Thursday, October 05, 2017

Unapologetically rise from the ashes

What if it were possible for both sides of the gun control debate to get what they want?

What if it were possible for some places to restrict the movement of firearms and allow the free movement of undocumented migrants while other places allow for the free movement of firearms and restrict the movement of illegal aliens?

What if it were possible for places where people think diversity is a strength to become more diverse while places where people desire homogeneity to become more homogeneous?

What if it were possible for something other than a uniform set of rules, restrictions, and regulations to apply to 330 million people--people who are disunited linguistically, culturally, ethnically, politically, financially, geographically, morally, racially, and religiously?

It is possible. It's happening across the globe--from Spain to Sudan, from Britain to Kurdistan, from East Timor to, say, some day in the not-so-indefinite future, Texas.

The members of these formerly United States are like a married couple well past the point at which they should've divorced.

The husband leaves the gate open, the dog runs off and before long the couple is yelling back and forth about how stupid it was to get the house in this neighborhood. A psychopath shoots up concertgoers and we're simultaneously screaming about the evils, and apologizing for the merits, of guns, white men, parenting strategies, media sensationalism.

The wife forgets to turn a light off in the closet and before long their yelling back and forth about how she doesn't care about saving for retirement and he doesn't care about anything but money. A subset of athletes refuse to stand for the anthem and we're simultaneously screaming about the evils of and apologizing for the freedom to do so without consequence, of popular entertainment, on what constitutes patriotism.
Resonates with wistful boomers;
stuff of legend for younger Americans

Every incident escalates with such rapidity that it should probably be described as immediacy into something much larger than the incident itself.

Who do Hillary Clinton voters hate more--Donald Trump or Nigel Farage? Who pisses red-staters off more--the Democrat party or the Labour party? Trump and Democrats, the ones with control over their lives, of course.

This nation no longer makes sense. Inertia, economic convenience, and a large enough tax base to run a global empire are the only things holding this carcass of a country together.

How the political dissolution will occur is anyone's guess--probably along currently existing state boundaries, though that needn't necessarily be the case. What seems clear, though, is that it's time--past time--for secession.


---

Parenthetically, when I had the opportunity to host a certain polymath for a few hours over the summer, I asked if he thought the political dissolution of the US in our lifetimes was a real possibility. A decade ago his answer would have been "no way", but now he thinks it is conceivable (though not necessarily desirable).

The likely mechanism? Another severe economic downturn, exacerbated by the potential of a resultant dollar crisis. There are obvious ways a crash could precipitate dissolution.

There are also less obvious ones. To get out from under the risibly unpayable national debt, for example, a state like Texas could secede, declare the federal debt accumulated under the union it used to be a part of both unconstitutional by the standards of that union and an unjust burden on the republic of Texas, and wash its hands of any obligation on the $20 trillion.

The Cloud People would never allow it! The secession would be brutally suppressed! The optics of Spain's reaction to the Catalon referendum were terrible, even though Catalonia's actions were clearly illegal (while Texas' would not be).

Think the people of Oklahoma would go for the feds marching on Texas? More likely, they'd petition the governor to join their southern neighbor. Hell, think people in Massachusetts would? Nope. Good riddance, they'd say.

26 comments:

Reg T said...

Catalan's attempt to separate may indeed be "illegal" in the sense that they have no provision in their governing rules or laws for secession, but _morally_ it can never be wrong for an oppressed people to seek to separate - peacefully if at all possible - from the government that oppresses them. That is a human, natural right.

If only the Left would choose to secede from an America being made great again, from a country which has elected a President they hate with such an irrational passion. Let them keep California, New York, DC. Let them keep Atlanta, like a Berlin of the South, existing in the middle of a sea of Red. The same with Seattle, maybe Denver - but not Austin. Allow the LGBT and other Lefties to move out of Austin or accept the laws and culture of a conservative nation called Texas (where marriage means a legal and moral union between a man and a woman). Up to the State of Texas as to whether they want to legitimize a civil union between gay or lesbian couples, or make it illegal in _their_ state/country.

As long as the Left continues to control the education system, the media, and most of the bureaucracy of our government, as well as most of Congress (the Uni-party), it will never happen without a very un-civil war. The Left is, by nature, incapable of accepting the notion that they don't have the right to control and direct the lives of everyone in America (and eventually everyone else in the coming Caliphate).

