Michael Coren and Peter Brimelow on Immigration and Death of Our Culture

MRC TV, December 12, 2011

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • cecilhenry

    Why can’t Peter and others be honest when the get on the networks?

    Everyone rushes to deny it is about race? Why? The reaction is like– Thank God its not about race!! anything but that!

    But it IS about race. Whites have a right to protect and promote their ethnic interests by controlling the racial composition of their society. Basic reality. To deny whites that reality is RACISM and genocide.

    No immigration to Japan— ask the question guys– Why are we accepting that the Japanese protect their ethnic interests but whites explicitly do not.

    That is wrong. Stop dodging the issue on the news. Vdare is a great site– you’d never know it from that interview!!

  • Anonymous

    There was some mention of Mexico’s immigration laws. Mexico has draconian and harsh immigration laws. That is why I continually say that we should apply Mexico’s immigration laws to Mexicans who come here.

    Guatemalans who cross the border into Mexico illegally are arrested, beaten, and raped. We will not treat people that way because our people are better than that. But the official Mexican immigration laws should be applied to Mexicans.

    http://goo.gl/9P6H

  • white advocate – Canada

    There is one big difference between Coren and Brimelow. Brimelow teaches you how to think for yourself. With Coren, for each new situation you have to go back to him for new advice. Perhaps it is because Brimelow is an individualist and Coren is a collectivist (although I’m still thinking of how to defend this statement).

  • Anonymous

    1 — cecilhenry wrote at 9:20 PM on December 14:

    Why can’t Peter and others be honest when the get on the networks?

    Everyone rushes to deny it is about race? Why? The reaction is like— Thank God its not about race!! anything but that!

    —————————————————

    First let’s understand that as Peter said he generally can’t talk about immigration in the ‘mainstream’ media. SunTV is a new conservative network in Canada (which is famous for ‘hate speech’ prosecution) and the knives are already out for SunTV daring to cover things from a different perspective. Peter is wise to not come on too strong right out of the box. Michael Coren said he wants to have Peter back repeatedly. It is very pragmatic for them to develop the topic gradually, in a relaxed and cumulative manner rather than immediately being blunt about the race factor and possibly squelching the long term prospects.

    And it is not correct that Peter denied that race matters. First he said one factor is that the numbers were too big and he went on to say “AND THEY’RE TOO DIFFERENT”.

    Later Peter deployed the wonderful catch phrase of race realist immigration restrictionists: “ELECTING A NEW PEOPLE” and said the Democrats wanted to do that for electoral power. The phenomenon of voting by race is thereby raised. Peter is famous, among us that know him, for saying “In American politics, demography is destiny”. Let’s watch for him to say that in a subsequent visit.

    I consider this brief interview to be an excellent start, laying markers for further elaboration as the series of interviews progresses and avoiding throwing any bombs and frightening the horses needlessly and counter-productively right at the start. Peter, like Jared is a real pro, with a total grasp of his issue, comfortable and relaxed in speaking without prepared remarks, and coming across as a rational, respectable person who nonetheless will say politically incorrect things that ordinary people WILL AGREE WITH, find to be good sense and want to hear explained more.

    Coren is a very accomplished broadcaster too and it’s a coup for SunTV to have gotten him.

    I am extremely pleased at this development. What US network is welcoming Peter to be a repeat guest? The only one you could even hope for would be Fox and they are not doing it and probably won’t.

  • Anonymous

    Even jews are able to maintain their cultural insularity and cohesiveness without being branded as “racists”–something that is denied to the white gentile–WHY??

    I await intelligent responses . . .

    Not “anti-semitic” just racially aware . . . If thinking such thoughts makes me a racist, oh well . . .

  • Anonymous

    A STARK AND ALARMING ANALYSIS OF CANADA’S DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE

    Did you note that Peter Brimelow projected the UK to be minority White by 2060? It so happens that I did some research recently on demographic change in Canada and came to a similar projected date for Canada. I haven’t seen it published so probably you are hearing it here first.

    Canada imports more people per capita than does the USA. Australia is close behind the USA.

    Canada keeps extremely detailed demographic, census and immigration data which is easily available on the internet, allowing one to get a grip on the trends easily.

    Let me show some of what I have found in one evening. I can source all this stuff but I am not going to clutter up this post with links. All is based upon official US and Canadian government sources.

    Toronto has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world (presumably compared to other major cities).

    Canada uses the term ‘visible minorities’ which simply means ‘non-white’. In data below I have substituted the terms White and Non-White for the clumsy newspeak of Non-Visible Minority and Visible Minority.

    Canada’s census is every 5 years i.e. 1996, 2001, 2006.

    2011 data will be out next year.

    Immigration data is annual.

    Toronto city is already (2006) 47% non-white, the metro area 43%.

    City non-whites increased 10.6% from 2001, 31.8% from 1996.

    City whites declined 6.5% and 11.3% respectively.

    City top five non-white groups (2006)

    South Asian 12%

    Chinese 11.4%

    Black 8.4%

    Filipino 4.1%

    Latin American 2.6% (but the fastest % growing since 2001)

    BTW take a look at Toronto’s Homicide Most Wanted list

    http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/homicide/mostwanted.php

    Canada as a whole is de-whitening at a furious pace, actually faster than the USA I would say. US Census Bureau projects white minority by 2041. Canada started massive de-whitening later than USA but is moving faster.

    Non-White portion of total Canada population

    1981 4.7%

    1991 9.4%

    1996 11.2%

    2001 13.4%

    2006 16.2%

    2011 got to be 19% or so

    1996

    Total Population 28,528,125

    Total Non-White population 3,197,480

    Total White population 25,330,645

    2006

    Total Population 31,241,030

    Total Non-White population 5,068,095

    Total White population 26,172,935

    Total population increase from 1996 to 2006

    2,712,905

    White population increase from 1996 to 2006

    842,290

    White Percent of total population increase

    31

    Non-White population increase from 1996 to 2006

    1,870,615

    Non-White Percent of total population increase

    69

    Non-White population increase = 2.2 times the White increase

    FROM A MUCH SMALLER BASE

    AND ACCELERATING

    Are you shocked and alarmed yet?

    It gets worse the more you analyze it.

    1996

    Total Population 28,528,125

    Total Non-White population 3,197,480

    Total White Population 25,330,645

    1996 RATIO OF WHITES TO NON-WHITES

    7.9 to 1

    call it 8 to 1 for simplicity in conversation

    2006

    Total Population 31,241,030

    Total Non-White population 5,068,095

    Total White Population 26,172,935

    2006 RATIO OF WHITES TO NON-WHITES

    5.16 to 1

    call it 5 to 1 for simplicity in conversation

    Is it not staggering that in a mere 10 years the White/Non-White Ratio could shift so far?

    From 8/1 to 5/1

    IT GET’S WORSE !

    1996

    Non-White population 3,197,480

    2006

    Non-White population 5,068,095

    Non-White population increase in 10 years

    1,870,615

    PERCENT INCREASE OF NON-WHITE POPULATION IN 10 YEARS

    58.5

    1996

    White population 25,330,645

    2006

    White population 26,172,935

    White population increase

    842,290

    PERCENT INCREASE OF WHITE POPULATION IN 10 YEARS

    3.3

    not per year, only 1/3 of 1 percent per year, a little above replacement level, earth-friendly, culture-friendly

    vs.

    PERCENT INCREASE OF NON-WHITE POPULATION IN 10 YEARS

    58.5

    All of that above is official data and simple arithmetic.

    Compound that trend for a mere few more decades.

    The following is my analysis of the comparative rates of De-Whitening in the USA and Canada and why I say Canada is moving faster than the USA and despite a later start will likely be (barring major immigration changes) minority White by about 2060

    Canada in 2006 was 83.8 percent White.

    For comparison, in 1970 the USA was officially 87.6 percent White but not really because Spanish speakers were included. A census sample asking about language put non-Hispanic Whites at 83.2%.

    Starting in 1980 the Hispanic census category was official and could overlap Whites so the number we seek is thenceforth Non-Hispanic White. In 1980 it was 79.6 percent. So let’s say Canada’s de-whitening is about where the USA’s was in about 1970.

    41 years later we in USA are down to about 63+ percent.

    US Census projects White (non-Hispanic) goes below 50% by 2041 – another 30 years.

    USA in 1940 was officially 89.8% White, but again a sample identifying Spanish speakers reduced it to about 88.4% estimated non-Hispanic White.

    Thus in one century (one long lifetime) 1941-2041 we see it (non-Hispanic White) go from nearly 90% to 50%. And of course it will continue slide ever faster toward complete subordination.

    From 1970 – about where Canada is now – Whites in USA will have become a minority 71 years later. If Canada’s pace is the same as the USA Canadian Whites become a minority about 70+/- years from 2006 which is 2076.

    HOWEVER I think Canada’s pace may be even faster.

    Note that in the 10 years between 1996 and 2006 Canada’s White population dropped FIVE percentage points (not percent) from 88.8% to 83.8%.

    By comparison in the USA it took from 1940 to 1970 to drop 5 percentage points from 88.4% to 83.2%. Then in our decade of 1970-1980 the non-Hispanic White share dropped ‘only’ 3.6 percentage points and in our (USA) decade of 1980-1990 we dropped ‘only’ 4 percentage points.

    It certainly looks like Canada is on a distinctly faster pace. Canada can probably become majority non-White by somewhere in 2060’s.

    Remember how compounding works.

    CANADA IS COMMITTING NATIONAL SUICIDE

    If you are a Canadian or have Canadian friends I urge you to pass on this material. Canadians need to wake up fast.

    We in the USA (maybe not some readers here, but too many Americans) failed to recognize, much less address the problem when the damage was not nearly so severe. We slept through the 70’s and 80’s and while more aware in the 90’s and 2000’s still are losing the battle badly.

    Canadians are where we were in 1970. They have a much better chance to save themselves if they start now. Don’t blow it like we did.

    One last point. Don’t be complacent and rationalize like this.

    A Canadian might say:

    “Well I’m not really that concerned. After all you Yanks are getting hordes of Latinos. And to be blunt (don’t tell anyone I said this) but yeah they are average low IQ, poorly educated, hard to educate, difficult to assimilate because there are so many Mexicans pulled by ties to the home country right next door. And yeah there’s some reconquista agitation going on and some difficult history there with the Mexican-American War. And yeah there seems to be quite a gang problem, drug smuggling and so on. But Canada’s immigration situation is so different, really a totally different pattern. We are getting lots of high IQ Chinese, many wealthy, well educated, who kids excel and lots of talented East Indians, PhDs galore, scientists, entrepreneurs, just great additions to out nation.”

    Well even if that were true (it’s only partly true) those people are still not you, the traditional European base. You will still have natural segregation by neighborhood and a palpable feeling of difference, while your child may be disadvantaged getting into college. Vancouver, anyone? Recall that liberal John Cleese recently said casually in an interview that he doesn’t spend much time in London any more because ‘it just doesn’t really feel like England’. So the concern is not just fears of dramatic things like drug gangs or Sharia fanatics. It’s loss of your national/historical/cultural/linguistic identity.

    But mainly it’s not true because if you look at the immigration data you will find that, surprise, the largest influx is actually Filipinos (the drones of the Middle East are imported Filipinos) Chinese come second and Indians third. And don’t think a lot or corruption and crime doesn’t come with them.

    The more disturbing part is the rest. Lots of Muslims. Pakistanis for heavens sake. Lots of Africans. Somalis. Congolese. Central Americans. Colombians. Why do that?

    Not that many Europeans. For example the city of Edmonton in the most recent data received almost exactly the same number of Africans as Europeans. And as was shown for Toronto – Latin Americans a fast rising percentage. Our major problem group is becoming one of yours.

    Alright I must end this post. A lot of work.

  • tombarnes

    Great interview, you rarely see Brimelow interviewed.

    I think his point about the 3% of GDP transferred from Labor to Capital via immigration is a great point. Middle class wages stagnate but you get your lawn cut cheap. Australia has a minimum wage of 15 bucks and if the US minimum wage had a COLA it would be 11 bucks.

    The new elite are screwing the native born population of the US.

    As far as racism is concerned,I do not understand why people do not repeat the song from the musical Avenue Q… “Everybody is just a little bit racist.”

    Singing this song takes the wind out of the racist charge forthwith.

  • Luke

    “3 — white advocate – Canada wrote at 11:11 PM on December 14:

    Perhaps it is because Brimelow is an individualist and Coren is a collectivist (although I’m still thinking of how to defend this statement).”

    Wise up, White Advocate: you cannot DEFEND this statement – and the reason you cannot is because ‘individualist’ thinking is the #1 reason why White European people are in the demographic mess we are in today. This is the precise reason why the alien, hostile, hate-filled Cultural Marxist, anti-white enemies of all White European people worldwide – use their media control to endlessly promote the suicidal notion that Whites should always think and behave as (disorganized) ‘individuals” and NEVER think or behave as a collective (organized) group of people who share the same genetic lineage, the same history, the same general traditions, customs, values and who have perfectly legitimate, perfectly justified ethnic specific interests. The most important of which is to NOT ALLOW THEIR NATIVE HOMELANDS to be flooded with non-Whites who are totally unlike themselves in every measurable way, and who pose a existential threat to the future survival of White Western people and White Western civilization.

    A few weeks ago, Ilana Mercer – who is in Peter Brimelow’s stable of writers, and who recently authored a book titled ‘Into the Cannibals Pot’ appeared on The Political Cesspool radio show, which was hosted that weekend by Bill Rollins and Keith Alexander. I encourage everyone to go back in the archives, download and listen to that show. The show date was 10/29 and Mercer appeared during hour #1.

    This Ilana Mercer interview is a classic, text-book illustration of the Cultural Marxist enemy in action, real-time. Mercer continually attempted to insist that White European people were physically and intellectually incapable of being energized along racial lines and by appeals to their long-suppressed inner instincts for racial and cultural survival. Keith Alexander attempted to argue otherwise, but Ilana Mercer continually interrupted him, and tried her level best to encourage White Americans to continue to think and behave as individuals! She even had the incredible gall to insinuate that the very same behavior that has allowed our nations to be hijacked and basically taken away from the White European founding stock by a highly collectivist oriented, extremely aggressive, ethnic conscious group of Cultural Marxists with very sharp elbows – was a type of (self-destructive) behavior that Whites should increase their devotion to?

    Is this not proof-positive that anyone who tries to push the idea that Whites must only think as individuals and never as a collective group who have shared interests that it is perfectly legitimate to wish to defend – is clearly trying to sell Whites a sentence of death and racial extinction?

    Later on, during subsequent Political Cesspool shows – Keith Alexander expounded on the interview with Ilana Mercer and he and Bill Rollins both acknowledged that they understood what Ilana Mercer was attempting to do by discouraging Whites from thinking tribally. Keith Alexander used an analogy that I thought was brilliant, so I will give him credit before I share it with the readers of American Renaissance. Keith commented that even the best trained, best equipped, most bad-### in the world individual soldier cannot hope to prevail when he is on a battlefield and he’s facing an organized army. Our enemies understand this truth and that is why Cultural Marxists and even some who pretend to be on our side, i.e., Ilana Mercer, will constantly try to encourage White European people – in America and in every other White European historic nation – to think as individuals and never think tribally.

    Don’t fall for it, my fellow White brothers and sisters. Think Tribally. Behave Tribally. And demand tribal loyalty from friends, family members, and most especially from politicians who you vote for.

    This is the recipe for survival. Embrace it. Live it. Teach it.

  • Jupiter7

    Peter Brimelow should not be using the 3 percent number for the scale of the wealth transfer. This is a very crude estimate of Borjas from 15 years ago…even Borja admits that econometrics is incapable of measuring the labor market consequences of post-1965 immigration. Just state that the scale of wealth transfer is enormous…a fact known by millions of Native Born White Americans and Native Born White Canadians…we determine what the facts are not an immigrant Cuban Economist with a really big ego.

  • Fed-up Canuck

    Thanks to Poster #6 for your invaluable research.

    White Canadians need to awaken from their induced mindset of demonstrating “tolerance” for our eventual(?) replacements who’ll definitely NOT return the favour when they become the majority place-holders.

    In times ahead, China will still be Chinese, India will still be Indian, the Philippines will still have their own people, etc, but multi-culti Canada will have ghettoized minority Whites assigned to the fringes of society.

    Enforced “employment-equity” (affirmative action) programs or “sensitivity sessions” are but two indications of where we’re headed. If today’s “White” governments and businesses deny our equal rights to jobs and merit-based job promotions, imagine what this future scenario portends if the “NON-whites” take control!

    Many of us, within the next few decades, will have passed on but our children/grandchildren will have to live with the consequences of our stupidity because we were too afraid of being called a “racist” if we protested over the mass 3rd world invasion that’s happening in OUR country today.

    Stop reading mainstream media newspapers (especially the leftist Toronto Star), or watching shameless, multi-culti promoters such as the CBC or CTV with their token Blacks and other minorities reading the news or “laughing it up” in some incongruent television commercial scene.

    Internet access is here today, but for how long? It’s the last bastion for real independent news and free speech.

  • Anonymous

    Reply to #8.

    I think that your understanding of collectivism and individualism is completely flawed. Furthermore, no cause is worth the forced adoption of collectivism.

    Individualism does not mean that no “collective” action is possible. Individualism is why Americans for many many years were the most innovative and productive people on earth. Individualism is what made our country great. I will fight tooth and nail to defend individualism.

    If one really loves collectivism immensely, one might consider gene therapy to change into an ant or a bee.

    You cannot be an advocate for whites and an advocate of collectivism. It is not in our nature to be collectivists and we have never thrived under collectivism. Our nature is individualistic. If you wish to destroy our nature you are not a good advocate for us

  • Anonymous

    Some thoughts-

    1. Sooner or later this has got to catch up with the rich as the poor. Just as the blue collar working class died an ugly death in the 70s and 80s and the white collar office/IT generation thought it was ‘all the fault of the unions’. And then the white collar office/IT people got outsourced to India so that tech support is essentially a joke. And all the doctorates thought that they ‘couldn’t be replaced’ in their specialist skill sets. Without looking outside our borders to see that the REASON the ROW doesn’t have advanced trauma units and the like is because _nobody can pay for it but the elites_ and they all go to the U.S. So now, in the 10s, we are looking at the dissolution of the U.S. 25 year technology base lead as R&D is shifted offshore. And with that will come the end of the specialist classes as the associated university complexes which do the majority of our R&D fold up as well.

    The rich will follow the richest of the working classes, right out of existence if not the country, if they cannot secure the lifestyle they want from the screaming masses.

    2. Presumably, the rich are smarter (or at least better read) than the rest of us schmucks and so ‘have a plan’ to avoid Third World Birth Rates flooding our nation and ruining it (I swear, the one thing that lets whites be successful over all other things is not our IQ but our reproductive self-discipline). A few years back there was a report out of England which detailed, specifically, how the liberals in Labor set up the demographics change for ‘social reasons’, not for economic ones.

    Which means that either the rich have a way to resolve the ‘just too different to amalgamate’ problem. Or they want the destruction of our global as much as Western culture since places like Africa with it’s estimated 2.6 billion population by 2060 _and continued growth through the end of the century_ will have to do so without the economic props of massive relief as compensation for their IQ deficit.

    So…

    What is the answer? There has to be one. Because the rich don’t do things just to be doing them. And _IQ and the Wealth Of Nations_ all point to countries like India (3.2 billion by 2060), China (1.4 billion by 2060) and Africa as having _direct links_ between their genetic potentials and their achieved wealth status. I believe the numbers are something like IQ = 84, 91 and 70 respectively.

    In this, we need to remember that we should not assume that alien ‘competition’ is necessarily representative of the home nations -average- intelligence and thus their contribution as equality should not be defined by H1b visa status.

    Part of it is creaming the milk and part of it is outright fraud of disinformation forced upon us.

    But it still doesn’t answer the ROOT QUESTION: Why is it being done and what is the wealthy classes ultimate motive for doing it?

  • Anonymous

    Wasn’t it Bill Clinton who gave a speech at the Un. of Portland and practically boasted that whites would soon no longer be the majority population. The crowd of grads, mostly white, cheered and clapped.

  • Anonymous

    To poster # 6:

    Thank you for taking the considerable time and trouble to do that important post. The situation is even worse then you say, because Canada’s white population is divided into two separate language and cultural camps. The French and English speaking sections of Canada do not interact at all with each other. Hence whites are not only diminishing in numbers in Canada but are also divided. According to Statistics Canada’s (which says it like its a “good” thing) own estimates “Visible minorities” (I.E. non-white foreigners) will be AT LEAST 30% of the total population by 2031. THAT’S JUST TWENTY YEARS FROM NOW! These numbers are astonishing when it is considered that until about 1970, Canada was about 99% white. (If anyone is interested see the 1961 Canadian census.) My mother and father (born 1930 and 1928, respectively) were both IN THEIR TWENTIES beofre they ever EVEN SAW a black person in Canada! I warned my fellow Canadians over thirty years ago that Canada was heading towards a demographic disaster since most of the immigrants coming were non-white because of Pierre Trudeau. I was ignored or called a “racist” with really nasty personal vituperations. I actually broke up with a girlfriend when I realized she didn’t share my race-views at all. At the time my long-term plan was to marry her.

    To poster # 13: I was disgusted – but not surprised – to learn that white students would “cheer” their impending racial marginalization. They remind me of my old liberal university girlfriend I dumped. Only whites seem to have this masochistic tendency to destroy themselves as a race and not think as a race-group. I couldn’t imagine any non-white political figure saying a similar thing to a group of non-white students, let alone having a similar reaction. I can’t even conceive of it. There was a post in a previous AmRen article about a 23 year old white girl who donated a kidney to a black she didn’t even know. Such foolish, misguided self-destructive false ‘altruism’. Only whites do this. Note how blacks, don’t donate organs because they “don’t want whites to get them”.

  • white advocate – Canada

    Thanks for the comments about individualism and collectivism. I’ve come across writers who think this is a primary difference that explains much. They say that whites are more individualist than other races. When you mix individualists and collectivists together, there are competitive advantages for collectivists. So whites have to become more collective ourselves to compete. Going forward we will have to consider our white human nature against the need to be more tribal. Our struggle won’t be easy so the debate will be intense.

  • Anonymous

    [commenter #6 here again]

    MAJOR NON-WHITE POPULATIONS IN MAJOR CANADIAN CITIES AND METRO AREAS

    All data from census website.

    Also highlighting major language differences.

    (Note that in my previous post I was unaware that Aboriginals are not included in the Non-White category. In this post I highlight the largest urban concentrations of Aboriginals)

    Vancouver city (2006)

    51% Non-White (metro area 41.7%)

    32% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Mississauga city (2006) large part of metro Toronto

    49% Non-White (1996 was 33.9%)

    29% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Toronto city (2006)

    46.9% Non-White (1996 was 37.3%)

    31.2% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Toronto metro (2006)

    42.9% Non-White (1996 was 31.6%)

    26.9% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Montreal city (2006)

    26% Non-White (1996 was 19.3%)

    19.8% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Calgary city (2006)

    23.7% Non-White (1996 was 16.5%)

    22.2% Non-White metro Calgary (1996 was 15.6%)

    13.9% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Edmonton city (2006)

    22.9% Non-White

    5.3% Aboriginal (not included in Non-White category)

    12.7% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Ottawa city (2006)

    20% Non-White (1996 was 15%)

    11.1% only speak other than English or French most often at home

    Winnipeg city (2006)

    16.3% Non-White (1996 was 11.9%)

    10.2% Aboriginal (not included in Non-White category)

    9.5% only speak other than English or French most often at home

  • Jason Robertson

    Yes, special thanks to poster 6 – get this information out.

