On the Rise of Mixed-Race Britain

“The intermarriage of nations gradually extinguishes the characters, and is, despite any pretended philanthropy, not beneficial to mankind.”
          Immanuel Kant

The recent engagement of Britain’s Prince Harry to a mixed-race actress of Black and Jewish origins has delivered something of a propaganda coup to the promoters of miscegenation. It’s been hailed as a “great day for interracial relationships and mixed race girls everywhere.” It’s been claimed that it will “change Britain’s relationship with race forever.” The New York Times has even suggested it will “save the monarchy.”

While hyperbole saturates each one of these statements, they all betray the truism that, in a ‘celebrity culture,’ such events can spark ill-informed attempts at imitation among the dedicated and dim-witted followers of fashion.

The excitement over the racial status of Meghan Markle is all very reminiscent of similar propaganda in the wake of London’s 2012 Olympic Games, when a number of mixed-race athletes, Jessica Ennis in particular, were singled out and promoted as the ‘new face of Britain.’ According to a celebratory report published shortly after the Olympics by British Future, a ‘think-tank’ funded by George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, Ennis and other mixed-race celebrities had “helped to change perceptions about interracial relationships.” This seemed to have been largely borne out by the 2011 census, which revealed “the mixed race population is the fastest growing in Britain with more than one million people born of interracial parentage.” British Future point out, probably with good justification, that this figure “is only half the story of the rapid growth of mixed Britain. Twice as many people have ethnically mixed parentage – but over half of them choose other census categories, such as black or white.” Ennis, in some senses the precursor to Markle as the darling of miscegenation propagandists, was chosen by British Future to grace the front page of its report, The Melting Pot Generation: How Britain Became More Relaxed About Race, and opened it with the line: “Jessica Ennis was not just the face of the Olympics this summer; she could stake a fair claim to be ‘the face of the census’ too.”

One of those most concerning aspects of the report, if accurate, concerns the statement that “it is Britain, not America, which has the stronger claim to be a “melting pot” on race.” The rationale here is that those of mixed racial parentage tend not to marry or reproduce with American Whites — those of mixed race normally become absorbed into the minority ethnic group. By contrast, those of mixed race in Britain marry heavily into the White majority. We might therefore state that while America currently has the more pressing demographic concern in terms of the White share of the population, miscegenation may be considered a greater concern in Britain. The report explains:

“On no other country on earth is my story even possible,” said Barack Obama, a product of Kenya and Kansas, as he burst onto the US political scene in 2004. His is a great story, but he was wrong about that. Mixed marriages are more likely in Britain, where the dynamics of mixing are different too, and accelerate faster in Britain. That is because most Americans from mixed parentage marry somebody from a minority group, as Obama himself did. By contrast, three-quarters of Britons from mixed parentage marry somebody from the majority white group (it does contain over three-quarters of the population, after all)…10% of African Americans are in mixed marriages [with Whites]…compared to over 40% for British born black Caribbeans.

It is difficult to make a full assessment of the true scale of the problem because the Black population of Britain (including those described as “African/Caribbean/Black British”) is roughly 3% of the overall population of England and Wales. One might be tempted to conclude that, while the number of Black men marrying or reproducing with White women is very high, their relatively small percentage of the overall population means that the number of White women entering relationships with Black men is also relatively small. However, these relationships are almost exclusively forming at the lower end of the socio-economic scale, and often at the very bottom.

This is crucial because those at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder, rather than the middle classes, are a key driver of national fertility. The same phenomenon is of course also apparent in the United States, where author and demographic expert Jonathan Last observes in What to Expect When No One’s Expecting: “The bearing and raising of children has largely become the province of the lower classes. It’s a kind of reverse Darwinism where the traditional markers of success make one less likely to reproduce.” Similarly, with the rise of the welfare state and the contemporary squeeze on the middle class, anthropologist David Lawson of University College London has argued that “poorer households have relatively little to gain by limiting fertility.” The result, as one article in The Economist put it, is that “mixed-race children are now about as common in Britain as in America—a country with many more non-whites and a longer history of mass immigration.”

Britain thus finds itself in a situation where White, middle class couples are numerically far superior to the number of mixed race couples, but this balance is radically offset in demographic terms by significant differences in fertility — the White couple have no children, or very few, and the mixed couple produce several children. In other possible scenarios, the Black father sires a number of children with several low-status, low-IQ White women. It is very likely that this is the dynamic driving the increase in mixed-race children in Britain. Indeed, the Runnymede Trust argues that at least “61% of mixed race children are being raised in single mother households. … African Caribbean fathers are twice as likely as white fathers to live apart from their children.” Black men are also the demographic least likely to enter into marriage, which accounts well for the fact that despite the rising number of mixed-race births, “interethnic marriages account for only 2% of all marriages in England and Wales. … Caribbeans have very low partner rates by comparison with other ethnic groups.” The overwhelming tendency then is for very short-term, low-commitment, sexual relationships between Black males and White females, resulting in high numbers of mixed-race children being raised in low-income single mother households. This is of course just one of the dark aspects of miscegenation that is left out of the panegyrics of its promoters.

The nature of Britain’s social housing arrangements, combined with a lower-class “TV culture” in which celebrity interracial relationships are incessantly portrayed as fashionable, exciting, and successful, make the lowest socio-economic strata of the White population particularly prone to entering into mixed relationships. The Economist reported in 2014 that “mixed black-African and white children are particularly common in working-class suburbs and commuter towns such as Croydon and Southend-on-Sea, possibly because black Africans are rarely tied to city centres through social-housing tenancies.” Further suggesting that housing and immediate cultural factors are important in the behavior of lower-class White women, it is interesting to note that Black men have also reproduced to a significant degree with White immigrants from continental Europe. The Economist notes that “most of the 21,000 children born to Polish mothers in 2012 had Polish fathers; but of the rest, 23% had African or Asian fathers.” Remarkably then, almost one in four “Polish” births in Britain involve a Black or Indian/Pakistani father.

These are of course far more likely to be Black fathers given that ‘British Asians,’ the term used mainly for Muslims from the Indian subcontinent, are the population most reluctant to engage in the production of mixed-race children, the main reasons being, in the politically correct terminology of  British Future, “parental resistance to mixing, influencing marriage choices across either faith or ethnic boundaries; or more limited contact between some minority groups and others.” For this explanation one may simply substitute “Islamic cultural practices.” Another study found that “British Asians are five times less likely to marry outside their race than their white population.” Interestingly, British Jews also demonstrate a relatively low rate of intermarriage, roughly half that seen among Jews in the United States. The future of Britain, should present trends continue, will therefore be that of a mixed-race population, punctuated, and perhaps dominated, by endogamous Muslim and Jewish communities.

It goes without saying that the grubby origins of the rise of mixed-race Britain do not feature in the growing number of panegyrics devoted to the biracial population. In 2011 the BBC had a “mixed race season” to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the category “mixed race” being added to the census. It included a three-part documentary titled Mixed Britannia, praising the ‘tolerant values’ of the British and presenting an image of miscegenation stripped of its statistical realities. Joseph Harket, a journalist at the Guardian, wrote of a new “love of mixedness.” In the scientific sphere, dubious studies have promoted the idea that mixed-race individuals are seen as more beautiful and healthy, apparently ignoring existing research indicating that adolescents “who self-identify as more than one race are at higher health and behavior risks.” Suggestions that mixed-race individuals would be seen as healthier and more attractive because of the genetic process of heterosis, or hybrid vigor, (i.e. that cross-bred offspring have greater genetic fitness than pure-bred offspring), also seem to be flatly contradicted by evidence showing that, while mixed-race adolescents perform better than their purely Black counterparts, they have a lower birth weight, lower intelligence, and greater disposition to promiscuity than their White counterparts.