Just as Lincoln didn't give a damn about slavery but DID refuse to allow the country to become divided (he felt personally affronted by the idea, plus he believed the loss of income from losing the crippling tariffs charged against the South would hamstring the federal government), the Left will never accept the possibility that any of us non-progressives should be allowed to go our own way, live a life free of government control, the diktats of the State.

Short of forcing the Left to accept our "exit" through the use of armed might, I really don't believe it will ever happen. The Left controls too much of the government and the infrastructure of our country.

DAN III said...

RegT,

Your closing paragraph sums it up well.

??? said...

What does that caption mean by legendary?

Feryl said...

"Who do Hillary Clinton voters hate more--Donald Trump or Nigel Farage? Who pisses red-staters off more--the Democrat party or the Labour party? Trump and Democrats, the ones with control over their lives, of course"

Good point. Such are the times that elites keep their fingers crossed that proles haven't woken up yet, then every time this "dream" (to them) is spoiled, with Brexit, Trump, with George Soros all but declared an enemy of the state in the Slavic/Baltic states, with Germany taking a moderate turn to the right after 70 years of repression of Rightist culture, etc., The New Right feels emboldened.

Of course, most liberals right now are in total denial of how much they hate what the Left has become. The Dems come primary season surrender their party to blacks, who demographically dominate urban areas in the Eastern US, and a fair chunk of the Deep South and Mid-Atlantic, but otherwise are scarce. This is the primary cause of ID politics psychosis, as blacks and those who love them blazed every ID politics trail first and widest, which then encourages a fair number of POC non-black strivers (or light-skinned imposters) to try and do the same with every other ethnicity, to mixed results since Mix-tecs and Asians are more taciturn and less likely to feel entitled to run a party or an area.

There already is, and it's going to get worse, a spectacular pile-up of swpl whites, blacks, and other ethnic groups. They can only unite in hatred towards prole whites for so long. In fact, in the 2016 election blacks under 40 were much less enthusiastic about voting for Hillary in the general, let alone in the primary. ID politics seems most attractive to those who came of age in the 60's-80's; note that virtually every Dem heavy hitter was born before 1970. The older generations won't accept a graceful exit, either career-wise, or of their ideas. It's more acutely felt on the Left since they screwed Sanders and also because, demographics being what they are, division and schisms are going to be more hard felt on the Left which is full of kids and varying races. 20 year old Sanders supporters are going to take recent events a lot harder than a 30 year old Trump supporter would've taken a primary loss or a general election loss.

Back in the 60's, the Left paid dearly for it's dalliance with youthful radicals and mature leaders who enabled them. The GOP would've won every pres. election from 1968-1988 if Watergate hadn't happened. Nowadays, it seems like the reverse is happening: younger people are tired of their parent's Left, but the Me Generation is flat out ignoring them.

Anonymous said...

@audacious

I think that you're painting the situation as if there are only two sides, but there are not only two sides. There are not just the far-left and the "alt-right" even though these two sides screech the loudest.

I hate Annoying Orange just as much as the average leftist but I am still pro-2A. I want strict controls on immigration and the deportation of illegals, but I still hate the "waht pauer!" sentiments of the "alt-right". If I had it my way, society with be more pro-2A AND have stricter immigration controls, but the few immigrants allowed in would piss off both the far left and the "alt-right".

scrivener3 said...

It needent be black or white. Texas dosn't have to secede or accede, it can demand more local autonomy. Scotland has more self-rule than Texas does and it dosn't have to be that way.

The Feds didn't send the army in when states started refusing to enforce pot laws, or immigration laws. Now the establishment is agnostic on pot and in favor of immigration, but there must be a lot of room before the feds resort to open violence.

Much of the Washington control is enforced through taking vast sums of money out of states and conditioning the return of the money on local compliance. The national 55 MPH speed limit, 21 yr old drinking age, enforcement of title IX etc is through threats to deny federal funds. But if States said we are going to withhold from federal remittances the amount due to us under block grants while we negotiate an equitable solution to our policy disagreements . . .

Sid said...

I think secession is something red states can employ in the future, but it's not a tactic available to blue states - namely because there really aren't that many blue "states" so much as blue cities.

Let's say Washington State and Oregon both try to break off from the Union. They're both ultra blue states, but that's just because of the Seattle and Portland areas. Believe me, the counties where people voted for Trump would be aghast at the prospect of leaving America to live in Shitlibia.

