You can post questions and eventually I will try to post answers.

Links to academic papers and more discussion:

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/06/30/population-genetics-island-model-one-way-migration/

The graph of declining fertility in the US from 1800 to 1990 is”

http://www.elderweb.com/home/node/2919

Fertility falls except during immigration restriction. This is a combined economics population genetics interaction. Wages are part of this economics genetics combined situation.

The baby boom is when fertility went up. This happened from 1940 to 1957, the period of lowest immigration except for the 1930’s during the Great Depression. Fertility fell from 8 c. 1800 to 3 c. 1920 and then fell to above 2 in the Great Depression and then rose to 3.75 in 1957 and then fell to below 2 by 1980 and recovered slightly to around 2. Part of that is higher immigrant fertility.

The theorems work. Note it was the Mill not the Pill that caused this decline. Info on 19th century wages and working conditions for the Lowell Mill Girls:

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/06/24/search-catholics-immigration-intense-feelings/

http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Data_on_Median_Wage_by_President

Median Wage Increase in constant dollars.Last three decades. Sorted Best-to-Worst.D:Clinton	 565

D:Carter	-108

R:Reagan	-228

R:Bush II	-588

R:Bush I 	-825
R:Ford		-894

Except for Clinton, the median wage has gone down under every President since Ford took office in August 1974.

==Extensive Comment Thread at Front Page Mag Linda Chavez 1.5 mm annual

I posted some of the above information as a comment at Front Page Magazine in a debate involving Linda Chavez. Chavez advocates 1.5 million legal immigrants per year. According to the theorems, this implies genetic replacement of all the stock here on any date, and the entire cohort that comes each year. The Chavez plan is for a rolling genetic extinction. According to her, the economy needs that. It does in fact hold down costs to have people go extinct instead of having replacement children. This is one reason economics papers have such a hard time identifying what is wrong with immigration.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/GoPostal/default.aspx?GUID=88D116DF-7F1F-4109-9C41-5CA29BD2369B

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=88D116DF-7F1F-4109-9C41-5CA29BD2369B

Original article was titled, “The Immigration Debate”.

FP: John Fonte, Mark Krikorian, Linda Chavez, Joe Hicks and Clint Bolick, thank you for joining Frontpage Symposium.


Jamie Glazov is Frontpage Magazine’s managing editor. He holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in U.S. and Canadian foreign policy.

==My comment at Wash Times

“Who cares?” I read Vanishing American’s blog on this.

I care and I am trying to do all I can to stop it. I am for ending all immigration. I support Numbers USA and Fairus and send in my faxes and make the phone calls to my Senators and reps.

The Wright Island Model is a theorem in genetics. It says one way immigration causes complete genetic replacement. Go to link at my name for links to references available on line w/o subscription.

Genetics. 1979 January; 91(1): 163�176.

The Island Model with Stochastic Migration

Thomas Nagylaki

Department of Biophysics and Theoretical Biology, The University of Chicago, 920 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637
“We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.”
Posted by Old Atlantic | October 5, 2007 1:24 PM

==

Mr. Eberstadt said that historically, immigrants in America, over time, are able to assimilate into society and become productive citizens, inferring that the same assimilation process would take place over the next century as immigrants, and their offspring, became the ethnic majority in America.

==

“This will arguably be the third great revolution of America, if we can prove that we literally can live without having a dominant European culture.” – Bill Clinton

The above proves that we “literally can” not live with sustained immigration. Its a theorem.

==

We can either extinct together or stop all legal immigration together.

==Appendix Note on VA’s point on difficulty in learning the science.

David Coleman

http://www.apsoc.ox.ac.uk/Biographies/Biography9.html

http://pondside.uchicago.edu/ecol-evol/faculty/nagylaki_t.html

search Thomas Nagylaki quantum 

If you look at their bios and papers you will see David Coleman has no papers in mathematical biology, they are at a lower level of math.  Nagylaki started in quantum field theory and then switched to mathematical biology.   There is evidently a lack of communication.   These two groups need to communicate more so that Coleman can explain the concepts and math better.  We are not headed towards a mixture state as the long term outcome, we are headed to extinction.  Moreover, this can happen rapidly in some scenarios.