It would thus be extremely maladaptive for a White woman desiring healthy offspring of optimal intelligence to reproduce with someone of African origin. In an age before Cultural Marxism took hold in academia, Herbert Spencer Jennings, the Harvard professor of experimental biology, was able to advocate the idea that the mixing of two different but genetically similar ethnic groups (e.g. the Celt and the Saxon) would produce very strong offspring, but the mixing of two very diverse groups would mean “a lowering of quality” — a distance theory of hybridity.[1]

Really there is only one way in which the mixed-race individual is ‘superior’ or best adapted, and that is entirely due to the cultural environment we currently find ourselves in. We happen to live in an age in which the development of ‘technological man’ is almost complete, by which I mean that we are racing headlong into an era in which man himself is viewed almost exclusively as technology, a tool, a resource. This is the age of the ‘human resources’ department, and the predisposition of individuals and governments to encounter human beings in a technocratic way. In today’s environment, the best ‘human resource’ is the man or woman most flexibly able to deal with shifts in the marketplace (able to cross borders and move where the jobs are), capable of existing among pluralities of cultures (loyal to none, and open to all), and content with changes in social norms. In ‘fluid’ environments, those orchestrating things, and profiting from them, require ‘fluid’ people. Ideas of nationhood, of rootedness to the land, of fixed sexual identity, of coherent ancestry, and future destiny, are all viewed as obstructions to the rush of ‘progress’ and globalized, usurious capital. The mixed-race individual ultimately possesses a plurality of origins and consequently a loyalty to none. He or she is the ultimate tabula rasa upon which may be written the fevered dreams of Cultural Marxism; the apex global citizen, and the final destination in the search for a ‘technological man.’ The first casualty, other than native birth-rates, will be individual White national identities. The Economist opines with the greatest of under-statements, that “Englishness, which has remained distinctly a white identity for many, may become less exclusive.” The truth is that it will cease to exist in any manner commensurate with its historical form. Englishness, as a centuries-old sense of defined peoplehood, will have made its last entry in the annals of Man.

In this context, and at this crucial point in the history of the British, it is highly symbolic that Prince Harry should take a mixed-race woman as his bride. The Royal Family, along with the entirety of the British aristocracy, is a dying breed, now a mere parody of what it once was. Forced by modern capitalism to compete for resources rather than derive wealth from ancestral rights, many of the landed gentry have collapsed into bankruptcy. Since 1900, 1,200 country houses once owned by Lords have been demolished in England. A significant proportion of those remaining are kept alive only via the renting of the property for weddings or other gatherings, with many listed on dedicated websites.

The self-styled aristocrat is thus reduced to proffering his wares to the ‘commoner’ in order to maintain even the semblance of dignity and continued refinement. In much the same way, the Royal Family in recent decades, perhaps with the exception of the Queen herself, has taken to trading in its dignity in order to appear more user-friendly and accessible (again, we are in the age of ‘technological man’) to the masses. Part of this approach has been the intermingling of the Royals with the cause célèbres of the multicultural age, including but not limited to the appearance of Prince William on the cover of a gay magazine and an accompanying interview in which he issued the apparently obligatory statement that homosexuals and transsexuals are “truly brave.” Prince Charles has apparently shown an interest in having his coronation reflect “the religious diversity of the country that he will be ruling,” by having a multi-faith ceremony — leading The Spectator to ask if he will be “the first multicultural monarch.”

A nation overseen, even symbolically, by stagnant aristocracy is like a lion pride overseen by a toothless, old, former alpha male. It has outlived its purpose. Aristocracy assumed its power through competition and violence, and grew stale in comfort and peace. If it can be said that the Alt Right is an elitist movement in the sense that it believes in inequality and the will to power, then it must be clarified that this does not necessitate an acceptance of those currently holding elite positions. In many cases these positions are unearned or sustained through corruption, and it should be an essential principle of our thinking that meritocracy is the only means by which we select our elites. Uniquely of course, we face a scenario in which our current leaders have “failed the pride” by essentially inviting rival factions to share in our resources and territory.

Young lions have risen up for less.

[1] H.S. Jennings, The Biological Basis of Human Nature (1930), p.287. For a useful, if flawed,  discussion see T. Teo, ‘The historical problematization of ‘mixed race’ in psychological and human-scientific discourses’ in A.S. Winston (ed.) Defining difference: Race and racism in the history of psychology (Washington, D.C., American Psychological Association, 2014), pp. 79–108.

76 replies
  1. Nick Dean
    Nick Dean says:

    I appreciate hugely the fact that Andrew Joyce, whom I take to be Irish, is consistently interested in the survival of the English as such, just as well as the Irish and other White nations.

    • T
      T says:

      I do as well, Nick Dean. Dr Joyce, whatever his background might be, should be commended for that evenhandedness you’ve described.

  2. Jason
    Jason says:


    Thank you for the article, Dr. Joyce. It is sad sad day that the Prince is falling into the gutter.

    I think the problem of white women who are ensnared by black or colored men is a serious problem and will lead to white extinction. We must take steps. Here is one.

    Such women have been brainwashed by the Jewish owned liberal media that they are being superior and on a higher moral ground in doing so. They get a feeling of self-importance and believe others will love and admire them for being “open-minded”, “tolerant”, etc.

    But white conservatives/intellectuals can turn the tables on them using one powerful method. It is better than doing nothing (no results) and even using facts and logic about black crime, low black IQ, STD’s, etc. (very limited results). This is so because no matter how many facts you provide, she will ignore them because she believes you are a “racist”, beneath her.

    But there is one method involving use of a powerful loan word (rather phrase) from Indian languages which Indian foreign students used often in college to denigrate dark skinned people.

    It is called “kala kakoos.”

    Note that English has many loan words from Hindi, such as: Chutney Guru: teacher. Jungle: forest. Pajamas Shampoo Thug.

    **Kala Kakoos literally means black excretum, but more loosely is akin to black shit**.

    It is an alternative to using the n-word and a good way to respond to “white trash”, also, besides educating women as below.

    So when you criticize a liberal girl for dating/supporting blacks, and she says you are a racist, you can answer back, like: “Do you know what light skinned Indians call blacks? They call them kala kakoos.”

    Liberal girl will say: “Oh, and what does kala kakoos mean?”

    Then the intellectual can answer him/her, as the line (**) above, in a hushed whisper.

    And then the intellectual can add: “The students said that Western white women are gutter as they associate with the kala kakoos. Why do women get BRAINWASHED so easily?”

    By asking a question, she has to think of an answer. Plus it is less sudden than a statement. (The words in capitals are the key points to use.)

    In other words, you have to shame them and show your disgust and mock their pride in negroism, but start off indirectly.