If you grant that states have a right to secede, then it follows that counties have that right too. And once you've established that, nations formed from blue areas will hardly make for viable independent countries: http://static.snopes.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/3141-counties-trump-won.jpg

Another problem for blue states becoming their own countries is that progressives really don't feel all that much regional loyalty. SWPLs are basically a class that exists across America - if a SWPL from Seattle meets with SWPLs from Boston, the Bostonians will hardly exclude the Seattlite as an outsider. You'll see SWPLs in Virginia complain about the hicks in their state, just as you'll hear Bostonians groan about non-SWPLs in their area who say all sorts of non-PC things about race and sex. They have more cultural loyalty with one another than regional loyalty with others in their area.

It would be better if we afforded local and urban areas more autonomy. One solution I can think of is employing a kind of "free cities" approach the Holy Roman Empire had, where certain cities were free to govern themselves largely of their own accord. You're starting to see blue staters boast about how they can take action on a local level: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/florida/articles/2017-06-01/states-cities-pledge-action-on-climate-even-without-trump

Of course, it's hard to take their calls for a new federalism all thag seriously after how they behaved under Obama and forcing gay marriage down everyone's throat.

Bluesgal said...

THIS:

"They have more cultural loyalty with one another than regional loyalty with others in their area."

Culture is more important to them than country.

Random Dude on the Internet said...

It'd be hilarious if the endgame of globalism isn't demographic replacement but more nationalism. If everyone has advanced infrastructure, why not have Catalonia split off from Spain? If the world is truly flat, then why not have Texas secede? Let these regions split off. Besides some technocrats who may be made redundant, will Brexit dramatically transform Great Britain for the worse?

The dissident right seemed universally against Catalan independence, but I was all for it. Ethno-nationalist states, left wing or right wing, is still nationalism. The EU is having a harder time maintaining their grip on European society. Eastern Europe openly flouts EU leadership and gets away with it. Euroscepticism is on the rise for both the right and the left. With the immivasion, we find that the EU is not only unwilling to help, they're the prime culprits in ruining societies. If the EU is unable to provide basic security and function for the public, the public will draw the conclusion that they don't need an EU and will proceed accordingly.

The US will be in the same boat eventually. We got to see the ninth circus intervene in actions taken by Trump that were supported by a clear majority of the country. If people want things done and the government keeps getting in the way, eventually people will decide that having a Republic of Texas or a Cascadia is preferable to letting some loon out of Honolulu decide that we can't ban Sudanese from invading the country. If globalists were remotely smart, they'd have pulled back on all this but they keep pressing forward.

Audacious Epigone said...

Reg T,

Catalan's attempt to separate may indeed be "illegal" in the sense that they have no provision in their governing rules or laws for secession, but _morally_ it can never be wrong for an oppressed people to seek to separate - peacefully if at all possible - from the government that oppresses them.

While rights are ultimately what one can get away with, agree with the sentiment entirely. My point was simply to show that Spain looks like the bad guy even though the law is technically on Spain's side. In the case of an American state seceding, our Spain--the Imperial City of DC--wouldn't even clearly have that on its side.

Dan III,

If there was broad support for allowing a state to secede among those remaining, I'm not so sure that would be the case. That's the sort of thing that brings down governments. It could be our 1848 redux.

???,

Boomers came of age when Heritage America--the aesthetic implications of that picture are clear--was simply America. Those who came of age after the 1965 immigration act, and especially those who came of age after the Reagan amnesty, as many reading including myself did, Heritage America has been on its heels and losing significant ground for as long as we've had any cognizance of the world around us.

Feryl,

Listened to the Z-Cast tonight and he did a segment on the impending end of the goodwhite/badwhite cold civil war after the death of the baby boomers, the point at which the US will become "majority-minority". Seems to me we're definitely seeing the beginnings of that with low trust in the Democrats even among white millennials, Gen Z whites going strongly for Trump in 2016, etc.

@anonymous,

Fair. Hopefully it's implicit in the litany of disunited fronts in a country of 330+ million that there is more than the reds and the blues. Even in the restricted confines of the American political system, the primaries show as much. Dissolution will really reveal it.

scrivener3,

Agreed, this is something that can be fought on many fronts. Are you familiar with the 10th amendment center? Great outfit, run by a single guy who does yeoman's work on exactly what you're referring to.

