Doom and Gloom
Posted by Spandrell on
http://www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2015/diversity-explosion
Some random examples. Note these are metro areas, not just the urban core.
[gallery ids="wp-content/uploads/2016/04/screen-shot-2016-04-03-at-22-44-10-2.png|,wp-content/uploads/2016/04/screen-shot-2016-04-03-at-22-43-36-2.png|,wp-content/uploads/2016/04/screen-shot-2016-04-03-at-22-43-29-3.png|,wp-content/uploads/2016/04/screen-shot-2016-04-03-at-22-43-01-3.png|,wp-content/uploads/2016/04/screen-shot-2016-04-03-at-22-42-48-3.png|,wp-content/uploads/2016/04/screen-shot-2016-04-03-at-22-42-38-3.png|,wp-content/uploads/2016/04/screen-shot-2016-04-03-at-22-42-15-3.png|" type="rectangular"]
Brazil is here. Or shall I say Mexico?
20 comments
[…] Doom and Gloom […]
Brazil...Argentina...maybe. I read about how the hinterlands have been "abandoned" more or less by the State in those countries. Survival in rural communities depends on local chieftains with their own armed forces protecting farmers and merchants from wandering brigands/ terrorists. This scenario seems more likely than secession; a kind of low-key "mad-max"; armed support of trading caravans to the outside world for flour and salt until we get our milling machinery and mines back up and running...
[…] Source: Bloody Shovel […]
Multnomah County (Portland) is 59.3% white in the 0-4 age bracket and 56.4% white in the 5-20 age bracket, likely due to Portland being a white destination. The metro area as a whole is fairing somewhat better at 62.9 percent in the 0-4 bracket (down from 64.6 percent in the 5-10 bracket), as the suburbs aren't as popular as the city itself. Still, it's apparent that the future of Portland isn't overwhelmingly white at all, contrary to the common conception of the city.
One more comment: It's also amazing to me that any white person thinks that this future scenario is going to be beneficial to us, particularly in metro areas like Houston and LA. Does anybody really think that we are going to receive the same sensitive treatment that we have given the browns and blacks under multiculturalism? No way, they're going to fuck us. I think that individualism is one particular white trait, which makes us incapable of groking tribalism, and I myself have had issues with it. To be specific, I don't feel any particular fondness or kinship for most other white people, and I don't think most other whites feel that way either in relation to each other. Most whites don't immediately see any obvious reason why they should practice in-group favoritism in relation to other whites, given that they don't particularly like the majority of them all that much and are meritocratic when it comes to choosing friends and associates. My response to this is that other whites are the only people who are likely to treat YOU in a remotely meritocratic or fair fashion, meaning that you are only free to "be an individual" among a white super-majority. All other racial groups will simply look at you as a member of a rival tribe, and will never evaluate you "according to your own personal merits" or the "content of your character". You don't need to regard whites as your brothers to comprehend the "safety in numbers" principle. Sure, you might have individual non-white friends that treat you fairly, but when you multiply their presence such that their group is large enough to form an ethnic block, their fair treatment of you will go out the window.
I'm not saying that I like the impending change in the racial demographics of the US, but the reality is that what the US is becoming will be much better than what Brazil currently is. Let's remember that what makes Brazil Brazil is the enormous population of blacks and part-blacks that it has. However, the mestizos in the US, though they are a bit dull, aren't blacks; genetically, they're about ~60 percent white. As well, many of them do in fact assimilate and begin to identify as white after a generation or two. That this is so is partly the reason why it seems as if Hispanics in the US commit more crime or do even worse academically in the second- and third- generation, for the best Hispanics become middle class and then intermarry with whites, and finally drop their Hispanic identity altogether. It is probably more accurate to say that America is becoming more like Argentina, except with a more substantial number of blacks, a nontrivial Hispanic underclass and a much higher number, both in relative and in absolute terms, of people with 120 IQs, partly due to high-IQ immigrants from Asia and, to a much lesser extent, Africa. Of course, if/when Europe finally has its civil war, most or all of its high-IQ whites will likely flee to America, Canada or Australia, thus increasing the number of high-IQ types that the US will have. The future America might not be what most of us would like, but I think that as far as things go, it'll be pretty functional and economically competitive. Colin Liddell has some interesting thoughts on this subject, you should have a look: http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-future-of-west-white-revolution.html
I recall reading that. I've always liked Liddell. Argentina is of course a complete basket case; and European whites aren't going to flee to the US. Nor would the US accept them, given the present identity politics. I agree that Brazil is not quite accurate, as indeed Brazil is pound per pound more black than the US, and it shows on the crazy crime rates. Mexicans are actually rather well behaved on average. Still, Mexico is another basket case; and what the US is evolving too has worse demographics than Mexico itself.
>Argentina is of course a complete basket case; and European whites aren’t going to flee to the US. Nor would the US accept them, given the present identity politics. Argentina is pretty dysfunctional, but it isn't a third world country by any means. As for European whites, though, I do think that there is a possibility of Europe suffering a massive brain drain in the coming years, especially as Europe becomes increasingly impoverished, politically unstable, and outright dangerous in the coming years. European whites with 120 IQs are likely not going to be willing to fight the Muslims in the streets of Paris or Berlin or wherever else as a part of some ethno-nationalist militia. It is more likely that they'll leave Europe for abroad--especially for those countries with whom they share a close cultural and linguistic affinity, like the US--at the first opportunity, before the going in Europe really gets rough. >Mexicans are actually rather well behaved on average. Still, Mexico is another basket case; and what the US is evolving too has worse demographics than Mexico itself. Close to 80 percent of Mexico is mestizo, about 6 or 7 percent is fully Amerindian, and the rest are white. As for America, even in the worst case scenario, it'll always be at least ~45 percent white. These whites, plus the many high-IQ immigrants of all races that we're getting, will ensure that America's demographics are better than Mexico's. And actually, the fact that America's elite will be increasingly multi-racial in coming years, they won't be experiencing any white guilt, and so they'll be capable of dealing with the problem of the black underclass in the particularly brutal and, let us say, definitive and irreversible way. So there's that too.