    I tried convincing these gullible liberals with facts, but it did not work, but the above approach worked a lot better. It may make them angry (***), so you have to choose your time and place and speed and medium, and whether to do it directly or indirectly, but it works. Sometimes the girl may try to follow you to try to convince you that she is not gutter, but you can keep using the above tactic, to convince her that she is indeed a gutter woman. If you are unable to continue this dialog face to face, it can be done through the mail, such as through anonymous letters.

    *** The fact that it makes her angry is a factor in why it works. This anger is a strong emotion, so she is more likely to remember this. And every time she associates with blacks in the future, she will remember that somebody called her a gutter woman. Secondly, using an Indian word is less likely to make her think you are a racist, because then she is saying that Indians are racists. Most liberal girls don’t think that blacks/browns/Indians are racists, but telling her that Indians are attacking people like her also shakes that delusion in her mind.

    In sum, this tactic works because it goes to the core of her self-identity, which is that she is a great woman because she is “open”, “tolerant” and “liberal”, treats “blacks as equals” and will stand up against racism. A white woman loves a colored men not because of him, but because it makes her feel good about herself (that she is a liberal) and thinks the whole world will love and admire her for this. But by showing that others (including 3rd world Indians) will NOT admire her, but instead consider her a gutter woman for that exact reason, you have shaken her self-identity to the core.

    • Karlfried
      Karlfried says:

      Hello Jason, December 8, 2017 – 2:33 pm |,
      thank you for telling about a tactic that works. That is a very useful tool. —
      —> Single out the “friends of multiculti”, speak to them when they are alone.
      —> Show them, that there is no future in their thoughts.
      —> Show them that they will stand alone as soon as hard times will come:
      a) because neither the normal-Germans (normal-whites) will want to have something to do with them,
      b) nor their multiculti-friends (because they all want to get out of the line of fire and problems). The other Gutmenschen step back and he is all of a sudden alone in the frontline.
      c) and not their negroe or Turk friends because those groups have their harbour and place of safety within their own group.

      Show the “friends of multikulti” that they are a very small minority,
      show them that the “be friendly to foreigners and let they come in our country in large numbers” – sentence is not only bad, but that it is satanic: it is genocide killing our own folk.

      Show them that they have to bear the consequences of saying to be a “Gutmensch” (do gooder) not today, but in the years to come, and as the years go by, more and more.
      Say them that they are cooking a soup now, but later they will be forced to eat it, whether it tastes good or not.

      As you said: do not try to convince them with thoughts about justice, mankind, our folk, the future of our children: They do not listen, they do not care.
      Make it clear that they have massive disadavantages by their being a Gutmensch and that these disadvantages aim at their very person and life and year after year more and more.

      This and only this will reach the Gutmensch at his inner parts. At this point he has no defense. He will think about it in the months to come. He will doubt his Gutmensch-Multikulti-religion. He will change slowly. And a year later, all of a sudden, he will deny to be a Gutmensch at all.

      That is the time for us to accept him within the German normal-folk again. He is a re-born German now. No speaking about his former time as a Gutmensch. No questions asked. We take him and accept him. Those ones who have gone through hell like him will be 100% Germans afterwards.

    • ilena
      ilena says:

      Be careful. You might be charged with harassment and abuse. The anger may simply be the woman’s reaction to such.

  3. T
    T says:

    Regarding the mentioned BBC ‘mixed race’ television special how can there be ‘mixing’ of races when they at other times insist race doesn’t exist? Why is it okay for them to celebrate and advocate this mixing and resulting demographic destruction of white Britain (which is genocide) and somehow not okay for others to simply desire to retain what already has long existed, and thereby resist genocide?

    Morally and intellectually the people advocating the ideology of multiculturalism are clowns.

    • T
      T says:

      The persons at the high levels pushing multiculturalism and their hangers on are unreformed slavers. In the mid 19th century primordial days of the multicult this was out in the open and blunt as evidenced in an excerpt from a September 30, 1851 London Times editorial below published decades after the Empire’s cynical abolition of chattel slavery to make way for wage slavery..ie ‘cheap labor’ so called. It describes the mixed immigrant population of native Celt Irish, imported Scot and immigrant English of the northern portion of Ireland in slave terms, ie ‘more mixed, more docile, which can submit to a master’, etc, which is in reality how the elites see families such as the one which headlined this thread. Since that time they learned the power of Pavlovian conditoning, aka positive reinforcement, and are not so open.

      Its present place will be occupied by the more mixed, more docile, and more serviceable race, which has long borne the yoke of sturdy industry in this island, which can submit to a master and obey the law…

      ‘The prosperity and happiness he [Lawrence] speaks of may some day reign over that beautiful island. It’s fertile soil, its water-power, its minerals, and other materials for the wants and luxuries of man, may one day be developed; but all apearances are against the belief that this will ever happen in the days of the Celt. That tribe will soon fulfill the great law of Providence which seems to enjoin and reward the union of races. It will mix with the Anglo-American, and be known no more as a jealous and separate people. Its present place will be occupied by the more mixed, more docile, and more serviceable race, which has long borne the yoke of sturdy industry in this island, which can submit to a master and obey the law…’


      • Rerevisionist
        Rerevisionist says:

        You’ve misinterpreted that Times piece. The writer is talking about mixing of the Celt race with the Anglo-American races. He was talking about the emigration during and following the Irish Famine, and the relative attraction of the USA for starving people. Whether his categories make sense depends on your view of the causes of poverty in Ireland, which readers here will attribute in part to Cromwell and the Jewish ‘Bank of England’, and plantations.

        • T
          T says:

          No misinterpretation, RR. The editorial was broadly speaking an open acknowledgement of the genocidal aspect of slavery, whether it be of the chattel or its monetized variant wage slavery types, the latter being commonly referred to by that term of propoganda since its early 19th century introduction as ‘cheap labor’. By the way, Irish people were leaving Ireland in not small numbers both before and certainly after the Famine years of the mid 19th century.

          The quote ‘It [the Irish people] will mix with the Anglo-American, and be known no more…’ is a reference to the mass exodus of Irish to the US, and the result to both Anglo-Saxon within the US and to the newly arrived Irish Celt.

          The quote ‘Its present place [ie geographic Ireland, the Irish peoples homeland] will be occupied by the more mixed, more docile, and more serviceable race, which has long borne the yoke of sturdy industry in this island, which can submit to a master and obey the law…’ is a specific reference to the immigrant plantation population of the North of Ireland and their descendants which the editorial alludes are to fill in the vacuum left by the mass departure of indigenous Irish as wage slaves to North America. It should be noted London Times editorials have long been seen as a mouthpiece for official British government thought regarding policy much in the same way as the New York Times editorials in the states are regarding US governmental policy. Abbott Lawrence, whom figures prominently in the editorial, is a 19th century example of the intermingling of government and corporate interest. He was a Massachusetts textile factory magnate whom had finagled himself the plum post of US ambassador to Britain, which then included the whole of Ireland. With little doubt at least some of those very Irish he would see on his tour of the island would very likely soon be wage slaves within his manufacturing plants in his industrial town of Lawrence, Massachusetts. That city’s official nickname to this day is ‘Immigrant City’. Not coincidental in any of this, the state of Mass, then colony, had been the historic center of the chattel slave trade in British North America, and families such as the Lawrence’s were of the type which had been heavily involved.