If we want to keep on reading the Nagylaki papers in quantum electrodynamics, we need to start reading and applying the Nagylaki papers in population biology.

Two Wright Island Model also Vanishes

September 26, 2007

In the Wright Island Model we have an annual inflow of immigrants which is bounded from below by a positive number.   If we assume the genetic survival ratio of the immigrants times some constant bounds everyone on the island, then we get the result that the genetic survival ratio of everyone, immigrants and others asymptotes to zero.  Here the genetic survival ratio is plotted as a function of time since arrival, with presence considered a type of arrival for running a clock.

The above is actually the Immigration Vanishing Survival Framework.  It also extends more broadly than just to genes, but to states of a system.  It is then a fundamental concept in statistical aggregate analysis just as entropy is.

To derive the Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem result, we can modify the assumptions in a variety of ways.  If there is a subgroup of immigrants that satisfies the same assumptions, annual inflow bounded from below at some level above zero, and which also can dominate or shrink the rest, then we get the same result.

The key is that we have a squeezing group.  This group has a survival ratio that is greater than or equal to that of the other groups, and which is of unbounded size including its annual inflow.  That inflow can come from outside the island or it can come from above replacement fertility of that squeezing group.

The other groups are then squeezed.  In effect, the squeezing group is self squeezing towards its own members, since if we tag a member’s genes with a serial number and track them, we find that the asymptotic survival probability of each tagged gene is zero.  This applies to every member of the population and to each entrant.

The keys are to have an unbounded inflow and some way of aggregating individuals to form a squeezing subgroup.  The squeezing subgroup needs to be able to dominate in survival ratios the other individuals or groups in the population.  To link individuals together, we can assume homogeneity, or membership in a group of equal survival probabilities.  In fact, we can consider groups in which the survival probability is bounded by some appropriate subgroup.   To aggregate individuals into a sqeezed group, squeezee group, we only need to have a subgroup that dominates from above.

A second island doesn’t alter the conclusion if we add sufficient conditions to effectively include the island in the framework.  If the population of the second island is bounded, and it is subject to unbounded immigration by the same or similar squeezing group, then circulation of the squeezee groups between the two islands doesn’t alter the conclusion.  Whether the squeezees are limited to each island separately or can circulate in any matter between them doesn’t matter.  As long as both islands are subject to immigration from a squeezing group from outside both, the same result occurs.

We can also get the same result if there are two separate source groups on each island.   Source groups have above replacement fertility.  These two source groups will squeeze the others on the two islands.  Adding immigrants to islands with domestic source groups only makes it worse.  Again, we are assuming a bounded population on each island and thus on the whole.

The idea of importing population is a foolish one.   The result is to squeeze the domestic product, in this case genes. The Immigration Vanishing Survival Framework is about what conditions or assumptions are needed for the importation of genes to result in the domestic production of genes to disappear.  This is what is happening in every land of the European diaspora. The presence of pockets or islands of below replacement fertility Europeans which circulate among European diaspora lands or other lands doesn’t change the fact that European genetic survival ratios are asymptoting to zero world wide.

This is draft and is preliminary.   As this is put into a more formal structure, there may be additional supplementary assumptions or refinements in the definition of source, squeezer groups, and squeezee groups.  The conditions for aggregation also may require refinement.

White Zeroist Wright Island Model

September 6, 2007

Southern Poverty Law Center enjoys using the label white nationalist in its mathematically based analysis of the views of others. We can return this favor by using mathematical analysis to label the views of those who advocate zero survival probability for whites or genes currently residing in whites.

The Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem states that one-way migration causes the survival probability of genes in the stock to asymptotically vanish, i.e. go to zero as time increases. This also applies to every gene in the flow.

Of course, one needs a few more assumptions to prove this result. Homogeneity and unlimited inflow are two assumptions that can prove the theorem. This set of assumptions is typically a subset of the assumptions in a Wright Island Model setup. For more on the Wright Island Model go here.

