US Becoming the Brazil of North America–When Did We Vote for That?

Patrick J. Buchanan, VDARE, July 17, 2014

To observe the decades-long paralysis of America’s political elite in controlling her borders calls to mind the insight of James Burnham in 1964–”Liberalism is the ideology of Western suicide.”

What the ex-Trotskyite turned Cold Warrior meant was that by faithfully following the tenets of liberalism, the West would embrace suicidal policies that would bring about the death of her civilization.

The crisis on our Southern border, where the left, and not only the left, is wailing that we cannot turn away desperate people fleeing wicked regimes and remain true to our liberal values, is a case in point.

To assert that we cannot take all these people in, that we must send them back and seal our border for our survival, is to be called a variety of names–racist, xenophobe, nativist–all of which translate into “illiberal.”

But as we continue our descent to Third World status, perhaps we should explore more deeply the “diversity” that has of late come to be regarded as America’s most treasured attribute.

In 1960, we were not nearly so diverse. Nine in 10 Americans professed a Christian faith. Nine in 10 Americans traced their ancestry back to Europe. E Pluribus Unum. We were one nation and one people.

Since then, we have become the Brazil of North America, a multiracial, multilingual, multiethnic, multicultural “universal nation”unlike any that has existed in the history of the West.


Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Dominicans, Somalis and Arabs in America also build replicas of the countries and cultures whence they came. Thus, we take on the aspect of an empire. And empires fall apart.

The melting pot, rejected by our elites as an instrument of nativist bigots, is history.

Libya, Syria and Iraq are coming apart, as did Sudan and Ethiopia. The Kurds seek to carve a nation out of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. A Sunni-Shia sectarian war impends.

Christians are being persecuted, martyred and expelled from Islamic nations. In Myanmar, Muslims are brutalized by Buddhists. In Western China, ethnic Uighurs resort to terrorism in a war of secession to establish a new East Turkestan.

Disintegration, separatism and secessionism, for racial, religious, and cultural causes, are a phenomenon common now to Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia. Are we somehow immune?

The world is boiling with racial, tribal, cultural and moral conflict. People carry in their hearts the seeds of these conflicts. The notion that they will come here and be converted into Ozzie-and-Harriet Americans may be a bit utopian.

America is becoming a microcosm of a world on fire.

Why are we doing this? Why are we inviting the world into the USA? Was there some grievous flaw in the America of Ike and JFK that must be expunged? Some sin for which we must do penance?

What is coming is predictable, and has been predicted.

By 2042, Americans of European ancestry will be a minority in a country built by Europeans. “Anglos” are now a minority in California, New Mexico and Texas. Hispanics will soon be the majority in all four border states with Mexico.

And should Hispanics decide not to give their electoral votes to any presidential candidate who does not promise to erase the border with Latin America, that would mean the end of the United States as we know it.


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.
  • Publius Pompilius Quietus

    The idea that those who opposed immigration were defeated is an illusion. The American nation was never asked if we wanted to be ethnically replaced, our wages driven down, and
    resourced depleted by immigrants.

    • WR_the_realist

      At the presidential level all we are ever offered is a Democrat who favors illegal immigration and mass immigration and a Republican who favors illegal immigration and mass immigration. The same is true in most congressional races. Some Republicans take a strong stance against illegal immigration, but never object to increasing legal immigration. Presumably they’d be happy if we just declared all immigration to be legal.

      • JP Rushton

        ” Presumably they’d be happy if we just declared all immigration to be legal.”

        Those Republicans are opening up themselves to a bill that would massively increase legal immigration and make it much easier for people to get citizenship.

    • Stan D Mute

      We were defeated, but we were not given a chance to vote on it. Then again, back in 1965 when the Immigration Act was passed, white Americans of voting and/or fighting age just sat on their hands and did nothing. Congress passed and the President signed an Act of Treason against the American people and the people did … NOTHING. Not a damn thing. They reelected their congressmen and senators then sent Tricky Dick Nixon to the White House. Notably they could have sent George Wallace to the White House, but fewer than ten million voters pulled the lever for him. And that dear friends, was the end for us.

      Remember the 1968 Presidential election next time somebody utters the words “The Greatest Generation” or any other such thing. Anybody born after 1950 or so never had a real say in this. Certainly anybody born after 1965 had been born into a nation that sold out his birthright.

      • To be fair, the authors and sponsors and advocates of the ’65 Treason Act said that nothing in their legislation would change the country’s race demographics, which means there must have been a lot of concern that it would if they thought they had to lie their teeth off to get it passed.

        • M.

          People should’ve started revolting as soon as a sensible change in demographics started to get noticed. Perhaps were they too busy with Vietnam and all that.

          • John R

            Exactly! The conservatives were too busy celebrating the defeat of the Big Bad Russian Bear back in the 1980’s to realize that this country’s changing demographics were our real danger. We forgot that Rome fell even as her army was the greatest in the world.

          • M&S

            We forgot that Rome fell even as her army was the greatest in the world.
            No. Rome’s Legio had long since been severely downsized from Legio of 6,000+ to under 2,500 after the three emperors period and then, worse, degraded to ‘tiered readiness’ standards of a Palace Guard and various Auxilia, including the most elite mounted formations.

            These Auxilla were in turn operationally classified as comitatenses and limitanei with the former being roughly equivalent to our Guard/Reserve formations with some heavy infantry/campaign experience and the latter little more than a raised militia rabble.
            BOTH these formations were formed from the Peregrini or ‘free folk’ of the non-Roman populations wandering about the interior of the Empire and so their loyalty was, at best, questionable.
            Rome having long since ceased to fight for herself there is increasing evidence that many of the principle Legions were in fact broken up into much smaller units and used as a cadre` formation to stiffen these local forces as garrison troops.
            Both because marching boot infantry were considered technically obsolescent against the increasingly mounted forces of the Asian Steppe raiders (the Alae were in fact named after one such group). And because they posed too great a cost and risk to internal unrest as full up formations.

            In reality, Rome was being set up to Fall as her armed forces were both partisan and extremely limited in their skillsets, particularly with regard to out of area operations and coordinated vexillation.

            You can look forward to a similar breakdown of the U.S. armed force esprit as unit strengths if the artifice of Sequestration continues, for much the same reason: we are being driven towards annihilation as a Nation State so that ‘something greater’ can come from out place.
            The easiest way to beat an undefeatable enemy is to demobilize and/or bankrupt his forces in being.

          • The size of the late Roman Army is a source of some uncertainty by historians. During the earlier Severan period (early 3rd century or 200’s up to 236 AD) the Army consisted of 30 legions of 5,000-plus troops each + a similar number of Auxiliaries. This would indicate a total of around 300,000.

            By the time of Diocletian (r. 284 – 305 AD) one report is of 389,704 plus 45,562 in the fleet making a total of 435,266 men. There is another figure of 645,000 men which was quoted by an author writing 200 years after the fact (in the 570’s AD). Historians generally settle on the number as between 400,000 and 600,000 men.

            However, by any measure, the Late Roman Empire supported a
            very sizable, well equipped army, possibly the largest in existence at the time. You are correct in that the early Roman Armies had bigger units, the Late Roman Armies used smaller units but more specialized.

            Part of the reason for this is that during the 3rd & 4th centuries AD, Rome fought against a developing superpower in the East: Persia, which it eventually defeated after 150 years of warfare. This is not unlike the US / USSR superpower rivalry.

            Also I am unfamiliar with what you mean by “the 3 Emperor
            Are you referring to “the year of the 4 Emperors” which was 69 AD? Or possibly the tetrarchy of Diocletian, 293 – ca. 305 AD?

            Of course Late Roman history is becoming a hot subject these
            days with many (or at least the few at Amren) drawing contrasts between the cataclysmic fall of the Roman Empire in 476 AD and the downward trajectory of the formerly great United States of America.

          • propagandaoftruth

            You know…

            My dark enlightenment was partly brought on by the undeniable evidence of my eyes and what they perceived. Not just stats and threats from my intimate enemies (you are soon to be a minority in your own country – watch out), but an inescapable experiential assault on my senses that screams “genocide” no matter how I try to spin it.

            I know I harp, but have you seen the movie yet? There’s this character, Sayeed, Algerian. Decorated WW2 vet, family killed by rebels, fiercely loyal to France and brutal to her enemies. I love my Folk more than any other, don’t get me wrong, but…

            I’d rather have one swarthy little “Sayeed” at my side than five treacherous libtard eloi traitors any day of the week. Welcome to the Folk, Sayeed. Help me with the treacherous ones? Thanks.

            Morality is pretty simple isn’t it?

          • M.

            Exactly. At the end of the day, one has to remain pragmatic and focus on the end goal. If my end goal is to keep my country white, then I’d have no problem allying myself with people of other races/ethnicities/nationalities/etc if those people would help me get there, or if even, for some reason, they have the same end goal as me. I wouldn’t hesitate to team up with black people to protest against Hispanic invaders, even if that means standing up against “fellow” white liberals. The end goal is all that matters.

            I saw the movie yesterday. Very good, and quite moving. Sayeed seemed to me more like a mercenary, but a very reliable one at that. One that would do the job. He obviously had personal reasons for fighting aloneside the French, which made him all the more reliable.