          What did the Irish within Ireland think of this genocidal enmasse predation of their people as wage slaves in North America and far flung places of the Empire? A London Spectator article from the same time period (1847) as the Times editorial tells that story. The Spectator article was entitled ‘Extermination and Vengeance’.

          The case of Mr. Ormsby Gore is very instructive. The Irish papers, alluding to his estate of Leganommer, had a terrific story of ” extermination in Leitrim,” full of direct falsehoods. Setting aside smaller matters, it appears that the tenants on the estate owed rent for several years, in some instances for as many as twelve or fourteen; one year’s rent was demanded, under pain of a twelvemonth’s notice to quit : not a shilling of rent was offered, and the notice was enforced ; but the enforcement was accompanied with a declaration that those who could not retain their holdings would be aided by their landlord to emigrate to America. Such is the conduct which the Irish in- cendiaries name “extermination.”

          Rather than seeing the promotion of the Irish people as wage slave immigrants to the US and elsewhere as ‘a helping hand’ they correctly saw it rather as a genocidal act, a hand being placed around their throat and squeezed hard. They fought back, even to the point of assasination. The Irish population to this day hasn’t recovered from this predation and is lower by far than what by rights should be. And in a sickening perversion, the same forces that promoted the 19th century predation of Ireland resulting in the lower than should be Celtic Irish population, now promote Ireland being flooded with ‘immigrants’, ie wage slaves, fraudulent asylum seeker/refugees, etc, from everywhere, as their population is ‘too low’.


          • T
            T says:

            Bearing in mind this is multifaceted, powerful elements of the elites of the Anglo-Saxon and Jewish peoples have been heavily involved in the multi-cult project as it has evolved over the past several centuries.

            Slavery, in its monetized chattel slave variant form, wage slavery, is the very basis of the ideology of multi-culturalism. The 95% plus fraudulent asylum seekers/refugees simply act as window dressing, a flimsy figleaf, to cover up this aspect of things. In that regard, below is a telling excerpt taken from debate regarding immigration to Ireland that took place within the Irish Senate [Seanad Éireann] in Dublin in 2006. The link I had to the Irish government records site which had these debates transcribed no longer works, never the less, these words were spoken there.

            It may not be politically correct to say so but it is a major contrast to our [Irish] workers.

            Seanad Éireann – May 11, 2006

            Ms White: ..Immigrants here work in restaurants, hotels, shops, IT customer support companies and on building sites. I find them an inspiration. Their work ethic, dedication and enthusiasm in customer service is outstanding. It may not be politically correct to say so but it is a major contrast to our workers. Last night on the way home I went into a beauty salon in Dundrum at around 8.45 p.m. An advertisement for a new service was displayed and I went in——

            Mr. Bradford: There is no need for the Senator to go there.

            Ms White: I thank Senator Bradford for the courtesy. I went into the salon and there were four Irish girls behind the counter who told me the salon was closed. I said I wanted to make an appointment but they said they had nothing available until next week. This was Wednesday night. We all know that foreign people working in shops, or the service industry generally, cannot wait to pack the bags properly and so on…

          • T
            T says:

            Rr, from ‘the original piece’, the 1851 Times editorial in reference to the effects upon the Irish people due to their enmasse predation as wage slaves (ie ‘cheap labor’ if one prefers) and their leaving to the US.

            It [the Irish people] will mix with the Anglo-American, and be known no more as a jealous and separate people.

            That sure sounds like a declaration of genocide to me. Of course, we have a record of what the Irish themselves thought on this matter from the 1847 London Spectator article quoting from the Irish newspapers of the time. Bear in mind that most Irish even then spoke English, and they entirely concurred with the London Times assessment with the effects this enmasse predation was having on them. The Irish called it ‘extermination’, and that word means now exactly what it meant then.

            You know RR, blindly lashing out at others ideas with derogatory commentary as to whatever concept they’re presenting, or worse yet, aiming such at their person, isn’t helpful towards the promotion of civil discourse.

    • Flossie
      Flossie says:

      Sad but true. It’s elementary economics: If you subsidize something, you’ll get more of it. The Western welfare state has subsidized bastardy and indolence, and now we’re awash in both, along with dysgenics. I read a few years back that the average IQ of American blacks has dropped a point or two over the last few decades. This may not sound like much, but in the grand scheme of things it’s significant. (Sorry, I don’t remember where I read this, but I’ve never forgotten it — it made quite an impression.)

      • Buckeyex
        Buckeyex says:

        Yes, and despite all the money tossed into the school system, the longer time the blacks are in school the greater the disparity between them and the whites. Their reproductive choices just keep getting kids with lower and lower IQs and less and less ability to learn and be anything but welfare queens and bucks who sire even more of themselves.

      • Irene
        Irene says:

        Dysgenics is a taboo subject! Recently I visited Florida, Georgia and Alabama and it’s scaring down there: Everybody is fat, they’ve even lost the ability of walking. This is the perfect environment for moronic Judeo-Christian Israel firsters who worship the people of the book. Holy Book, holy Jews, holy land, holy Jerusalem, holy everything…

        • Alicia
          Alicia says:

          The bankster Mateusz Morawiecki, who of course comes from “people of the book” is replacing the naive Christian Zionist, Beata Szydlo, as Poland’ s Prime minister. According to the in Poland prevailing outlook, most ethnic Poles are just yokels (Pol. chamy). That is why those with (((tribal))) background, .i.e. people of the book, are fitted for highest positions in the society, inclusive in the Roman Catholic Church. https://www.jta.org/…/poland-appoints-ex-banker-with-jewish-r…

    • pterodactyl
      pterodactyl says:

      Trenchant – You are correct. Only when the people in the West are no longer rich and pampered will they think differently. For now we are vastly wealthy and using the wealth to (a) pay the underclass are to breed (b) pay the third world to come over and join us and share our wealth.

      The way the West is running at present now that the far-left have taken over immigration policy and culture-setting via the TV, the way the West is run is like inheriting a successful business that was run properly, and then running it badly. This is actually how many of the blacks ran shops in Uganda after taking them over from the Indians in the 60s when Idi Amin kicked them out. They just sold the stock that was there and never restocked. So the profits were great for a time even after the incompetence started, then after a delay period the businesses collapsed.

      It is the same in the West. Now run badly (eg inviting over the third world) but still thriving off what has been built up over time. There is a delay before reality hits. We can already see the cracks – eg in Britain the health service is often not fit for purpose, roads are full of holes, the police no longer investigate most burglaries, and the authorities are so incompetent that they put inflammable cladding around Grenfell Tower, which then burned down, and this cladding got through the many stages of our massive Health and Safety industry, showing that at all stages in the authorities and regulatory bodies we now promote incompetents.

      And another point is that once the Western economies collapse, there will be less aid to the third world to pay them to breed. All the rest of the world is being propped up by the Western economies.

      Furthermore, the wealth of Google etc and the banks will diminish as they have lots of money only when the economy is working.

      In other words the West can do a really good job of self-destruction only when there is plenty of money for the left to spend, and without this wealth we will return to a state where there is a connection between how much you (or your family) contribute and how much you thrive, and where families are important again, rather than as now where there is no such connection, and where those groups who are burden on society are thriving and breeding.

  4. Charles Frey
    Charles Frey says:

    Beautifully and persuasively written, reflecting an old English tradition of higher learning of a bygone era. Even the usually dry statistics are well woven-in, and expanded upon with impartiality.

    I have a minor bone to pick with the cited statement of anthropologist David Lawson, of UCL: ” …that poorer households have relatively little to gain by limiting fertility “. A clever way to word-smithy the fact, that they have a lot to gain by not limiting fertility. In Canadian terms, probably transposable to GB and the remainder of Western nations: how about tax-credits for each child; and federal child-allowances; and annual fall school supplies and clothing allowances; as well as entitlement to Salvation Army and similar community and church-sponsored food distributors ?

    Please don’t misinterpret my remarks: having eaten from the field-kitchens of the ever-passing-by forces of the Waffen SS, Vlasov’s contingents, the Luftwaffe, the Wehrmacht and later even the Red Army and ultimately the US FORCES, after they came to Berlin, I DO NOT BEGRUDGE THESE CHOICELESS CHILDREN A FULL STOMACH OR A WARM ROOF OVER THEIR HEADS: while this broader, demographic and race-mixing problem is not precluded by my personal feelings.

    This has nothing to do with mixing, but merely with the enormous, in fact untenable burdens on the state; to wit: Germany. A local friend has an old school acquaintance in Duesseldorf, whom he calls on whenever visiting. This school-chum holds a middling rank in the municipal Police Department.

    Shortly after re-unification, this officer, as with thousands of others, was mandated to host and instruct officers from former East-Germany in the methods and standards of the West; by taking them on duty with them.

    This chum and his learning colleague were called to investigate a local disturbance. Both arrived on the top floor of a new, seven story apartment block with seven or eight apartments per floor.

    The entire seventh floor was occupied by one male Muslim, his three wives and, as far as the two could determine , seventeen children. In addition to healthcare, education, child services, interfamily dispute resolution – to mention just a few expenses carried by the aging ethnic-German taxpayer. Requiring tax-gap [ Paradise Papers ] bond issue loans, eagerly subscribed to by the usual crowd, so that we, not they, finance our own destruction. As always.

    • Rerevisionist
      Rerevisionist says:

      With respect, ‘poorer households’ may mean whites, or the Jew-supported other races. The latter have a lot to gain by breeding, but the former less so, though it’s hard to get accurate figures under the jew regime in Britain. But the fact that nonwhite illegals get housed in preference to whites suggests it is definitely true.

      • Rerevisionist
        Rerevisionist says:

        A further point is that nonwhites are handed out paper money – many of them have net income greater than whites. It’s unlikely that poor white women will resist that (and more than their ‘betters’ could).

        • Rerevisionist
          Rerevisionist says:

          [1] You quoted anthropologist David Lawson, of UCL: ” … poorer households have relatively little to gain by limiting fertility “.
          [2] ‘Poorer households’ may e classified two ways: (1) Whites. (2) Immigrant invaders.
          [3] Because whites are discriminated against, immigrant invaders tend to have larger families (or at least offspring).
          [4] Lawson, the (((anthropologist))) is hiding that obvious fact.

          • Charles Frey
            Charles Frey says:

            While we all know, that often more EU Whites are discriminated against in allocation of public housing, how could they possibly be more discriminated against, by law, in their PER CHILD ENTITLEMENTS; given all their shrieking, Press-savvy guardians of their interests ?

            This PER CHILD ENTITLEMENT, whether for Whites or the others, induces their ‘ fertility ‘. Their economics version of some company making an acquisition for yet greater profitability.

            There are three such, ever-growing profit-center-based
            ” families ” wandering about town.

            The probably common-law ‘ wife’s ‘ obesity can’t hide the fact, that she has yet another ‘ in the oven ‘. She pushes a stroller with two. Her ” husband ” is trailing by four paces guiding one more. She is on the cell, almost certainly describing their progress towards the supermarket to a similarly ‘ useless eater ‘: while Wanted Signs, for low or unskilled workers go unanswered.

            They are certainly in my thoughts while paying my municipal property-taxes, covering, in large part, local welfare inducements.

            Your [ 4 ] : Lawson is suspect for his word-smithing, but, in my opinion, not for his failure to differentiate the un-

  5. Kelly
    Kelly says:

    have you looked into the HEALTH PROBLEMS of mixed raced kids….AKA KALERGI KIDS?

    they have higher rates of depression , more suicide, drug/alcohol use…..you can’t get organ matches or bone marrow….they are 2 different DNA’s…..

    just research health issues of mixed raced people

    bone marrow problems for mixed raced ppl

    the Mongrel Kalergi Kids will die out in 1 to 2 generations, just like whites will, if we keep this up….

    once the cream is gone, the coffee goes black


  6. Ronald Christ
    Ronald Christ says:

    “The intermarriage of nations gradually extinguishes the characters, and is, despite any pretended philanthropy, not beneficial to mankind.” — Immanuel Kant

    So tell me again why the Occidental Observer sees itself as the standard bearer of the utterly bland and mongrelized concept of “Whiteness?”


    (Mod. Note: Is this comment yet another masque put on by Darth Seder, sticking its snarky beak into something it can’t comprehend? Commentariat: you decide.)

    • m
      m says:

      Here’s the thing with the Kant quote. The idea of “Whiteness” is a recent historical awareness. Hitherto, Europeans did not “identify” as White, but rather did they consider themselves to be an ethnicity–one first stemming from family/clan, and then merged into an aggregate nation (country might be a better word for it). That is what Kant was talking about. He was, in fine, writing for a different time. But you can’t end it, there.

      Too, common religion bound together the disparate White groups as far as was possible, but by the time of the Reformation, along with a rising secular liberalism that exploded in 1789, even the very idea of “nations” became subordinate to the concept of an overriding “humanity.” It was a humanity where each member possessed a metaphysical “equal right of man.” At the same time, however, we must keep in mind that this “humanity” was essentially a White thing.

      Moving on to about the middle of the 19th Century, with a greater awareness of non Whites within their midst (through explorations, colonization, slavery, etc.), many Whites came to mistakenly believe that non Whites (in the US this meant Africans), were just like them, only darker in hue. How they came to believe it would take too much time to explain, but once they found out that their imagination of how Blacks were was not the case in reality, Whites, for some mysterious reason, decided the reason for the discrepancy had to be their (White’s) own fault. It was twisted logic, but that’s how the masses came to see it.

      To partially rectify the situation, because Whites could not raise Blacks to their own level, the only thing left for Whites to do was to devolve down to the level of Blacks, and start mimicking them. This is what you see in our institutions, today, with AA hiring. All helped along by entertainment media Jews, who for their part are quite in favor this White reduction, or Africanization.

      However all that is, now that deracination has triumphed among Whites, a nascent awareness of racial commonality is happening. This is because ethnicity and nationality have been so badly deprecated by liberalism, that there is not much else left as a coherent option for White folks.

      Therefore, to cite Kant as some sort of argument against the racial awareness of “Whiteness” (if that is the argument) is wrongheaded. It is to be guilty of an anachronism. Kant could not have any idea of how Europe would work itself out by the 21st Century. At the same time, although “Whiteness” is the current rallying point, ethnicity as a species will likely resurface, once Whites reclaim themselves as a genus.

      • Irene
        Irene says:

        “…that non-Whites were just like them, just darker in hue. How they came to believe it would take too much time to explain…” In fact it takes just a few words to explain: Hundreds of years of universal Christian braibwashing telling people there is just one mankind, the big lie of monogenism.

