Who cares who was here first?

This memes popped up on my InterWebs today: Europeans were in North America before the Asians. Now, to be clear, I find this interesting (if it is true), but I think this is a loser in the battle for the meme-o-sphere.

CcR7GH7UAAE2vQ4 [Full size images are at the bottom.]

It’s not so much the content of the meme that matters to me here, but I want to express a thought about framing. This meme is a loser, because it has already lost the frame.

The meme is attempting to counter the narrative that the noble savages we call American Indians were in North America and then the evil white man came and conquered them and genocided them and stole their lands with shiny beads. In this typically Leftist narrative, weakness and savagery are good, and strength and civilization are bad. That is the frame.

CcR7GIMVAAAuWupHowever, the counter-argument this meme uses is “we were here first”, therefore it was actually the Asians who genocided the Europeans. The mistake is that it accepts the frame that weakness is good and strength is bad, and tries to portray Europeans as the weak (and therefore good) victims. The memeologist thought they were countering the Leftist narrative, but instead they played right into it. Needless to say, playing into the enemy’s frame is a losing strategem.

Instead, break out of the frame. State the obvious: Strength is good. Winning is good. The Darwinian struggle is real and it is never-ending. Let me put on my bowtie and fedora for a moment: Yes, now distinct peoples can trade with each other and everyone can benefit from this trade, but we don’t have to live together. And if we come into competition, then Europeans are going to win, and winning is good.

This little meme below breaks the frame and re-frames the discussion with a powerful message, one that is powerful because it is true: strength is good. Don’t fall into the Leftist frame. Don’t try to argue that Trump (or anyone else) is not a racist. Argue that strength is good. Argue that solidarity is good because it makes a group strong. Survival is good. Argue that the Darwinian struggle is not going to end. The Leftist argument (that being a weak victim is moral) is a lie. They are attempting to frame morality in such a way that Europeans owe them something. They are attempting to use this lie and this frame to get access to our resources at a discount — they are attempting to steal. We have no incentive to accept that weakness is good and every incentive to assert that strength is good, because we are strong and that is Nature’s way. Never try to frame us as weak and therefore deserving, the weak deserve nothing. Nature does not reward the weak. That’s the truth and the truth is enough.

CVesxXtUwAAGc7C


America does not belong to the Native Americans

Genocided by the Asians

 

Advertisements

Multiculturalism is Balkanization

Multiculturalism is Balkanization

Balkanization, or Balkanisation, is a geopolitical term, originally used to describe the process of fragmentation or division of a region or state into smaller regions or states that are often hostile or non-cooperative with one another.

When you place distinct population groups in competition for resources, then one group will eventually win. Think about multiculturalism for a second, what is it changing from? It is changing from homogeneous states to mixed-ethnicity states, from mono-cultures to multi-cultures.

Humans have naturally migrated all around the world except when blocked by topographic features. We have lots of historical examples of distinct populations coming into contact. Homogeneous states rarely occur from lack of contact. How is it that these homogeneous states (all one ethnicity) come to exist in the first place? Think about that question for a second before you keep reading.

Homogeneous states exist because throughout time, one ethnic group always either subsumes, ejects or kills the other groups. This is humanity. Like it or not. To say that we should not behave that way is to be Utopian,  and is to ignore the reality of human interaction. To think that one could educate populations to coexist peacefully is Utopian. To believe that competitions amongst the human animal can be arrested, that the Hobbesian war of all-against-all can be negotiated, that the evolution of the species can be halted, is disastrously ignorant of the true nature of the human life.

Currently, Myanmar is trying to deal with its Muslim minority through deportation and second-class citizenship. This is actually the nice way to handle it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/07/world/asia/rohingya-myanmar-rakhine-state-thailand-malaysia.html?_r=1

If you want to see the not nice way to handle it, just search Genocide.

If you are a proponent of multiculturalism and a cheerleader for diversity, you might want to think about the future of America. Maybe here in America, there will be a nice resolution. We can always hope, can’t we?

Hong Kong has too many poor people to allow direct elections

From Quartz: Hong Kong has too many poor people to allow direct elections, leader says.

Hahahahaha!!!

You have to go pretty far from America to get some straight talk on democracy. Here’s what CY Leung, Hong Kong’s top city official, had to say about it:

“If it’s entirely a numbers game—numeric representation—then obviously you’d be talking to half the people in Hong Kong [that] earn less than US$1,800 a month. You would end up with that kind of politics and policies.”

Ya think? So let me get this straight: if a country lets a bunch of poor people vote, then that country will inevitably get a bunch of wealth-destroying, wealth-transfer policies?

Well, I’ll be darned. Whodathunkit? It’s not like that is perfectly obvious. Or is it?

Let me rephrase: Democracy is retarded.

As an aside, Curt Doolittle wrote in Neo-Reaction in a Nutshell: We Are Ruled By A Theocracy – An Evil One:

The central problem of any post-hunter-gatherer society, engaged in production, is to ensure that the fecundity of the unproductive does not eradicate the increases in productivity of the creative – but that those increases are accumulated as a competitive advantage against the fecundity of not only our own relations, but of those who would replace us. Otherwise all innovation is translated into population expansion rather than advancement. Northern European civilization succeeded faster than all others, in no small part because it concentrated reproduction in its upper classes, not in expanding the burden of its lower classes.

It seems that Hong Kong is wrestling with that problem as we speak, Curt.

When Texas Becomes Mexico

Check out the demographics provided by the State of Texas, including projections to 2040:



Points of Interest:

  1. Exhibit 3 – As of 2006, Texas White population was under 50%
  2. Exhibit 8 – Notice that the Total Population line (in black) mirrors the hispanic (Mexican) population line (in blue)
  3. Exhibit 8 – Texas will become majority hispanic (Mexican) in 2020. Just over 5 years away.

You know that old saying ‘Remember the Alamo?’. Well, it appears that no-one in Texas does, because the open-borders pro-amnesty Republican leadership is going to do what Santa Ana couldn’t: Deliver Texas to the Mexicans.