Invasion, not integration

The mass immigration of the late 20th century is simply not the same as the European immigration of the 19th century. All social policies formulated on the basis of the false equivalence will not only fail, but lead to considerable bloodshed in the near future. The reason is that most of these immigrants have no desire to assimilate into Western society; they come not as supplicants, but conquerers.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has called on Turkish citizens living in France to apply for dual citizenship and be integrated with the French society, but also stay loyal to their roots, especially their language and religion, Hurriyet Daily News reported.

“There are 620,000 Turkish citizens living in France,” he said while addressing the Union of European Turkish Democrats, or UETD, in Lyon June 21. “Why don’t they apply for dual citizenship?” he asked….

Erdogan advised Turks in France not to forget about their French citizenship. “Feel proud of your identity. Particularly do not forget or let forget your language and beliefs. France needs people like you,” he said. “Do not become assimilated and let our kids be assimilated.”

Turkey is no more immune to the expansionary pressures of the Third Jihad than other Islamic nations. The West is still waiting for its Charles Martel 2.0, but the sooner Europe and America begin their Second Reconquistas, the less terrible it will be for the West and the West’s invaders alike. A better question would be: why are 620,00 Turks living in France instead of Turkey? That is a Turkish invasion more than five times larger than Sultan Suleiman I’s army of 120,000 that conquered Hungary and besieged Vienna.

The first step is to reject all amnesty and immigration “reform”. The second is to end dual-citizenship. And the third is to end birth citizenship. Then, and only then, can the invasions begin to be rolled back with the mass deportations that will make Eisenhower’s million-Mexican Operation Wetback look petty.

Meanwhile, in England, more than 500 “British” Muslims have traveled to Iraq to fight for the establishment of the global caliphate. If Baghdad falls, it won’t be long before they are fighting for it in Londonistan.

Reyaad Khan, 20, once dreamed of being the first Asian Prime Minister.
Now, he is pictured holding a Kalashnikov rifle alongside Islamist
militants, and is urging fellow Britons to join ISIS.
Former school friends said he was a studious pupil who loved
sports, but he is now one of 500 from the UK who have been radicalised
and have fled to the Middle East to fight.  

Given advancements in human genetics and the scientific understanding
of their implications, I think safe to assume that more than one
European nation will eventually adopt genetic-based citizenship
standards on much the same grounds that Erdogan is assuming that
Turkish-French dual citizens will remain Turkish in terms of language,
identity, and beliefs.

The coming tragedies and
atrocities will not be the fault of those who are determined to defend
their nations and cultures and keep them alive at any cost, but those
who blithely threw history and logic out the window in the name of the myth of human
equality.


The division cycle

It’s interesting to note that the pattern of growing nationalism and ethnic homogenization, reversing the trend of the last 45 years, is global:

Welcome to Myanmar, where tremendous democratic progress is being swamped by crimes against humanity toward the Rohingya, a much-resented Muslim minority in this Buddhist country. Budding democracy seems to aggravate the persecution, for ethnic cleansing of an unpopular minority appears to be a popular vote-getting strategy….

This narrative is absurd, as well as racist. A document as far back as 1799 refers to the Rohingya population here, and an 1826 report estimates that 30 percent of the population of this region was Muslim.

Since clashes in 2012 claimed more than 200 lives — including children hacked with machetes — the authorities have confined Rohingya to internment camps or their own villages. They are stripped of citizenship and cannot freely go to the market, to schools, to university, to hospitals. Tens of thousands have made desperate attempts to flee by boat, with many drowning along the way.

This year, the Myanmar authorities have cracked down even harder, making the situation worse. First, the government expelled Doctors Without Borders, which had been providing health care for the Rohingya. Then orchestrated mobs attacked the offices of humanitarian organizations, forcing them out.

As usual, Kristof fails to grasp the implications of “tremendous democratic progress” occurring simultaneously with ethnic cleansing. And it also demonstrates how the diversity dogma that has permitted more than 10 million Asian immigrants to enter the USA is very unlikely to lead to improved inter-tribal relations.