            Many Algerians by the way fought alongside the French. They are known as the Harkis. Some of them for personal reasons like Sayeed, many others because they simply saw that their own people would be way better off under French rule than they would be under Algerian rule, which was the case. Some others because they’ve grown up, studied, and were neighbors with the European settlers. France was all they knew, and they remained faithful to them. After the independence, those who remained in Algeria were savagely tortured and butchered.

            So yes, I’d ally myself with anyone who’d help reach my end goal. But if the ending of that movie (the fate of Lieutenant Terrien) were to teach us something, is that you should pay extra attention and be extra wary with allies who aren’t of your immediate folk.

          • propagandaoftruth

            Idiotic idealism…

            Another Algerian character I liked was the big neanderthalic Qurum. Gentle giant.

            Yeah. My theory is that those who join with the Folk and are accepted/liked by our Folk, are usually possessed of some retrogressing DNA or are examples of more distant genetic types convergently evolving.

            Idiotic ideological idealism…

      • Einsatzgrenadier

        Don’t forget that the 1965 anti-white immigration act was followed by a campaign of mass deception. According to Senator Ted Kennedy: “…our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually…. Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset….”

        • David Ashton

          We had similar (not identical) false assurances in Britain, with a different immigration history.

          • LACountyRedneck

            What was it called? I’d like to research it.

          • David Ashton

            Regret I am too busy just now to dig out all the successive references for you from my files, which have been put away to accommodate my younger daughter’s extra large family here for a summer break, but you could start by googling Migrationwatch-UK, and then looking for writers like Steven Moxon and Tony Linsell. We were given assurances in Parliament around that “primary immigration” had virtually stopped, since which time immigration has escalated.

        • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

          85 percent of Republicans voted for the bill, 75 percent of Democrats. Most had no idea it was to become the foundation for white dispossession.

          Just one example: Congress in 1965 could not anticipate the deadly 1982 Plyler v. Doe decision, a 5 to 4 Supreme Court decision forcing states to provide K-12 schooling for children illegally in the U. S. Plyler made the U. S. a major magnet for families of illegal workers. Automatic birthright citizenship for children born to illegal aliens was a non-factor before the 1980s when females began coming with the males.

          • MBlanc46

            “Automatic birthright citizenship for children born to illegal aliens was
            a non-factor before the 1980s when females began coming with the males.”

            Or crawl across the border to drop the kid on the US side.

        • Oil Can Harry

          Shaking my head at The Swimmin’ Senator’s claim that immigrants with “contagious diseases” will not be admitted.

          The hispanic invaders have a ton of maladies. Obamarx overturned our decades-long prohibtion barring foreigners with AIDS moving here!

          How long before the ACLU and La Raza team up to demand a law that we can’t bar immigrants with the Ebola virus?

        • kjh64

          Yes, what a lie. Just about the ONLY people allowed into the US these days are poor, unskilled non-Whites who either have diseases, commit criminal acts, and/or are likely to be a public charge or are subversive ie. Islamic terrorists.

          • SFLBIB

            Easier to state it the other way around: about the only people not allowed in the US these days are white heterosexual males with PhDs.

        • Alexandra1973

          He had his fingers crossed.

        • gemjunior

          Ted Kennedy was only establishment window dressing for what really went on with the “Hart Cellar” act – see the Irish Savant’s article on how long the Frankfurt School was trying to get this done in the US. It went way back.

        • gemjunior

          What an outrageous liar.

        • brior

          If you remove the word “not” from the quote it sums up perfectly what has happened to our country.

        • SFLBIB

          “I’ll eat my hat if this leads to racial quotas.” — Senator Hubert Humphrey in the debate over the proposed Civil Rights Act.

      • Sick of it

        I never bought into the greatest generation spiel myself. More than likely, those in power wish to celebrate the people who willingly handed over the future of their families to a foreign racial elite which despises them utterly. They’re glad those people were so naive. Since that time, a great many of us have gotten off the farm and read quite a few books, so we get how the world really works.

        • John R

          I hate to admit this, but seriously, could the world have turned out any worse if Nazi Germany had won the war? I would rather end up speaking German than Spanish! The wrong side won World War Two.

          • RisingReich

            My Father (88 yrs old) has said the same, and he was in WWII.

          • Sick of it

            Re: to John and you – I’ve said it before, Hitler would have been killed after the war had Germany won. People would not have put up with his brutality against the German volk. He would have been replaced by a more normal military officer with a good reputation who had no desire to abuse his own people. So yes, it would have had a happier ending if the Germans had won. And no, they would not have invaded America. They didn’t have the capability at that time.

          • Robert Haschberg

            Considering that Hitler had Parkinsons (possibly from gas exposure in WW1) he would have stepped down because of health reasons, likely no later than 1950.

        • Pro_Whitey

          I think some part of it came out of the crucible of serving in various hellholes in WWII. For example, to jump from a rope ladder on the side of a transport ship into a landing craft, it was necessary to jump when you were told, even though when you were told there was open water below you and not the landing craft. Those who jumped when the boat was under them hit the water instead and many were likely crushed to death or drowned when the transport ship and the landing craft crashed back together. Experiences like that inculcated an implicit trust in the government that no amount of indoctrination could do. And people like the Kennedys used that trust against them. Kennedy so blatantly lied through his teeth, yet you can still get into trouble in Boston if you badmouth him. He deserved a bullet in the head, not a tumor in the head.

          • Sick of it

            Most of our people back then were farmers who were rather ignorant about the world. Very capable people, but far too trusting and naive. There is no excuse for naivete in this modern hell. Too much has become obvious even to those with a low IQ.

          • The Great Depression played a role in this. Combining the GD with WWII, the fact that the economy started booming after WWII, most people just plain implicitly trusted any action on the part of anyone who worked for governments including the Feds, while they cast aspersions on private actors, thinking that they were all invariably out for themselves and want to screw everyone else over in the process.

            If you happen to live in a city where the restaurant chain Steak-n-Shake exists, and has existed for a very long time, you might find some perfectly preserved S-n-S locations in its original 1930s and 1940s style, and at those locations you’ll find that they proudly pronounce they only use “100% government inspected beef.”

      • kjh64

        People then believed the politicos when they said that the demographics wouldn’t be changed. Also, the changes were gradual, decade by decade. People bit by bit were lulled by gradual increases in immigration. If, in 1965, we could show them the end result right there, they would have risen up.

        • John R

          We were like a lobster in a pot of water that rises one degree of heat every hour. We are gradually being boiled to death.

          • RisingReich

            I think the fact your earlier post got deleted putting forth the idea really speaks volumes about how much BS people have swallowed. And yes, that includes the moderators and owner of this website.

            Questioning the “historical narrative” just WILL NOT be tolerated.

            I’m sure they believe they are scholars, but scholars they are not if they can’t even allow someone to question things.

            That quote from TJ at the top of the website needs to be removed, because this website doesn’t really believe in it. Just like most everyone else, they just want to talk about the version of truth they want to hear.

        • Sick of it

          Bobby Lee would have been replaced by leadership with more grit and determination had they known back then what we know now. Unfortunately, what is done is done.

          • Garrett Brown

            I don’t think there was a man with more grit than Robert E Lee back then, or ever since.

          • Sick of it

            He played nice. He quit when playing nice didn’t work. Sorry, I was born and raised in a state whose population suffered terribly at the hands of those damnyankees. We didn’t quit as early as Lee. And yes, we as in my own relatives who have been in this part of the state for several hundred years.

          • Garrett Brown

            Lee didn’t quit early. Just because your state admirably held on a bit longer doesn’t mean Lee didn’t do his duty. After the war he even stated himself he wished he had re-rallied and fought to the last man seeing the travesty the Yankee armies had done to our farms and crops.

          • Sick of it

            I’m sure the grandparents of mulatto children wish for the same.

          • Garrett Brown

            Sick of it, what is your opinion of Katherine Johnson, the NASA worker? Do you think she actually did what they stated she did? How rare would that be?

          • Sick of it

            Sounds like a hoax. No offense, but the white folks in West Virginia are not generally bright…but this mixed lady was somehow a mathematical whiz kid? Also, men didn’t take women seriously in the workplace at that time.

          • Garrett Brown

            Pretty much my thoughts as well. They probably just give her praise because she was only one of five women that worked there at the time and the others were white.

      • Beloved Comrade

        Remember, in the bad old days of the 60s, there were only three major news stations and major city and local papers, all leftist, and that was it. Uber-leftist Walter Concrete was the “most trusted man in America.”

        There wasn’t the Internet then to offer up the other side, the great damage massive 3rd world immigration would cause to the majority White population, only the one-sided statist view that massive immigration from the 3rd world was good for the US. The beloved Kennedys said as much and who could doubt them?

        It was the Internet that has truly set us free from the one-sided anti-White agenda that is designed to make Whites a hated minority in the countries they created and built.

      • Jo

        “Congress passed and the President signed an Act of Treason against the American people and the people did … NOTHING.”

        The majority of Americans were against it as demonstrated by polling during that time. Regardless, legislators voted for it anyway.

        Last January, only 3% thought immigration was an important issue. In July, 17%. Whites, generally, become aware of the seriousness when the mainstream media jumps on it. Fox News, Bill O’Reilly, to my surprise, has been addressing the consequences of the massive numbers; although, it’s been mostly about illegals; although, he has used the word ‘immigrants.’