      • Curmudgeon
        Curmudgeon says:

        Difficult to know exactly when Kant made that statement. However, you are correct about Kant writing for the time. It can be simplified even further. Other than royalty and the very wealthy, the overwhelming majority of the population would marry someone within a day’s walk of where they lived.

    • Charles Frey
      Charles Frey says:

      Snarky and of course beak are the operative words. If I were a professional profiler I would guess he contracted Ronald McDonald and Jesus Christ, as ” that other clown “, into one handle.

      Unless he were to start using up too much space here, under whatever ” better and improved ” handle, let him be; so he can’t complain the next time, perhaps to ADL HQ, or in an editorial in the Jerusalem Post, about our hypocrisy in fighting for an unfettered Net, yet censoring his unique, greater-than-Kant intellectual and pithy thought-process.
      [ Mommy, he broke my tricycle ! ].

    • TGD
      TGD says:

      Congratulations, Dr. Joyce, on penning a well researched and important study of a pressing problem impacting wide swaths of the white nations.

      I would point out that it is not just the lower socioeconomic classes of whites who marry or reproduce outside of their race. A couple of examples: Bill De Blasio, just reelected mayor of New York City. De Blasio’s birth name was Warren Wilhelm, Jr. De Blasio is of half German and half Italian extraction but chose his mother’s maiden name as his permanent surname. De Blasio married a black female and has 2 mixed race children.

      Mark Zuckerberg. One of the richest men in the world, Zuckerberg could have had his choice of the most beautiful and/or most intelligent euro Nordic, euro Slavic, euro Mediterranean or even Jewish female. Instead, he married a Chinese female and not even a pretty one. I suspect that Zuckerberg was so ashamed of his fair skin and blue eyes, that these traits had to be expunged from his offspring.

      I also want to call attention to “conservative” columnist Ann Coulter. If there were ever an ideal female specimen for reproduction of the white race, Ann would be it: tall (6 feet), blond/blue, ravishingly beautiful even in her mid fifties, super brilliant and aggressive/fearless. Ann Coulter never had children.

      So we have the upper class ultra liberal whites (or mixed white) who are ashamed of their race and choose to marry outside of it and career/goal oriented white females who either have no time for reproduction or feel that pregnancy is too primitive a state to submit themselves to.

      An ancient Indo European proverb applies:

      “From the corruption of women proceeds the confusion of races; from the confusion of races, the loss of memory;
      from the loss of memory, all understanding;
      and from this – all evil. “

      • pj
        pj says:

        Ann Coulter dated the half jew/half Puerto Rican Geraldo Rivera so she’s not a proud white. And Don’t forget the other white female conservative star Laura Ingraham who adopted a couple of Guats.

        • TGD
          TGD says:

          Ann Coulter dated the half jew/half Puerto Rican Geraldo Rivera so she’s not a proud white.

          Ann Coulter has been on the lonely front lines of the battle against the 3rd world colonization of the USA through her many books and columns. My gripe with Ann is that by not reproducing, her superior genetic inheritance is now lost. She also refuses to name the (((reals sponsors and backers))) of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, preferring to blame that law on Teddy Kennedy alone.

          Did you see that reference to Ann’s dating Geraldo Rivera on Wikipedia? Wikipedia is controlled by a cadre of San Francisco liberals and Jews, who edit the entries to disparage certain individuals who don’t conform to their Marxist bent. They would have left Ann’s name out of Wikipedia entirely (as they did with John “Birdman” Bryant who was deserving of an entry), but she is too well known (and popular) for that action. So they have Ann dating Jews, blacks, Hispanics, one eyed Venutians, barnyard animals and who knows what else.

          Fake entries and stay away from Wikipedia.

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      If this commenter is truly named Ronald Christ and is also the Ronald Christ who has run Lumen Books for many years, all I’ll say here and now is that I knew him when he taught English and World Lit at a Bronx college in the sixties.

      However openly dismissive and contemptuous of those who embrace the pro-white, pro-Christian, and pro-Western cause he may have now become, as evidenced by his comment, he was then a witty, charming man, a notable scholar, a memorable teacher, and an inspiration to many of his students. (My contact with him fell largely under the first two headings.)

      So if it is he, there is little else to say except corruptio optimi pessima.

  7. Whit
    Whit says:

    Literary social science at its best. But for me, I’m sorry to say, also more evidence my uncle fought on the wrong side in WWII.

  8. Ricky
    Ricky says:

    I wouldn’t put it past the Royal Family to play a little trick on the uniformed public… by faking Meghan’s pregnancy, and having her give birth to a white looking kid, making it seem like mixed race people are just like whites. What is shocking to me, is how ignorant a lot of white women are about how genetics work, and that the kid always winds up looking like the other race.

  9. Irene
    Irene says:

    It’s a quantum leap in status for an impoverished Polish woman in England to marry e.g. a Paki with a car a house. Moreover many Poles are heavely admixed with Tatars and other Asians which make them more flexible to engage in further race-mixing.

  10. Jason
    Jason says:


    I forgot to mention one point in my earlier comment. Since nobody seems to have mentioned the obvious, I would like to add this.

    This marriage of the Price to dark skinned Meghan Markle will fail. It might even be rigged, fixed, fake scam.

    Men are attracted to beauty–period. White skin color is the most attractive color and caucasian features are the best. So white women, on the average, are the most beautiful women on earth.

    This Prince is 10 almost on a scale of 1-10, and this girl is -5.

    So this marriage is fishy. It might even be fixed and a sham, by the Judaists, just like that Hollywood star marrying that Muslim woman.

    Once the Prince tries to make love with her and sees her ugly dark shriveled skin, he will be filled with disgust, not lust, and revulsion, and a light bulb will go off in his head–“Oh, God, what have I done”. Just like a man who ate worms after a night of drinking tequila.

    And then, he will leave her.

    Just wait and see.

    • wiggins
      wiggins says:

      Oh I dunno…..his ‘father’ had the hots for Sheila Ferguson of the Three Degrees back in the day.

      ‘I didn’t want to be a notch on his bedpost’: Three Degrees singer Sheila Ferguson

    • Irish Savant
      Irish Savant says:

      “Once the Prince tries to make love with her ” ????

      WTF,,,what planet are you on Jason? You think he’s waiting for his wedding night to ‘make love to her’?

  11. Junghans
    Junghans says:

    The picture of this race-mixing White goofer, and her welfare funded, negroid brood, pretty well foretells the “future” of White mankind, (and Western Civilization itself), if not stopped, and soon. She is a perfect reflection of a foolish White female who has been imprinted with a warped Jewish cultural template. This Jewish induced racial defilement is rapidly infecting the White gene pool. It is, of course, promoted by the (((enemy within))), as well as their deluded willing accomplices. Self abnegation and breeding down has been presented as something ‘hip & trendy’…for the gullible ‘Goyim’. After all, isn’t this ‘tony’ narrative constantly seen and extolled on TV, and in Weinstein’s, (and Jewry’s) glitzy Hollywood ‘movies’?

    Through their subversion and domination of White countries, Jews and their minions are able to encourage, program, and promote such hideous state sponsored dysgenics, and to thus normalize the abnormal. Stupid Whites, such as the twit pictured above, are breeding a Mulatto horde which will eventually decapitate White Civilization. And, to add insult to injury, we ambivalent, dumbed-down White folks are supposed to stand down, subsidize, and humbly accept this Jewish orchestrated White extinction!

    This devolutionary process has been going on for a long time, at least since the Jews founded the NAACP, Boas undermined anthropology, and other Jews began promoting Negro “music” and negroid cultural emulation in general.

    For those Whites seeking a deeper understanding of the racially destructive forces at work here, do read Dr. Elmer Pendell’s excellent book Why Civilizations Self-Destruct, as well as Richard Fuerle’s online book The Missing Link Walks Amongst Us.

  12. ilena
    ilena says:

    The royal family did not seem overly enthused about the engagement. What the Queen should do is step down, skip over Charles (who is old and ugly), and put William in as King. I don’t think they could make a better move right now. It would give the indigenous Brits and younger folks something to be proud of again.
    The USA has same problem; they have the same ‘ol Old people running things. Most of Trump’s team are old men over 70, who are sagging at the seams. It would be ok if these old people leading their nations were Wise….but they are not. Besides, in a High-Tech civilization, wisdom isn’t even discussed. And that does seem to be the desired direction most people, especially the young, want to move towards.

  13. Alt-Right.com
    Alt-Right.com says:

    Great article until the end. Meritocracy is a left-liberal term created in the 1950s which should not have any place in traditionalist discourse. What about the aristocratic racialists of the past and present, such as Arthur de Gobineau (creator of the Aryan race theory), Julius Evola, Lord Sudeley (president of the Traditional Britain Group). The upper classes of the past were racialists but they were too liberalised. These ideals could be revived. We need to keep out leftist socialist ideas from our movement as they are part of the Jewish revolutionary ethos. Pro upper class racialism would be ideal. I suppose in the modern sense something closer to libertarian white nationalism. Meritocracy is just a control mechanism of today’s elites in that it is designed to have as much turnover of elites as possible, making sure that they are ‘fluid’ as you say so they can continue to be led by their Jewish overlords.

    • Alt-Right.com
      Alt-Right.com says:

      It won’t let me edit my comment. What I meant to say was that the aristocracy used to be largely racialist until they were liberalised beginning around a century ago. You can still find racialist aristocrats like Lord Sudeley, but they are usually very old and have no political power.

    • T. J.
      T. J. says:

      “. . .something closer to libertarian white nationalism. . .”

      I will support nothing less. I literally jumped out of my chair when I read this.

      An area, with a fence. A property marker, not a border. White on inside with as much freedom as possible. The fence as a biological filter, keeping out genetic poison.

      Libertarianism makes sense only for Whites, and it is the only thing that makes sense for Whites. All socialism is born of idealism [Platonism] and is based on magical thought. A prerequisite of socialism is having an out-of-focus mind. . .

  14. pj
    pj says:

    The situation with the Polish mothers is actually not so bleak, I think the writer interpreted the stats incorrectly. The stats actually say 23% of the “rest” had non-white fathers but we see that it was most of the 21000 children born to Polish mothers had Polish fathers so at the very worst 23% of 10290 (49% of 21000-smallest majority of both polish parents, 51%-rounded to one percentage point) is 2367 mongrel babies but that is not likely since “most” surely means a higher percentage like 75% or even 95% and not 51% as in my example so 75% of 21000 is 15750 all-Polish babies which means 5250 are the “rest of which 23% or 1208 mongrel babies or 19792 white babies!!! Similarly, if “most” means 95% of 21000 then we have just 242 mongtrel offspring and 20758 white babies!!!

    “The Economist notes that “most of the 21,000 children born to Polish mothers in 2012 had Polish fathers; but of the rest, 23% had African or Asian fathers.” Remarkably then, almost one in four “Polish” births in Britain involve a Black or Indian/Pakistani father.”

    Note to Irene: I’m not Polish but I’ve seen many Polish people over the years and I could count on one hand the number who looked like they may have some Asian admixture

    • wiggins
      wiggins says:

      Agreed….the Polish women living in my part of the UK stick with fellow Poles. I’ve found the Poles to be racist in that department, although it must go on….

      • pj
        pj says:

        The Polish-Americans, women as well as men, here in Philly area are also very good, sticking to Polish and other European groups with just a few race-mixers who seem to get along better with Puerto Ricans then blacks, probably because they’re both Catholics. When you get further away into areas where there are few blacks and other non-Europeans like into the coal mountains it is much worse with a noticeable number of eastern European women race-mixing-probably from the media brainwashing and few real non-whites as a reference

  15. Deep North
    Deep North says:

    We know that European genes are recessive when whites race mix with non-whites. Look at pictures of mixed race children, they always look on-white. Isn’t it strange that white parents don’t find it troubling that their children don’t look like them? Most white women who miscegenate usually fall into these categories: obese, low self-esteem, low income, broken family and live/work or got to school with non-whites. VERY rarely will I see an attractive or intelligent white woman dating a black and I live in a diverse area. All of these factors are due to the 1960s Jewish ideological takeover of this country.

    Turn off the black dominated sportsball. Doesn’t look good when your white daughter observes you worshipping athletic black men. Move if your public schools have a large percentage of blacks. Do you want your white daughter being a cheerleader and dating one of the black football players?

    The Mulatto supermen that our elites fantasize over is an illusion. The reality will be thuggish black men impregnating fat low-status white women with the end result of the white mother raising the children.

    An even greater to whites is female careerism. White Millennial woman are throwing away their prime years attending endless college classes, traveling abroad or refusing to settle for any man unless he makes six figures. For every white female race- mixer, there are countless white females who are putting off having children to advance their career. That’s even if they have any children at all.

  16. Thomas Jones
    Thomas Jones says:

    Both Jessica Ennis and Megan Markle have White husbands and given the fact they are mulattos, their children will be more White than POC. But the West is now a civilization in which the one drop rule dominates. Moreover, people desperately search for that one drop of non-White blood because White ancestry is somehow ‘boring’ and ‘uncool.’

    Sounds like England is fast becoming a land of self-hating White minorities, anti-White black and brown minorities and a mixed majority that will desperately try to ignore any amount of European ancestry it has. England YES!


    (Mod. Note: “Thomas”, please rephrase this and tell TOO readers WHAT YOU MEAN. There’s more than a little “word magic” present, with ambiguous insinuation taking a lead role. What do you MEAN?)

  17. pterodactyl
    pterodactyl says:

    “make the lowest socio-economic strata of the White population particularly prone to entering into mixed relationships.”
    Also, it is female selection processes in action. If a woman in the underclass is offered a choice between two men to father her children – a maths teacher type or a black criminal, she will be much more impressed by the bling and cocky attitude of a black criminal than by the knowledge that the ‘boring’ maths teacher type will devote himself to the care of her children and provide for her. She knows that she will likely never see the criminal again after mating but would still always chose him. She will be more impressed by the black man’s sports car and loud stereo than by the maths teacher’s mortgage and steady job. There was a time when the wider group controlled such behaviour, but this control has gone. This behaviour in the West now actually rewarded, using our taxed wealth that the state now directs towards such types.

    It is actually a puzzle in terms of natural selection why women’s choice of partner is so often way off the mark and crude and does not seem to lead to sensible choices much of the time. We all know women who choose a violent man for partner who abuses her badly, then when finally free of him, go and choose another one just like him.

