Saturday, May 21, 2016

Demography, Destiny, and Derbyshire

I was having another exchange with some SJW's who think they're libertarians on the net. There are two of them, and they have concluded that I'm a xenophobe because I think accepting Muslim immigrants into the West is idiotic.

One of them, predictably, asked me:

"And you hate them [Muslims] so much you dont think they have a right to live next to you?"

I replied:

"Not logical. Do you hate Americans so much that you want to see them replaced by foreigners? See, it's easy. You're using the liberal "hate" technique, whereby everybody who disagrees with you is accused of some kind of hate. Childish and VERY leftist."

This analogy, and sarcasm, went right over their pointy little heads, because the other one at once piped up:

"Lol because we support immigration, we hate Americans (immigrants for the most part) around us. Bahaha. You are an idiot."

And the second one, at least, insists that he's a libertarian.

In the same thread, one of them told me that this country was founded by all kinds of people from everywhere. I answered, no, it was founded basically by a bunch of Brits, migrating from Britain  to the colonies of Britain. Then they headed for Wikipedia and lectured me on the fact that there were some Dutch and Swedes, etc. here, too. 

All this is in aid of their delusion that the Magic Dirt of America will turn any rag tag and bobtail into a free-market constitutionalist when he steps off the boat, or plane.

But no, oddly enough, there's a correlation between what kind of people live in a country and the qualities of that country. The Brits who colonized New Zealand, for example, went right on being Brits and behaving like Brits. They didn't turn into Maoris. Now, think about what the area now called the United States was like before 1492, and ask yourself if immigration had any effect on it. Demography is destiny. At Unz Review [link], John Derbyshire elaborates on that.

Demography Is Destiny–So Why Do Gregg Easterbrook (And Barack Obama) Want America to Take the Third World Risk?


  1. One correction, it was a nice country before the mass immigration starting in the 1840's. The hordes of Irish and Germans were just the advance guard for the 3rd worlders of the 1960's and later.

  2. This is the Marshmallow test given to kids transposed.

    A child sees a marshmallow in front of him and is told if he waits 5 minutes he will get two marshmallows. Time preference. Deferred gratification.

    No one does the experiment where after a minute the first marshmallow is taken away and the second was just a lie.

    In the article, Norway gives you more and more marshmallows as you delay gratification. In Venezuela they steal your marshmallow if you don't eat it immediately.

    Culture? yes. Race? How do you separate it from culture?

    You see it in Europe - PIIGS - Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Greece are southern Dolce Vita countries where you don't freeze to death.

    Sweden, Norway, Finland, the Baltics, Belarus... are where you have to think hard about Winter (which Napoleon nor Hitler did).

    That said, I should remind that the fundamental problem - including the point of libertarianism including the mutant forms - is that a small, unobtrusive government when it has a tyranny it is often literally remote - like reading about a natural disaster thousands of miles away. When Government is big and intrusive, even if you are in the most remote places, it wishes to seek you out and force you to engage in the civil liturgy, so the right and the left, secular and religious, everyone is forced to worry about the content. Where nothing is imposed, whether America is secular or religious is merely an interesting discussion. Where one or the other will be harassed or enslaved it is a matter of life and death - literally.