    Re-educating white youth, especially those few intelligent ones who angrily realise how they have been deceived by restricted information and deliberate brainwashing, is the priority. Immediate problem: the students mix with brighter non-whites socially and falsely suppose they are representative, while vaguely “sorry” for those they read about whose failings are blamed on “white racism”.

    Next problem: career progress depends on acceptance of the official ideology (but this is often lip-service as under communism).

    Working on strategies of educating the young has become a priority. We cannot just wait until the Chinese take their jobs, Muslims bomb their streets, or Blacks stab them for a few dollars; the lessons must start the “easy” way.

    All sensible suggestions welcome in the shrinking white world.

  • Luke

    “11 — Anonymous wrote at 3:56 PM on December 15:

    Reply to #8.

    Individualism is why Americans for many many years were the most innovative and productive people on earth. Individualism is what made our country great. I will fight tooth and nail to defend individualism.”

    Correction. You will fight tooth and nail to defend a continuation of the unnatural and clearly suicidal, artificially imposed and promoted ideology of individualism – in a nation that was once 90% White European and in which that 90% White majority felt no existential threat to their dominance inside the nation of their 100 percent White European ancestors – but, today, this is no longer the case.

    Posters like this guy remind me an awful lot of a really stupid football coach whose team is down 41-0, and its in the 4th quarter and the coach is still clinging to his original game plan – because that game plan worked in some game he coached 40 years ago.

    Well, wake up, Mr. Anonymous. The game plan that you are stupidly clinging to – worked great, back when Whites were 89-90 percent of this nation’s population and our dominance was not yet being threatened. Peter Brimelow himself has repeatedly stated that, in a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic society such as the one our enemies are trying to force down our throats – those ethnic groups who do not learn how to play, or who refuse to play, ethnic identity (collectivist) politics – will get rolled by those groups who DO know how the play the game. That is called tribal thinking, pal.

    This ‘individualism’ mindset that you, and far too many other whites, seem to want to cling to is a sure fire recipe for defeat – and defeat, in this case, means permanent subjugation to be ruled by a motley collection of openly hostile non-white minorities with which we do not share any geneology, culture, history, values, traditions, customs, language, sometimes religion, and most importantly – who do NOT share the vision of our White Founding Fathers as to what constitutes a strictly limited system of government, with a heavy emphasis upon individual liberty and self-reliance and a guaranteed freedom from tyranny.

    The ‘greatness’ of America that posters like Anonymous will often nostalgically refer to, and then try to assign credit for that greatness to the spirit of ‘rugged individualism’ that was once a dominant and highly revered characteristic of America – that was a totally different world than the one our enemies have now created here in North America. We were a unquestionably, and proudly White European dominant nation in those days – and until a certain group of subversives got their hands on our immigration policy in 1965, our immigration policy was specifically written to preserve and protect the European dominance in America. We were racially strong and confident enough prior to 1965 to openly defend the European centric nature of our immigration policies – and we had White leaders in our Congress who refused to apologize for wanting to keep America White, because it suited them and it also suited the people they represented. Well, those days are long gone.

    Today, the name of the new game is ethnic identity politics.

    So, it is Mr. Anonymous and not I, who is a lousy advocate for our cause. Somehow, after reading Mr. Anonymous’s response to my earlier post – I found the aroma of Libertarianism wafting up my nostrils. A truly infantile political ideology, when taken to some of its more extreme and radical destinations.