We can either consider the Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem (IVST) as a more elegant or parsimonious version of the Wright Island Model or as a separate, but closely related paradigm. The IVST also has applications beyond genes, so in that sense its a more basic and more general result in probability.

In the genetics literature they don’t recognize the issue of tagged genes as we shall call them. We can consider each gene, each physical unit, however expressed, as having a little tag with a serial number on it. Even though two genes may be “identical”, they still have different serial numbers on their tags. Probability as applied to genes is consistent with this approach.

(In quantum mechanics one encounters two other types of statistics, Fermi Dirac and Bose Einstein for which identical particles can’t be tagged to distinguish them. All the probability calculations in genetics journals and textbooks is of the classical kind where one can distinguish each “particle” or gene. The Wright Island Model although it calculates probabilities of gene types, is still based on tagged probability.)

Tagged probability makes it easier to prove some theorems. The Wright Island Model theorems are formulated towards gene frequencies, without trying to trace their history. The Nagylaki article, “The Island Model with Stochastic Migration”, (link here) uses stochastic analysis that is a little difficult for the non-probabilist to follow easily. (Although one should struggle through it as best one can and come back to it later.)

With tagged probability, we can prove the Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem. Here we tag each gene and follow it through time. With tags, we can talk about different genes still having the same survival probability. We can also make that an assumption.

If every gene here has equal survival probability and each gene that arrives here has that same survival probability at the time of arrival, then its easy to see that if the population is bounded from above, the single common survival probability has to asymptote to zero. (Note this is really a function of time, and as time from arrival or presence increases, survival probability goes to zero.)

This is seen by multiplication. If we multiple the survival probability of each tagged gene times the number here and the number that arrive from now to some date in the future, then this product, the expected value, grows without bounds if the survival probability is bounded away from zero.

The product is unbounded since the number arriving is unbounded and the other factor, the survival probability is above some minimum positive number. This contradicts population being bounded from above, so the survival probability can’t be bounded from below, except by zero. Thus the survival probability goes to zero.

It is possible to vary the assumptions of the theorems. We can have multiple groups. Remember these are groups of genes. Suppose one group has an asymptotic (far in the future) survival probability greater than the others. (This has to happen if the number of groups is finite, and we consider the asymptotic probability, i.e. far in the future as the basis of ranking the groups.) As long as this best survivor group has an unlimited inflow, its survival probability has to asymptote to zero, because otherwise by itself it would cause the population to exceed its upper bound by the reasoning above.

Since this best survival group has an asymptotic survival probability greater than all the others, and since its asymptotic survival probability is zero, so must all the others have an asymptotic survival probability of zero.

There is no need to assume whether people of different group inter-marry or not. The same conclusion happens either way. The theorem in fact is not limited to genes, but can be applied abstractly to “states” of a system or in other abstract ways.

(We shall capitalize phrases like White Zeroist, etc. in what follows for emphasis and focus, and perhaps too much German study.)

So we can come back to the terms, White Zeroist, White Nationalist, White Nativist, Nightly Nativist, and the like. A person who advocates that each year immigration into Europe, America, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and a few other places should be greater than zero is a White Zeroist. They are advocating a policy that with probability one causes the extinction of every gene in those countries, white or not, white origin or non-white origin alike. Its every gene currently in those countries, whatever its source. Its also every gene that enters, with some lagged time.

However, focusing on the white aspect, as SPLC likes to do, and Daphne Eviatar at the Nation and others, we need to have a term to label their advocacy. The term White Zeroist seems to apply when the context is their use of the term White Nationalist. The opposite of White Nationalist, if it requires immigration above zero, is a White Zeroist.

What is the opposite of a White Zeroist? White Unitarian? White non-Zeroist? White Survivalist? White Existentialist? White Cooperativist? White on White Altruist?

Existentialism means existence precedes essence. A White Existentialist could mean someone who thinks there is a white culture or civilization that follows white existence. People talk about acting white. Is this correct?

Is objectivity, some forms of altruism, minority rights, justice for all, altruism outside one’s own group, etc. taken together characteristic of white societies but not others? Is democracy with minority rights a concept developed by white societies? Did white existence have to exist first before this cultural construct could occur? If whites cease to exist, will acting white stop as well? Are minority rights acting white?

