Whites, Doing it To Themselves By Brian Simpson
Many Dissent Right sites run a kind of victimology line that the bad guys have done, and are doing us over. That is true, but, there is still the issue of agency, that Whites have participated in activities involving heaping up their own funeral pyre. Take the US immigration law of the 1960s which is now set to turn America into majority non-white and ensure Democrat tyranny until the collapse:
“Fifty years ago, the Immigration and Nationality Act dramatically changed the makeup of the country by ending a quota system based on national origins in favor of one that took into account occupational skills, relatives living in the U.S. and political-refugee status.
Despite the long-term impact of the 1965 law and the highly partisan tone the issue has taken on today, immigration was not highly divisive a half-century ago, and the American public paid it little heed. Of course, a lot was going on in 1965 to occupy the public’s attention – Vietnam and civil rights, to name just two mega-issues.
Nonetheless, Gallup polls that year found less than 1% of the public naming immigration as the most important problem facing the nation. And, by the end of 1965, the Harris poll found just 3% naming immigration revision as the legislation most important to them. (Back then, Medicare legislation was cited most often – by 28%.)
While Americans were much quieter about immigration back then, the public was divided about the right level of immigration. A June 1965 Gallup poll found that 39% preferred maintaining present levels, almost as many said they should be decreased (33%), and only a few (7%) favored increased immigration.
But in the end, a majority of the public approved of changing the laws so that people would be admitted on the basis of their occupational skills rather than their country of origin. And after the Immigration and Nationality Act was passed, fully 70% said they favored the new law.
An approval score like that was possible because, unlike today, there were almost no partisan differences on the issue. A mid-1965 Gallup poll found 54% of Republicans and 49% of Democrats favoring the concept of admittance based on job skills. Support was only modestly lower among two population groups: less well-educated Americans (44%) and Southerners (40%).
One can only wonder what reactions would have been had Americans known how much the new law would change the face and complexion of their country in years to come. In 1960, the foreign-born share of the population was just 5%. By 2013, that figure had more than doubled to 13%.”
This shows the level of dumbness, if not racial suicide tendencies, in the general population, not to be able to see past the mundane things of life like jobs, food sex, comfort, to think of the longer term. Anyone could see that the new immigration policy over-turned what was fought for in the 1920s, by the likes of Madison Grant. The issue should have been fought, just like the abandonment of the White Australia policy met with only a few grumbles, while conservatives worried about communism, something that was being let in any way. The same can be said for the rise of feminism, and the destruction of traditional family life to produce the familiar dystopia we have today. One thing always leads to another, and who in the 1960s would have thought that we would be having a situation of gender fluidity, with what is, thousands of genders now, and children almost fresh from the womb, wanting sex changes? And they have only started, this is just a warm up for the main event, which is probably the transhuman agenda.
Here is one black pill view, more pessimistic than my position about all of this:
https://affirmativeright.blogspot.com/2019/12/the-myth-of-white-genocide.html
“When it comes to whites, we see no resistance of any kind. Whites neither wage wars, rebel, or commit terrorist acts against their supposedly “oppressive” Western governments, even though they have both the numbers and technical ability to do so if they wanted to.
Why the inertia?
The answer is that whites want to be demographically replaced; they do not want to be saved, least of all by other, more level-headed whites. The demographic transformation of the West is occurring because of mass democracy, not because of the “soft” totalitarian policies of the globalist elite. These are a consequence, not a cause, of the demographic transformation of the West.
Notwithstanding Bob Whitaker’s online mantra, “white genocide” is a myth. By calling white race replacement “genocide,” we trivialize the enormity of this crime for cheap rhetorical purposes. Not only is non-white immigration not “white genocide,” it isn’t “invasion” either, since non-whites have been invited by whites to settle in white countries. Neither are whites being ethnically cleansed or “dispossessed” of their own nations, since they are freely giving away everything they have received from their ancestors, often with smiles on their faces.
In this case, non-white replacement migration is more accurately described as collective white racial suicide, which is not the same thing as genocide, invasion, and ethnic cleansing.
The conclusion that follows is an unhappy one. There will be no collective white racial awakening. The diversity madness will not end until the West is utterly destroyed. As it now stands, a solution to this pitiable state of affairs remains an elusive one. Peaceful dissemination of race realist and white nationalist ideas seldom accomplishes anything. Whites, many of whom are already familiar with the biological reality of race and sex, will continue to uphold the neoliberal order, regardless of what the latest science says (just like Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan did).
Since resistance to neoliberalism is futile, white nationalists must stop lying to themselves about what the majority of whites want or whether they really want it. For example, it is often alleged that whites are being systematically brainwashed into supporting their own racial suicide by the education system and the mass media, yet brainwashing remains scientifically unproven.
White ethnomasochism is a hard-to-swallow blackpill for pro-white activists, which is why so many cope with specious rhetoric about “white genocide,” “invasion,” “racial dispossession,” and “ethnic cleansing,” anything to deflect white responsibility to some fictitious external agency, rather than acknowledge the white electorate is willfully cannibalizing itself while its civilization lies in smoldering ruins all around it.
If the prognosis is a bleak one, what hope is there for pro-white activists? The only viable option that remains is separation from the mainstream.”
That is a somewhat lame conclusion after such a blast of pessimism. Actually, if things are this bad, and we are going to see worse in the near-future, with the collapse of America, what will be interesting is how we respond to this. Will a new post-apocalyptic warrior arise from the ashes, similar to the Germanics who polished off a decadent, decayed Rome, or is Western man now too far gone, and is on the road to extinction, like the dodo?
http://www.amerika.org/politics/ecofascism/
http://www.amerika.org/texts/pentti-linkola/
Comments