← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Faust
Thread ID: 10106 | Posts: 16 | Started: 2003-09-29
2003-09-29 02:55 | User Profile
Bad Schools, Immigration, And The Great Middle-Class Massacre
By Steve Sailer
What do homebuyers mean when they say "bad schools?ââ¬Â Occasionally, they do have highly specific criticisms: the principal might be disorganized, the teachers unmotivated, the textbooks incomprehensible. Overwhelmingly, though, Americans use the term "bad schools" to meanââ¬âââ¬Åbad students.ââ¬Â
[QUOTE]Bad Schools, Immigration, And The Great Middle-Class Massacre
By Steve Sailer
Huge numbers of mothers entered the labor force over the last few decades. And the inflation-adjusted price of food, clothing, appliances, electronics etc. dropped sharply. So how come we don't feel like we've got a lot more discretionary income than our single-income parents had?
A wise and readable new public policy book called The Two-Income Trap: Why Middle-Class Mothers and Fathers Are Going Broke provides a simple answer:
We don't have more discretionary income than our single-income parents had.
The mother and daughter team of Harvard Law professor Elizabeth Warren and former McKinsey consultant Amelia Warren Tyagi explain:
"The average two-income family earns far more today than did the single-breadwinner family of a generation ago. And yet, once they have paid the mortgage, the car payments, the taxes, the health insurance, and the day-care bills, today's dual-income families have less discretionaryââ¬âand less money to put away for a rainy dayââ¬âthan the single-income family of a generation ago."
The two authors note:
"The brunt of the price increases has fallen on families with children. Data from the Federal Reserve show that the median home value for the average childless individual increased by 23 percent between 1983 and 1998 ââ¬Â¦ (adjusted for inflation). For married couples with children, however, housing prices shot up 79 percentââ¬âmore than three times faster."
For example, in August, the median price of a single-family home in pleasant, suburban Ventura County west of Los Angeles was $480,000.
Many economists shrug that this vast rise in prices increases Americans' net worth. "But that net worth isn't worth anything," the two women point out, "unless a family plans to sell its home and live in a cave, because the next house the family buys would carry a similarly outrageous price tag."
Further, this housing cost rise transfers hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth from young families to aged empty-nestersââ¬âwhich probably isn't the most sensible way to run a society if the welfare of the next generation is a high priority.
Warren and Tyagi made an impressive survey of 2200 families that declared bankruptcy. "Our study showed that married couples with children are more than twice as likely to file for bankruptcy as their childless counterparts," they write. This will come as no surprise to married couples with children. Even more striking: "This year more people will declare themselves bankrupt than will suffer a heart attack."
The biggest single cause of this growing financial stress on middle-income parents: the breakdown of much of the public education system. As Warren and Tyagi note,
"Even as millions of mothers marched into the workforce, savings declined, and not, as we will show, because families were frittering away their paychecks on toys for themselves or their children. Instead, families were swept up in a bidding war, competing furiously with one another for their most important possession: a house in a decent school districtââ¬Â¦ "
Warren and Tyagi report: "A study conducted in Fresno ââ¬Â¦ found that, for similar homes, school quality was the single most important determinant of neighborhood prices ââ¬Â¦"
They go on to say:
ââ¬ÅBad schools impose indirectââ¬âbut hugeââ¬âcosts on millions of middle-class families. In their desperate rush to save their children from failing schools, families are literally spending themselves into bankruptcy."
But what causes "bad schoolsââ¬Â?
Here the authors play it coy. I can hardly blame them. Almost everybody uses "bad schools" as a euphemism. Who wants to become a pariah for telling the truth?
And for a book about the economics and law of personal bankruptcy, The Two-Income Trap is full of well-crafted zingers. I came away just plain liking these two ladies and their down-to-earth approach based on both formal data and the realities of daily life.
Still, euphemisms get in the way of solutions. So I'm going to rush in where W&T fear to tread. Iââ¬â¢m going to explain exactly what Americans mean by the term "bad schools"ââ¬âand the one crucial thing that can done be to slow their decline.
Iââ¬â¢m a reductionist. I believe in simple explanations and simple solutions. The more conceptual moving parts an idea requires, the more likely it is to fail. This insight has been the basis of Western science going back to the English monk William of Ockham in the 14th Century.
If you want to read a highbrow vindication of reductionism, check out Edward O. Wilson's Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. Or just remember "KISSââ¬âKeep It Simple, Stupid."
What do homebuyers mean when they say "bad schools?ââ¬Â Occasionally, they do have highly specific criticisms: the principal might be disorganized, the teachers unmotivated, the textbooks incomprehensible. Overwhelmingly, though, Americans use the term "bad schools" to meanââ¬âââ¬Åbad students.ââ¬Â
That's the single most important key to the "two-income trap." Parents spend huge amounts of money to keep their children away from dim and dangerous fellow students.
Maybe Americans are wrong, on factual or moral grounds, to do this. But it's how they behave.
What, then, should we do?
W&T propose a statewide voucher system. You won't have to live in an expensive municipality to send your kids to school there. You could live in South Central LA and send your kids to school in Beverly Hills!
The problem with this idea, of course, is that Beverly Hills schools would no longer be Beverly Hills schools if they were full of students from South Central.
If we eliminated the legal right of suburbs like Beverly Hills to protect their residents' children from bad, big city students, parents who could afford it would just flee to remote exurbsââ¬âto defend their children through sheer distance.
No, the fundamental problem with America's schools today is the sheer number of bad students.
So let me propose one crass but extremely simple way to at least lessen the harm done in the future:
Let's stop importing bad students from the rest of the world.
America has all the bad students it needs right now.
Letââ¬â¢s use the total Hispanic student population as a rough proxy for immigration to show how the government is worsening the two-income trap. Hispanic 12th graders averaged 3.8 grade levels behind whites in reading on the 2002 National Assessment of Educational Progress test. (Blacks were about another grade back.) And thatââ¬â¢s even though the Hispanic figure is skewed upward by the higher Latino dropout rateââ¬â12th graders who arenââ¬â¢t in school donââ¬â¢t get tested.
The new SAT results paint a very similar picture. Over the last decade, white students' scores are up 26 points (that would be about 0.12 standard deviations) to 1063. Asiansââ¬âwho are, in effect, more carefully selected immigrantsââ¬âare up an impressive 41 points to 1083. (These aren't huge improvements, and most of the gains are in Math rather than Verbal, but they're better than a sharp stick in the eye.)
Some Hispanics are improving too. The small Puerto Rican group, which did most of its immigrating to America one or two generations ago, is up 26 to 909. But thatââ¬â¢s still only 85% of the white average.
And the trend among the two recent immigrant Hispanic groups is in the wrong direction. Mexican-Americans are down 5 to 905. "Other Hispanics" are down 2 to 921. (See page 11 of this 820k PDF. All these scores, whether from 1993 or 2003, use the easier scoring system introduced in 1995.)
Since blacks were up 7 points to 857, the gap between whites and Mexican-Americans is now over three-quarters as large (77%) as the notorious gap between whites and blacks.
The government is importing uneducated foreigners into Americaââ¬âand the middle class is driving itself to the brink of bankruptcy to keep its children away from them.
To the tally for Americaââ¬â¢s post-1965 Immigration Disaster, we can add the Bad School Squeezeââ¬âand the Great Middle Class Massacre.
[Steve Sailer [email him], is founder of the Human Biodiversity Institute and movie critic for UPI. His website [url]www.iSteve.com[/url] features site-exclusive commentaries.]
If you want to email or print out, format by clicking on this permanent URL: [url]http://www.vdare.com/sailer/two_incomes.htm[/url]
**[/QUOTE]
2003-09-29 23:23 | User Profile
This is horse-puckey, and I told him so in an e-mail. It kind of got off-tangent (because there are so many questionable assumptions in it), but trust me, a new car is not $35 or 40,000 because of the search for good schools. Your electric bill is not $240 a month, and your phone bill isn't $60 before you make a single call, because Joe & Jane Focaccia-Bread are driving it up looking for a middle school that teaches PhotoShop classes.
2003-09-29 23:47 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]This is horse-puckey, and I told him so in an e-mail. It kind of got off-tangent (because there are so many questionable assumptions in it), but trust me, a new car is not $35 or 40,000 because of the search for good schools. Your electric bill is not $240 a month, and your phone bill isn't $60 before you make a single call, because Joe & Jane Focaccia-Bread are driving it up looking for a middle school that teaches PhotoShop classes.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps his economic assumptions pursuant to school and the effect on the overall earning power of the great middle class are overreaching. But there is no doubt that mass third world immigration is taxing even destroying in some parts of the country, schools, medical care, and virtually all other social services which should be, by rights, exclusive to citizens.
But with respect to :[QUOTE]Americans use the term "bad schools" to meanââ¬âââ¬Åbad students.ââ¬Â [/QUOTE]
He's right on the money....I'm quite sure you would not even consider sending your son or daughter to a school in Santa Ana, CA or Douglas, AZ.
2003-09-30 01:46 | User Profile
Here's my note to Sailer:
[B]Wake up, Steve; you obfuscate with the best of em. "Bad students" means "violent, criminal savages" and not "low SAT scores". It means BAD STUDENTS... in the old fire-and-brimstone connotation of 'bad'.
Joe & Jane Frontporch aren't afraid that proximity to Rajee and Bok-Choy will result in lower test scores for their own progeny: they may be venal but they're not stupid. Indeed, they can read the spray-paint on the municipal wall quite clearly, and they're already alarmed that the omnipresent media-culture is luring little Johnny & Janie into Jamaalhood almost from the cradle these days - and they can't think of any other goddamn way to halt the process other than running as far from Jamaal as their bank accounts will take them. The reason they fear large Hispanic concentrations is due to so many Hispanics living cheek-by-jowl with inner-city blacks for so long that - like milk in the icebox over a protracted period of time - the violence, lawlessness and 'let-Whitey-pick-up-the-tab' sense of entitlement inculcated into blacks has become the defacto worldview/value system of far too many Hispanics as well. Blacks may react with rage at 'racist' demands that they speak proper English but, by God, they all know enough Spanish to get by, it seems. And Pablo in turn has picked up the neat trick of crying 'victim' while showing you his teeth like a Doberman's grin simultaneously. Indeed, 90% of our immigration problem comes from our publicly offering crocodile tears and a free pass for dependance & criminality towards an entirely home-grown racial group. And immigrants of color aren't all that dumb either: sooner or later, they all catch on to the correct protocol for Workin' Whitey.
The reason Mr & Mrs Frontporch won't say any of this publicly lies again with the media. Arson, rape, drug dealing, kidnapping and murder are one thing, it seems, but these days they pale on the transgression chart to even appearing as if you might be thinking the "n-word". Same goes for the increasing public antipathy towards all foreigners, including Asians & those from the Indian subcontinent: the media's cowardice in clearly stating who's who and what's what (in the name of tolerance and fairness) has resulted in a kind of kneejerk lumping together of lawful and productive aliens with savages and criminals. It's just easier to point to a monolithic 'them' if that's as far as the Media, Academia and the Federal Government will allow you to speak your mind without serious penalty time accruing. End of story. One part of it, anyway.
Now explain to me how the search for good schools explains how that $480,000 house, that $40,000 car and even that $300 utility bill were less than one fifth of that when the two-income family trend really got going in the late 1970s. Hey, I live in filth-ridden NYC - nobody's idea of "Good School" Central - and trust me, you can't stand on a street corner here contemplating your shoelaces without it costing you an hourly charge, an annual licensing fee and a few summonses besides.
It seems to me that you're reaching, not just for an easy answer, but a [I]politically tenable [/I] easy answer, when the obvious and ACCURATE answer is not only just as easy, but plopped right in front of your nose! Whites are - more and more - tacitly subscribing to a policy that grudgingly accepts the ubiquitous presence of nonwhite aliens. It doesn't mean they're happy about it....but [B]anything's better than blacks[/B]. And "anybody but blacks" is the animating principle behind much of white behavior (although the verboten nature of SAYING SO - complete with social, civil and legal penalties, many quite frightening - makes it easy for the wise old heads of public commentary to frame the issue in any number of deceitful and dishonest terms.) Because should a Hindu crime wave explode tomorrow in Terre Haute, there's still the possibility it could be openly referred to as one. But what's the percentage in being stuck in a situation where your odds of having physical harm befall you and your loved ones (along with the need to accept drastically lower standards of civil behavior to better blend in to your environment) sharply increase, manacled to the certainty that you'll be required to apologize to your predators for taking offense at it - let alone taking steps to remedy the situation?
"Good schools" are a small part of the equation. Joe & Jane could live with community-college educations for their kids. It's something, at least, and provides some kind of foothold for further self-improvement. But hearing their 10-year-old pop off strings of "bitch-ass motherf*cker"s with little or no prompting gives them much greater pause. Watching their children absorb self-hatred of their whiteness (if they intend to get straight A's, that is) and knowing far more about George Washington Carver than George Washington only deepens their malaise and their quiet desperation. If we still had a free press and a Constitution protecting it, you might know that. But then, I suspect you know it anyway.[/B]
Sailer's response:
[I]Right. But the "Anybody but blacks" theory, while popular, would only make practical sense if the U.S. was exchanging blacks for Hispanics, instead of just adding Hispanics on top of blacks. The imprisonment rate for Hispanics is only 41% of the African-American rate, but it's 3.7 times the white rate (and probably ten times the Asian rate). Eventually, there'll be 2.4 times as many Hispanics as African-Americans, and then there will be just as many Hispanic felons as black felons. Why do we want to speed this up?[/I]
Me, I see this as semantic three card monte. There is no divorcing the immigration threat from the third world with our cowardice and capitulation towards our home grown predators. Because if we (responsibly and correctly) lowered the boom on parasitic/violent/expensive/utterly-useless 'black culture', two things would happen: 1. Fewer third-worlders would SEEK to come here, and 2. those who did would be more productive, and quite likely future assets to the republic. (As I suspect Sailer is Jewish and didn't want to hand him the broom to dismiss my arguments, I set aside the question of WHO has been agitating for, and directing, the current mess.)
I'm obviously not in favor of 'let-em-all-in' immigration, but allowing untrammelled immigration when we can't even demand civil behavior and a modicum of productivity from our own domestic parasites is a recipe for disaster. Don't lecture me about the 'cost' of immigration when you take pains to avoid entirely the 'cost' of subsidizing barbaric illiterates out of fear they'll get pissed off enough to burn a few more cities to the ground.
2003-09-30 03:59 | User Profile
Il Ragno, this crap is vintage Sailer. You'll never get him to be "on the mark" in a manner of speaking. I live a stone's throw from Sailer, went to UCLA at about the same time. I've caught many a chunk of bs in several of his articles when referring to what it was like to go to UCLA (example: I didn't run into whites scared of Asians in science courses - the absolute highest scores in most science classes were by individual whites, but there were a lot of Asians in the classes though, compared to other groups), what's going on with the middle class, etc. He knows, and pokes around the edges of reality when he posts his drivel. Maybe he hopes people can take a look and use his laments as a stepping stone toward the hard truth(s). But I don't think so. Once in a while he comes out with something valid, but it's best to ignore him. He ass kisses certain 'minorities' as an insurance policy. "See? I said so and so is better than whitey!"
As to Vdare opening up on the "forbidden topic" - I still have a copy of an e-mail sent to me by Brimelow, several years ago. Well before I stumbled across the SF Forum, and then on to OD. He KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON. He didn't come out and state anything that could be ... used against him. But his answers to my questions, and charges, spelled it out. He's been biding his time, and will continue to let the door creep open, bit by bit.
2003-09-30 09:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I still have a copy of an e-mail sent to me by Brimelow, several years ago. Well before I stumbled across the SF Forum, and then on to OD. He KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON. He didn't come out and state anything that could be ... used against him. But his answers to my questions, and charges, spelled it out.[/QUOTE]
I never doubted it. In fact, let's go one step further and identify both the symptom and the disease - every single member of the media, the elite, the chattering classes, or however you wanna phrase it - EVERY ONE OF THEM - know what the deal is, and who benefits by the deal going down.
And the ones who know but keep silent for self-preservation know they're being casually monitored (but monitored nonetheless) by those who enforce that silence for purposes of a separate agenda the rest of us will never divvy up with them.
EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM. Not just Brimelow and Francis and Buchanan and Horowitz and Podhoretz and Foxman, but the arts and crafts editor in Fort Wayne; the local weatherman in Tacoma; the radio traffic reporter and the bridge columnist and the alderman and the linotype operator. [I]ALL of them know the what, the why and the who.[/I]
I think that's what gets me so friggin' crazed at the supposed trad-cons who bash Linder, sniffing at his crude colloquialisms, or the Birdman-bashers who take umbrage at his porn fetish, or the 'pragmatists' who tsk-tsk at David Irving's so-called 'self-aggrandizement'.
They disdain honest men who go half-crazy at the [I]politesse [/I] required (by who?) to maintain a public platform. I don't doubt that the Linders and Irvings, etc, [B]are[/B] partly mad. Who [I]wouldn't [/I] go bugf*ck in a world where 'conservatism' is defined as having the good taste to die passively in a raging inferno, eyeballs bursting from the thousand-degree heat, rather than commit the faux pas of screaming 'fire' in the loudest voice possible?
2003-09-30 16:34 | User Profile
It is good to be on the same side as you, Il Ragno.
To apply Linderism to your metaphor: the only way to escape the engulfing flames is through the Jew.
I would say "until the limp-wristed intellectuals of the world realize this...," but like you said, they DO realize this. To put it in a better fashion, until the limp-wristed intellectuals grow some balls our race is screwed. As Aristotle would say, the virtue lies somewhere in the mean of these two extremes. Be a thinker and a warrior - and fight the true enemy, the Jew. Time to stop rattling the saber at abstract, imaginary, invisible foes, while simultaneously using some political correctness as your plate armor.
We went from a race of warriors during the Pax Romana to a race of warrior-thinkers during the Renaissance, to a race of thinkers during the Enlightenment, to a race of dull, pacified sheep being led to the slaughter following World War II. Maybe we are a Spenglerian biological entity that is rotting away at the core and slowly dying. Or maybe it is time to identify the disease that is causing our death: Juden.
2003-10-02 07:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Sailer's response:
Right. But the "Anybody but blacks" theory, while popular, would only make practical sense if the U.S. was exchanging blacks for Hispanics, instead of just adding Hispanics on top of blacks. The imprisonment rate for Hispanics is only 41% of the African-American rate, but it's 3.7 times the white rate (and probably ten times the Asian rate). Eventually, there'll be 2.4 times as many Hispanics as African-Americans, and then there will be just as many Hispanic felons as black felons. Why do we want to speed this up?[/QUOTE]
Il Ragno: thank you for another brilliant bit of writing. You've really been outdoing yourself lately.
Here are my two cents.
I think that our elites are also very sick of Negroes and their lowlife problems, and they're hoping that Mexicans will be a sort of "new and improved" underclass. You know, folks to trim the hedges and bus the tables but who lack the intellect to challenge their children in their professional niche in the future. Good, hard working proles who are happy with their lot. A good, stable brown working class. Jamaal is out, Hector is in.
Sailer raises an interesting question - but he can't imagine how blacks could be replaced by Hispanics and concludes that Negro replacement therefore couldn't be in the plans. But of course the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. I suspect otherwise. I can't prove it, but I think that blacks are slated for total replacement.
Sailer leaves out a few facts, including that blacks are many times more likely to be aborted than whites as a direct result of our leftist elites' efforts. Heck, the leftist elites crow about how black crime rates dropped as a direct result of Roe v. Wade working its magic on the succeeding generation (many fewer young black males in the '90's - they wound up as medical waste. In law school I knew a guy who had a part time job at the city's hospital incinerating medical waste. He told me that he burned dozens of black babies every day. What a way to put yourself through school - and I thought working at a liquour store was bad! My point is that Roe and lavish federal funding of Planned Parenthood are thinly-veiled attempts at genocide of blacks, who are tragically too dumb to notice). "Family planning" in Africa is leading to a collapse of Africa's population, but again nobody will call it an attempt at genocide, even as they secretly hope it succeeds.
Sailer also leaves out the fact (although to his credit he mentions it elsewhere) that it is precisely Negroes who are directly competing with cheap Mexican labor, and they're getting their black butts kicked at it, too. Jobs that should by right (IMHO) belong to our American Negroes are being given over to Meztizos. If you're brown we're down, if you're black get back, as the jump-rope jingle goes.
I suspect that our (very diproportionately Jewish) elites know precisely what they're doing. Jews have long, long memories, and while the Crown Heights pogrom (and similar threats made during the Rodney King riots) has been assiduously ignored, it simmers just under the surface. There's no love lost between Jews and blacks, even though they've put on a brave face for whitey. The McKinney flap springs to mind. Jews are sick, sick, sick of blacks and their weird problems, and they're looking for a replacement. Blacks cost too much - they eat up in welfare money desparately needed to keep Israel afloat and finance the war on Israel's enemies. I think that they're hoping that Mexicans will be their new and more self-sustaining allies against us whites.
Mexicans (who are screaming racists in their own right and who generally have no use for Negroes) will certainly assert the power of their numbers and seek to elbow Negroes out of their ecological niche as the highly paid American proletarian kings. How that will play out is anybody's guess, but I think it's bound to be dramatic. Call me nuts, but we might even be looking at Negro re-colonization in the future. Things will look very differently even a short 10 years from now.
I suspect that Jews may be underestimating the Mexicans. If they fear Rob Whitebread from First Presbyterian, wait until they get a load of Our Lady of Guadalupe. But that's for another thread.
Walter
2003-10-02 07:48 | User Profile
***>>>I think that they're hoping that Mexicans will be their new and more self-sustaining allies against us whites. ***
The funny thing about this is that Mexicans tend to be as anti-Semitic as the blacks, if not even more so. California is a good example of this. There is a lot of tension between the Jewish Democratic elites out in California who dominate the state and the Hispanics.
2003-10-02 13:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Mexicans (who are screaming racists in their own right and who generally have no use for Negroes) will certainly assert the power of their numbers and seek to elbow Negroes out of their ecological niche as the highly paid American proletarian kings. How that will play out is anybody's guess, but I think it's bound to be dramatic. Call me nuts, but we might even be looking at Negro re-colonization in the future. Things will look very differently even a short 10 years from now.
[/QUOTE]
Walter, I don't know. Many brown-skinned Mexicans have African Blood and I see much race-mixing between them, especially here. I think that blacks and hispanics will race-mix and have a new underclass, with the worst characterstics of both races.
2003-10-02 14:01 | User Profile
Walter: Blacks cost too much - they eat up in welfare money desparately needed to keep Israel afloat and finance the war on Israel's enemies. I think that they're hoping that Mexicans will be their new and more self-sustaining allies against us whites.
The problem -- and no one seems to address it in this thread -- is that it's all well-and-good to see Mexis as the next underclass, and maybe more law-abiding and with an actual work ethic (although it seems lots of them have been infected with the black disease) -- WHERE WILL THE BLACKS GO?! Y'all are saying Mexis will be the new brown yard-workers and so maybe the American situation will get a little better -- but we've still got the black parasites who aren't going to up-and-move to Mexico, or (oh, paradisical dreams!) back to Africa!
So, we'll have the costs and burdens of supporting the (immigrant) families, schooling and medical care for all our NEW yardmen, PLUS the now-entirely useless and unwilling to work black population!
Idle hands make Jamaal twice as criminal! :angry:
2003-10-02 14:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=skemper]Walter, I don't know. Many brown-skinned Mexicans have African Blood and I see much race-mixing between them, especially here. I think that blacks and hispanics will race-mix and have a new underclass, with the worst characterstics of both races.[/QUOTE]I don't know where you live, but I don't see that in Texas.
2003-10-02 14:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE]The funny thing about this is that Mexicans tend to be as anti-Semitic as the blacks, if not even more so. [/QUOTE] There is a strain of anti-Semitism in some militant groups, but it is tempered by the fact that most of the Mexican leadership is of Jewish ancestry.
2003-10-02 15:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE=mwdallas]There is a strain of anti-Semitism in some militant groups, but it is tempered by the fact that most of the Mexican leadership is of Jewish ancestry.[/QUOTE]
There are a lot of Jews in Mexico. I hadn't realized this. I understand that they're especially prevalent in the industrial city of Monterrey.
[QUOTE]Originally Posted by skemper Walter, I don't know. Many brown-skinned Mexicans have African Blood and I see much race-mixing between them, especially here. I think that blacks and hispanics will race-mix and have a new underclass, with the worst characterstics of both races. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]I don't know where you live, but I don't see that in Texas.[/QUOTE]
I cut my legal teeth doing criminal defense in California. That was ages ago, but I never heard Mexicans say good things about blacks, and vice versa, and I can only imagine that it's worse now. In fact, they bloody hated each other. Gang wars and turf wars and revenge killings. They definitely had territories marked off and no trespassing was allowed. A Mexicana "home girl" with a black would have been cause for an honor killing and another tear proudly tatooed to a brown cheek. I never heard the "N" word so often as I did from my cholo clients. There are riots in high schools between Mexicans and blacks - which the press hardly reports.
I dunno, Skemper. I haven't seen anything but increasing racial nationalism among the Mexicans - who hated the blacks more then whites, I imagine because they were in most direct competition with them.
Walter
2003-10-02 15:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=mwdallas]I don't know where you live, but I don't see that in Texas.[/QUOTE]
South Carolina. Maybe because we have more blacks. But I don't go up and ask if they are Mexicans either, but I do see Hispanics and blacks mix.
2003-10-02 16:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE]The problem -- and no one seems to address it in this thread -- is that it's all well-and-good to see Mexis as the next underclass, and maybe more law-abiding and with an actual work ethic (although it seems lots of them have been infected with the black disease) -- WHERE WILL THE BLACKS GO?! Y'all are saying Mexis will be the new brown yard-workers and so maybe the American situation will get a little better -- but we've still got the black parasites who aren't going to up-and-move to Mexico, or (oh, paradisical dreams!) back to Africa! [/QUOTE]
I think that our elites have a long term plan for blacks. Of course, I don't know exactly what those plans are, as I'm not invited to their meetings.
Their plans could well include repatriation - it seriously wouldn't surprise me.
Their plans certainly includes limiting their population through state sponsored sterilization and abortion programs.
So long as the brown population is increasing in proportion to the black population (especially if the black population is decreasing in absolute numbers) the elites are getting what I think they want.
Walter