        As for the 1965 law, the ‘controlled’ media designed narrative to instill guilt
        as it does today.

        Supporters of the bill did not merely say the critics were mistaken; they said they were “bigots.” Referring to anxieties voiced by the
        opposition, Ted Kennedy said “The charges I have mentioned are highly
        emotional, irrational, and with little foundation in fact. They are out of line
        with the obligations of responsible citizenship. They breed hate of our

        The New York Times led the way. “No piece of legislation [Hart-Celler] before Congress that in terms of decency and equity is more demanding of passage. In a time when this country is attempting to wipe away ancient wrongs against its Negro citizens, its conscience will not permit a sign at all ports of entry reading: ‘Only whites from Northwestern Europe are welcome.’”

        Another editorial examined the current law as the product of unfounded paranoia produced by “the mood of Harding isolationism, periodic Red Scares, and the revival of the Ku Klux Klan.”

        “The country’s immigration law, based on racially angled national origins
        quotas, makes a strange counterpoint to its progressive laws against racial
        discrimination here at home.”
        These are the tactics some tribal members have been using since they arrived on our shores to get immigration laws changed in their favor.

        “This system violates the basic principle of American democracy —
        the principle that values and rewards each man on the basis of his merit as a man. It has been un-American in the highest sense, because it has been untrue to the faith that brought thousands to these shores even before we were a country.” (Lyndon Johnson)

        Since then, the media continues to censor the number of immigrants coming here. Last year about 1,400,000 excluding illegals.

      • Jacobite2

        I’d say that the beginning of the end was the mass immigration from Southern/Eastern Europe around the turn of the 20th Century — especially the non-European immigrants, if you know who I mean. The execrable poem by Emma Lazarus under the Statue of Liberty was only the opening shot of the new race-war to displace Americans in America. With the 5-year citizenship process, these people were up and voting to elect Woodrow Wilson, Not to mention FDR. And that was mostly that.

  • MekongDelta69

    In 1960, we were not nearly so diverse. Nine in 10 Americans professed a Christian faith. Nine in 10 Americans traced their ancestry back to Europe. E Pluribus Unum. We were one nation and one people. Since then, we have become the Brazil of North America, a multiracial, multilingual, multiethnic, multicultural “universal nation”unlike any that has existed in the history of the West.

    Exactly right. And that is due to the 1965 anti-White Immigration Act which excluded 85% of Europeans from coming here legally, mind you. Combine that with the “sex, drugs, and Rock and Roll” hippies of the sixties insanity (who now control everything) – and voila – Welcome To The Sewer.

    • Luca

      How’s your Latin? try: “Sui Interitum” (Self destruction)

      • MekongDelta69

        “liberals insaniunt”

        I took a little Latin in H.S. (but that was about the time when the Roman Empire was at its peak, so it’s been a while). I also took French, Spanish, Italian, and I know MilSpeak in my sleep.

        However (to keep up with the ‘new’ America), I’ve enrolled in an Ebonics class which they’re giving at the local elementary school. I’m the only White guy in a class with a bunch of black 18 y/o 6th graders. (They affirmative actioned me in), which means I get free breakfast, lunch, after school activities, a pat on the head every hour simply for breathing, and I’m allowed to go berserk in class with no consequences whatsoever. Of course, it also means I’ll ace the course without having to do anything at all.

        I know everyone will be so ‘proud’ of me. I’m also trying to be an ‘aspiring’ rapper.


        • Sick of it

          Unfortunately, growing up where I did, you tend to learn ebonics whether you want to or not.

    • AndrewInterrupted

      Da, puer turpis.

      • Garrett Brown

        Give a child?

        • AndrewInterrupted

          Let’s try: Da mihi.

          • Garrett Brown

            Give me child? Lol

  • Dave4088

    Sorry to burst everyone’s bubble, but whites will become a minority long before 2042. Don’t forget that it was already moved up from 2050. Official demographers are playing games so as not to alarm white people. As it is we have the highest median age of any race and lowest birth rates, so add in the looming amnesty and continuing mass third world immigration and white people are facing a perfect storm of crises and an existential threat to our survival like no other in our storied history.

    Conservatism or the tea party don’t have the solutions either since they have no quarrel with tens of millions of third world immigrants so long as they enter “the right way”. And conservatives are too busy fighting abortion so black welfare queens can birth twenty kids by as many babby daddies.

    • I think were already the minority to a degree.

    • kjh64

      Well that depends upon what Whites do. One must remember that a huge number of non-Whites here are not American citizens and are not here legally. We have around 40 million? non-White illegals as well as millions of non-White, non-American legal residents. These people are NOT Americans, they are foreigners on American soil so don’t count in the racial breakdown of American citizens. If White Americans took back their country and ended this nonsense, are White racial percentages would rise dramatically. As of now, we have no clue as to what the actual racial breakdown of American citizens are because millions of illegals and other non-citizens are wrongly counted as “Americans.”

      • Beloved Comrade

        We are far past the point of a White take back of the American government. There would be far too much opposition including from anti-White Whites who believe White dispossession is the most moral and noble of causes.

        The better, and only solution is to free ourselves from this anti-White government with its anti-White agenda, start fresh and secure land and resources for future White generations. Then wall it off guard it with military grade weaponry because that’s what the government plans to use against us.

      • M&S

        Means nothing without a massive Kinder, Küche, Kirche program to redomesticate women. We would need to immediately pump up the numbers on our TFRs by a factor of two at least and that will not happen so long as women are allowed to remain in the work force as independent social agents.

        Pull women from the workforce and unemployment goes down as wages increase but the -kinds- of jobs would remain ugly and we would have to do BOTH things, simultaneously and immediately, as we expatriated the nominal citizens and non-citizens who live here and fulfill social roles at the bottom of the ladder.

        This too could be done, but only at the expense of losing a great many social conveniences from shopping mart retail to fast food to dozens of menial labor positions in agro and construction. Which would in turn have a massive effect on the economy. Returning America to a pre-1950s level lifestyle.

        If you think women, who went along with the sexual revolution and racial entitlements schemes primarily because it gave them a victim group to care for as an escape from our evil white male clutches, will go along with this return to baby factory status, merely to save a nation which will lack a large number of the conveniences they have come to expect _if we are successful_, you are sadly mistaken.

        We have lost the U.S.. The best that can be hoped for is to retranche` behind social and economically exclusive white enclave zones and hope that enough of us follow the communal lead to form groups too large to break up when the final (intended all along) breakup of this nation state happens.

        • kjh64

          “Means nothing without a massive Kinder, Küche, Kirche program to redomesticate women. We would need to immediately pump up the numbers on our TFRs by a factor of two at least and that will not happen so long as women are allowed to remain in the work force as independent social agents.”

          That is utterly false. Women have every right to be in the workforce and to say they need to leave the workforce to solve this problem is absurd. We only need to expel the illegals and other non-citizens from the 3rd world.

          “This too could be done, but only at the expense of losing a great many social conveniences from shopping mart retail to fast food to dozens of menial labor positions”

          No, Americans, both men and women would do these jobs. We do not need foreigners to do this.

          “If you think women, who went along with the sexual revolution” will go along with this return to baby factory status, merely to save a nation, which will lack a large number of the conveniences they have come to expect ”

          Men went along with the sexual revolution. Men should quit concerning themselves with what women do sexually, if men want sexual morality, then men should be sexually moral, if not, don’t complain about what women do. Also, again it is utterly false to say that women must go back to baby factory status to “save a nation” also utterly false to say that the nation would lack a large number conveniences BOTH men and women have come to expect.

    • BernieGoetzFan

      Plus groups like Armenians, Arabs, Turks, Persians, etc. are now classified as white. They are filing lawsuits to have that changed so they can get affirmative action. Does anyone doubt they will succeed?

    • Garrett Brown

      I believe that date was predetermined before Obama came into office and started the amnesty that will assuredly finish before he leaves office. That will be the end of us.

  • Delta 69 is spot on, neocons often say we’ll just against illegal imm. when we’re against it period esp.. since 1965. considering 90% of it has been the 3rd world.

  • Luca

    Liberalism is an evil cult. At least a religion is inclined to believe in altruistic tenets. A religion is inclined to do good deeds and administer positive effects on society from time to time. A religion is inclined to preserve a culture and bond its people together.

    • RisingReich

      Cult. Exactly.

  • Mexicans are everywhere now, even in the smallest towns in rural Alabama, where the whites declare, “They work soooo hard.” Apparently white Alabamans feel the need to do penance for opposing the blacks 50 years ago.

    This kind of thinking is very dangerous. There are some whites in the rural deep south who are sounding the alarm bells, but many whites have been duped by the “they do the jobs Americans wont’ do,” and they have our “family values” bee ess.

    Whites seem to think that messcans are just whites who spend a lot of hours at the tanning salon. My god, I think of all the whites who vacation in San Antonio to visit the Alamo and enjoy the Mexican food and the charm of the mariachi music. Muddle-headed! The really dumb ones vacation in Mexico and even retire there.

    If whites give up without a fight, then I suppose from an evolutionary point of view we deserve to cease to exist. But I’m prepared to fight and at least some others are as well.

    • Nonhumans

      I think that we will see a revolution or secession once it reaches a critical point. Probably the former in pursuit of the latter.

