Archive for the 'Imperialist PC' Category

English PC is Frustrated Imperialism

December 18, 2007

Melanie Phillips is an example of an English woman who identifies all the effects of third world migration and Islam, and they are all bad, but won’t say to stop it. This has been pointed out by Lawrence Auster, who has tried to deprogram her but without success. Why? Why can’t she admit the obvious.

The same applies to Peter Hitchens at the Daily Mail. There have been an entire slew of them at Daily Telegraph, Lnodon Times, Front Page Magazine, LGF, etc. What is it?

At a higher level, we see the same thing in Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. The Labour Party has it, but so does the Conservative Party. So do the Lib Dems. Only BNP doesn’t. BNP also identifies that it wants to give up all imperialism. Ron Paul expresses the same thing in the U.S.

The English lost their empire in the 20th century. They could do two things at that point.

  1. Admit they screwed up.
  2. Invent a theory for why it was the better thing.

They chose to invent a theory. That theory is Imperialist PC. To the extent that all of Europe lost its colonies, they went along with it.

To a certain extent, Europe lost WWII. America and Russia came in and took over the continent. Central Europe was destroyed and occupied. Europe lost its colonies and status around the world. British, French, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, German and other colonies were all lost in the 20th century. Scandinavians and other Europeans had participated in the colonies of other European countries. The movie, “Out of Africa” was by a Danish colonist.

Out of Africa is a memoir by Isak Dinesen (the pseudonym of Danish Baroness Karen von Blixen-Finecke), first published in 1937. The book describes events during 1914–1931 concerning European settlers and the local tribesmen in the bush country of Kenya (British East Africa), from seaside Mombasa to Nairobi, from Mount Kenya to Kilimanjaro, as told from the lyrical, poetic viewpoint of Dinesen.

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

Europe lost its colonies out of

  1. Arrogance.
  2. Infighting.
  3. Failure to push immigration into their colonies.
  4. PC that was already manifesting itself to help the natives instead of other Europeans immigrating into the colonies.

This mindset is very clear in 1939. Hitler was forcing the Jews out of Europe. The European countries to the West of Germany had a huge portion of the earth under their control. This was relatively unpopulated compared to today, where its population is billions more.

The European colonial powers could have taken all the Europeans Hitler didn’t want and put them in their colonies and compared to today’s population, it would not have been noticed. Why didn’t they? Because they had a different concept. Britain had settled the eastern shore of America and seen those colonies secede from its empire. To a certain extent, the British became or already were anti-colonial because of this. Anti-colonial in the sense of against settlers.

In the 18th century, they lost America. That came out of arrogance. It also came out of settlers who owned slaves and were afraid perhaps of losing them. The British opposition to slavery in the 19th century was partly out of religion but also to avoid losing colonies from this motive. The main war they fought with settlers was in South Africa after that, the Boer War.

After WWII, the Europeans lost all their colonies. So they would have been better off having taken the Europeans Hitler didn’t want and putting them in their colonies. But they didn’t. Instead they fought a civil war that resulted in Russia and America taking over Europe.

At that point, they could admit they had mismanaged empire. That would mean admitting that what counts are genes. They would have to admit that in spreading their genes in the third world they had failed. They had also let foreign powers occupy them. So they had failed to keep invading genes out. This would mean that instead of saying they had won a great victory in WWII, they had failed at the basic job of a nation, protecting its genes from being extincted.

So instead of admitting they had lost, and that genes are what count, they instead went into PC worship. This allowed them to avoid admitting their failure. They let themselves be invaded by third world genes rather than admit their loss of empire was a real loss. If genes and blood and soil are what matter, then Europe failed in the 20th century. The elites there didn’t want to admit that. They didn’t have the strength after WWII. Moreover, they were occupied and weak. They didn’t have the psychological strength to admit it. They also couldn’t imagine a come back. The inability to imagine a comeback prevented one. They still could have kept their colonies. They could have started immigration into their colonies. They could have avoided the welfare policies for third world populations they did pursue.

In the US, the Anglo elites were in a similar position. They had allowed 19th century immigration of other and Southern Europeans. They too had lost their grip on power. They too had to either admit it was stupid and admit the real reasons they did it, or invent a theory of why it wasn’t bad but good. Admitting the truth would mean acknowledging that to some extent 19th century white immigration into America was motivated by the black population. The same applied to post 1965 immigration in America, but not in Europe.

The Anglo elite could buy into PC for similar reasons as the Europeans could. It let them off the hook for mismanaging their chance. If they said genes are what mattered, then they had screwed up starting with black slavery in the 17th century. If it was culture that mattered, then they could avoid admitting their mistake.

The problem with inventing lies is that it prevents one with overcoming adversity. Genes are what matter. The way to come back from a setback is to admit the truth and concentrate on the comeback. This is something that PC prevents. PC is a way of avoiding the truth of having let foreign genes in and losing great empires. In America, the Anglos lost the American continent as exclusively theirs. In Europe, the Europeans lost their third world empire. In both cases, they have used PC as a false theory to avoid admitting their failure to spread their genes when they had the chance.

Those invading the European world don’t have a failure to cover up. They don’t have to use PC to hide their failure to spread their genes. They are spreading their genes. They are taking over. Jorge Ramos and Maria Hinojosa can openly trumpet their takeover of America. Muslims can march in London showing not just cultural takeover but genetic takeover. Ideology is always the hand maiden of genes.

