Race Hatred, Immigration and Democracy in America Today

America is increasingly torn by racial strife, with the white majority now openly targeted by colored racists and their white Communist and liberal (is there a difference?) advocates, who see mass illegal immigration of colored people as a means to put paid to white domination. This wave of colored racism now dominates the American political landscape and the current Presidential election contest. 

The reaction of most white Americans, particularly among the working class, is naturally, tit-for-tat anti-colored racism. This, however, is to fall into a trap laid by their anti-white racist antagonists, who then have proof that all whites are contemptible racists.

What low-fertility white Americans, concerned about their race being swamped out by colored immigrants, need to focus on, is not the racial conflict, which is contrary to the spirit of a nation founded on the principal that "all men are created equal," but rather on the nation's right, as recognized in Chapter 1 of the United Nations Charter, to self-determination.

Under the American doctrine of the equality of men, any person becoming an American citizen, becomes a member of the American nation— the nation being a race in the process of creation through the free association and intermarriage of its citizens. 

But under the UN doctrine of the "principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples" Americans, whatever the color of their skin, have every right to oppose the immigration of people from elsewhere. 

For most Americans, whatever the color of their skin, immigration is not in their interest unless they are adherents of a racist ideology that seeks to change the racial balance of the population. 

Immigration is bad for most Americans because immigrants compete with the existing American citizenry for jobs and housing, thereby driving down wages and raising the cost of living. Immigrants also increase the need for infrastructure paid for not by immigrants but by taxes on all Americans. Not least important, immigrants when concentrated in large numbers as in California, for example, resist integration, acting rather as settlers intent on preserving their own religious, racial and cultural identity in their country of adoption. 

Beside those seeking non-white racial and cultural hegemony in America, the chief beneficiary of mass immigration to America is the corporate interest that seeks to reduce the cost of American labor to the Third World level. These are the people who hypocritically advocated ridiculously high minimum wage rates that make low-skilled American workers unemployable, while driving mass illegal immigration of people who will work in the black economy at below minimum wages. 

At the same time that business interests seek to impoverish the American working class through mass illegal immigration, technology-based companies seek to expand the H1b visa program to suck in cheap brain-power to undercut American-trained programmers and engineers. As a result, bright Americans who made the effort to master hard subjects find the return on their effort diminished as they are sidelined by immigrant competition. (And remember the best and the brightest in India and China and Korea, and Hong Kong and Taiwan, can all get brilliant jobs with high status in their own countries. It is, for the most part, the second raters from abroad that companies like Boeing have employed with, as we now see, sometimes disastrous results). 

And as mastery of technology rewards American citizens less and less well, the schools that train scientists and engineers inevitably suffer a decline in the quality of teaching staff and the ability of students, smart kids turning to other areas of endeavor. H1b visa immigration, in other words, spells American technological decline. 

All Americans, therefore, should think very carefully about immigration, whether it serves their interest as citizens of a nation with the UN-endorsed right of self-determination, including the right to have borders, to police those borders and to decide who may cross those borders. 

Why Globalists Hate Calls for Covid Herd Immunity

Covid19, says Prince Charles, "provides the unique but rapidly shrinking window of opportunity to reset ourselves on a more sustainable path," which is to say an opportunity for the "Great Reset," meaning the great lowering of the standard of living for all but the elite who yearn to enjoy a world unpolluted by the teaming masses, the hoy polloy. Yes, dear reader, it is you Prince Chuckie and his Davos friends are gunning for.

And down that "more sustainable path" of a much lower standard of living for you, is where we are headed.

For now you will be cushioned from the fall in standard of living by stupendous monetary inflation, cash bailouts for all. But when the ballooning money supply -- yes money is just digits and can be inflated without limit -- and the fall in output in goods and services touches off an accelerating rise in prices, then watch out.

There will be an explosion in demand as people seek to rid themselves of currency of rapidly diminishing value. The result will be shortages and panic. As in Germany's great 1923 inflation, folks will be forced to trade the grand piano or the second car, the only car, even a child, for a basket of groceries. In no time, most folks will be entirely cleaned out: no money, no food, desperate.

Wages can then be adjusted: down.

"A Truly Orwellian Culture"
- Amazon Removes COVID
Skeptic's Book For Violating
 Content Guidelines. Source

Maybe, as during Germany's 1923 inflation, the corporate behemoths, the FAANG stock companies and other big boys that survive the great downsizing, will pay wages in their own currency. Amazon, for example, might pay its workers in Amazons, each redeemable by Amazon for one US dollar. 

Why? did you ask? 