Are minority rights part of White Nationalism? What societies in the world have minority rights? Very few non-white societies? Without whites, minority rights will disappear? Is the survival of whites necessary for the survival of minority rights? Does the existence of White Nationalism precede the essence of minority rights?

Mexicans Without Borders is a group expressing Mexican Nationalism. What part of minority rights do they understand? Does Mexico practice Americans without borders? Except for themselves as an immigrant group, when have Mexicans stood up for minority rights for others? For Gringos?

Do minority rights for Mexicans Without Borders mean the right to come in, get welfare, have a higher birth rate, take over, and then do the same with the next country? When this runs into Muslims Without Borders doing the same from Europe, the result is a nuclear fought with the leftover nukes of Europe and America? Is this their superior morality, using the leftover weapons of superior civilizations to destroy themselves in the remnants until the sun finally burns off all life on this planet? Is the only thing standing in the way of that, acting white? Does that require white existence?

For Mexican Nationalists are not all whites automatically Gringo Nationalists? Is not all white culture just Gringo Propaganda? Don’t they see their replacement as their goal? Mexicans Without Borders is really following a Wright Island Model of replacement? World wide ultimately? Don’t most other groups have that as their model as well?

If the only way to avoid a white survival probability of zero is some form of white nationalism, then all those not White Zeroists would be White Nationalists?

A related question is the denial of ethnicity to Germans, English, etc. In European countries, its quite common for immigrants to claim to have an ethnic group, Turkish or Arab, and also to have a foreign nationality, Libyan, and to be German or English.

Where does that leave the ethnic group formerly known as German? Or English? Or Irish? Or Italian? Its considered racist to refer to these as ethnic groups or as nationalities (in the traditional sense of a people) that exclude newcomers.

Can some people have an ethnic group and others have no ethnic group? The people in the non-ethnic bin, can they survive long term? The non-ethnic bin is the dustbin of genetic history?

Which brings us back to White Nationalist. If not having an ethnicity means you are out in terms of genetic survival, and having an ethnicity means some form of cooperation, then its White Nationalist or White Zeroist?

Is cooperation within an ethnic group a form of ethnocentrism or nationalism? If some groups cooperate within their group, they will survive over groups that don’t? Is SPLC hostile to cooperation by whites with whites, but for cooperation within all other ethnic groups? (That is except for giving money to SPLC to fight cooperation by whites with whites?)

So is it White Nationalist or White Zeroist? Of course, one could have the mixture of two or more groups, and have survival of both’s offspring in the mixture, as long as the inflow was cut to zero. This is a logical possibility. As long as the inflow is greater than zero, then all within a country must have a zero asymptotic survival probability, as well as every gene that comes there.

One definition of nativism is maintaining an asymptotic survival probability greater than zero for those in the land.

In discussions of genes and evolution, there is sometimes a tendency to use terms like best or fittest or adaptive or mal-adaptive without discussing what those mean. Survival probability is an attribute that applies to every gene or group of genes.

In discussing mal-adaptive, we should consider the most important mal-adaption. If humans don’t get off the earth, they will be cooked by the sun along with all life on the planet. So becoming a successful space faring species is the only way to have a long term survival probability greater than zero. Whatever prevents that or makes it less likely is mal-adaptive at that time horizon. So preserving human intelligence, altruism, social cooperation, individuality (which is connected to optimal search), freedom (also linked to optimal search), is adaptive and in fact essential at long time horizons. Its the only way for humans and everything else alive on earth to survive, except perhaps some bacteria or viruses that might get into space somehow and travel onwards.

Some of the criticism of the Frank Salter work tends to do a poor job articulating the issue of what mal-adaptive means. Where it comes to the survival of a technical civilization, this is important as the above discussion shows. Survival of civilization is adaptive near a star that is going to expand and heat up and is essential.

Infinite diversity and infinite multiculturalism also imply that each specific gene or culture should be infinitesimal. Diversity for the sake of diversity is the advocacy of eliminating what we have. Eliminating it for what? For an infinitesimal. That is, for nothing. Diversity is the philosophy that you have to give up everything to have nothing, or you are a bigot.

This article is draft and preliminary. These are hypotheses, not assertions. Comments welcome. It is subject to revision. Any remarks on the Nation, SPLC, Daphne Eviatar are meant to be in the same good natured humor that characterizes their efforts (actually better than that).

Population Genetics Island Model One Way Migration

June 30, 2007

One way immigration causes the complete genetic extinction of the target population. This is a theorem already established in population genetics. It can be traced back to a 1931 paper by S. Wright.

EVOLUTION IN MENDELIAN POPULATIONS
SEWALL WRIGHT
University of Chicago. Chicago. Illinois
Received January 20. 1930

More on this paper below.  But first let’s review the actual decline in fertility since 1800 during immigration periods, but the rise in fertility during immigration restriction from 1940 to 1957.

The graph of declining fertility in the US from 1800 to 1990 is”

http://www.elderweb.com/home/node/2919

Fertility falls except during immigration restriction. This is a combined economics population genetics interaction. Wages are part of this economics genetics combined situation. However, wages in an economic model have counterparts in seemingly non-economic ecologies.  In a pure animal or plant population other variables play the same role of an indicator of survival that wages do in a modern human economy.  So there is a wages dimension even in the wild. Food is the wage for work in the wild. Or survival from a fight or from the natural elements.

Men’s median wages are flat since 1973 in the US.  This is a marker that men can’t provide as well in the human ecology. The result is lower fertility since women can’t find a substitute for men.

In population genetics, the case of one way migration is often treated in what is called the “Island Model”.

Genetics. 1979 January; 91(1): 163–176.

The Island Model with Stochastic Migration

Thomas Nagylaki

Department of Biophysics and Theoretical Biology, The University of Chicago, 920 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1213928

The island model with stochastically variable migration rate and immigrant gene frequency is investigated. It is supposed that the migration rate and the immigrant gene frequency are independent of each other in each generation, and each of them is independently and identically distributed in every generation. The treatment is confined to a single diallelic locus without mutation. If the diploid population is infinite, selection is absent and the immigrant gene frequency is fixed, then the gene frequency on the island converges to the immigrant frequency, and the logarithm of the absolute value of its deviation from it is asymptotically normally distributed.

The above implies that if you have two genes in some frequency in the immigrant population, that under one way migration that frequency becomes the frequency on the island.

From PDF, conclusion:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1213928&blobtype=pdf

We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.

What this means is that the genes initially on the island, in effect, disappear. But the West is the Island, and we don’t survive in this model. We are being voted off the island by the genes of the immigrants. This never stops. Every cohort of immigrants is voted off the island in genetic terms by the following cohorts.

WRIGHT S,. , 1931 Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics 16: 97-159. -, 1948 On
the roles of directed and random changes in gene frequency in the genetics of populations.
Evolution 2 : 279-294.

References with links from above paper were posted by NIH. Some are below. To see the original article on-line in this case does NOT require a subscription. Go to the link and in the middle of the page is Full Text Genetics Free. Click on that. This will open another page, and in a few seconds that page will itself open a pdf. If that doesn’t happen try clicking.

You don’t need to understand the math or the biology terms to get something out of the articles. Read the abstract, the introduction, the conclusion and look at figures and tables and their captions. There may be conclusions or explanations between equations or technical discussion that gives the conclusions.

Don’t let yourself get stuck on not understanding a word. Just skip around or pretend the word isn’t in the sentence and give it the meaning it needs. You can look up technical words in Wikipedia or with Google. Wikipedia is very good in math and science. Textbooks often have more errors or misinformation on the history of their subject and who discovered what than is found in Wikipedia science and math articles.

“This list contains those references that cite another article in PMC or have a citation in PubMed. It may not include all the original references for this article.”