As an alternative, we might note that Jorge Ramos is European in gene stock to a large degree. He may also be going down this same path. The Hispanic elite is also trying to cover up their failure to make their chance count when they had it. Now PC is a way to cover up the failure to spread their genes when they had the chance.

George Bush shows this attitude completely. So does the entire Bush family. The Bush family are the perfect Anglo elite Wall Street Yale power family. They are completely taken by PC. They are completely taken by power. They see them as the same thing.

The rest of the US elite acts the same way. Whether Anglo or not, they have imbibed PC as a path to power. They are completely imperialistic. This applies to European elites when they have the chance. Tony Blair was as much an imperialist as George Bush. PC imperialism and old fashioned guns imperialism go hand in hand.

PC Imperialism had no qualms in torturing third worlders. If PC was genuine concern for third worlders, then the resort to torture should not have happened instantly. It shows that not only is PC thin, but its really just a wrapper for imperialism.

The problem is that PC Imperialism displaces recognizing the reality of genes. Genes trump culture. Genes create culture just as culture selects genes. This can be an upward spiral as in Europe in the last 50,000 years. But it can also be a downward spiral as in Europe, America, Canada, and Australia in the last 50 years.

We need to admit that genes are what matter. We need to admit that we did fail to spread our genes everywhere when we had the chance. We need to admit that pushing up third world demography by aid was a huge mistake for us and for civilization. We need to admit that third world immigration was the same thing. The reason we don’t stop third world immigration is that we have to admit more stupidity on our part.

==

==Wright Island Model Sustained Immigration is genetic replacement immigration.

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

“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.”

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=12139

As pointed out in a previous post:

The theorem doesn’t say you get a mixture of old and new. The theorem says you get complete replacement of the old by the new. The old goes extinct. This is pure genetic replacement. It doesn’t matter if there is an intermediate mixture or not. Over time, the initial stock is replaced completely. Promises of a mixture are false.

==

Man tortured 5 years at Gitmo, according to one claim.

http://www.rawstory.com/comments/42324.html

==Vanishing American piece today

VA comments on the following Hispanic Nationalist-Supremacist piece by by Abelardo J. Arias, Esquire

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/arias1.html

http://conservativetimes.org/?p=1429#comment-24203

http://vanishingamerican.blogspot.com/2007/12/60-million-more-legal-immigrants.html

My comment at VA

Great article. It seems when Libertarians get tired of losing they return to the reality zone, ethnic interests trump ideology. Libertarians feel they have a chance, so they “stoop” to reality.

But Hispanic Supremacists for Libertarians show how the HS’s have figured out that open borders is good for their openly proclaimed takeover. If Paul is elected they expect to keep their welfare and get open borders. Some Libertarians are willing to pander to that view perhaps.

Perhaps Libertarians are also part of the PC frustrated imperialist group. They have invented libertarianism as a way to avoid the reality of the loss of empire and the loss of a chance to spread genes.

=Mutual Assured Destruction

When the US got the A-bomb in 1945, it tried to keep it to itself. But some scientists betrayed the secret to the Soviet Union.

After the Soviets exploded their bomb, other scientists at RAND and in academia then invented the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction. This was an ex-post rationalization of a defeat, a defeat that came from a betrayal by scientists at the same institutions as those who invented MAD.

MAD said the Soviets having the bomb was good because both sides were rational and neither would use it. But in the Cuban Missile Crisis, the US military wanted to invade and we now know the Soviet army had tactical nukes in Cuba and would have used them. We would have lost millions. We came very close to it. So the MAD rationalization was a lie. MAD wasn’t genius, it was a marketing slogan to cover up betrayal.

The same applies to letting Pakistan keep its nukes after the 9-11 attack by branding Islam as The Religion of Peace. This was betrayal of the same kind. Steve Sailer has been pointing out since before 9-11 that Bush was PC-betraying us by ordering no profiling of Muslims which he promised in the 2000 election campaign.

Many of Bush’s actions since 9-11 have been to cover this up, despite its being publicly available information. Its Vdare available but not MSM available. Evidently George Bush knows the difference. Vdare is running a fund raising campaign now.

==Answer to a criticism

Critic: You make it sound like life is about spreading genes.

Answer: Yeah, it is. Life centers around the DNA molecule, not about spreading culture.

If one wants a more spiritual version:

The only way to transcend genes is to use genes. You can’t beat genes by pretending they don’t exist. If you want a moral purpose to life higher than one gene is the same as another, more or less, then you have to recognize that they are not the same, more or less. If there is something to be built on or out of life, it has to be built on or out of genes. You can’t build a spiritual purpose on genes and not mind the genes.

Said differently, if there is a spiritual molecule it has to be the DNA molecule, because the DNA molecule has life in it. Culture grows out of the barrel of a chromosome. We need to accept that and build on it not against it. We can only fail if we ignore physical, chemical or biological reality. That is what PC Imperialism and Libertarianism both do.

To paraphrase Lenin instead of Mao this time, the PC Imperialist or Libertarian, will sell the future of his genes for money. That will gain him neither the culture he says he wants nor his genes. If we don’t build on the reality of genes, we will get only the reality that nature gives to those who ignore her reality, extinction. At some point, nature stops giving you second chances. The chances go to the genes that survived. If you chose extinction for yours, you lose your vote.

==Lawrence Auster on Melanie Phillips

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/009484.html 

The above is draft and preliminary and subject to revision. Comments and corrections are welcome. This blog considers different and conflicting hypotheses. The above are hypotheses and should be restated as hypotheses or questions. All other disclaimers apply.

%d bloggers like this: