Overpaid Yet Happily Forgotten 163


The greatest boost ever received by Islamic fundamentalism was the invasion of Iraq.  Closely followed by extraordinary rendition, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and drones, and Israeli bombings of Gaza.  All of those things lead some Muslims to believe a violent response by terrorism is required to defend themselves.  So for Tony Blair, who has promoted huge hatred and caused unnumbered deaths through a career of deceit and self-enrichment, to warn about the dangers of Islamic terrorism is something nobody but a few Guardian and Murdoch acolytes wish to hear.

Blair of course has many tens of millions stuffed into his capacious back-pocket by oligarchs from the ex-Soviet space, so it is unsurprising to hear him call for understanding between Russia and the West.  It is even more to form that this understanding should be based on joint hatred of Muslims.

There is an alarming failure by many in the UK to understand that Russia is an Empire.  Russia’s Asian possessions were taken  by invasion from their indigenous and Muslim populations in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, at precisely the same time Britain was taking its own colonies.  The Russian conquests were no less colonial from the accident of geography that they were contiguous.  Dagestan and Chechnya were only conquered in the 1830’s.  Most of Tartarstan later.  The “Islamic fundamentalist threat” Russia faces jointly with the UK, is actually the struggle of colonized peoples for their freedom.

Blair includes China, which likewise is the colonial occupier of the Uighurs and other suppressed Muslim populations.  To conflate the struggle for freedom from colonial occupation of these people with an over-reaching monster of “Islamic terrorism” is part of Blair’s trick.  His examples in Africa are again born of despair from the consequences of centuries of colonial and now neo-liberal exploitation.  I find his pronouncements on Boko Haram ironic, given that Blair’s single biggest legacy is to move the United Kingdom close to Nigerian standards of equality of wealth distribution.

The extraordinary thing is that Blair is somebody so hate-filled he wants to see yet more hatred, killing and violence.  It is worrying that the establishment media are so happy to promote his view without providing any balancing opinion. I comfort myself that the real motive of this silly speech was that, other than his media acolytes, absolutely nobody cares what he is saying.  It wasn’t so much a speech as a public display of ADD.

 

 


163 thoughts on “Overpaid Yet Happily Forgotten

1 4 5 6
  • Clark

    Resident Dissident, 8:09 am

    “…he clearly places some races in superiority and inferiority to others”

    I think this may be unfair to Canspeccy; I don’t see anywhere that he’s expressed such value judgements. However:

    “…his style of thinking does bear an awful lot of similarity to that of the racial purity thinking of the Nazis”

    Yes; the same mistake about genetic inheritance, but a roughly opposing objective; the Nazis wanted the “Aryans” to be “the Master Race”, whereas Canspeccy seems to think that without clearly definable racial groups, humanity is vulnerable to takeover by some group he calls the “plutocratic elite”, whoever they are.

  • CanSpeccy

    Clark,

    I’m glad you’re beginning to think about what mass immigration means as a biological phenomenon, rather than just sloganeering about it like RD and Jives.

    It is true that if there is indiscriminate interbreeding among two or more races, you will have a gene pool of greater allelic diversity than that of any of the original races, but you will lose the phenotypic diversity of the original races. That is because you break up the unique concentrations of particular alleles that determine the dominant skull forms, proportions of fast muscle, lung capacity, and all the many other characteristics, obvious and obscure that define each race.

    Thus, as I stated above, you have to understand what happens “…in generations two, three, etc. The hybrid population will not have the range of special talents that the original immigrant population had. There is reversion to the mean among the children of those of superior talent and there is disruption of particular gene associations that make for superior speed, or strength or mathematical or verbal ability (the last two being among talents for which the English have in the past been distinguished).”

    There will also be selective events that begin to narrow down the gene pool. For example, religious faiths affect fertility and certain of the original races will outbreed others, as is evident now when the indigenous British have a below replacement fertility, whereas Bangladeshi women in Britain have a fertility around twice that of the indigenous British and higher even than that of women in Bangladesh.

    There are many such factors affecting the relative fertility of different groups and types, some of which are obvious, whereas many are subtle and little understood. But in any case, you will have, after a rather small number of generations, a relatively homogeneous population, which is different from any of the original races. The racial melting pot thus destroys the human diversity that has evolved over tens of thousands of years and which can never be recreated in historical time.

    But the reason that the promotion of mass immigration should be considered equivalent to treason is that it destroys the posterity of the native born. Man is a territorial species. If you fill the space with aliens there is less room for the native population and their descendants. So although the population may remain the same, the inclusive fitness of the native population will be reduced. In London, Leicester, Luton and Slough the indigenous British can look forward to very little in the way of posterity. This is genocide by stealth.

  • Resident Dissident

    “But the reason that the promotion of mass immigration should be considered equivalent to treason is that it destroys the posterity of the native born.”

    So I’ve committed treason by marrying someone from a foreign race by destroying the posterity of the British nation, and especially my Yorkshire ancestry going back for many generations – yes of course I should have only married a true British girl – one people, one nation as they used to say.

    Of course we need to place phenotypic diversity above all other forms of diversity such as cultural and intellectual. And of course environmental influences can have no impact on phenotypic characteristics in this particular brand of science.

  • Resident Dissident

    The racial melting pot thus destroys the human diversity that has evolved over tens of thousands of years and which can never be recreated in historical time.

    Even if this were true – perhaps you might also wish to consider the benefits that it gives before reaching your conclusion that this is a bad thing. Rather poor science to look at a single factor in isolation before reaching a conclusion I would say – but then I don’t believe that science is what is driving your judgement in this matter.

  • CanSpeccy

    So I’ve committed treason by marrying someone

    Don’t be an idiot. Try instead to use your brains, such as they are. Marrying someone is not promoting a policy implemented by law.

    Even if this were true – perhaps you might also wish to consider the benefits

    I’m glad you are beginning to see that what I asserted was factually correct.

    whereas Canspeccy seems to think that without clearly definable racial groups

    Primarily, I’m opposed to the genocide of the English. For RD to equate that with Nazism is simple stupidity or mendacity, as his qualified acknowledgement “even if this were true” confirms.

    The sad thing is that you have vehemently held opinions based on near total ignorance of what you speak.

    As to my thinking humanity is vulnerable to takeover by some group he calls the “plutocratic elite”, whoever they are.

    Are you willfully stupid? I gave you a link above to an X-archiv paper that made quite clear who the plutocratic elite are. Now you claim not to know who I am referring too.

    God, why don’t you read some history and use your brains? Do you think that shits like Sheldon Adelson (look him up) who buy American elections for tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, or banks like JP Morgan who paid off Blair after his retirement from office (read about JP Morgan’s role in establishing the Council on Foreign Relations and the connection of the latter with Cecil Rhodes, and various bankers), give a shit about the ignoramus members of the public like you? They are the plutocratic elite, they have immense personal fortunes and control even vaster aggregations of capital and corporate power.

    Democracy is a fraud controlled by the elite and all your drivel about racism and the wonders of diversity is mere propaganda that drives the plutocratic agenda, which is for global governance via undemocratic global institutions such as CM’s beloved EU, the UN the WTO and many others. The main obstacle to globalization is the nation state and it must be destroyed. Scotch nationalism serves that purpose because it brings about the destruction of the United Kingdom into components more easily managed and if necessary coerced to serve the globalist, plutocratic elite.

  • Clark

    CanSpeccy, 27 Apr, 10:10 pm;, no, it is you that thinks you’re thinking “about what mass immigration means as a biological phenomenon”; I’m just thinking of populations and characteristics.

    Your reasoning seems circular. You’re defining “race” as certain groupings of characteristics, swapping those characteristics between your arbitrarily defined groups, and then asserting that the lack of these groupings in the descendants is a loss of diversity.

    But the “race” groupings were arbitrary to start with. New arbitrary groupings of characteristics could be defined that would exhibit just as much “diversity” as was seen between the original groups called “races”, so long as you define enough groups. No diversity of characteristics has been lost; it hasn’t changed.