  18. Irish Savant
    Irish Savant says:

    “The Black population of Britain (including those described as “African/Caribbean/Black British”) is roughly 3% of the overall population of England and Wales. ”

    Looking at TV and other media you get the impression it’s closer to 50%.

    • Bramble
      Bramble says:

      Her pornographic past fits exactly with Dr. Joyce’s previous T.O.O. article on the Jewish obsession with obscenity, because Prince Harry’s arranged African bride is also Jewish, like the royal family, reportedly. Her real name is Rachel, and she was previously married to a Jewish businessman in a full Jewish wedding. She has also been doing “charity work” in Rwanda, where the ancient Jewish Tutsi=Cush elites continue to rule after persuading the world to help them crush the rebellion of their Hutu Christian servant caste, just as the world was persuaded to help Muslims crush the Christian Serbs in the Balkans. Western Jewish activists have been busy promoting Judaism in Africa, reminding certain descendants of the “Tribe of Ham” that they are Jewish and funding synagogues for them (though not allowing them to immigrate to Israel).

  19. Bramble
    Bramble says:

    You will not believe what I’m going to tell you, and may sneer and laugh, but here it is anyway:

    1) Prince Harry has been earmarked since birth to be forcibly married to an African, in order to put an African on the throne, as part of the Illuminati plan for the destruction of the English people first, as well as the Welsh, Scots & Irish later. The Africans have long been promised all the wealth and ceremonial titles of royalty and aristocracy, while the Indian Subcontinentals have been promised all the real power behind the scenes. The “service economy” means the Indigenous English will be the servants. When patriots ask why the Globalists would want to ruin their own countries, since they will have to live in them, the answer is: they won’t be here. They have already bought up huge estates in the secret Illuminati “hideout” country of “Andinia”, including European politicians like Merkel, who has bought land there near George Bush’s, the Queen, whose estate there is reportedly called “Monte Dinero”, and Hollywood celebrities. There they plan to watch “The Great Cull of the Goyim” in WW3 from the comfort and safety of their vast estates, which is why they are creating a barrier of “failed Marxist states” to the north of Andinia: Brazil & Venezuela, Colombia ruined by drug mafias, and of course Argentina’s economy was deliberately wrecked before to empty the countryside (like the Highland Clearances), leaving vast tracts of land to be bought up on the cheap. Please see “Zionists Set Their Sights on Patagonia”, for example.

    2) Since Prince Harry is fifth in line to the throne, perhaps some accident or terrorist attack will be staged, spiriting the royals away to Andinia, leaving the African spouse & offspring in charge.

    3) The reason so many European (=white) elites have been marrying into Third World ethnic groups is that they are REQUIRED to prove their “loyalty” by assisting the Illuminati plan in some way, to “set an example” to us plebs, openly supporting mass immigration, sodomy, or mixed marriage in the West (but not for Israel). They sneer at Christian morality and present themselves as “rebels against rules” and “freedom fighters”, but are chained and enslaved to obey the orders of their Illuminati masters, in exchange for their wealth and fame.

  20. Rosa
    Rosa says:

    I think the marriage will last no more than 2-3 years. She’s more or less a refined, attention seeking, gold digging whore who, as soon as all the hype will have subsided, will try and find a lover, another lover, etc.
    Stay tuned.

  21. Jon Hinch
    Jon Hinch says:

    The statement that one in four ” Polish ” births involves a black or Asian parent is factually incorrect Whoever wrote it should correct this bullshit statistic as it devalues what is otherwise an excellent article .

    ” The Economist notes that “most of the 21,000 children born to Polish mothers in 2012 had Polish fathers; but of the rest, 23% had African or Asian fathers.” This is probably true .

    The phrase of the REST ( possibly a mere 10 % of births to Polish mothers ) would mean 2.5 % of ” polish births ( 25 % of 10% ) . not the absurd statement in the article and quoted below .

    Remarkably then, almost one in four “Polish” births in Britain involve a Black or Indian/Pakistani father. Observably BS Poles are generally more proud of their white heritage than other whites .

  22. Armor
    Armor says:

    “our current leaders have “failed the pride” by essentially inviting rival factions to share in our resources and territory”

    I think the main resource is White people themselves. Our current leaders are pimps! At the same time, the behavior of the British royal family shows that the White upper class has been hit too. The race-replacement ideology isn’t a case of the White upper class trying to destroy the rest of the nation.

    “Ideas of nationhood (…) viewed as obstructions to the rush of ‘progress’ and globalized, usurious capital”

    They want to replace and blend us out of existence even though they can get more money out of us than out of any other people.

    “The mixed-race individual ultimately possesses a plurality of origins and consequently a loyalty to none.”

    ZOG wants us to see our own society as a disposable commodity, and our fellow people as pieces of meat. Mixed-race people are necessarily more likely than Whites to accept that view. They will tend to have little loyalty to the White race. Even so, they will agree with ZOG that they have a divine right to live among the last Whites.

    The news media think it is cruel to let Blacks live among other Blacks in Africa instead of inviting them all to Europe. We ourselves especially don’t like the idea of expelling half-Whites. We are afraid it may be too harsh. What if they are rejected by the full non-Whites? On the other hand, as White people, we had better not complain about becoming isolated and losing our own nations to the third-world invasion. A number of people have already been jailed for that.

    But we need to change our attitudes and stop feeling any loyalty to the half-Whites who live among us, or it will spell our end. As a whole, they are not going to show any loyalty to us. That is because their identity is not the same. We should not sacrifice our collective existence for them. And the English shouldn’t try to feel any connection to Meghan Markle either.

    The idea that we are all the same is often used to dismiss any opposition to race-replacement. People should be interchangeable, we are told. But what is the point of race-replacement if we are really the same? What is the point of race-mixing if races do not exist?

    Similarly, supporters of the third-world invasion say that we must ignore race and become civic nations. And it is hoped that race-blindness will facilitate the third-world invasion.

    Actually, those who say they can’t see race are lying. But in any case, their claim of not seeing race is really an argument for expelling them all to Congo. Prince Harry should move to Kinshasa with Markle. If they think all people and all societies have to be interchangeable and racially mixed, they cannot claim a special attachment to Britain.

    What matters most is not sovereignty over our own land, but over ourselves. We must stop working to finance our own racial displacement. Our nation is first of all our race. That’s why we need racial separation. The non-Whites who live among us are not part of us. We have nothing in common. So, expelling them is no big thing. It won’t break their hearts. They will only miss the money. They should be relocated either in their home countries, or in some multiracial territory set apart for that purpose in Africa.

    A comparison: Traditionally, there were different ways to use a knife to kill a pig. Some people used to aim at the heart. Others would first knock out the pig and then bleed it, using its last heartbeats to draw the blood out. As I see it, our own governments are using a similar technique. They make us participate in our own destruction.

    Civic nationalism is used to destroy ethnic nationalism, but it couldn’t even be promoted if not for the remnant of ethnic nationalism among White people. No one in Britain would be interested in hearing about Meghan Markle if the Brits no longer had any ethnic awareness.

    If ZOG succeeds in getting rid of us completely, it will have to give up civic nationalism and switch to hard dictatorship. That will be the only way to keep order.

Comments are closed.