    • Sick of it

      Actually, when you really talk to people, they’re scared to do anything about it on account of the government. They don’t want the foreigners here anymore than we do.

      • connorhus

        Yep scared of the government or even just simply losing their job if the wrong person reports it.

        Yet it is really a house of cards. The entire thing and I doubt it’s going to stand much longer. The flimsy Muti-Cult society is built on White shoulders and guess who is really going to shrug. When enough of us have been dispossessed the entire thing comes crashing down.

    • IstvanIN

      I am amazed where I see Mexicans and Mestizos here in NJ.

    • kjh64

      What some Whites don’t get is that it is the people as a WHOLE that decide the culture of a country and what a country will be like. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve met and been around plenty of Hispanics. Sure there are many hispanic individuals that are hard-working and good people. I’ve met many Hispanics who have lived in America for generations, are intelligent and fully Americanized. That is not the point. The point is the group as a whole, and if we become majority Hispanic, our nation will become like Latin America.

      • Sick of it

        I’ve known a guy with two Hispanic parents who couldn’t speak English (he couldn’t speak Spanish) but was more of an American geek than anything else. He was, of course, a statistical outlier. Every rule has an exception, but the exceptions prove the rule all the more.

    • AndrewInterrupted

      “They work soooo hard.”

      ….because they’re jacked-up on the high grade meth they brought with them from Mexico. That stuff lasts 12 to 15 hours without a top-off. It’s America’s dirtiest secret. I was encountering “super employee” meth users at a defense contractor, of all places.

      • Robert Haschberg

        Meth also causes brain damage unlike cocaine and amphetamine.

        • AndrewInterrupted

          Yes, it turns chronic users into sociopaths and psychopaths.

  • M.

    For those naïve liberals who believe Third-World immigrants don’t bring their Third-World cultural, religious, and of course biological baggage and problems with them:

    (Paris, France – a week ago)

  • Olorin

    ” by faithfully following the tenets of liberalism, the West would embrace suicidal policies that would bring about the death of her civilization.”

    The same will happen by “faithfully [note the word] following the tenets of conservatism,” which got into bed with religious fundamentalists (both Christian and Muslim) in the 1980s and are still there.

    Western civilization isn’t the point. Western civilization includes things like the Inquisition and Christian missionaries in Africa.

    American civilization and its renaissance IS the point. And is all we whites should be about, given our ancestors left Europe for very specific reasons and created the US for very specific other reasons. My Revolutionary War ancestors were most certainly NOT interested in Europe 2.0 in the New World. They envisioned something entirely new.

  • M.

    Funny thing, the people who accuse you of nativism tend to be the ones who keep whining about Amerindians’ stolen land. So which one is it, you’re nativists or you’re not?

  • guest

    “The crisis on our Southern border, where the left, and not only the left, is wailing that we cannot turn away desperate people fleeing wicked regimes and remain true to our liberal values, is a case in point.”

    The problem is we’ve been expected to care only about the problems of illegal immigrants when we have too many of our own to deal with. At this point, we can no longer afford to be compassionate to “desperate people” other than our own. And with how these illegals make demand after demand in our country in order to appease them, that shows that they don’t care about us and our problems, they only care about what we can do for them and it’s time for it to come to an immediate stop.

  • Bossman

    And should Hispanics decide not to give their electoral votes to any presidential candidate who does not promise to erase the border with Latin America, that would mean the end of the United States as we know it.

    Well then this new country would be an entity which would be huge with tremendous potential.

    • kjh64

      Americans never wanted a “new country”. They, like every other country on planet, want their own culture and country.

    • Erasmus

      Go home. It’s time you Israel-firsters stop using every other country as yours to plunder.

    • Beloved Comrade

      Well then this new country would be a Third World entity which would be huge with tremendous problems like overpopulation, grinding human misery, nationwide poverty, oppression and disease.

      Just like the countries THEY created for themselves back in the “old country” and the reason they left.

      • Bossman

        That has not been proven yet. More integration would only make North America stronger.

  • IstvanIN

    The United States I was born in may exist as a legal fiction but it hasn’t existed in reality for at least 20 years.

    • Garrett Brown

      I’d state the 90s were the last great decade for this country. After that it was a sharp, steep, quick decline.

      • IstvanIN

        It was probably the last decade where we had any chance to save the nation as a whole.

  • kjh64

    “The crisis on our Southern border, where the left, and not only the left, is wailing that we cannot turn away desperate people fleeing wicked regimes and remain true to our liberal values, is a case in point.”

    These people fleeing “wicked regimes” are fleeing what they created. When enough of them come here, they’ll simply recreate what they left behind. If they were capable of having a first world country, they wouldn’t be coming in the first place.

  • bubo

    The USA as one nation is dead and gone. Just like the old Soviet Union it will limp on for a few more decades and then out of the blue it will dissolve. I never knew the great times so I won’t shed any tears. It’ll be more of the relief of putting a dying animal out of it’s misery.

    • JDInSanD

      I knew the great times. I thought I was so lucky to be part of something so special. The country that put men on the moon, invented practically all modern inventions, had the tallest buildings in the world, opposed communism, had the most powerful military, defeated those evil Nazi’s and had the best of everything.

      Now we’re just sort of bowing out like it’s on someone’s checklist that we bankrupt ourselves and let the Chinese have their turn on the swings.

      • Garrett Brown

        We’re seeing now that the Nazis weren’t the bad guys. They were our saving grace.

  • NoMosqueHere

    Why are we doing this? Why are we inviting the world into the USA? Was there some grievous flaw in the America of Ike and JFK that must be expunged? Some sin for which we must do penance?


    Whites lost their racial confidence. They decided to be fair. Blax’n’Browns saw this as weakness are started playing to win.

    • RisingReich

      It doesn’t help that the tribe has been running a re-education campaign in the domestic US via media for the last 60 years.

      • NoMosqueHere

        Liberalism has roots in america going back at least to Lincoln and Mark Twain. And the jews are disproportionately involved in everything — for good and for ill.

        • Long Live Dixie

          Who are the Jews who are disproportionately in support of closing Europe and the West to non-whites? I can think of plenty of Jews who oppose that, but none who support it.

        • RisingReich

          Jewish involvement is for ill.
          Ever notice anytime I mention something even slightly negative about them my post gets deleted?

          Makes me wonder because if I’m SO off base on the topic, why the extreme level of sensitivity?

    • ye ol’ swampyankee

      It’s not “You”, it’s not “I” and it’s not “We”.

      It is THEM!

  • Evette Coutier

    Funny that liberalism originated in the notion of individually over the collectivist state. Now it means the exact opposite. George Orwell was very astute to point out in 1984 how politicians change the meaning of words to achieve their agenda.

    • Spikeygrrl

      Control the language and you control the debate. When key-concept words are co-opted by liberals at every turn, fundamental conservative and libertarian precepts become, very literally, un-thinkable.

      • Evette Coutier

        And this is the problem. We work hard to be correct, and they work hard to win regardless of the facts.

  • RisingReich

    The end of the US as we knew it is already gone, Pat.
    Other than that – spot on.
    We are about to see one of four things happen. Maybe a couple of them, actually.
    1)World War III
    2)Civil wars in many European countries and the second civil war in the US – all happening at the same time.
    3)Isn’t real or the Russians start a nuclear conflict.
    4)Global pandemic that kills millions
    Just like at the end of WWII, the world map will look considerably different after it’s all over.

    • JDInSanD

      And don’t forget the Chinese may take a shot at us when we’re down.

      I understand they massively cyber attacked us on 9/11.

    • Spikeygrrl

      We’ve already been fighting WWIII — in slow motion — for centuries. From time to time it heats up/cools down and is more/less top-of-mind. But it’s always THERE.

      Our enemy? It starts with an “I” and ends with a “slam.” (Hat tip: Mark Steyn)

  • JohnEngelman

    Immigration is not a Republican v. Democrat issue, or a conservative v. liberal issue. It is a rich v. non rich issue. Rich Republicans and rich Democrats have different reasons for supporting unlimited immigration. Nevertheless, that is what they support.

    • Dalliance

      The only thing I don’t understand is why rich Republicans and rich Democrats aren’t at least building themselves a giant, rotating space station before sending the U.S. down this path. (I think I saw that in a movie somewhere.)

      • refocus

        rich Republicans and rich Democrats are going to hide in bunkers in the ground. Their owners have their Elysium on orbit as we speak.

    • Garrett Brown

      John, can you link those statistics about how our crime rate went down with more incarceration? I can’t find it.

  • Erasmus

    Only a fool would have been unable to see the seeds of the US’s destruction were planted in that 1965 bill.

    The people who rammed it through knew it would eventually destroy the US. They acted with deliberate malice and intent. Yet, no one knowledgeable about history should be surprised they acted thus.

  • Jo

    This is worth repeating (posted a few days ago). On June 26, 2014, the Census Bureau revised the birthrate estimates for July 1, 2014.

    “Minorities are not yet the majority of any age group, even babies, in the bureau’s new estimates.” Among the nation’s 3.9 million children younger than age 1 in 2013, there were about 3,000 more non-Hispanic whites than minorities. The revisions represent a reversal for the bureau, which announced two years ago that most children younger than age 1 were minorities in 2011, a widely reported demographic milestone.”