It’s hardly a mystery why the Burmese do not wish to permit any Muslim minority in their midst; one could ask Lee Rigby’s widow about the potential downside there. No one wants the jihad on their doorstep and the people of Myanmar are obviously exercising their rights of national self-determination and freedom of association.

Because Man is a social creature, mass immigration is the crime against humanity. Those who have advocated and permitted it are the parties who should be held primarily responsible for the eventual bloodshed.


The chaos flowers grow

A Statistical Portrait of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States 2012

There are now 40.7 million foreign-born residents living in the USA. This makes foreigners the most populous “state” in the country; the total population of California is only 38.3 million. The top ten source countries:

  1. Mexico: 11,489,387
  2. India: 1,974,305
  3. Philippines: 1,861,996
  4. China: 1,719,819
  5. Vietnam: 1,264,188
  6. El Salvador: 1,254,501
  7. Cuba: 1,114,864
  8. Korea: 1,105,653
  9. Dominican Republic: 960,211
  10. Guatamala: 880,869

Of course, this doesn’t even begin to account for the “American” citizens who are foreigners born in the United States. The actual number of full or partial Mexicans legally resident in the USA, for example, is 34 million. A few observations:

  • The idea of “integration” and a “melting pot” at this scale is laughable. None of the people from the top 10 countries have any political tradition that is even remotely compatible with the Common Law and the concept of limited government. Integration no longer exists as there is no longer a WASP-standard to which the foreigners can be integrated.
  • The tribal battles for the levers of resource distribution are going to heat up once the Chinese and Indian populations exceed 3 million. Both populations tend to be more intelligent than the average, they are just as self-confidently tribal as the Jews, and they are totally unsusceptible to the Holocaust card.
  • African-Americans are rapidly becoming irrelevant. The black-white lens through which all American politics has been viewed for the last 50 years is very nearly outdated. The Obama administration likely represents the high water mark for African-America.
  • The observed decline of the USA as the premier global economic and military power will speed up as the nation becomes increasingly fragmented and its average IQ declines.
  • Since deportation is no longer physical practical, the political entity will necessarily break apart. Some level of ethnic cleansing will likely take place. Civil war is unlikely, as the central government will be hard-pressed to maintain order in the Northeast corridor.

I understand it is impossible for most people to imagine change. Most people are linear thinkers who can only extrapolate the present into the future for infinity. But history is cyclical, and it should be obvious that we are already 25 years into a negative cycle in which political entities all over the world are either breaking up or are coming under intense tribal pressure to break apart. Forget the doomed EU, the old alliances of England and Scotland, and Aragon and Castile, both of which predate the existence of the USA, are in jeopardy.

The seeds of chaos were sown in 1965 with the Immigration Act of that year, the plants have sprouted and grown, and soon they will begin to bloom.


So much for the melting pot

Social science is supporting the obvious history-based logic and blowing apart the concept of multicultural utopia:

The U.S. Census Bureau projects that racial minority groups will make up a majority of the U.S. national population in 2042, effectively creating a so-called majority-minority nation. In four experiments, we explored how salience of such racial demographic shifts affects White Americans’ political-party leanings and expressed political ideology. Study 1 revealed that making California’s majority-minority shift salient led politically unaffiliated White Americans to lean more toward the Republican Party and express greater political conservatism. Studies 2, 3a, and 3b revealed that making the changing national racial demographics salient led White Americans (regardless of political affiliation) to endorse conservative policy positions more strongly. Moreover, the results implicate group-status threat as the mechanism underlying these effects. Taken together, this work suggests that the increasing diversity of the nation may engender a widening partisan divide.

Translation: the Republican Party should totally ignore its various outreach efforts and focus on becoming the Traditional White Party. And as we’ve seen in every liberal state to date, liberal whites have no desire to live in the political utopias their ideologies create and experience the logical consequences of their actions.