Because when shortages are growing and the supply of money is exploding, the value of the US dollar will fall so fast that between the time Amazon issues its currency and the time those who have sold goods for Amazons receive dollars in return for the Amazons, the US dollar will be worth no more than four-fifths of flip all. At that point, wages will be at the level that Bezos and Zucks are happy with, which is to say next to nothing.

That's the great, but "rapidly shrinking window of opportunity" that the globalist traitor, Prince Chuckie, is working to push you out of.

What's the alternative. Herd immunity, achieved by ending the the shutdown of the Western economies now. The result? Kids, university students, and other young adults, the most socially active element in the population will mostly get Covid19, survive it and acquire immunity. Then the incidence of the disease will collapse due to a shortage of susceptible individuals. The disease will remain in circulation but at a low level. Older people or people otherwise susceptible to serious complications from the corona virus will then be comparatively free to engage in normal social activity as their chance of contact with an infected person will be low. 

Herd immunity is thus precisely what the elite seek to prevent at all cost. It is the one thing that can protect your job, and your current prosperity. What the globalist "Great Resetters" want, instead, is a crisis so prolonged as to destroy the consumer economy and permanently lower the standard of living of the 99% to the massively lower level that they, the sheltered elite, call "sustainable." 

Related:
The Spectator:

A medic’s case against another lockdown

... In August, the Lancet published an analysis of data from 50 countries. The researchers found that full lockdowns were 'not associated' with decreased mortality from Covid-19. These are hard outcome data; reality cannot be waved away with theories or projections.  So much for the purported benefits. What about the risks? We cannot answer this question fully because a worldwide lockdown experiment has never been run before. However, evidence for the harms of lockdown is now piling up. In the US, homicides are up 50 per cent compared to last summer. In France, domestic violence calls are up 30 per cent. In Canada, almost three times more people are contemplating suicide compared to last year; and in British Columbia, overdose deaths have tripled from pre-pandemic levels. When you deprive children of their education, adults of their livelihood, and elderly people of their social connections, desperation and despair quickly set in. While a thoughtful person might have predicted this, the mathematical models did not.  All of these numbers fit with what I see in my clinical practice. I have personally admitted dozens of elderly people to hospital with illness resulting from social isolation and neglect. Some were literally starving to death. One patient, in her eighties, lived in a retirement community but relied on family members to feed her meals. When they were socially distanced (banned) from the premises, she couldn’t feed herself and her health quickly deteriorated. Another patient, a 92-year-old woman, simply gave up on life and started refusing her meals once her family stopped coming to visit. Both these scenes were catastrophically inhumane and will stick with me for a long time. Neither is captured in the government’s Covid-19 statistics. ... ...As a medic, my verdict is clear: mandatory government lockdowns amount to a medical recommendation of no proven benefit, of extraordinary potential harm, that do not take personal values and individual consent into account. Physicians who call for their use should hearken back to these core planks of their ethical training.

. 

AIER:
Is Cowen Right about the Great Barrington Declaration?
Off Guardian:
Why we should seek Covid19 herd immunity not suppression

EClinicalMedicine: 

A country level analysis measuring the impact of government actions, country preparedness and socioeconomic factors on COVID-19 mortality and related health outcomes

Covid-19: Why the Panic?

Referring to the panic reaction to Covid 19, a commenter at the Unz Review remarked:

This is looking more and more like an epidemic of mental illness.

But although what is being done to the mass of ordinary folk may cause an epidemic of insanity, the politicians and their media enablers, mainstream or "alt", who are using the Covid pandemic as  a pretext for destroying the livelihood of tens of millions, are surely not insane.

The question, then, is what's the objective? And the answer to that question must be something that can be inferred from the consequences.

So what are the consequences?

(1) The sharpest rate of job losses every recorded, leading to Great Depression levels of unemployment.

(2) Consequent upon (1), massive loss of income for the salaried workforce, business owners, and beneficiaries of pension funds etc., (the last having sustained large and soon to be larger investment losses).

(3) Consequent upon (2), massive reductions in consumption spending.

(4) Consequent upon (3), big cuts in imports to the West of products of cheap Third World labor.

(1) Means real wages will fall, thereby raising potential economic competitiveness of manufacturing in the US and other Western nations, i.e., reindustrialization of the West as will be essential in an emerging East-West cold war.

(2) Means many small businesses will fold, opening the way for expansion by the big boys: Starbucks,  Dominoes Pizza, Amazon, etc.

(3) Means fewer goddam plebs cluttering the best beaches, ski resorts, tourist meccas.

(4) Means a slowing of China's economic growth and reduced Chinese access to dollars with which to buy American and European technology and businesses, from GE Appliances to Motorola Mobility, and from the Chicago Stock Exchange to the Waldorf Astoria.

As for those few the virus kills, they're just old geezers, useless eaters, wasn't that what Adolf called them?

So, nothing crazy about this fake plague: what's not to like about it?

And to put things into context, the situation is much like that during the Great War that led to the still ongoing destruction of Europe. Then, British Prime Minister, David Lloyd George remarked:

If the people knew what is happening, this war would end tomorrow. But of course the people cannot know what is happening.

Likewise, they cannot know now, thanks to the MSM and its "alt" auxiliaries.

Related:
Nic Lewis: Why herd immunity to COVID-19 is reached much earlier than thought

Nationalists Versus Globalists

Nationalists believe that the occupants of a territory have all the rights of ownership to that territory including the right to govern themselves as they see fit, such governing rights including:

(1) the right to limit or entirely prohibit the settlement on its territory of people from elsewhere, such limitation being either general or specific as to the origins, religious beliefs, political affiliations, age, sex, health, financial resources, education, linguistic or professional qualifications or other characteristics of prospective immigrants;

(2) the right to regulate trade, financial transactions, and information exchange with foreign entities for the purpose of promoting national prosperity and security;

(3) the right to defend national interests by force of arms.

Globalists deny the legitimacy of the territorial rights of nations, recognizing only the claims of private property as legitimate. Globalists thus assert the moral right of private individuals, including corporations, to buy and sell property, and to move goods, capital, technology and people wherever it is most profitable, without regard for the rights claimed on behalf of citizens by sovereign nations.

Europe: The Perils of Complacency

Source: The modern typewriter

The UK urgently needs to wean itself off international finance and get back to what it did well 150 years ago, making and selling quality things and services. That will mean an attitudinal revolution in the UK ...

That's a quote from a discussion at the Slog, which prompted some reflection.

One thing the above-quoted remark brought to mind was a cartoon, in the style of the 19th Century Punch Magazine, which seemed to exemplify the thinking of many Europeans during the present moment of financial shock. It portrayed a fat man watching a cricket match on the village green and wearing a look of astonishment at the moment of being struck in the stomach by the ball.

Sadly, I was unable to find the image on the Internet, which raises the interesting though irrelevant question of whether I retain in memory more images than Google has stored on its servers. But Google did provide a link to the image of the sinking Titanic and a note by the Modern Typewriter:

On April 14th, 1912, the RMS Titanic hit an iceberg at 11:40 pm. ... the Captain ordered the lifeboats to start leaving the ship. The passengers were frightened. They thought that leaving such a safe ship into a[n] “unsafe” lifeboat wouldn’t be smart. So they refused to enter the boat[s].

The insistence of some in Europe on clinging to the past, and on assuming that what Europeans did better than the rest of the World 150 years ago they can do better than the rest of the World today with little more than an adjustment in attitude, is reminiscent of the belief of those on the Titanic who apparently thought that if they kept a stiff upper lip and refrained from panic they could stay aboard the warm, comfortable sinking ship indefinitely, without need to brave the cold ocean in a tiny lifeboat.

The question these people need to ask is how can Britons get back to making things, quality or otherwise, when competing with those in Asia and elsewhere who are earning a tenth or less of what UK workers earn?

150 years ago, Britain was the workshop of the world because she had the world’s most advanced industrial technology powered by the World's largest coal industry.

Today, energy is available everywhere and the most advanced technology is moved to wherever labor is cheapest -- and that includes not only factory labor, but much white collar labor including design, software engineering, all kinds of R & D and back office work in financial services, publishing, marketing, etc.

There appear to be only three ways Britain (or any Western nation) can revive its manufacturing sector, these being to: (1) construct a massive tariff wall that excludes cheap products from low wage economies, (2) print massive amounts of money, while keeping a tight lid on nominal wages, thereby driving real wages to the Asian level, or (3) subsidize wages to create a work force that can be employed at internationally competitive rates, i.e., by wealth transfers from the 1% to the 99%.

It seems that the inflationary route (plus mass immigration of third world labor to help drive market wages down) is the route that, without public acknowledgment, has been chosen. To be effective, it will take many years, possibly a decade or two, and it will cause much social conflict in a period during which multinational corporations that can take advantage of opportunities for wage arbitrage continue to reap huge profits by off-shoring production and services.

In the meantime, something like one quarter of the Western world's workforce continue to be treated as so much useless baggage to be kept alive in a demoralized and degraded condition on food stamps or other forms of welfare including residential programmes in prisons and mental hospitals.