Sid,

Yes, there's a lot to the idea that we could scrunch a bunch of cosmopolitan cities all over the developed world together--London, New York (well, Manhattan anyway), Paris, Berlin, Chicago--and the denizens of said cities would have more in common with one another than any have with the exurbs of the cities they actually live in.

As I've recounted to you I've driven from Seattle through the Cascades and into Wenatchee three times in the last few years and your assessment is spot on. Wenatchee, in central Washington, is Heritage America (with an admittedly large number of Mexican peasants thrown in). It went 53%-38% for Trump.

Bluesgal,

It's more important to them than race or ethnicity, too (if they're WEIRDOs, that is--if they're Han Chinese or Arab princes or Brahmins, they just think of white cosmopolitans as tools to be used, tolerated only to the extent that it is necessary to tolerate them).

Random Dude,

Always love your comments. They're more lucid expressions of my own sentiments than I'm able to string together so I don't often have much to add.

Issac said...

The unfortunate reality geopolitics is that aggrieved minority ethno-states would be a clear and present danger to any white North American nation. Absent some iron-clad guarantee that they would not become Chinese proxies, you would have to subjugate or destroy them immediately.

Audacious Epigone said...

Issac,

Israel manages well enough, and they're vastly outnumbered in their neighborhood. Granted we're a lot cuckier than they are, but we'd still be as large or larger than the neighbors.

China is going to surpass the US--whether in its current form, or what is left of its rump--this century to become the globe's dominant power. As long as we have nukes, though, does it really matter? There's will be a sort of net-mercantilism, not the stupid nation-building the West is so fond of.

Audacious Epigone said...

neo-mercantilism*

Feryl said...

"Listened to the Z-Cast tonight and he did a segment on the impending end of the goodwhite/badwhite cold civil war after the death of the baby boomers, the point at which the US will become "majority-minority". Seems to me we're definitely seeing the beginnings of that with low trust in the Democrats even among white millennials, Gen Z whites going strongly for Trump in 2016, etc. "

It's not just demographics, though. German Gen X-ers and early Millennials got used to their country being heavily white, yet they still had a different coming of age than Boomers did. Or even older generations, for that matter.

GIs came of age when elites were learning noblesse oblige, and when foreigners and traitors were being derided. They enthusiastically supported efforts to diminish individual excesses in the name of the greater good. Silents and Boomers came of age too late to understand the culture of the early 1900's, and would spend the rest of their lives mischaracterizing the period and focusing on how GI collectivism and works always ended in war, nativism, moral ignorance, and even cultural blandness, while little was done to nourish what a given person wanted.

Silents came of age in the shadow of the several previous generations who had done so much sweating and bleeding in the many domestic and international conflicts which had riven America for basically 80 years, from the 1860's-1940's. The Civil War, Reconstruction, the Mexican war, dealing with Indians, multiple presidents assassinated, WW1, the Depression, WW2. By the time most of them were 20, America was, out of nowhere, on top of the world. You can't overstate that America in the 1950's, in it's tranquility, prosperity, and idealism, had absolutely no resemblance to a country which once was avowedly protective of Prostestant whites, dabbled in eugenics, had seen bloody labor disputes and ethnic warfare in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Silents never have shaken the embarrassment they feel at inheriting so much which other people worked so hard for. Yet they also felt, in an odd way, that they missed out on the adventures that previous generations took for granted. How do you appreciate comfort, wealth, and security, when you only briefly experienced the opposite circumstances? Come the later 60's Silents tried to live life to the fullest, desperate to not dwell too much on the inadequacy that they'd never shake.

Boomers came of age having no gratitude at all for elders, or any self-awareness that they ever had it good or easy. The culture of trying to find yourself and not be overly concerned with other people's feelings, which the Silents had already started, was embraced even more eagerly by Boomers. Silents felt heartened that the younger generation appeared to be more confident about taking on the system, though Silents also quietly shook their heads at how poorly adjusted so many Boomers seemed to be. They didn't dress, talk, act, or think in a manner that any of the older generations could process.

The Gen X-ers came of age when Silents and Boomers had re-made society in their respective images, and we're not listening to younger people anymore. Youth poverty, child abuse, rising divorce rate, rising inequality rate, and so forth were things that confronted X-ers. As they got older, they found that Boomers barely noticed them, let alone helped them. The idea of passing the torch, which GIs did with Silents, and Silents did with Boomers, was not going to happen with Boomers and X-ers. If young Boomers were accustomed to upbeat GIs and neurotic Silents generally having a restrained bearing, young X-ers would see a world where young and middle-aged Boomer adults constantly screamed and fought over everything.

icr said...