    “The nation’s birth rate, which has been declining since 2007, hit a record low in 2013. Birth rate declines were especially steep for immigrant and Hispanic women.”


    Now, if we can deport illegals, secure the border, and stop legal immigration from third-world countries, we might have a chance.

    • libertarian1234

      “Now, if we can deport illegals, secure the border, and stop legal immigration from third-world countries, we might have a chance.”

      Right on.

      But everything depends on neutralizing the press, the entertainment industry, academia, and far left politicians.

      If we started from 1960 levels, we would still be doomed to fail if the radical leftist elements aren’t neutralized somehow.

      And we also need to stop being the world’s policeman and getting involved in foreign entanglements, including foreign aid.

      • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

        There is some hope as regards “neutralizing the press.” AmRen’s web presence — at least in this form — is a fairly new thing. Many other first-rate race realist sites are flourishing as never before — all at the expense of the mainstream media.

  • IKUredux

    Sorry, Pat. Barn door and all that. We have already passed the point of no return. This country is no longer the U.S. as we know it. Actually, hasn’t been so, for a long time. It is completely absurd to think that being a member of a nation is as simple as donning a suit of clothes. It is truly magical thinking. If Whites who moved to India did not become Indians, why is that? If Whites who moved to China did not become Chinese, why is that? If Whites who moved to Africa did not become African, why is that? It is, simply, that that entire concept is ludicrous. Just moving to another country, which is ethnically, racially, culturally different from you, does not magically transform you into one of them. It is not like we can all go into a global closet and don English clothes and magically become English. OOH! I wanna wear French clothes; voila, I’m French. There seems to be a massive effort to include EVERYBODY into White European culture. You know, give them credit for shiite they didn’t do, changing our European folktales and gods and culture to include non Whites historically when they shouldn’t be there, and of course sharing our very ancient rich culture of literature and art and music with them. And, how do they thank us? Well, they don’t. They hate us from the very bottom of their inferior souls and intellect. They hate us for our beauty. The beauty that we represent both inward, and, especially outward. They resent our architecture, our beautiful European countries, our sublime paintings, amazing sculptures, ethereal music, our fashions, and of course, all the technological and medical advances in the world. They hate us with all the passion an inferior peoples can muster, because, frankly, they are incapable of channeling that passion into anything creative. These inferior beings travel and vacation in our European ancestral homes. Because frankly, NO ONE wants to travel to the third world ugliness, especially not third worlders with any money. All the rich blacks in America, might visit Africa, but, you sure as hell don’t see ANY of them moving there. Now, why is that? The bottom line is this: DNA is EVERYTHING. DNA is NOT a suit of clothes that can be donned to turn yourself into a Frenchman, a German, or an Englishman. I would point out that Whites moving to other countries to be declared Nigerian! Congolese! Pakistani! Chinese, is not an issue. Why? Why the hell do you think? Nobody but a crazy person, elects to be associated with inferiority.

  • LACountyRedneck

    White Americans that care about what is happening, that care about a future for their children and grandchildren, should remain calm, vote for the usual Republicans, sell all your guns and ammo, drink some warm milk, love all your colorful brothers, be patient and wait for the other guy to get involved, stay civilized and obey all laws, pay your taxes, support your government, not stress over any stinking borders, and just go about your usual business of being a friendly passive understanding White person………………then kill yourself.

    That, or…..get busy.

  • John R

    Sad that it took an ex-communist back in 1964 to predict this. But sometimes it is better to listen to your enemies: They are more keenly aware of your weaknesses.

  • 4321realist

    This is without question an empire. It’s a conglomeration of tribal factions each one fighting the other for domination and control and all of them hate white people who founded and built this nation.

    But unfortunately it was white people who also turned it into an empire of squabbling groups. However, they never represented the majority. It was the elitists, power and money mad types, political extremists, sick ideologues, and screwy academics who hijacked the culture and assumed control turning it into a facsimile of some kind of Orwellian distortion.

    Part of the problem also is size. We’re too big. 535 representatives CANNOT adequately represent 310 million people…..or even half that number. We not only need to be smaller we need to vote by referendum on issues of importance.

    The immigration act of 1965 would never have been enacted if the people had been allowed to vote on it via referendum. That’s true with many other things, including wars.

    As it stands now nothing this present ideologue in the WH has caused to be enacted by Congress is supported by a majority of the people. They never wanted most everything he has brought about. Because we have no voice in what this country does is why somebody like him can gain control and dictate to us what he’d like us to have, and he wants us to shut up about it. That wouldn’t be possible if we had ACTUAL representation in Congress and had the power to vote on issues via referendum.

    Do you agree that we would have been better off to have broken up into nation states instead of fighting a civil war? Slaves should have been freed, given reparations and returned to Africa, with billions of dollars worth of building materials, farm implements and equipment, along with teachers to show them how to create an agrarian society.

    Also, if it were up to me, I would have never committed the country to world war I or II or the Korean conflict, and certainly not Vietnam.

    What would you do….briefly….. if you could start from say1900 before WWI?

  • Carlos Geary

    Brazil’s population is very diverse, comprising many races and ethnic groups. In general, Brazilians trace their origins from four sources: Amerindians, Europeans, Africans and Asians. I visited Brazil several times, and according to my own observations, in Brazil each geographic region is composed by different demographics:
    1. NORTH: Most people are of African ancestry.
    2. WEST: West: Most people are of Amerindian Indigenous ancestry.
    3. CENTRAL PART: Where most big cities are located: Europeans (mostly Portuguese),
    Asians, Middle East, African, Indigenous, “caboclos” (mixture of European and Amerindian),
    “mulatos” (mixture of European and African) etc. This area is a melting pot of
    races and nationalities, has the highest degree of intermarriage in the world.
    Immigrants found a strong social and cultural tolerance and mixed European,
    African and Indian people
    4. SOUTH: Most people are of full European ancestry (Germans, Dutch and Italian).

    • M.

      The #4’s don’t seem to have a high opinion of the #1’s though.

      • Carlos Geary

        I was just describing the country. I was born in Ireland, but my uncle bought a farm in Uruguay. After my father died, when I was 7 I moved to Uruguay with my mother and I was raised in my uncle farm, very close to the Brazilian border. My life took me back to Europe, to the USA, and back to Europe, again, but I never sold the farm.
        I love South America, Uruguay, Argentina, Brazil,

  • MBlanc46

    I think that it’s been pretty clear–well, to me, at least–since globablization really took off in the 1990s, that the Latin American socioeconomic model is the future for the US. We’ll have a few folks who are hooked into the global flow of money and credit that will be fabulously wealthy and live lives increasingly distanced from those of ordinary people. There will be a small stratum of professionals, merchants, and artisans who will prosper by supplying the needs of the global elite. Third will be a stratum, many just eking out a living, providing services and small scale merchadising for the second stratrum and each other. Everyone else will be unemployed or casual labor.

    • Carlos Geary

      South America isn’t what it used to
      be, their farming production
      has steadily increased over the past two decades, and is now at the point of
      surpassing North American production levels, becoming a major player in the
      global agricultural market. The know how
      to use advance technology and production practices very efficiently.

      • MBlanc46

        I’m quite sure that agribusiness, like other elements of the elites, will continue to prosper.

  • refocus

    White Americans are suckers for a soothing plausible narrative where everyone sleeps comfortably on a nice sofa in an air conditioned room with a big TV.

  • Long Live Dixie

    We were one nation and one people.

    Not true, and that’s a big part of the problem. ‘American’ has never been a nationality. From the very beginning, America was a bringing together of people under the idea that different people could get along with each other and live in union with each other. It was an idea inspired by the mushy-headed intellectualism of the Enlightenment era.

    ‘Americans’ became even more diverse with the unprecedented influx of people from every part of Europe. The original Anglo-Celts became a minority in every part of the so-called USA except for the South and Interior West. No real attempts were made in the USA to assimilate the white newcomers, allow them to put down roots, and form a genuine national (folkish) identity out of the mix.

    It really shouldn’t be a surprise that a white melting pot that is unrooted in the land would be willing to open the doors to Third World immigration.

    • Erasmus

      Perhaps not one nation as France, Germany and Spain were once one nation, but we will never be that “propositional” nation neocons and other slimy lefties are always telling us we are.

      Propositional nation. *puke* Everyone who calls the US a propositional nation deserves a beating.

    • Einsatzgrenadier

      No real attempts were made in the USA to assimilate the white newcomers, allow them to put down roots, and form a genuine national (folkish) identity out of the mix.

      This isn’t true at all. There was the nationwide Americanization movement of the early 20th century, which coincided with the last great wave of mass immigration to America. Although many of the Americanizing reformers were liberals, there were also many old stock (WASP) American radicals who demanded 100% Americanization. The liberals believed that learning to speak English fluently, studying American history and accepting the democratic principles of American government would turn the newcomers into model Americans. The radical Americanizers pressured the newcomers into assimilating to Anglo-conformity. They wanted them to immediately give up their languages and customs, embrace American values such as thrift and hard work, convert to Protestant Christianity and reject subversive political ideologies like communism and anarchism. In short, the radicals wanted the newcomers to become assimilated WASPs.