Which is precisely why they should not be permitted to vote when they relocate, otherwise they will promptly Californicate the places giving them refuge. Alternatively, they could be simply barred entry.

You may recall that I pointed out the inevitable move of European-Americans to the right years ago. It’s one thing to admire barbarian culture from afar, it’s another thing to see your hometown transformed into Mogadishu on the Mississippi.


An appeal to false consciousness

Such is Naomi Wolf’s dedication to the Unreality Principle that she can’t even consider the possibility that the increasing appeal of traditional nationalism and to women in the West is neither fascist nor false.

Many lower-income women in Western Europe today – often single parents working pink-collar ghetto jobs that leave them exhausted and without realistic hope of advancement – can reasonably enough feel a sense of nostalgia for past values and certainties. For them, the idealized vision of an earlier age, one in which social roles were intact and women’s traditional contribution supposedly valued, can be highly compelling.

And, of course, parties that promote such a vision promise women – including those habituated to second-class status at work and the bulk of the labor at home – that they are not just faceless atoms in the postmodern mass. Rather, you, the lowly clerical worker, are a “true” Danish, Norwegian, or French woman. You are an heiress to a noble heritage, and thus not only better than the mass of immigrants, but also part of something larger and more compelling than is implied by the cog status that a multiracial, secular society offers you.

The attraction of right-wing parties to women should be examined, not merely condemned. If a society does not offer individuals a community life that takes them beyond themselves, values only production and the bottom line, and opens itself to immigrants without asserting and cherishing what is special and valuable about Danish, Norwegian, or French culture, it is asking for trouble. For example, upholding the heritage of the Enlightenment and progressive social ideals does not require racism or pejorative treatment of other cultures; but politically correct curricula no longer even make the attempt to do so.

There are numerous errors in her essay. The first, and most important, is her failure to recognize that it is the multiculturalists who are both anti-democratic and fascist. It is the eurofascists of the EU and their corporatist allies in the USA who forcibly installed unelected governments in Greece and Italy, who attempted to deny the Russian nationalists in the Crimea their right to self-determination and they are now turning against the Ukrainian nationalists who supported their anti-democratic coup in Ukraine.

The second is her denial of the fact that there are, materially, true Danes, Norwegians, and French. She obviously subscribes to the bureaucratic myth of geographic relocation, where the simple act of traveling by plane magically transforms an individual into something he is not. As an expat myself, I continually find it amazing that people who would absolutely insist that I am an American will turn around and claim that Moroccans who happen to be in Holland or Turks who happen to be in Germany are actually Dutch or German simply because they have a piece of paper granting them state citizenship.

But the nation is not the state. In fact, the nation-state is generally considered to date back to about 1700 and the Treaty of Westphalia, so it should be obvious that making a national the citizen of a state belonging to a different nation does not change anything intrinsic about the national.

The third is that it is objectively obvious that the nationals of a state being invaded by hordes of immigrants are heirs to a materially better heritage than the invaders. The invaders want to live in the society created by that heritage; the national does not want to go and live in society created by the invaders’ heritage.

The fourth error is the failure to grasp that mass immigration will end. It is mathematically doomed. The secular advocates of The Invaded Society don’t seem to grasp that all of these various nations did not come into existence ex nihilo. They were created by the same force of natural human preferences that will soon bring a violent end to The Invaded Society.

It’s all very simple. British people want to remain British. They don’t want to be African, or Pakistani, or some sort of Afro-Britistani melange. The Dutch want to remain Dutch, they don’t want to become Moroccan. And neither black nor white Americans want to become Mexican. And they will not, even if that means wars will be fought and national borders will be redrawn.


Raise the minimum wage

Ann Coulter sees the connection between immigration and falling real wages, but she fails to see the obvious Republican strategy:

Why were wages so high until 1968? Because that’s when Teddy Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act kicked in, bringing in about a million immigrants a year, almost 90 percent of them unskilled workers from the Third World.

