What’s wrong with the Swedes — and so many other Whites?

/111 Comments/in , , /by

Another in the unending list of suicidal behavior by Swedes, this one by Cecilia Wilkström, a Member of the European Parliament for the center-right (!) Liberal Party, who is concerned about the recent drownings in the Mediterranean of Africans attempting to invade Europe. Note that, once again, the Holocaust is front and center stage as a paradigm requiring Westerners to engage in pathological altruism and embrace diversity and their own dispossession.

A Swedish MEP is stepping up a pan-European cross-party campaign for “legal and safe routes to Europe” for migrants in the wake of the latest Mediterranean boat disaster. Cecilia Wikström, has told The Local that EU member states are currently doing so little to help guarantee safe passage that future generations will compare their actions to Sweden “turning a blind eye” to the Holocaust.

The MEP – who is a long-time advocate of safer passage for refugees seeking safety in Europe – made headlines on Monday after she initially told Swedish television network SVT that future generations would liken the approach of EU governments to the policy of appeasement during the Second World War.

Speaking to The Local after the broadcast, the centre-right Liberal Party politician said: “I stand by what I was saying …. I think that my children and grandchildren are going to ask why more wasn’t done to help people running away from Isis, or violence in Eritrea or wherever, when we knew that people were dying in their thousands. [On the contrary, your children and grandchildren are going to wonder how you could be so naive and morally bankrupt as to make them a resented minority in an area that their people had dominated for thousands of years.] People will ask the same question they did after the war, ‘if you were aware, why didn’t you do something?’. In Sweden we allowed our railroads to be used to transfer Jews to Nazi death camps.” …

Some 11,000 migrants have been rescued since the middle of last week and current trends suggest last year’s total of 170,000 landing in Italy is likely to be exceeded in 2015.

Many travel onwards to other countries including Sweden, which takes in more asylum seekers per capita than any other EU nation.

Never mind the obvious point that the vast majority of Africans would love to live in Europe and that helping them enter will ensure that more come. Since the population of Africa is now over 1 billion and is projected to be 4.2 billion by the end of the century, tiny Sweden and the rest of Europe will have their hands full, particularly given that there is absolutely no foreseeable end to the poverty, oppression, and warfare that is endemic to the continent.

Read more

Il ruolo degli ebrei nella formazione della politica di immigrazione statunitense

/5 Comments/in /by

Capitolo 7
Oggi… gli immigrati – sopratutto gli immigrati ebrei – sembrano più americani di quanto possa sembrare [il WASP]. Sono loro le facce, le voci e le inflessioni di pensiero che ci sembrano più familiari, letteralmente d’istinto. [Il WASP] è l’eccentrico, lo straniero, il fossile. Gli diamo uno sguardo, un po’ attoniti, e ci chiediamo: “Dove sarà andato a finire?” Ce lo ricordiamo pallido, composto, vestito con cura, speditamente sicuro di sé. E lo percepiamo come un estraneo, un forestiero, una razza piuttosto nobile in via di estinzione… Ha cessato di essere caratteristico, e non ce ne siamo accorti fino a questo momento. Non in modo così enfatico, ad ogni modo. Read more

The United States Congress: Decorum Lost

/21 Comments/in /by

Lord, what would the Founders say if they read the letter from the Congressional Black Caucus to President Trump indicating their desire to “educate” him on all things relating to—what else—the Black community?  It is one thing to enfranchise a group in our representative government; but to be condescended to by them in this manner?  Gerrymandered districts have given us an abundance of diversity in the House of Representatives, and to a lesser extent, the Senate.  This sometimes results in a complete debacle of stumbling incompetence and embarrassing displays of semi-literacy.  But what is most offensive, these diverse Congress critters exhibit impudence and a breach of decorum, which again, makes one think back to the Founders with regret.

The Congressional Black Caucus rejected Trump’s offer for a second meeting because his initiatives would not meet their agenda.  They’re not used to not getting their way.  In fact, many protected groups are having a hard time adjusting to the Trump Era.

They chided our President: “We took advantage of every opportunity to educate you on the needs of the Black community and provide you with the information and solutions necessary to act on them in good faith.”  Never mind the futility of any “solution” to the needs of the Black community that has already been the recipient of trillions in federal aid with nothing to show for it. What strikes one is their refusal to attend a civil meeting when their demands are not immediately accommodated. Could it be that Trump is not buying into the minority grievance industry?   Read more

Science and the Suicide-Cult: The Irrationalism of Richard Dawkins

/53 Comments/in , , /by

The basis of science is the same as the basis of life: pattern-recognition. Even plants recognize patterns in the weather and the attacks of insects. The difference between scientists and trees, or scientists and sharks, is that scientists use reason and method, not instinct and other forms of biological automation.

Mathemodels of reality

Scientists try to identify and understand patterns in the world by creating patterns of their own: they perform experiments, they model and analyse data using mathematics, trying to create symbolic patterns that behave like real ones. Astronomy is the paradigm of this endeavour. There was sufficient regularity and permanence in the heavens for the ancients to predict lunar and solar eclipses. Ptolemy had an effective mathemodel of the solar system in the Second Century A.D.; Copernicus put forward a better one in 1543; Newton refined and expanded it in 1687. The power of Newton’s mathemodel was confirmed by the successful predictions it made: there were undiscovered planets out there. Neptune was mathematics before it became matter.