Anon: "I want strict controls on immigration and the deportation of illegals, but I still hate the "waht pauer!" sentiments of the "alt-right"."

You must be a boomer trapped in the Sixties. "White Power" was the slogan of George Lincoln Rockwell and Jewish convicted pedophile "Illinois Nazi" Frank Colin (now calling himself Frank Joseph and making a living writing New Age pseudo-history books). The problem now is the prospect of white extinction and trying to preserve what remains of Western Civilization.

Also. whites have to continue to exist because only they will do anything to stop the impending extinction of all the wildlife of Africa-the Chinese are only speeding up the process. Only whites care about this. Somewhat similar situation for the wildlife of SE Asia and Amazonia.

I live in Costa Rica, the only Central American country that hasn't yet turned into a shithole.It's now a predominantly mestizo country probably living off the social capital of of its long history as a white majority country. If you see photos and movie footage from the 1940s and 1950s just about everyone looks Med white (but of course you can't say this). Even so, all the animal shelters in the country were founded by gringa expats-except for one, the largest dog sanctuary in the world,founded and run by a female Costa Rican whose father is Canadian. Her mother was apparently a very hard woman to live with (and hated dogs) and the mild-mannered Canadian finally lost it and shot and killed her. He's still in prison.

Anonymous said...

@icr

You don't get it. I don't care what color the immigrants are, or what their religion is, I don't want them here.

The problem with the wn proposals is that it allows for large-scale immigration as long as the immigrants are white and Christian. This is just as unacceptable to me as third-world Muslim immigration.

What part of this do you not get? I want drastically fewer immigrants.

Issac said...

AE,

Oh I think it would be an existential problem for Israel as well, and I attribute this realization to my disavowing the interventionist paradigm that's so popular on either side of the Atlantic. Interventionism has to stop in order to conserve the deterrent power of the western empire and allow regional defense forces to be built in the place of the hegemonic system we have now. If that rug is pulled out from under everyone before that happens, it will simply produce a power vacuum to be filled by the next imperial rival. And that, I think, should be more of a threat to the seat of the current western empire than the peripheral vassal states. The latter are potential clients of the eastern empire. The former is going to be targeted to ensure it does not revive to geopolitical significance any time soon.

Nuclear deterrence works fairly well for stopping conflicts between empires, but it has a very poor track record against dispersed marauding neighbor tribes. Rhodesia had a nuclear deterrent and it was simply surrounded and ground to an economic halt by massive outside pressure. I could easily see a white American rump state pressured to disarm itself by its international rivals if it was not willing to engage in a total-war of elimination to pacify its neighbors. This same basic scenario is playing out on a small scale with democratic politics already. That is the basic premise of gun-control, amnesty, and reparation. Disarm the white men, surround them, drain them of their resources, and finally destroy them.

Sid said...

Bluesgal,

Thank you!

AE and Issac,

In January 2015, I talked with a hotel owner in Romania about America politics. I said that it's almost impossible for Americans of different political persuasions to talk objectively and dispassionately about politics. Everyone takes it personally and assumes the other guy is evil. I also said that sometime around 2025-2035, an ultra fast Chinese missile will overcome the defenses of a US aircraft carrier, and we Americans will feel a kind of outside pressure we haven't felt since the end of the Cold War. That will be our Pearl Harbor/Sputnik moment, and we'll have to get our act together again.

icr,

I drove through Costa Rica a few years ago. I would honestly describe most everyone I saw as being mestizos, or "brown." I didn't understand why Costa Rica has a reputation for being white, so it makes sense that it became a brown country through demographic changes.

I also agree that concern for animal welfare is a white thing. I love telling my relatives who believe we need to take in an infinite number of Muslims about how the Muslim men in a country I lived in like to murder street dogs at night for kicks. There are all sorts of stories about Muslims assaulting dogs in Germany too.

It's not likely, but here's to hoping our liberal friends with empathobesity and leap frogging loyalties understand that Muslims are cruel sadists to dogs. That'll rile them up in a way that even accounts of rape and sex slavery of white girls won't.

Audacious Epigone said...

Feryl,

Is Gen Z the first to be out of the shadow of the boomers, then? I certainly hope so.

icr,

I've never met anyone who wants "white supremacy". The "white power" stuff comes from ghosts, plants, and imposters. Richard Spencer explicitly states that he doesn't want to rule over anyone but instead to be separate from them.