 

  • Hartl, Daniel L. Mutation-Selection Balance with Stochastic Selection. Genetics. 1977 Jul;86(3):687–696. [PubMed]
  • Jensen L. Random selective advantages of genes and their probabilities of fixation. Genet Res. 1973 Jun;21(3):215–219. [PubMed]
  • Karlin S, Lieberman U. Random temporal variation in selection intensities: case of large population size. Theor Popul Biol. 1974 Dec;6(3):355–382. [PubMed]
  • Kimura, Motoo. Process Leading to Quasi-Fixation of Genes in Natural Populations Due to Random Fluctuation of Selection Intensities. Genetics. 1954 May;39(3):280–295. [PubMed]
  • Latter BDH. The Island Model of Population Differentiation: A General Solution. Genetics. 1973 Jan;73(1):147–157. [PubMed]
  • Levikson B, Karlin S. Random temporal variation in selection intensities acting on infinite diploid populations: diffusion method analysis. Theor Popul Biol. 1975 Dec;8(3):292–300. [PubMed]
  • Maruyama T. Effective number of alleles in a subdivided population. Theor Popul Biol. 1970 Nov;1(3):273–306. [PubMed]
  • Wright, Sewall. Evolution in Mendelian Populations. Genetics. 1931 Mar;16(2):97–159. [PubMed]

http://www.sinauer.com/detail.php?id=3082

“island model” population genetics

“island model” migration

“theoretical biology”

Wright’s first paper is available online

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=17246615

1: Genetics. 1931 Mar;16(2):97-159.
Evolution in Mendelian Populations.

Wright S.

University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

PMID: 17246615 [PubMed]

http://www.genetics.org/cgi/reprint/16/2/97

Page 128 “Irreversible recurrent mutation ”

—Previous Post:

Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem

June 4th, 2007 Assume that

  1. Population is bounded from above
  2. The flow of immigrants is unbounded from above
  3. The survival probabilities of the genes of each immigrant are equal.

Then

For any given cohort of immigrants at time t, the survival probability of their genes at T > t, p(t,T) must go to zero as T goes to infinity.

==
Mathematical Population Genetics
By W. J. (Warren John) Ewens

http://books.google.com/books?id=twXIyXyod2MC&pg=PA279&lpg=PA279&dq=%22island+model%22+population+genetics&source=web&ots=DKOTb367VO&sig=he6GEQDiOzlD20h-asiwmRR8Kh4#PPR11,M1

==

https://oldatlanticlighthouse.wordpress.com/2007/06/01/1965-immigration-act-causes-u-inverted-u-in-income-inequality-and-fertility/
1965 Immigration Act Causes U inverted U in Income Inequality and Fertility
==Omnia Cleansing Immigration Substitution Effect

Mathematically, immigration causes omnia cleansing. To review the math:

Suppose US population is stable at 300 million. If people live 75 years, 4 million die per year. If 2 million enter, and pop is stable, then there are 2 million births. 2 million births over 4 million deaths is a genetic survival ratio of 1/2. 25 years birth to parent, so in 75 years, 3 cycles leaves 1/8 genes. Even if pop goes to 450mm and 1 million enter, we get a fraction of 5/6 per cycle, which results in genetic extinction.

This happens by lowering wages and is happening already. There is a substitution effect from births to immigrants.

quote

“Numbers Drop for the Married With Children
Institution Becoming The Choice of the Educated, Affluent

By Blaine Harden
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, March 4, 2007; Page A03

PORTLAND, Ore. — Punctuating a fundamental change in American family life, married couples with children now occupy fewer than one in every four households — a share that has been slashed in half since 1960 and is the lowest ever recorded by the census.

As marriage with children becomes an exception rather than the norm, social scientists say it is also becoming the self-selected province of the college-educated and the affluent.

end quote

== Some historical analysis is here:
Search Catholics Immigration Intense Feelings
=Key words

Unpleasant Immigration Arithmetic, Omnia Cleansing.

