Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Impotent Republican Party: Time for Secession
11 views
Skip to first unread message
walt tonne
Nov 12, 2012, 7:29:35 AM11/12/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
A must read.
> (Kevin MacDonald is a Prof. of Psych. at Cal Tech)
>
> >
> > Impotent Republican Party: Time For Secession?
>
> > Kevin MacDonald
>
> > My impression is that in 2008 the mainstream media was basking in the
> > glow of multicultural heaven with the election of Obama. There was
> > very little commentary on the racial pattern of the results and what
> > they portended a difficult time ahead for the Republicans. This time
> > around, one hears nothing but commentary on how the Republicans are
> > doomed if they don’t pander to Hispanics (Hispander, as VDARE has it).
>
> > The racial fault lines are more apparent than ever. Whereas in 2008,
> > the official version was that 58% of Whites voted Republican, this
> > year, according to the CNN exit poll data, it split 59%–39%. Of
> > course, the White population includes Jews and Middle Easterners
> > classed as Whites but who do not vote like other Whites and do not
> > identify with the traditional people and culture of America. (70% of
> > Jews voted for Obama, down from ~80% in 2008, perhaps because Obama
> > didn’t immediately bomb Iran at Israel’s behest. As a critical
> > component of the new hostile elite, Jewish voters are mainly motivated
> > by their identification with the non-White coalition of the Democratic
> > Party, assuming [correctly] that support for Israel is sufficiently bi-
> > partisan to carry the day.) As usual, the White percentage of the
> > electorate continued to decline, from 74% to 72%. And as usual, the
> > Republican Party received over 90% of its votes from Whites.
>
> > Non-Whites voted overwhelmingly for Obama–80% on average. Asians have
> > become like Jews in their voting—focused not on their economic
> > position so much as their identification with non-White America.
> > Indeed, a higher percentage of Asians (73%) voted for Obama than did
> > Latinos (71%) and Jews (70%).
>
> > Whites of both sexes voted Republican, with only 35% of White males
> > voting Democrat and only 42% of White women. Even Whites in the
> > youngest age category (18–29 years)–those most influenced by Sumner
> > Redstone’s MTV and by the school system whose main purpose now is to
> > pound the benefits of diversity into the brains of captive young
> > audiences–voted Republican (51% to 41%).
>
> > So the Republican Party is the White people’s party. The media is
> > screaming now that the party reach out to Latinos to become
> > competitive again. I suppose that is what they will try to do. But it
> > is very unlikely to work.
>
> > It’s not just about immigration. In order to appeal to the vast
> > majority of non-Whites, the Republicans would also have to be the
> > party of entitlements for minorities and high taxes for their White
> > base. Consider the situation in California. In a Wall Street Journal
> > article (“California’s Greek Tragedy“), two Stanford professors,
> > Michael F. Boskin and John F. Cogan, note that
>
> > from the mid-1980s to 2005, California’s population grew by 10
> > million, while Medicaid recipients soared by seven million; tax filers
> > paying income taxes rose by just 150,000; and the prison population
> > swelled by 115,000. … With 12% of America’s population, California has
> > one third of the nation’s welfare recipients. (see here)
>
> > And as a result of the most recent election, the Democrats have a 2/3
> > majority in the State Legislature, meaning that they can raise taxes
> > as much as they please. This new supermajority will now see White
> > Californians as a cash cow, to be milked at will until we see the
> > light and leave. California is a harbinger of what the entire nation
> > will look like soon.
>
> > So in order to appeal to Latinos, Republicans will have to not only
> > agree to let more Latinos in, they also have to be gung ho on raising
> > taxes and jacking up benefits. This is not even remotely a vision that
> > even a moderate Republican could accept. It is complete surrender, and
> > would be staunchly resisted by its core constituency. As all the
> > research shows, Whites are not going to be willing to pay for public
> > goods that will be consumed by non-Whites. It’s going to make for a
> > very unhappy White minority. Just another cost of multiculturalism.
>
> > And the bottom line is that Latinos will ultimately behave like Jews
> > and Asians—they will see their future in the Democratic Party as the
> > party of non-White America independent of social class.
>
> > White males constituted only 34% of the electorate and this will
> > continue to decline. It’s no accident that stocks of gun companies
> > soared after the election, even though the stock market as a whole
> > took a dive. What we have here is a situation in which around 70% of
> > traditional American White men (correcting for the overly inclusive
> > White’ category used by the media) are now pretty much officially
> > disenfranchised in a country where they see themselves as the founding
> > population. That’s a lot of angry White men. The vast majority of
> > these men are not going to be willing participants in a Republican
> > campaign to recruit Latinos, no matter what the enlightened party
> > elites want. And there will be far more non-Whites voting in 2016
> > because Obama is bent on legalizing the illegals and because of
> > continuing displacement-level legal non-White immigration.
>
> > This is or at least ought to be explosive. It may take a while for
> > this 70% to wake up to the reality that they are politically impotent.
> > But it will happen. Separatist movements in the many states that are
> > deeply red are certainly a possibility, as advocated by Farnham
> > O’Reilly here. (A friend mentioned that Rush Limbaugh joked about
> > secession.) Is there any other realistic alternative? Apart from
> > futile violence against the Leviathan, do White men really have any
> > other choice? That is, unless they think that exiting the stage of
> > history as something less than men is a reasonable alternative.
> (Kevin MacDonald is a Prof. of Psych. at Cal Tech)
>
> >
> > Impotent Republican Party: Time For Secession?
>
> > Kevin MacDonald
>
> > My impression is that in 2008 the mainstream media was basking in the
> > glow of multicultural heaven with the election of Obama. There was
> > very little commentary on the racial pattern of the results and what
> > they portended a difficult time ahead for the Republicans. This time
> > around, one hears nothing but commentary on how the Republicans are
> > doomed if they don’t pander to Hispanics (Hispander, as VDARE has it).
>
> > The racial fault lines are more apparent than ever. Whereas in 2008,
> > the official version was that 58% of Whites voted Republican, this
> > year, according to the CNN exit poll data, it split 59%–39%. Of
> > course, the White population includes Jews and Middle Easterners
> > classed as Whites but who do not vote like other Whites and do not
> > identify with the traditional people and culture of America. (70% of
> > Jews voted for Obama, down from ~80% in 2008, perhaps because Obama
> > didn’t immediately bomb Iran at Israel’s behest. As a critical
> > component of the new hostile elite, Jewish voters are mainly motivated
> > by their identification with the non-White coalition of the Democratic
> > Party, assuming [correctly] that support for Israel is sufficiently bi-
> > partisan to carry the day.) As usual, the White percentage of the
> > electorate continued to decline, from 74% to 72%. And as usual, the
> > Republican Party received over 90% of its votes from Whites.
>
> > Non-Whites voted overwhelmingly for Obama–80% on average. Asians have
> > become like Jews in their voting—focused not on their economic
> > position so much as their identification with non-White America.
> > Indeed, a higher percentage of Asians (73%) voted for Obama than did
> > Latinos (71%) and Jews (70%).
>
> > Whites of both sexes voted Republican, with only 35% of White males
> > voting Democrat and only 42% of White women. Even Whites in the
> > youngest age category (18–29 years)–those most influenced by Sumner
> > Redstone’s MTV and by the school system whose main purpose now is to
> > pound the benefits of diversity into the brains of captive young
> > audiences–voted Republican (51% to 41%).
>
> > So the Republican Party is the White people’s party. The media is
> > screaming now that the party reach out to Latinos to become
> > competitive again. I suppose that is what they will try to do. But it
> > is very unlikely to work.
>
> > It’s not just about immigration. In order to appeal to the vast
> > majority of non-Whites, the Republicans would also have to be the
> > party of entitlements for minorities and high taxes for their White
> > base. Consider the situation in California. In a Wall Street Journal
> > article (“California’s Greek Tragedy“), two Stanford professors,
> > Michael F. Boskin and John F. Cogan, note that
>
> > from the mid-1980s to 2005, California’s population grew by 10
> > million, while Medicaid recipients soared by seven million; tax filers
> > paying income taxes rose by just 150,000; and the prison population
> > swelled by 115,000. … With 12% of America’s population, California has
> > one third of the nation’s welfare recipients. (see here)
>
> > And as a result of the most recent election, the Democrats have a 2/3
> > majority in the State Legislature, meaning that they can raise taxes
> > as much as they please. This new supermajority will now see White
> > Californians as a cash cow, to be milked at will until we see the
> > light and leave. California is a harbinger of what the entire nation
> > will look like soon.
>
> > So in order to appeal to Latinos, Republicans will have to not only
> > agree to let more Latinos in, they also have to be gung ho on raising
> > taxes and jacking up benefits. This is not even remotely a vision that
> > even a moderate Republican could accept. It is complete surrender, and
> > would be staunchly resisted by its core constituency. As all the
> > research shows, Whites are not going to be willing to pay for public
> > goods that will be consumed by non-Whites. It’s going to make for a
> > very unhappy White minority. Just another cost of multiculturalism.
>
> > And the bottom line is that Latinos will ultimately behave like Jews
> > and Asians—they will see their future in the Democratic Party as the
> > party of non-White America independent of social class.
>
> > White males constituted only 34% of the electorate and this will
> > continue to decline. It’s no accident that stocks of gun companies
> > soared after the election, even though the stock market as a whole
> > took a dive. What we have here is a situation in which around 70% of
> > traditional American White men (correcting for the overly inclusive
> > White’ category used by the media) are now pretty much officially
> > disenfranchised in a country where they see themselves as the founding
> > population. That’s a lot of angry White men. The vast majority of
> > these men are not going to be willing participants in a Republican
> > campaign to recruit Latinos, no matter what the enlightened party
> > elites want. And there will be far more non-Whites voting in 2016
> > because Obama is bent on legalizing the illegals and because of
> > continuing displacement-level legal non-White immigration.
>
> > This is or at least ought to be explosive. It may take a while for
> > this 70% to wake up to the reality that they are politically impotent.
> > But it will happen. Separatist movements in the many states that are
> > deeply red are certainly a possibility, as advocated by Farnham
> > O’Reilly here. (A friend mentioned that Rush Limbaugh joked about
> > secession.) Is there any other realistic alternative? Apart from
> > futile violence against the Leviathan, do White men really have any
> > other choice? That is, unless they think that exiting the stage of
> > history as something less than men is a reasonable alternative.
Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole
Nov 16, 2012, 3:09:08 AM11/16/12
to
walt tonne wrote:
> A must read.
>
> > (Kevin MacDonald is a Prof. of Psych. at Cal Tech)
> >
> > >
> > > Impotent Republican Party: Time For Secession?
Moral Majority Lynch Mob vs the Rights of an Unpopular Few.
Got em Funding the Aryan Airforce, Covert Airbase, built in my Yard!
Don't Open ANWR, there's gonna be One Less Star on the Flag"!
Even the Threat of such Violation of the Union, is "TREASON"!
Alaska Independence Party is no Joke, Alaska has a strong Militant Streak that
insists on Secession!
"United States of Alaska"!
Anglican Oil Boys Like BP support em to!
Love the Idea that BP Alaska's Largest Oil Company just sold out to Russia, and
Everyone stills talks about reducing American Dependence on Foreign Oil, by
Giving ANWR Oil and DRILLING to the RUSSIANS?
rbowman
Nov 16, 2012, 10:03:39 AM11/16/12
to
Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole wrote:
> Alaska Independence Party is no Joke, Alaska has a strong Militant Streak
> that insists on Secession!
> "United States of Alaska"!
Sarah Palin for the first president? They could do worse, I suppose.
> Alaska Independence Party is no Joke, Alaska has a strong Militant Streak
> that insists on Secession!
> "United States of Alaska"!
PrecisionmachinisT
Nov 17, 2012, 6:33:35 PM11/17/12
to
"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:agn2u3...@mid.individual.net...
receives about $1.84 back, I hope it's efforts to secede come to bear fruit
soon
Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole
Nov 20, 2012, 1:17:51 AM11/20/12
to
> > Lady Azure, Baroness of the North Pole wrote:
> >
> >> Alaska Independence Party is no Joke, Alaska has a strong Militant Streak
> >> that insists on Secession!
> >> "United States of Alaska"!
> >
> > Sarah Palin for the first president? They could do worse, I suppose.
>
> Beings that for every dollar that Alaska pays the federal government, it
> receives about $1.84 back, I hope it's efforts to secede come to bear fruit
> soon
Would serve the World far Better to give the place to the EIA, so they can
> >
> >> Alaska Independence Party is no Joke, Alaska has a strong Militant Streak
> >> that insists on Secession!
> >> "United States of Alaska"!
> >
> > Sarah Palin for the first president? They could do worse, I suppose.
>
> Beings that for every dollar that Alaska pays the federal government, it
> receives about $1.84 back, I hope it's efforts to secede come to bear fruit
> soon
become a "NATION" before the world, than the Aryan's for their 4th Reich!
0 new messages