Anon,

My objectives, crafted to maximize appeal without being self-defeating:

1) A moratorium on immigration for at least a generation
2) A repatriation of all non-citizens
3) An increase in native fertility to at least replacement level

Issac,

Do you think Israel would do what Rhodesia (didn't know that, thanks) and South Africa did in a similar situation? Could any amount of international pressure lead to Israel voluntarily merging with Palestine and Jordan? Obviously it's so ridiculous a thought experiment that it's hard to conceive of the possibility, but my sense is the Jewish state wouldn't relent like the Afrikaners did.

Issac said...

AE,

"Do you think Israel would do what Rhodesia (didn't know that, thanks) and South Africa did in a similar situation? Could any amount of international pressure lead to Israel voluntarily merging with Palestine and Jordan? Obviously it's so ridiculous a thought experiment that it's hard to conceive of the possibility, but my sense is the Jewish state wouldn't relent like the Afrikaners did."

I think it could happen to us, yes. It might take longer because we are a much more tribal people, but we also have fewer local resources than Rhodesia, which was the bread-basket of Africa at the time. Ultimately, any smaller state is vulnerable to this without a significant patron. North Korea would have been gone long ago if not for China and the Soviets.

Audacious Epigone said...

Sid,

It's standard in Chinese zoos for patrons to be able to feed live animals to predators. I haven't seen cat burnings a la medieval Europe among the Han, but they probably happen, too!

Animal rights in particular, and environmentalism more generally. Even the most committed anti-Trumpian SWPL has to know that the average non-white Dem voter doesn't care about climate change, national parks, nature preservation, etc.

Anonymous said...

@Audacious Epigone
"Listened to the Z-Cast tonight" what is this that you and feryl keep referring to.
Also, thanks feryl for the demo/generational info and the 35th parallel info from a few post before good stuff.
Since AE and the people here seem to be interested in this sort of thing I got something from
https://twitter(dot)com/SmashMarxCult

A little present from our neighbors in the southeast and people keep telling me there is nothing to worry about with the (K)Neeling Felons League. Like that kind of hatred just goes away or vanishes into thin air or something.
http://africanamericanhomeland(dot)com/

traitors first

Issac said...

Sid,

That strikes me as nihilistic delusion. Not only are you pining for the death of thousands of your own people, but you're doing so on the demonstrably foolish gamble that ~50% white America is remarkably similar to the ~90% white America of the mid-20th century.

Sid said...

"Not only are you pining for the death of thousands of your own people..."

Absolutely wrong of you to say. This scenario would be disastrous and I would feel for the death of every sailor lost.

What I am saying is that I think that it has a strong likelihood of happening, much the way I think there will be more Muslim terrorist attacks in France in the coming years. I don't want these outcomes, but I can't pretend there's no chance they'll happen.

"...but you're doing so on the demonstrably foolish gamble that ~50% white America is remarkably similar to the ~90% white America of the mid-20th century."

The country as a whole wouldn't respond the same way, but I think such a scenario would show to American whites (as well as non-whites who feel a strong sense of loyalty and belonging to the US, whatever their numbers) that they can't play around anymore. It's time to drop the partisan games and the virtue signalling.

On the other hand, the country may be so far gone that a strong external threat would just hasten Americans' resignation to their future, much the way Edward Gibbon claimed the late Christian Romans just withdrew into themselves and their piety as their empire came crashing down.

icr said...

"You don't get it. I don't care what color the immigrants are, or what their religion is, I don't want them here."

You don't have to worry about white immigration. Except for small religious groups like the Amish or Mormons, whites haven't been reproducing above replacement level(2.1) anywhere for one or more generations. All European countries have TFRs (for whites) of 1.2 to 1.7.

Audacious Epigone said...

Traitors First,

The Z-Man's podcast. It's great.

Sid,

More pragmatically, we withdraw into functional smaller states. The rubber still has to meet the road at some point--we can't let just anyone in, and the immigration enforcement has to be robust--but seems to me our chances are better in that the scenario that the current one. This Las Vegas shooting was a genuine 'national tragedy' and yet the knives were coming out among people living in the US for other people living in the US in the immediate aftermath.

icr,

Good point. Median ages across Europe are in the late 40s and early 50s, and native ages are even higher than that since the invaders are younger on average.