Our immigration policies massively redistribute wealth from the poorest Americans to the richest. It’s a basic law of economics that when the supply goes up, the price goes down. More workers means the price of their labor plummets.

Unfortunately, politicians spend a lot more time talking to rich employers than to working-class Americans. And the rich apparently have an insatiable appetite for cheap labor. Having artificially created a glut of low-wage workers, now Democrats want to artificially raise their wages.

It’s win-win-win-win-win for Democrats.

— Employees who get a higher minimum wage are grateful to the Democrats.

— Employees who lose their jobs because of the minimum wage hike are grateful to the Democrats for generous government handouts.

— Poor immigrants who need government benefits are grateful to the Democrats.

— American businesses enjoying the deluge of cheap labor are grateful to the Democrats.

— Democratic politicians guaranteed re-election by virtue of ethnic bloc voting are grateful to the Democrats.

Do Republicans have any principles at all? Why isn’t the GOP demanding an end to this dump of unskilled workers/Democratic voters on the country?

Democrats show how much they love the poor by importing a million more of them to America each year. But then they prevent the last batch of poor immigrants from getting decent, well-paying jobs by bringing in another million poor people the next year.

You want a higher minimum wage? Turn off the spigot of low-wage workers pouring in to the U.S. and it will rise on its own through the iron law of supply and demand. In response to the Democrats’ minimum wage proposal, Republicans should introduce a bill ending both legal and illegal immigration until the minimum wage rises naturally to $14 an hour.

No, in response to the Democrats’ minimum wage proposal, Republicans should introduce a bill that ends both legal and illegal immigration AND raises the minimum wage to $14 per hour. This will eliminate the incentive to businesses and families to continue importing cheap labor from south of the border. What is the point of hiring an illegal if you’ve got to pay him the same as you’d pay an American?

And what is the point of increasing the Gross National Product when the Nation is destroyed in the process?

However, it is interesting to see Miss Coulter finally abandon the artificial and irrelevant distinction between legal and illegal immigration that so many Republican commentators attempted to maintain for the last two decades. It doesn’t matter if they invade legally or illegally, in either case, they are here to replace the native population. Historically speaking, it didn’t matter to the Indians that the Pilgrims were here legally, or to the Romans that the Lombards weren’t breaking any laws by colonizing their northern territories.

Legally or illegally, they were still conquered and subjected to rule by the foreign invaders before largely fading into irrelevance.


Of gentrification and immigration

It astonishes me that many people who are capable of grasping the fact that gentrification changes neighborhoods nevertheless reject the idea that immigration changes countries. Spike Lee opines on changes in Brooklyn:

You can’t discover this! We been here. You just can’t come and bogart. There were brothers playing motherfuckin’ African drums in Mount Morris Park for 40 years and now they can’t do it anymore because the new inhabitants said the drums are loud. My father’s a great jazz musician. He bought a house in nineteen-motherfuckin’-sixty-eight, and the motherfuckin’ people moved in last year and called the cops on my father. He’s not — he doesn’t even play electric bass! It’s acoustic! We bought the motherfuckin’ house in nineteen-sixty-motherfuckin’-eight and now you call the cops? In 2013? Get the fuck outta here!

Nah. You can’t do that. You can’t just come in the neighborhood and start bogarting and say, like you’re motherfuckin’ Columbus and kill off the Native Americans. Or what they do in Brazil, what they did to the indigenous people. You have to come with respect. There’s a code. There’s people.

You can’t just — here’s another thing: When Michael Jackson died they wanted to have a party for him in motherfuckin’ Fort Greene Park and all of a sudden the white people in Fort Greene said, “Wait a minute! We can’t have black people having a party for Michael Jackson to celebrate his life. Who’s coming to the neighborhood? They’re gonna leave lots of garbage.” Garbage? Have you seen Fort Greene Park in the morning? It’s like the motherfuckin’ Westminster Dog Show. There’s 20,000 dogs running around. Whoa. So we had to move it to Prospect Park!

I mean, they just move in the neighborhood. You just can’t come in the neighborhood. I’m for democracy and letting everybody live but you gotta have some respect. You can’t just come in when people have a culture that’s been laid down for generations and you come in and now shit gotta change because you’re here? Get the fuck outta here. Can’t do that!

And then! Whoa whoa whoa. And then! So you’re talking about the people’s property change? But what about the people who are renting? They can’t afford it anymore! You can’t afford it. People want live in Fort Greene. People wanna live in Clinton Hill. The Lower East Side, they move to Williamsburg, they can’t even afford fuckin’, motherfuckin’ Williamsburg now because of motherfuckin’ hipsters.

Gentrification, immigration, and colonization are all exactly the same thing. They are the replacement of the native population by invaders. Whether this happens peacefully or not is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things; the consequences are the same.


The abolition of America

Norway is already showing signs of following Switzerland’s lead to shut down the economic and societal castastrophe of mass immigration.

Mazyar Keshvari, immigration policy spokesman for the
anti-immigration Progress Party, told the VG newspaper that he believed
Norway should follow Switzerland’s example. “Norway should also have a referendum on immigration,” he said. “I am
quite sure that there is majority support for tightening immigration
across Norway’s political parties. The polls show that.”

No doubt this is one reason why. It simply IS NOT TRUE that mass immigration is good for the economy. It is an absolute lie.

The report, Sustainable Immigration, was put together by some of the party’s most vehemently anti-Islamic and anti-immigration figures, such as deputy leader Per Sandberg, and Oslo politician Christian Tybring-Gjedde. It cites figures that show that each non-Western immigrant costs the equivalent of 42 years of an average Norwegian’s tax payments, and calls for immigration from non-Western countries to be sharply reduced from from close to 20,000 a year to about 1,500 a year.

Meanwhile, the most retarded “economist” on the planet, an evil little man who makes Paul Krugman look like a paragon of coherency and decency, managed to further embarrass himself in response to the Swiss vote:

The Swiss just passed a referendum to restrict immigration from the EU.  Tyler thinks this shows that open borders is a hopeless cause.  When immigration gets too high, public opinion naturally turns against immigration.

“In my view immigration has gone well for Switzerland, both economically and culturally, and I am sorry to see this happen, even apart from the fact that it may cause a crisis in their relations with the European Union.  That said, you can take 27% as a kind of benchmark for the limits of immigration in most or all of today’s wealthy countries.  I believe that as you approach a number in that range, you get a backlash.”

But there’s a major problem with Tyler’s story: Swiss anti-immigration voting was highest in the places with the least immigrants!  This is no fluke.  In the U.S., anti-immigration sentiment is highest in the states with the least immigration – even if you assume that 100% of immigrants are pro-immigration.

The natural inference to draw, then, is the opposite of Tyler’s: The main hurdle to further immigration is insufficient immigration.  If countries could just get over the hump of status quo bias, anti-immigration attitudes would become as socially unacceptable as domestic racism.  Instead of coddling nativism with gradualism, we can, should, and must peacefully destroy nativism with abolitionism.

This is Hitlerian logic and it makes clear the evil objectives of the pro-immigrationists like Caplan. Switzerland already has a non-native born population pushing 30 percent, most of which lives around Zurich or in the French-speaking cantons. It is those previously naturalized immigrants, combined with the international business class, that supported open immigration, just as a pair of Jewish and Irish third-generation immigrants were primarily responsible for pushing the 1965 Hart-Cellar Act that demolished the USA’s demographics and made the dissolution of the union inevitable.

It’s the Denny Green syndrome writ large. Just as women always want to hire more women and blacks always want to bring in more blacks, immigrants always want to bring in more immigrants to make themselves feel more at home. I see this all the time, in fact, I’m one of the very few expats who doesn’t primarily socialize with people from my home country.

The voting phenomenon Caplan is observing is simply the national equivalent of “white flight”, and what he is advocating is nothing less than the invasion and demographic destruction of European nations.


Europe’s tide turns

Switzerland rejects the EU-imposed free movement of peoples required by Shengen:

Voters in Switzerland have
narrowly approved a rightwing proposal to curb immigration. It imposes
limits on the number of foreigners allowed in and may signal an end to
the country’s free movement accord with the European Union. The initiative was approved by just 50.3% of the votes and was passed by a majority of cantons.

The
move by the Swiss People’s Party – known for its anti-foreigner and
anti-EU agenda – will see the reintroduction of quotas, as well as a
national preference when filling job vacancies and restrictions of
immigrants’ rights to social benefits.

Critically, it also
stipulates that Switzerland will have to renegotiate its bilateral
accord with the EU on the free movement of people within three years or
revoke it. This in turn could threaten other bilateral agreements with
the EU.

This should mark the high water mark for mass immigration madness and perhaps the much needed reawakening of nationalism across the West as well. Switzerland is an excellent barometer in this regard because it is the only Western nation where the people have the ability to democratically overrule its representative leadership and the political games that allow the Western governments to ignore the democratic will of the people.


The end of multiculturalism in Canada

George Jonas castigates the new type of Canadian immigrant: the cultural invader:

Canada, along with some other great immigrant societies, such as America or Australia, evolved into a coherent whole by welcoming new arrivals from the four corners of the Earth, offering them a chance to become a Canadian, American or Australian as they desired or managed to be, and then rewarding them according to how close they’ve come. In the process immigrants suffered casualties, but generally enriched the societies that enriched them, often within a single generation.

The assumption, unspoken but taken for granted until the 1960s, was that immigration was beneficial as long as it was designed to serve the interests of the host society first. The immigrant’s own interests would be served by the opportunity to eventually join the host society. For this to have any meaning, of course, the existence and desirability of a host nationality had to be taken for granted. If there had been no “Americans” or “Canadians,” there would have been nothing to join. Inherent in the American model of a “melting pot” as well as the fussier Canadian model of a “cultural mosaic” was the pre-existence of a nation to which the immigrant was applying to belong.

Until recent times, the West has been spoiled by the loyalty of immigrants, even from hostile regions or cultures…. It was in the past 40 years that the immigrant of dubious loyalty
emerged, followed by the disloyal native-born, sometimes of immigrant
ancestry, sometimes of Islamic conversion. The new immigrant seemed
ready to share the West’s wealth but not its values.

In many ways he
resembled an invader more than a settler or an asylum-seeker. Instead of
making efforts to assimilate, the invader demanded changes in the host
country’s culture. He called on society to accommodate his linguistic or
religious requirements. In 1985, a Sikh CNR railway worker refused to
exchange his turban for a regulation hard hat. This was innocuous
enough, but in 1991, less innocuously, a newly appointed Toronto police
board commissioner of Asian extraction declined to take the traditional
oath to the Queen.

Those who uphold the values of the traditional West should not despair. The Ummayids who immigrated to Spain and imported their cultural values there were eventually expelled after 781 years of Reconquista. The West will win here too, but not until a sufficient number of Westerners realize that there will be no peace and their way of life cannot survive until the immigrants are returned home to their native lands.

Consider how small, in comparison to the present number of invaders, the earlier immigration was. And notice that the people invaded at the time also did not realize it was an invasion that was taking place around them:


In 711 a raiding force from North Africa approximately 1,700-strong led by Tariq Ibn Ziyad landed south of present-day Spain. Ibn Abd-el-Hakem reports, one and a half centuries later, that “the people of Andalus did not observe them, thinking that the vessels crossing and recrossing were similar to the trading vessels which for their benefit plied backwards and forwards.”  Tariq’s forces were thence reinforced by those of his superior, the wali Musa ibn Nusair, and both went on to take control of most of Iberia with an army estimated at approximately 10,000–15,000 combatants.