==

Samuel Karlin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sewall_Wright

Sewall Green Wright ForMemRS (December 21, 1889March 3, 1988) was an American geneticist known for his influential work on evolutionary theory. Along with R. A. Fisher and J.B.S. Haldane, he was a founder of theoretical population genetics. Evolutionary biologists argue as to whether Fisher or Wright made the greater contribution. He is the discoverer of the inbreeding coefficient and of methods of computing it in pedigrees. He extended this work to populations, computing the amount of inbreeding of members of populations as a result of random genetic drift, and he and Fisher pioneered methods for computing the distribution of gene frequencies among populations as a result of the interaction of natural selection, mutation, migration and genetic drift. The work of Fisher, Wright, and Haldane on theoretical population genetics was a major step in the development of the modern evolutionary synthesis of genetics with evolution. Wright also made major contributions to mammalian genetics and biochemical genetics.

==gap decay math

The gap between the current value and a target value decays in these models. The gap this period is a fraction less than one of its value last period. Suppose the fraction is one-half. Then after 2 periods the gap is 1/4 its size, and in 3 periods it is one-eighth.

The decay of a set of atoms or molecules follows the same math. This type of arithmetic is common.

==Life becomes hard and then our genes die

These theorems don’t happen by themselves. They have mechanisms. For humans, wages fall and they lose job security so that they pay more for security things like prestige education. As this goes on, they lose their chances to have kids when they are young.

== Young adults lose feeling of security

Young adults lose the feeling of security. Its the confidence of young adulthood that lets young adults get married, have kids, stay married and have more kids. When that confidence goes, they pull back at the time their biology says to have kids. So they don’t. The result is below replacement fertility.

There are estimates that up to 1/3 of the women who go to college will never have children. Ths is job insecurity at the time biology tells them to have children. By the time they feel secure, its too late. The same is happening to men.

==London Telegraph Women losing feeling of security

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/22/ncareer22.xmlo
Third of graduate women will be childless

By Ben Leapman, Home Affairs Correspondent, Sunday Telegraph

Last Updated: 6:46am BST 24/04/2007

A third of women graduates will never have children, research has concluded.

The number of highly educated women who are starting families has plummeted in the past decade, according to findings that provide the most detailed insight yet into education and fertility.

While some women are making a conscious decision not to have children, others are simply leaving it too late after taking years to build their careers, buy a home and find the right partner.

..

Overall population decline is only being prevented by immigration and a higher birth rate among non-graduate women.

Actually wrong. Its immigration that creates the economic insecurity. Economic insecurity doesn’t grow spontaneously from nowhere.

The findings come from a ground-breaking study into more than 5,000 women born in 1970 and tracked throughout their lives by researchers at the Centre for Longitudinal Studies, based at the Institute of Education in London.

Of a panel of older graduate women born in 1958, only 32.7 per cent were childless at 35.

The 1958 group were less impacted by immigration and diversity. Diversity sends the message of insecurity and that stops reproductivity. Colleges also tend to be more diverse themselves, thus sending that wrong message at the wrong time.

== Immigration level is at extinction level in US.

Legal immigration itself is as high as between 3 to 4 million per year in the US according to Senator Sessions if one counts every form of guest worker, temporary arrival, etc. Immigration is displacing replacement fertility.

At 300 million for US population, with a life of 75 years, 4 million die per year. Thus with zero immigration and zero population growth, replacement fertility is 4 million births. But immigration is almost at that level. Thus immigration is at the full immediate extinction level.

This is why women are not having children. This is why men are not either. Legal immigration is a democaust, a demographic holocaust. This is omnia cleansing. Every gene that comes here goes through this as well. So every gene that comes here goes extinct, and every gene here at a point in time goes extinct.

We have to set legal immigration to zero. We have to eliminate all guest worker, asylum, refugee, family reunification, student visa, H-1B, and tourism or business travel from any country whose visitors overstay visas. Until visa overstay is reduced to zero, all visas must be canceled.

Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem

June 4, 2007

Assume that

  1. Population is bounded from above
  2. The flow of immigrants is unbounded from above
  3. The survival probabilities of the genes of each immigrant are equal.

Then

For any given cohort of immigrants at time t, the survival probability of their genes at T > t, p(t,T) must go to zero as T goes to infinity.

Proof

Let N(t,T) be the flow from t to T.

The expected number of genes that exist at some date T is the sum of p(t’,T) N(t’) where t’ is an entering cohort and N(t’) entered at time t’ and have a survival probability p(t’,T) at T.