Stale pale male Charles Darwin

Biology proved much more difficult than astronomy and other branches of physics. The great pattern of evolution escaped the notice of Aristotle before Christ and Linnaeus long after, and when Darwin and Wallace recognized it in the nineteenth century, their description was linguistic, not mathematical. Their logic was good and their evidence substantial, but evolutionary biology didn’t become a proper science until it had a solid foundation of mathematics. Stale pale males like Ronald Fisher (1890–1962) and W.D. Hamilton (1936–2000) built mathemodels of biological systems that behaved like the real thing and made good predictions. Indeed, biology turned out to have a mathemodel of its own: the three-dimensional double helix of DNA carries a two-dimensional genetic code, which synthesizes proteins, evolves, and protects itself from error in ways that are illuminated by the human mathemodel of information theory.

Digital Dawkins

As Richard Dawkins puts it: “The essential difference between classical Darwinism (which we now understand could not have worked) and neo-Darwinism (which does) is that digital genetics has replaced analogue.” Dawkins will need no introduction. He’s much more famous than Fisher or Hamilton and a much better and clearer writer than his late rival, the Jewish Marxist Stephen Jay Gould (1941–2002). Dawkins’ line about Darwinism comes from the lecture “Science and Sensibility,” which is collected in a new book of his called Science in the Soul: Selected Writings of a Passionate Rationalist (Bantam Press 2017). I’ve enjoyed the book and it’s reminded me again both of what I admire about Dawkins and of what I deplore.

Powerful pattern: The DNA double helix

Read more

Kevin MacDonald Lecture 2: Social and Psychological Mechanisms of Group Cohesion (2005)

/in /by

“Collateral Damage” or “Targets of Opportunity”? Children of Divorce in the War of the Sexes

/40 Comments/in /by

No-fault divorce is a cultural artefact.  In other words, this “progressive” reform of family law is a product of human artifice.  Inevitably, any such cultural innovation will produce what economists soothingly describe as “negative externalities.”  The most toxic by-product of divorce law reform has been the concomitant breakdown of families with children.  This epidemic of dysfunctional families is not the unintended consequence of legal changes introduced for the best of reasons.  Did not conservatives predict that no-fault divorce would undermine the foundations of family life?  Did not churches remind secular reformers that the road to hell is paved with good intentions?

The fact is that some, perhaps all, of those who promoted the putative “democratization” of divorce intended to subvert the traditional institutions of marriage and family (particularly as practiced among white Anglo-Saxon Protestants).  Reform was marketed as a compassionate response to the personal plight of people “trapped” in loveless marriages.  Decades later, Andrew Root concedes that the ideal of love-based marriage did not create divorce, but insists that “it was the love-based union that democratized it.”[1]  But is marriage really about “love” in any recognizably Christian sense when the law enables any married person to sacrifice on the secular altar of personal happiness the health of society, perhaps even the future of Anglo-European civilization?  Neither legal prohibitions nor religious taboos, much less social shaming, constrain the selfishly unilateral repudiation of solemn matrimonial oaths.  Not surprisingly, the end of matrimony as a binding, irreversible covenant between husband and wife inaugurated an age of cascading, ever-more socially corrosive cultural revolutions.  Read more

Heart of Darkness: Hip Hop, Existentialist Theology, and the WASP Cult of the Other

/39 Comments/in , /by

Introduction

Hip-hop is another cultural artefact attracting the attention of Christians working with young people.  Back in January, at the five-day intensive university course for Youth Culture and Ministry, Andrew Root, a professor of youth ministry from Luther Seminary in Minneapolis, devoted an afternoon session to the subject.  His very effective audio-visual presentation reflected what I now recognize as the received understanding of hip-hop among progressive Black academics teaching at leading American universities.

Root left unexplored the ethno-political dimension of the hip-hop phenomenon.  My subsequent journey through the proudly ethnocentric work of several prominent Black hip-hop scholars took me to the front line of the contemporary cultural war on White America.  These Black writers describe hip-hop as a primary means by which Americans talk about race.  Debates about hip-hop, according to Tricia Rose, “stand in for discussion of significant social issues related to race, class, sexism, and Black culture.”  Commercial hip-hop provides “the fuel that propels public criticism of young Black people.”[2]  Strangely, however, White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Americans such as Andrew Root never ask themselves whether “the hip-hop community” (inclusive of rappers, fans, record companies, and well-connected professors) is friendly or hostile to young White people. 

Is Hip-Hop Good for Black People?

While properly repulsed by the violent and crudely sexist lyrics in contemporary commercial hip hop, Black scholars emphasize “the importance of craft, innovation, media literacy, and other practices that have made hip-hop such an enduring and inspiring force in the lives of young people, especially Black youth.”[3]  Some emphasize the ways in which the gangstas and guns, hustlers and pimps, the bitches and the hoes featured in hip-hop lyrics both reflect and contribute to “the socially and culturally toxic environment” of urban Black and Latino ghettoes.  Orlando Patterson, for example, laments “the fact that instead of artistically representing and transcending the realities of ghetto life, under the pressure of corporate packaging, elements of the street and prison culture have now been morphed into hip-hop, so much so that it is often difficult to differentiate the two.”[4]  Others celebrate the creativity of Black youth, from the “compelling aesthetic innovations of hip-hop’s founding figures” to the “countless variations” which they inspired “in the ensuing decades.”[5] Read more