      The problem with the old Americanization program was that it failed to assimilate certain ethnic groups, notably Jews and, to a lesser extent, Irish Catholics. It was these immigrants and their descendants that played an instrumental role in opening the doors to massive third world invasion in the mid-1960s.

      • IstvanIN

        Eastern Europeans completely Americanized. Italians still think of themselves as Italian but are generally fiercely loyal American, the evil Nancy Pelosi and Cuomo family notwithstanding. The Irish, because of their intense hatred of anything English, seem to have a harder time accepting Anglo-American culture. Jewish immigration was a huge mistake. Organized Jewry, as well as a large percentage of Jews, are anti-American and want to bring us down because life for them has been so horrible for them here, not being allowed into certain country clubs 100 years ago and other trivialities. They also carry certain hatreds for us over from Europe. All this despite the fact that the best place in the world for Jews has been America. No matter how much we sacrifice for them, liberation after WW2 and suicidal support for Israel, we are cattle to be abused.

        If I could advise the politicians of the 19th century I would have not allowed Jewish or Irish immigration and greatly restricted Italian immigration. In fact Northern European immigration would have been best to stick to exclusively.

      • Robert Haschberg

        You cannot “americanize” (anglo-waspify) personality and behavior traits that are genetically based. The new americans were genetically different from the old and americanizing them thus redefined what an american was, and that wasnt an anglo-wasp.

    • Garrett Brown

      Not true. Whites assimilated, colored people did not.

    • Ringo Lennon

      Nothing wrong with Eastern or Southern Europeans. You don’t want to be too fussy. A Caucasian is a Caucasian.

      • Robert Haschberg

        Most caucasians arent even white. Go back to race skool basic course.

        • Ringo Lennon

          You don’t like Poles or Italians? C’mon man.

          • Robert Haschberg

            Moroccans, turks, iranians, indians (dot), jews etc are also caucasians but they are not white. As I said, race school 101 would be educational for you.

          • Ringo Lennon

            I don’t think those people are Southern or Eastern Europeans.

          • Robert Haschberg

            You should not use terms you do not understand, you just look like an idiot to those who do understand.

  • MBlanc46

    Thanks. Maybe I’ll check out he film when I get a chance.

    • Spikeygrrl

      Only when it hits cable. I quit going to movie theaters when they became overrun with beige kids brought by their relatives to “see” PG-13 and R rated movies they’re far too young to understand, so they spend the time instead yammering on their cell phones (what White parent would give an 8-year-old a cell phone?!) throwing popcorn, and tearing up and down the aisles with complete impunity.

      For this the theater expects $10-12 in real money? MY money?! HAH!

      • MBlanc46

        Last film my wife and I saw was a Woody Allen film. As the mulatto who raped and killed his math teacher in Boston wasn’t there, the audience was all white. I suggested to the wife that she see when the local theater (a second run house) was showing the latest Coen brothers offering (about Dave van Ronk and the NYC folk scene), but it apparently didn’t show up. I’m pretty sure the audience would have been all white.

        • Spikeygrrl

          MY BAD for having failed to mention the ONLY three films I did go to the theater to see in the last dozen years, only because I knew they never would air on cable: Atlas Shrugged, Parts 1 & 2, and Dinesh D’Souza’s magnificent Obama’s America. I wasn’t specifically looking for non-White faces…but I could not have failed to notice any among the 10-12 other people at the midnight weekday showings my husband I attended.

          • MBlanc46

            Those certainly don’t sound like the sort of titles that would attract non-whites.

  • mobilebay

    On top of the invasion, we have become the world’s ATM and now the world’s babysitter. This is definitely not the world into which I was born.

  • LHathaway

    “Christians are being persecuted, martyred and expelled from Islamic nations. In Myanmar, Muslims are brutalized by Buddhists”
    The language sounds very similar to Jared Taylor’s Banned in Halifax speech. The general idea in the essay is also similar to that expressed in Taylor’s speech. I believe Taylor said, ‘farmers are being expelled from Zimbabwe only because they are white”, after mentioning the break up of the Soviet Union.
    There really needs to be a good link for that speech. Except for some parts being understated, I really think it’s the best talk from a white viewpoint I’ve heard.

  • Hy Alldredge

    America was founded as a loose conglomeration of culturally different regions and states, with a primary focus on individualism and property rights. The ideas of personal liberty and equality were an inherent part of the philosophy of the founders. One could argue that it doesn’t work, in the long run. We didn’t last 100 years until there was a civil war, and then less than 100 years later was the unrest and social upheaval of the civil rights era. Where we are today is a logical outgrowth of the country’s founding principles. A movement like Front National, which stresses a common culture over economics and individualism, could never take root here. The conservative fantasy of returning to a limited constitutional utopia where individual rights flourish is impossible as well. If America remains one nation, becoming Brazil might be the best we can hope for.

    • First:


      It has been a very long time since we had massive white immigration, the flow was very restricted starting in 1921 and restricted further in 1924. I think the white people in most of what is currently considered the United States of America are loosely related and inbred enough such that ethnonationalist politics can be successful.

    • withcaution

      Sadly, Pres. Lincoln is held as some universal savior of the nation. Rather twisted thinking when you look at the facts. He was the Stalin of that era, believed the nation was greater than the individual. That human life was expandable i.e. the draft. Drafting somebody military service is the ultimate form of slavery and even murder where brainwashed from a very early age into calling it your duty or the patriotic thing to do. Nothing could be more American than to demand your personal freedom from the oppression of government. It’s the very core of our Constitution and Bill of Rights! How is it we don’t get that?

  • Den Christe

    The Wilberforce (the sex slave law of 2006) law states, in relevant part:

    Any unaccompanied alien child
    sought to be removed by the Department of Homeland Security, except
    for an unaccompanied alien child from a contiguous country (i.e.
    Mexico–or Canada, so as not to sound discriminatory) . . . shall
    be–placed in removal proceedings . . . eligible for relief … at
    no cost to the child and provided access to counsel.

    But the law’s definition of
    “unaccompanied alien child” limits the hearings to kids who have
    no relatives in the United States. If your relatives live here, the
    law assumes you’re not being sex-trafficked–you’re trying to
    join them.

    (g) Definition of Unaccompanied Alien
    Child- For purposes of this section, the term ‘unaccompanied alien
    child’ has the meaning given such term in section 462(g) of the
    Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 279(g)).

    Here’s the definition–note
    subsection (C):16 STAT. 2205

    PUBLIC LAW 107–296

    (g) Definitions

    (2) the term ‘unaccompanied alien
    child’ means a child who–

    (A) has no lawful immigration
    status in the United States;

    (B) has not attained 18 years of
    age; and

    (C) with respect to whom–

    (i) there is no parent or legal
    guardian in the United States; or (ii) no parent or legal guardian in
    the United States is available to provide care and physical custody.
    [Emphasis added]

    The law is not–as George Will
    suggested on “Fox News Sunday“–a general humanitarian mandate
    allowing all 2 billion poor children of the world to show up at our
    border and be told, “Welcome to America!” It’s a law to combat
    sex trafficking.

    Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Vice
    President Joe Biden wrote the law–and Feinstein isn’t stupid.
    She’s well aware of illegal immigration. That’s why the law
    specifically excludes two huge categories of illegal aliens from
    getting hearings: (1) Mexicans; and (2) children who have relatives
    in the U.S.

    Those cases look more like illegal
    immigration than sex trafficking. (Didn’t anyone wonder why Mexican
    kids are excluded?)

    Mexicans make up the lion’s share of
    illegal immigrants in the U.S., and children with relatives already
    living in the U.S. are probably just trying to rejoin family–not
    trying to escape a fiendish kidnapper about to sell them into sex

    According to last Friday’s New York
    Times, almost 90 percent of the 53,000 illegal alien kids given
    refugee status since October have already been transferred to parents
    or relatives living in the U.S. By the law’s clear terms, those
    47,000 kids should have been summarily turned away at the border–just
    as Mexican children are.

    No law needs to be fixed. The only
    thing that needs to be fixed is the president.

    Obama has gone mad and is defying the
    law in order to “fundamentally transform America”–as he pledged
    to do during the 2008 campaign–into Latin America.

  • Beloved Comrade

    They squat out more because the government subsidizes non-White, welfare births, the more life-time dependent births, the better for Rs and worse for Whites who are forced to pay for it all.

  • Beloved Comrade

    They already are. Detroit, Camden, Trenton and other black or brown majority cities are bastions of corruption, violence, bankruptcy, life-time welfare dependency and grinding human misery.

    All by design.

  • Beloved Comrade

    Pat Buchanan asks,

    Why are we doing this? Why are we inviting the world into the USA?

    We are not doing this. We did not invite the world in the USA.

    This has been and is being done to us by anti-White genocidists who control the levers of power in the U.S. They are hostile elites who not White and loathe, despise and detest the White race and White Western-created civilizations.

    They mean to wrest our homelands away from us and then eliminate every last one of us. Noel Ignatiev is a representative of this White-hating elite:

    The key to solving the social problems of our age is to abolish the white race. Until that task is accomplished, even partial reform will prove elusive, because white influence permeates every issue in U.S. society, whether domestic or foreign.

    —Noel Ignatiev, Abolish the White Race – By Any Means Necessary.

    For this, instead of being roundly condemned and fired, he receives standing ovations, a sinecure, book deals and a six figure salary at the highest levels of academia. Anyone here doubt what these elites have in mind for us?