"European whites with 120 IQs ... [will] leave Europe for abroad–especially for those countries with whom they share a close cultural and linguistic affinity, like the US–at the first opportunity, before the going in Europe really gets rough." Speaking as someone with a half-dozen relatives in Europe in the 20-mid-30s range, I know them well enough to know that if I were to mention such a thing to them, they would be too polite to laugh in my face. But they will not be doing any such thing. Europe, and specific places in Europe, is their home.
>Speaking as someone with a half-dozen relatives in Europe in the 20-mid-30s range, I know them well enough to know that if I were to mention such a thing to them, they would be too polite to laugh in my face. >But they will not be doing any such thing. Europe, and specific places in Europe, is their home. How is any of this in any way relevant? You have smart European relatives who don't want to leave their home -- great. The point that I was making, however, is that it is doubtful that a high number of Europeans who have the opportunity to get out of Europe (which is to say, smart Europeans with 120 IQs), and to escape the civil/race/religious war towards which the Western half of the continent seems inexorably headed, would opt to not take advantage of that opportunity in order to stay in Europe, where they will personally face the impending turmoil and hardship, simply because they love and maybe want to fight for it. In the end, the homes of these smart Europeans may be in Europe, but they can always move, and establish homes elsewhere. High-IQ Asians and blacks do it all of the time--they flee for and establish homes in the first world countries instead of staying in and fixing the problems of their countries of origins--and those people are by all accounts far more ethnocentric than are Europeans. So why should high-IQ Europeans behave differently?
Well, of course if things get very bad in Europe people will flee anywhere they can find asylum. I doubt things will get that bad, or that the US would accept them. Remember a single family of German homeschoolers was thrown out of the country recently. US policy as it stands is strongly against increasing the number of whites.
That's a great anecdote.
There is some truth to this in the sense that America is never going to be as bad as the darkest heart of Africa or the worst Brazilian slums. Europe is starting less diverse then us, but their nearby immigrants are worse then Mexicans. At the same time, it doesn't take that much NAM presence to be a dysfunctional shithole. Let's take Puerto Rico, a bankrupt basket case. Despite massive US support its still a shithole. "One genetic study on the racial makeup of Puerto Ricans found them to be roughly around 61% West Eurasian (overwhelmingly of Spanish provenance), 27% Sub-Saharan African and 11% Native American.[213] Another genetic study from 2007, claimed that "the average genomewide individual (ie. Puerto Rican) ancestry proportions have been estimated as 66%, 18%, and 16%, for European, West African, and Native American, respectively."[214] Other study estimates 63.7% European, 21.2% (Sub-Saharan) African, and 15.2% Native American; European ancestry is more prevalent in the West and in Central Puerto Rico, African in Eastern Puerto Rico, and Native American in Northern Puerto Rico.[215] According to data provided by the DNA Tribes company, as of 2013 the genetic admixture of Puerto Ricans was, on average, 72.2% West Eurasian (49% European, 18.3% Saharan-Arabian, 4.9% West Asian), 12.7% Native American, 12.5% Sub-Saharan African, and 1.4% Northeast African." Seems a lot like the demographics your talking about. I actually had a smart engineer friend who spent a summer of college interning at a robotics manufacturer there. Today he designs robots that do surgeries, but back then he was testifying to the authorities about an engineer at his company being a crack dealer, blackmailing people, and conspiring with others. The authorities took bribe and he high tailed it out of the country under threats. So yeah, that will suck. Maybe it won't be a dollar a day sub-saharan Africa suck. But Baltimore Suburbs are 60% white today and they are burning it down. Washington, DC is a great centralization city full of high IQ people from all over the world...and it can't even make the trains run on time because black people took over the MTA: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/26/metro-derailed-by-culture-of-complacence-incompete/?page=all
spandrell, I posted a comment about an hour or two ago...did it get lost? Its cool if you deleted it, I was just curious as to what happened to it.
spam filter.
Speaking of Tribalism and group identity, Remember, we once mused about the purpose of Bullshit and what possible evolutionary reason it had and why humans kept coming up with more and more elaborate bullshit. It puzzled me for sure. Well, Looks like Mencius Moldbug answered it a while back. Here is a quote from the Great Man himself. “[I]n many ways nonsense is a more effective organizing tool than the truth. Anyone can believe in the truth. To believe in nonsense is an unforgeable demonstration of loyalty. It serves as a political uniform. And if you have a uniform, you have an army.” For every Truth, there is lots of bullshit. So if people believe in only one kind of bullshit and condemn all the other competing forms of bullshit, isn't that an organizing principle? Mencius Moldbug is truly the greatest political thinker alive today. He is Fully the Equal of Oswald Spengler, who is thought of as the last great thinker of the west. Well, Mencius is here.
Moldbug has the benefit of hindsight; Spengler didn't, so credit where it's due. Moldbug is a great historian, indeed the only one who came out to explain where the left comes from and how it operates. But he isn't a great political thinker. Ye shall know them by their fruits His proposal was neocameralism, which doesn't quite work. I think Moldbug underestimated the evolutionary mechanics of human politics, how monarchy actually worked, and just how nasty people can be.
Neocameralism hasn't been tried, so it doesn't seem inconceivable that something like it could work, if the technological environment were to evolve to a place where rulers didn't need to involve the population so much in order to keep power. That's a big if though.
[…] Ethnic cleansing numbers. […]
[…] Ethnic cleansing numbers. […]