    You claim there will be “a regression towards the mean”. You are taking the piss, aren’t you? “Although extreme individual measurements regress toward the mean, the second sample of measurements will be no closer to the mean than the first”.

    You wrote: “There will also be selective events that begin to narrow down the gene pool”, and then wrote of a shrinking population. Isn’t this called a “genetic bottleneck”, and isn’t it quantifiable? It must have been looked into regarding endangered species. It really only applies to a closed gene-pool, but populations of countries are typically orders of magnitude bigger than the threshold at which the gene pool would begin to contract, aren’t they?

    You nevertheless manage to use this supposedly scientific argument to yet again mention “mass immigration”, “indiscriminate interbreeding”, “aliens”, “melting pot”, and “will outbreed others”, all well known triggers for xenophobia.

    My impression is that you’re using pseudo-science to push a racist agenda, whilst hiding behind an “I’m not racist” Vietnamese Pinocchio’s nose. Not so surprising seeing as you’ve done it before:

    http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/07/the_ethics_of_b/comment-page-2/#comment-294700

  • Clark

    Canspeccy, your objection to the sex education course described in the Guardian article you linked suggests that you may be in favour of under-sixteens getting pregnant!

    My objection to your Guardian article is the blatant sensationalist spin:

    Encouraging schoolchildren to experiment with oral sex could prove the most effective way of curbing teenage pregnancy rates, a government study has found.

    Those behind the course stress the scheme does not suggest teenagers experiment with oral sex.

  • Clark

    Canspeccy, but thanks again for the paper about corporate power. Yes, Rhodes, the Milner Group, covert power, etc.. Much greater transparency is necessary.

    But eventually, ideally, people in general should be free to move about throughout the world, and the current flows of immigration are a natural reaction to economic inequalities. Diverse cultural development requires peace and stability, all of which require much broader economic equality.

  • CanSpeccy

    the sex education course described in the Guardian article you linked suggests that you may be in favour of under-sixteens getting pregnant!

    That was an important component of the British way or reproduction.

    In the 1950’s, something like one third of all children were conceived out of wedlock and about a fifth were born out of wedlock (among the common folk, abortion was in those days a rare expedient.) The pattern was not a peculiarity of a brief historical era, but dates back through the centuries, as Shakespeare recorded:

    Between the acres of the rye,
    With a hey, and a ho, and a hey nonino,
    Those pretty country folks would lie,
    In springtime, the only pretty ring time,
    When birds do sing, hey ding a ding, ding;
    Sweet lovers love the spring.

    etc.

    So, yes, one can be certain that the indigenous people of Britain have a below replacement fertility because of the influence of state enforced (i.e., school) sex education, state-funded abortion and pro-abortion propaganda, and anti-life environmentalist propaganda (also largely state funded), much of it based on false or distorted information that conceals the fact that the Western nations are experiencing a population implosion combined with an influx of immigrants that will wipe out the natives as majorities, and in some cases even as significant minorities, in their own homelands.

    A declining population without mass immigration might, for a while, be beneficial. It would greatly reduce the cost of housing, result in lower taxes because of an end to the construction of expanded infra-structure (maternity hospitals, schools, universities, roads, water works, etc.), and raise wages, particularly among the least competent members of society, due to the lack of immigrant competition. In time the improved conditions of life would tend to revive the birthrate and establish something like a new equilibrium population at a level lower than before.

  • CanSpeccy

    ideally, people in general should be free to move about throughout the world

    This is an anti-democratic sentiment. Most people in Britain, something like 70%, do not agree that such freedom of movement should trump the right of the state acting on behalf of the people to control national borders and limit immigration.

  • Clark

    CanSpeccy,

    “…in Britain, something like 70%…”

    Do you know those figures for other countries, and particularly how they’ve been changing in recent years? If you do, please post a few, with significant context if necessary like questions asked or skewed samples.

1 4 5 6

Comments are closed.