  • Ringo Lennon

    Rahm Emmanuel wants to invite 2,000 illegal children to Chicago. Chicago already is full up! How do we stop this guy? How do we stop this guy? It has to be mentioned twice.

  • DLRisVH

    The sad part is, it was our own race who threw us under the bus.

  • It figures. America’s first Black President and King of the 3rd World . . .
    King Emir Comrade President Obama.

    • Erasmus

      It’s the crown of the Holy Roman Empire Obama is wearing in that picture.

  • none of your business

    I saw the movie Valkyrie on TV last week. At the end it said the bombing was one of 15 KNOWN efforts to kill Hitler. I read somewhere that Hitler’s 1934? massacre of the old SS was preemptive to prevent them from killing him It’a no use speculating about what might have been.

    • LHathaway

      Stalin did something very similar in what were to be more ‘successful’ efforts. Maybe they both felt they were eliminating provocateurs and infiltrators.

  • Fighting_Northern_Spirit

    I just finished reading Carleton Putnam’s Race and Reason. The sin of the Eisenhower and JFK years for which we are now being punished was egalitarianism, masquerading as “The American Way.” Those who survive it will have no illusions. Hopefully they can carve a homeland out of the chaos that’s coming.

  • Carlos Geary

    Whites are a minority in some parts in Brazil, but in the southern part whites are a majority.

    • Garrett Brown

      Nowhere are whites a majority in Brazil. They make up less than 30% of the population.

  • Magician


    • 4321realist

      I understand that when he goes to a formal affair he thinks all he has to do is put on a clean T-shirt.

    • withcaution

      He’s gay or so far left he’s brainwashed his thinking into finding her attractive.

      • Magician

        Well if he truly is gay, he would not be married to a woman. He would simply stay single all his life ( and go to gay bars every evening and weekends ) or cohabit with a partner. I have never ever seen a gay man legally married to a woman in my life. Have you?

        In my area, I would be lying if I ever say I never ever see any white male or female dating or marrying a non-white person. I do feel it would be same everywhere in this world. 1. We do see it. 2. But it is rare.

        Many black men also date very light skinned black females or very light-skinned Hispanic women.

        • Spikeygrrl

          Actually yes, I have seen a homosexual man legally married to a woman: my first husband’s father. He stayed married for 26 years — with the full knowledge and complicity of his wife — until all three of their children had graduated from college.

          Those were very different times.

  • Magician

    Things that are speeding up the process of us becoming a minority

    – White men determined to breed with Asian women, even if she is about as attractive as Mark Zuckerberg’s wife. I see white men miscegenating with Asian women five times more frequently than white women do with black men or any colored men for that matter. There are some white men here on AmRen arguging that “It’s Asian women that are chasing us white men!” But on YouTube, there is no Asian woman saying “I love white men”


    – Single black mothers giving birth very irresponsibly to 7~10 kids ( and all her kids have different daddies ) Following is a YouTube clip about a black woman who gave birth to 15 kids. She does not feel guilty one bit, and actually, she feels the city must be such an evil city to not pay for the living of her 15 kids.


    – Obongo welcoming illegal immigrants, let alone not deport them, and providing them with shelter when they arrive here, and he can’t wait to give them American citizenship

  • Garrett Brown

    Thank you very much.

  • none of your business

    I wonder who wrote Edward Kennedy’s speech, surely not him. His handlers probably had to lock him up for 3 days to get him sober enough to memorize the speech.

  • Reading a little about the war in Rhodesia to put down black violence, I think they pursued a Vietnam type strategy where only certain blacks, would be targeted. For example they would know that this one black (for example) “Mogambambi Bandeshu”, blew up a white school. Thus they’d fly out in these helicopters to a village of 500 where he was suspected of hiding. Ground forces would move in and they interrogate all the villagers as to whether they’d seen him. Of course nobody knew nuthin so they’d all fly back.

    Meanwhile Mogambambi would blow up a school bus with white schoolchildren. He wouldn’t bother himself with whether any of those children were guilty of anything; he’d just kill ’em all because they were white. And that’s how they won the war & the country: despite the white Rodesians having helicopter gunships & modern arms.

    Also intense worldwide pressure, including by the US, to allow black majority rule, helped.

  • scutum

    Mexico and the countries of Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador are all rich in natural resources, yet they are all third world nations. There is a reason Mexico and the Central American countries of Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador are third world countries. Its because they are full of Mexicans, Hondurans, Nicaraguans and El Salvadorans. Japan on the other hand has virtually no natural resources, yet it is a first world nation with a dynamic economy and a rich and vibrant culture. But then Japan is full of Japanese, not Mexicans or Central Americans. Demographics is destiny, and a nations most important resource is its people, and not all people and races are the same. Third world peoples will produce a third world nation. We need to separate and build a Euro-American nation some where on the North American Continent.

    • Magician

      Population of Honduras 7.936 M
      Population of Nicaragua 5.992 M
      Population of El Salvador 6.297 M
      Population of Japan 127.6M

      But then again Norway, Sweden, and Finland all have less than 10M people each yet they are considered 1st world countries

      And it also depends on the area within the countries. Some cities in central America are amazingly advanced and wealthy. Just like China. It is not the first country yet, but several of its major cities are ridiculously advanced.

    • Ringo Lennon

      But then Japan is full of Japanese, not Mexicans or Central Americans

      And no Negroes.

  • Ringo Lennon

    This sure ain’t the country I was born into (1951). I always judge the country against my birth year.


    I have thought from the beginning that her death, tragic as it was, did more to save America than all the American soldiers’ deaths on the battlefield.


    It is a religion that requires its believers to think that whenever its ideology conflicts with reality, it is reality that must change.

  • Hy Alldredge

    You’re correct, when I said “founded” I was referring to the American Revolution and the founding of America as a distinct nation instead of a colony of England. When you stop seeing through the rosy glasses of patriotism, King George was an incredibly benevolent and hands off “tyrant.” To start a rebellion over a small tax on tea seems ludicrous. It was clearly rabble rousing and mob politics at play there, and in the end the government they created was far more overreaching and oppressive than the King ever was.

  • Shel

    This is very reason I couldn’t have kids until I was much older and by then I couldn’t have as many as I wanted. We didn’t have any money and was struggling to create a career which never materialized. I knew that I lived in a society where you need money to have kids or else you are doomed and you would be dooming your kids too. Also I didn’t want to send kids to daycare. Poor and people of lower intelligence don’t seem to worry about the outcome of having kids in adverse circumstances. I think you’ll find this is the case for many white females. We thought we needed to have high paying careers to pay for the house and the car first.. Getting there eats up our fertility years. We then get the silly career that we thought was so important and have to drop it to raise the kids right when they arrive. When we finally have a baby(s) we realize the baby means more to us than anything else in the world and it was the only thing that ever mattered. But we didn’t know this because you don’t learn this until you have a baby. Our society is not supportive of mothers. We are supposed to be able to earn money AND have babies by putting them in daycare which is unacceptable to the intelligent among us. A newborn baby needs to be breastfed every hour and then breastfed for at least 2 years 10 times a day. How will she do this when she is at work?

    • M&S


      I am truly sorry if you missed out on having more children which you wished for, I can only say that, if you invest in those you do have and they are healthy as I hope, you can contribute to the next generation both indirectly, through their behavior. And directly, through your genes as their’s.

      This is a credit to you as it exhibits more social responsibility on your part than perhaps half of today’s white women can manage, with either no planned intent to have children ‘until it feels right’ or a deliberate intent to have none/have those of another race’s male.

      If my experience of Hispanics is anything to go by, men’s behavior matters here in that other populations’ males know to corral as much as adore, push and force rationalization of sex as a constantly presented reinforcement (desirable) of masculine intent so that women don’t have the ability to push the ‘someday, maybe’ context to the back of their minds when work or social lifestyle calls to them as distraction.

      Marx was correct in stating that there are absolute social and ability as time-driven barriers to the rise of any individual within a given social bond group. Where those opportunities are further diffused among other, competing, groups; the overall ability of people to ‘rise beyond their station’ is extremely limited and almost tangential to their coincident placement in random events as much as earned opportunities.
      I believe that this is more instinctive than systemic as he did with a very large biologic effector unaccounted for. As tall men dominate in social metrics of salary and job position as well as rates of advancement, so do pretty people get a better chance than older/uglier/more experienced ones as we natively tempt youth and confirmation genetics to participate in and elevate our society through their assumed ‘greateness’ while they remain at the peak of their abilities.
      Women, who are natively more beautiful because they are more balanced in their confirmation (better feature symmetry driven by behavioral muscle controls derived directly from bi-hemispheric brain function) have a naturally alluring edge here but also a hard constraint in that their brains are typically 10% smaller with lower area for convolute densities and thus less chance for high IQ to compensate for when the rigours of hard work begin to rapidly steal their youthful glamour.

      This tar pit of social inequity is something which women do not comprehend the basis of because they assume that their sense of themselves as healthy and pretty is innate and they don’t see the muck between them and the green grass on the far side. Plowing right in, never realizing how hard a slog it is is further accompanied by co-participancy risks in the manner by which the more that the gender-beautiful participate, the less there is it distinguish them as individuals from /all the other pretty women/ also sinking fast in the social mire.

      A woman who gives herself to a man has, ironically, by ‘quitting early’, in fact guaranteed that that man will carry her over the finish line because that’s the legal expectation of men, even today, in creating a dependent adult household as wife and mother.
      That upwards of 70% of divorces are in fact female generated, (not for abuse or ‘incompatibility’ but simply ‘not fun anymore’ understanding of what the sheltered side of marriage does to generate ennui and feelings of entrapment) is, in fact, a -failure- of mothers to teach their daughters what to expect of the married life which brings us back to the tar pit as- “If only he would support me in a separate household, I too could participate in daily working toil and all that money I would earn, except a little for my baby, would be mine!”
      As a false social perception.

      Except that the cost of living is increasing, the number of working age males who don’t is going up on a steepening scale of job loss access to our own (tailored privilege group) social earning mechanisms and women often find that freedom from the male means fighting other females in a very collaterals intensive environment of alliances and cliques.

      Again, whites have always been told that to be chivalrous and romantic is to woo and to tease is and above all else, be respectful, rather than pushy and domineering in sexual demands placed upon the woman. This has gone on long enough that there have been definite social and genetic effects upon our society.
      And yet women who have the choice (inherent to going out of race when the males often have little else to offer) seem to prefer a more direct approach to being interactively ‘instructed’ in the man’s willingness to mate. Which means a wishy-washy white man who has great potential -on the road to wealth- can be beaten to the punch as it were by someone whose biology drive’s the woman’s equivalent.

      I think this is a hormonal response which is triggered by subliminal instinctive empathy with the ‘dominate = demiurgent need’. Women measure the strength of men’s committed soul as sexual drives and from that, their genetic health by the amount of aggressive, have-me/have-you frictional angst as wish fulfillment that they project.
      And provided the intent is indeed there the teasing is very short and sweet because the mating opportunity, when young, doesn’t need to be very long to bear fruit.
      Of course, being just a guy, I could be wrong in this, women seem to change up their game everytime something seems too fixed or well understood.

      What I do know is that forcing eye contact in women generates an oxytocin bloom and intimidating them with a strong male stare that makes them duck their eyes puts them in a no-win condition of either admitted weakness or challenged stare-back for which the response is hardwired (we know this from dog:human studies btw. in which canid owners -also- have an oxytocin bloom, gentling their own subsequent bonding behaviors).
      Since this is the exact opposite of what we are ‘told’ women want; the reality is that red light/green light behavior may be both delaying the inevitable and generating ‘permission granted’ conditions that are unmeetable because they lack the hard signaling that forces the biology to instead insist upon social norms whereby each partner in a relationship ‘must feel at ease’ rather than merely letting deliberate friction rapidly wear down the social barriers to something more primitive and driving as a basically simple behavior.

      There is again, significant evidence that long domestic partnerships not only do not generate children but fail, eventually, to even generate marriage conditions by which mutual household support is a given advantage to continued association.
      This in turn generates lag in the ‘have me or put me back on the market!’ return to dating by which couples who are ‘comfortable’ with each other, find themselves back dating after the bloom is off the rose and both are very inexperienced with the whole dating game sophistication of the PUA world.
      A kid early in the relationship, especially if the grandparents refuse to generate fall-back conditions of a return to the nest, makes dependence a given, until the State steps in with easy divorce enslavement of the man to separate household maintenance.

      While I personally have major doubts as to the nature of a 33 year old woman having kids as being a ‘good thing’ to begin with (cumulative toxins effect organ function in supporting the extra biomass metabolics and may influence congenital defects while a fused pelvis makes delivery very difficult) what we have discovered is that the older a woman gets, the more intelligent her children are. This is likely FOX-P2 epigenetic interaction between brain and gonads but it is equally balanced, in men, by a -fall- in the IQ of children sired by men over 30, presumably because their brains have swilled for so long under testosterone loads that they have lost the dual-hemispheric (rational/emotive) ‘indexing’ feature which help build IQ.

      Does this mean we breed lonely cougars to twenty something males and then support them as single mothers like Sweden does, just for 2-3 points of IQ in the ONE child a late-bearing woman is likely to have?
      IMO, the social demographics risks are too overwhelmingly pointed towards supplantative genocide by high TFR foreign ethnies for this to even be considered.

      Instead, I believe humanity has gone as far as it can through assortative interbreeding, both within populations and, via gene flow, between them.
      We can only go backwards from here as the number of strongly vital but incredibly stupid other peoples begins to utterly dwarf our own. And they all want to come here.
      Our only way forward, especially if we are going to ask women to make that enormous sacrifice as a ‘back to the kitchen with you!’ life change, is to make a Genomic Reset by which, not only is every white child gifted with a 10-20 point IQ raise but /the social modalities/ which come about from that, remove the ditch digger (exploitative class oppression) mentality from our societies altogether.
      Because, in a culture of 125 IQs across the board, nobody will want to ‘thank you and drive thru’ serve fast food or a dozen other make-work cog industries and everyone will be so massively ‘overqualified’ in overlapping expertise areas that rapid movement of our culture into automated sustainment will be a given as a fractional percentage of those in the native 160-180 range of genius IQs gets an equivalent frequency boost.
      An automated society which eliminates the cog-jobs is _Not_ one which needs to import more of the desperate and dumb to fill those positions (again, Marx was correct, capitalism for it’s own sake is a predatory, parasitic, condition…).
      The underlying prerequisite of a genomic reset as the harvesting individual allele sections from known high ability-X individuals and then additively agglomerating them into the population as a whole through retrovirals, is EUFI. Or Extra Uterine Fetal Incubation: Artificial Wombs.
      Which, for women, means trading the warm-fuzzies of growing something in their own garden for the screaming shriek of pelvic dislocation passing that watermelon sized body out of their own.
      More importantly, for the child it means the ability to control, not just the genetics but the activation/termination sequence of their tissue encoding use in fetal development (the human body only has about 20,000 genes, it must reuse them, several times, in the transition from pluripotent elastic to finished structures form).
      And the drugs that do that are functionally high level metabolic poisons, which would be lethal to a woman and likely to -most- of her children.
      In this, if you fertilize 10 ovum, 8 will likely die of exotic cancers and other obscure genetic defects in the womb.
      But the two you get will be the foundation of a new human followon species with super health, IQs/abilities off the charts, empathy in spades and a common sense pragmatism that balances ability with kindness against need without angst.
      It also means that women who make this sacrifice, for whites only, get an out-of-jail-free card, _if they want it_, for their daughters in the following generations.
      Because perfected EUFI exogenics also means perfect population control. Want to raise one child? Fine. Want to raise four? Okay too. And it also means everything from the female cycle to the long years of dependent parenting can moderated or eliminated.
      As I said, it is a sacrifice but it is one which, if whites make it _now_, while we still can, we will forever free ourselves from the large scale issues of societal unrest and leveraged class/race labor exploitation.
      If we don’t, we won’t get another chance because the idiot populations of the planet will wreck everything and then come looking for the gold inside the goose as if we were responsible for their actions.

      Finally, I am a little leery of the present emphasis on prolonged breast feeding. I don’t know how much early childhood you remember, whether it’s flash-fragmentary or contiguous with the emotion sets you maintained at the time but to put it simply, it’s a period experience of massive sensory overload in which every little stimulus is immediate and overpowering and the statistical weighting engine of the brain is in long-bootup mode struggling to index them all, giving each leverageable importance.
      It is a process that is at once painful and distancing from the immediate sense-memory of ‘perfect innocence’ that is a babes smiling lack of guilt.

      I have moments of early memory when I saw a mobile in my shadowed afternoon nap-room, whirring above my head in the breeze of an open window and scaring the crap out of me because it’s motion was that of continuously fluid shadow shapes changing their reality without boundaries until I screamed and screamed for help. And no one came.

      Oxytocin in breast milk can help with this overload but it does so by dulling the sensory-cognitive link. Literally dulling neuro-transmitter function as the ability to force connective links with other synapses.
      And while that helps the brain develop a healthy resistance to cognitive disruption between independent self-as-rationalist internal operating system dominance and environmental stimulus as felt-effect interaction same as insight but also as a pre-psychotic break limiter of dysfuction; the prolongation of dulled = limited ‘safe mode’ operations may also have an effect on total IQ build.
      Social conformist behavior and low criminality benefit from stable IQs but it -may- also serve to suppress the natural inquisitiveness of young, bright, minds which are literally building-the-computer as axon connections by making and erasing random associations in everything they do and sense, at blistering speeds.

      Obviously, there is also a social acceptance element to this as well.

      I don’t criticize you for your beliefs, they are yours to own, but I ask you to recall your mother’s wisdom: “Sometimes when a baby cries, it just needs to be allowed to do so.” Because the ‘Rescue Me!’ action:response is one of building addiction when, if the moment is survived /without/ mom’s nipple, there is a gradual hardening of the plasticity of the mind by which the realization that you haven’t died for want of reassurance means a positive feedback association that you -don’t- want to again undergo a situation by which you are the internal cause of your own panic for no reason or benefit.

      Because the panic is worse than the uncertainty and the uncertainty is worse than the knowing that you survive at a lowered social status in the eyes of your little-wuss peers.

      Boys learn this lesson early. Girls, not so much.