The sum of the N(t’) from t to T is N(t,T).

If p(t’,T) was bounded from below by epsilon, then we would have

N(t,T) epsilon

as a lower bound to the expected number of genes for the entire flow from t to T. Since N(t,T) grows without bound, so does its product with epsilon greater than zero where epsilon is fixed.

Thus the expected number of genes,

sum over t’ of the N(t’) p(t’,T) > N(t,T) epsilon

But we assumed there existed some upper bound B to population. Thus the expected number of genes will exceed the bound on them B as T grows larger.

So we have a contradiction. Thus there is no lower bound epsilon greater than zero for the survival probability of the immigrants.

So every immigrant gene that enters at time t eventually goes extinct.

QED.

Assume that for some positive k, the survival probability of those here already is bounded from above by k times the immigrant survival probability.

Then the survival probability of those here must also vanish, i.e. is not bounded below as T goes to infinity for q(t,T) where q is the survival probability for those here.

Proof

Since p(t,T) the immigrant survival probability falls below any epsilon1 for T sufficiently great, k times p(t,T) also falls below any epsilon2. Take T sufficiently great that p(t,T) falls below epsilon2/k. Then k p(t,T) is now less than epsilon. Since q(t,T) < k p(t,T), it follows that q(t,T) < epsilon. Thus q(t,T) vanishes as T grows larger.

What happens is that q(t,T) is between k p(t,T) and 0, q is squeezed between a vanishing quantity, k p(t,T), and zero, so q vanishes as well.

QED

Thus sustained immigration under these assumptions implies extinction of each year’s cohort that comes here as well as everyone here at any point in time.

Note that its only necessary to have one immigrant group whose numbers entering are unbounded and whose survival probability times some positive value is an upper bound to the rest for the theorem to apply to all those who enter and to all those here.

=

Thus the Bush Kennedy Kyl McCain amnesty bill with its guest worker provision and its annual flow that is bounded from below above zero implies genetic extinction of all those who come here and all those who are here.

So does existing law.

Any law that does not require that annual immigration vanish, i.e. approach closer to zero than any positive bound, implies that the survival probabilities of those who come here and those here all go to zero, i.e. complete genetic extinction.

The causal mechanism by which the law operates is the substitution of immigrants for births. When population reaches a maximum, immigrants must substitute for births or it wouldn’t be a maximum.

This drives the fertility rate below replacement.

This can happen quite quickly.

Assume US population at 300 million was the maximum. If people live 75 years, then 4 million die per year. If 2 million enter then births = 4million deaths – 2 million entrants = 2 million.

The ratio of births to deaths is 2/4 or 1/2. The time from birth to parent is roughly 25 years. So in 50 years, one has 1/4, and in 75 years 1/8 of the starting genes.

Even if population went to 450 million, deaths per year are 6 million. With even one million entrants that gives a survival ratio of 5/6. So the number left after 25*n years is (5/6)^n which goes to zero as n goes to infinity.

It goes to zero rapidly in fact.

The above implies that any law with immigration above zero on a sustained basis is unconstitutional and a crime against humanity. Causing the extinction of a group is a violation of treaties the US has passed.

The current US law is thus void. So is the proposed law.

The drop in fertility from 1800 to 1990 in one graph shows this substitution effect pressure from immigration.

Look at the graph of fertility from 1800 to 1990 below:

http://www.elderweb.com/home/node/2919

Fertility falls except during the period of immigration restriction from the 1920’s to 1965. During part of that period fertility rose, which is called the baby boom. This was a departure from the uniform fall in fertility.

Fertility is now below replacement for many groups in accordance with the theorem.

The same applies in Europe where it also violates EU law as well as international law.

See also
1965 Immigration Act Causes U inverted U in Income Inequality and Fertility

Blogs for immigration restriction even have names like those of the theorem, e.g. Vanishing American:

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/

June 14 to 16 all across America is March for America. Even if you can’t march, there are ways to participate.

http://www.lframerica.com/march2.html

See also Lawrence Auster on it:

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/007957.html

%d bloggers like this: