← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Dan Dare
Thread ID: 4578 | Posts: 8 | Started: 2003-01-23
2003-01-23 03:09 | User Profile
Is there a feeling among members that the immigration 'problem' is somehow different in N. America compared to Europe/Australasia?
Is it that one or the other situation is viewed as being more or less intractable?
Or is it perhaps that the root causes may be so different that different solutions are needed?
I'd genuinely like to understand if people here feel there are two 'regional/cultural' immigration scenarios divergent enough to call for two separate discussions. If so that would lead one to question whether White Nationalism remains a meaningful concept.
2003-01-23 04:50 | User Profile
I don't think the causes are particularly different. The proponents of mass 3rd immigration will inevitably mention the 'need' for foreign labor, moral 'duties' to asylum seekers, and will attack opponents of such immigration as having failed to understand the need to 'get beyond' race and affirm 'diversity.'
The root problem is the inability of anyone interested in discussing the biological bases of culture to get this message out to mass media or academic outlets. It is the same problem in every Western nation. And it is all tied-together: for example, Americans see Germans failing to reproduce, Germans see American becoming progressively less Germanic, and the overall idea everyone takes home is that the old white, Protestant-centered culture of the West is a lost cause.
2003-01-23 12:01 | User Profile
Originally posted by Dan Dare@Jan 22 2003, 21:09 If so that would lead one to question whether White Nationalism remains a meaningful concept.
Well for me White Nationalism will always be a meaningful concept as it is based on the simple principle that united we stand, divided we fall. No signal white nation is likely to survive in isolation. The reaction of European 'leaders' to the Freedom Party's relative success is a telling example, some of them even discussed sanctions against the legitimate, democratically elected government of Austria.
The only workable, long-term White Nationalism invovles the entire Eurosphere.
2003-01-24 00:47 | User Profile
Hello Dan,
Buchanan took the macro approach in Death of the West and his position is one I generally subscribe to.
The separation of the U.S. and Canada from Europe and Australia/New Zealand is really more just for organizational purposes. I'd like to see more international input and perhaps having a dedicated forum for same will bring that about. I don't know, but I thought we'd give it a whirl and see how it goes.
2003-01-24 03:14 | User Profile
Well thanks for the cogent replies.
Actually the questions were partly rhetorical in that after spending almost half a lifetime now in the US (the other in UK and continental Europe, with a spell in Asia), I have come to believe that the impact of third world immigration is much different in Europe compared to the rest of the Eurosphere (like that term, na Gaeil is gile).
No country in Europe had a non-white population of any size at all until the mid-50s, well within the lifetime of most people of voting age now. In the non-Euro Eurosphere (US, CDN, AUS/NZ) every country had an indigenous aboriginal and/or an imported ethnic underclass that to some extent provided the underpinning if not the rationale for transforming themselves into multiracial societies.
In Europe the transition to multiracialism has been dramatically more rapid; few people have really come to terms with it yet or realise what it is going to mean for themselves and their descendants. But they will, and I feel a political backlash is building that will force change.
One reason is that Europeans have fewer options than elsewhere in dealing with the problem. The one principal option they don't have is the one that has been favored in North America so far: white flight. In Europe there is nowhere to flee to particularly if you are an average working person with a family and job to consider. Draconian planning and zoning regulations preclude suburban sprawl on the American pattern, so native white people are forced to live in ever closer proximity with the unwelcome newcomers.
As the newcomers become more strident and shrill in their demands for a greater share of the national resources, as it becomes more apparent to native whites that it's all coming out of their taxes, and as ethnic violence erupts on a scale that will make the Oldham riots seem like a tea-party, it's inevitable that matters will come to a head. And probably sooner rather than later - in certain countries including the UK, France and Holland this is likely I would say within the next 5 years.
As far as the non-Euro Eurosphere countries (need a catchy label for that) are concerned, I just don't see this happening - primarily because of the safety valve afforded by the continuing of option of flight. As long as that remains the case, these countries will continue on a steady downward demographic slide towards a coffee-colored future. As long as people can run away from the problem no political concensus for change can develop, and really the only possible solution is a political one.
I think if we we are all honest with ourselves, we will acknowledge that all racially-conscious whites need to have an 'exit-plan' to depart for whiter pastures once things become too dire in the present habitat. I know I have, and although I still review avidly any proposals for re-segregation and secession, I know in my heart these are never going to happen.
My prediction, therefore, is that some very severe trauma, the EU will stabilize it's non-white population at around 10% by mid-century, while the US will have at least 50% non-white as many pundits claim, and will be heading 'south' at an accelerating rate. Canada, and perhaps Australia won't be that far behind.
Back to the old country?
Cheers!
2003-01-24 04:00 | User Profile
As others have observed, the immigration problem is essentially the same for both continents in that the usual suspects are implicated in root causes and current advocacy. The resolutions, however, may be very different in both tactics used to effect change and final outcome. As a well-travelled member of Rbanââ¬â¢s most cherished Aryan sub group, and one who has spent his time fairly evenly on both sides of the pond, I offer a few random observations of some pertinence:
Most Europeans, particularly the so-called lower classes, are considerably more racist than North Americans
To be sure this type of racism is of the vulgar variety and lacking persuasion it is easily distracted and nullified by the educated elite, nonetheless, it is there and can be of use when called for
Their opinion of ââ¬Åmulticulturalismââ¬Â is decidedly negative (this without substantive knowledge of such cultural havens as LA and Detroit) although many appreciate the merit of having different ethnic dishes readily available
They deem their culture to be sufficient by itself, thank you very much, and generally do not confuse the influx of barbarism with improvement
Corollary of the above is that there is no notion of ââ¬Åwhite nationalismââ¬Â as we understand it because they think in terms of their own distinct ethnicity or nation state, i.e., what do you mean white, Iââ¬â¢m ____
This racism is more widespread and includes a substantial segment of politicians and law-enforcement types, and though there are regional exceptions (e.g., England, Germany and Scandinavia) for various reasons, the frequent reporting of arrests of thought criminals is a poor indicia of public sentiment concerning immigration
Members of the chattering classes, and Liberal intellectuals in particular, may be hostile to what they perceive to be American ââ¬Åarroganceââ¬â¢ and ââ¬Åimperialism,ââ¬Â but they are quite neutered in cultural matters and would sooner die than be perceived as being less multicultural or less civilized, and therefore less enlightened than Americans (realistically, that is all they can claim at this instance in history)
Others can supply corrections or additional points, but that, in a nutshell, is what we have to work with. It has been said that the conflict will start in Europe because whites have no place to go and because the Jews will never convince them that the continent is not theirs and belongs to the world. Despite this fact and my above points, I feel that the hammer must first fall in the US.
Nothing will happen in Germany first for reasons we can all guess. In private I get an earful from them but inside the Fatherland they act in a subdued manner because on the world stage (rightly or wrongly) they are morally powerless and they know it. The thoroughly socialist Scandinavian states are traditionally no boat rockers, and other western European states are hindered by their sensitivity detailed in my last point.
The sole remaining superpower and supposed champion of democracy, civil rights, and multiculturalism must be the first to act to prevent suffocation on the vomit that is largely its own creation. Another civil war on US soil or even a minor conflict with racial overtones would probably suffice to break the peculiar stranglehold it has over the world by virtue of its much advertised ââ¬Åfreedomââ¬Â and ââ¬Ådemocracy.ââ¬Â I say peculiar because while European intellectuals may claim to not be impressed by the US, it is a simple fact that all European states are beside themselves in trying to imitate it (socially they are getting closer, and claims to the contrary are meaningless for keeping track of MTV ratings and counting McDonalds is more honest).
As unpleasant as it may be for readers, a failure, evidenced by massive social strife, may be just the antidote that will save Europeans from their delusions and North Americans from themselves. The alternative is a ââ¬ÅCamp of Saintsââ¬Â scenario for the Occident and Judeo dominion of the globe. :o
2003-01-24 05:19 | User Profile
While I think Sisyfos has provided a very keen anaylsis of the transatlantic situation, I inevitably have a few quibles.
I am not so confident that Europeans really move to protect their own cultures quite so instinctively any longer. They keep having these romantic notions that they can make, say, a Turk into a German if he just reeds enough Rilke. Like Americans, they are un-willing to focus on biology. The whole topic of racially-rooted culture has just become too taboo in the higher circles of Western civilization. This is where I feel some progress can be made in order to bring about more white friendly policies, without racial stife among the lower-classes necessarily having to take place.
The varying-levels of sucess experienced by thinkers such as Scruton in Britain, and Gottfried, Hoppe, & Brimlow in the States suggest that there is a space for such elitist discourse on race and culture. I think that this space is widening, and can be made to widen further. Academics (especially in the Classics, for some reason) are occasionaly very right-wing without ever making any kind of public statements to this effect that might harm their careers. It is unfortunate that racially aware white academics are so timind, but the fact that they are does suggest that there is room to hope that academia can be--to some useful degree--pried away from its on-going 3rd world, feminist, and Holocaust-industry obessions. This will be especially important for Europe, where public debate is more significantly influenced by academics and similar public intellectuals.
2003-02-08 14:44 | User Profile
Its no accident that Portland, Oregon, with its anti developement/sprawl legislation that the capitalists hate so much is the whitest big city in America and more importantly, the only major American city where the majority of public school students are white. Its not only that Europeans have no where to run, living in the same place for generations fosters a sense of community that is almost non existant in America. When some raghead dirt bag rapes a 12 year old girl in your neighborhood, its personal. Atomized American whites often don't even get upset when their own children are victims.
Its true that the european "man in street" may not see himself as a white nationalist, but all the serious nationalist political parties like the Vlaamsblok, BNP, FN and NDP do consider themselves "white nationalists." Even many people in the less serious nationalist parties like the Freedom Party would describe themselves as such.