The Problems with Minimizing Black Crime

Jason: Only 2 to 3 percent of black males are actually behind bars, and only 27 percent of all blacks are below the poverty line. That’s the facts for you.”

Phil: That doesn’t tell you how many are actually prone to violent behavior, just those who were incarcerated. It also misses my point on disproportionate behavior.

Actually what we are looking at is how many Blacks have served time. How many have a criminal record, and what for?

Have you seen those statistics saying that, what, 1/3 of young Black men are either in jail, in prison or on probation or parole? 1/3 of them are under the control of the criminal justice system in one way or another? I believe that 1 out of 8 Black men cannot vote because they have a felony conviction. I forget what the actual statistics are, but they are pretty stunning. When you have 1/3 of your young men involved with the criminal justice system in one way or another, that’s bad news.

Further, if you live in a heavily Black neighborhood, it will become rapidly clear that it’s a lot more than 2-3% of the Black male population who are problem people. I mean if that was all it was, then we could deal. For Chrissake, 25% of White men in my age cohort have been arrested, including me, and not just once but twice in my case! If 25% of White men in my cohort have been arrested, can you imagine what the figure for Black men might be?

Of course not all Blacks, or Black men, or young Black men are criminals.

But it’s a bad idea to minimize the Black crime problem. For one thing, it is hitting their own community like a nuclear bomb. Saying it’s no big deal is an insult to all of the Blacks suffering under the wrath of this crime wave. Furthermore, it’s an insult to these Black men themselves, not all of whom are bad human beings, who are having their lives screwed up or ruined by arrest, imprisonment or even just having a record.

It’s also a bad idea if you are going to have a dealings with large numbers of Blacks, especially younger Black men, especially of a certain type. Minimizing their behavior is not intelligent for your own sake. You really need to get it into your head how dangerous large numbers of them can be so you can exercise due caution.

274 Comments

Filed under Blacks, Corrections, Crime, Law enforcement, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Social Problems, Sociology

274 responses to “The Problems with Minimizing Black Crime

  1. RockT

    The minimizers should somehow be made to live in the ‘hood for at least a year. Jason included.

  2. Fucking exactly. If Jason used data as I have been saying to him since I’ve been on this blog, he would’ve been able understand his mistake.

  3. Jason Y

    33 percent isn’t 50 percent, much less 100.

    The minimizers should somehow be made to live in the ‘hood for at least a year. Jason included.

    What about the white hood full of thieves, scammers, and meth?

    • “33 percent isn’t 50 percent, much less 100.”

      In the context of a population, that is still huge majority or not.

    • “What about the white hood full of thieves, scammers, and meth?”

      Go back to previous threads and see my point on proportions, and how they don’t match in terms of expressed criminal activity.

      • Jason Y

        Though it may seem irrelevant, I can say even though maybe there are more black hoods, the white hoods are just horrible. Ironically, these white hoods hate blacks much more than more well off whites, often for hypocritical reasons obviously.

        • “Though it may seem irrelevant, I can say even though maybe there are more black hoods, the white hoods are just horrible.”

          Yeah, pretty irrelevant in the context of comparison.

          “Ironically, these white hoods hate blacks much more than more well off whites, often for hypocritical reasons obviously.”

          Again, pretty irrelevant.

    • RockT

      “What about the white hood full of thieves, scammers, and meth?”

      What about it son? Go live where you’ll stand out starkly…ya know, since there is really not much crime there; right? Like I said, it would be good if it could be legally imposed.

      • Jason Y

        Not crime there? Of course there is. I told you people on and on on here about white goobers worming thier way into families: stealing, using identity theft, using kids as a form of extortion, the list goes on and on.

        Why should I have more pity for them, simply cause they’re white. Note blacks cannot worm their way into white families cause nobody, other than some pear shaped or large women will marry them.

        • Jason Y

          These scamming whites don’t even really need a hood. They can just marry into any old family anywhere. However, normally they can get away with it better in certain areas, areas that aren’t populated by doctors etc.. as those types won’t put up with it. Just run of the mill blue collar neighborhoods or mountain valleys will work.

        • EPGAH

          That was your family member’s CHOICE, OK?
          Noone white can force their way into houses or neighborhoods that want to keep them out. Contrariwise, the Government CAN AND DOES force NAMs into formerly respectable neighborhoods.

          And bad Blacks can very much worm their way into white families, please ask the family of Nicole Brown Simpson.

        • RockT

          Jason, I did not say- and neither did anyone else- that whites do not commit crime. The levels and intensity are what is different- but you already know that. It is not taboo to talk about white trash however. So, dear Jason, I expect that soon you’ll take up residence in the nearest ‘hood, am I right?

      • White criminals are petty in nature and tend to be arrested for property theft, burglary, grand theft auto. Robberies another words.

        Italians are the exception but are very geographically-zoned. Their crimes are not random thefts to obtain money for narcotics.

        Bikers are violent and aggressive but usually limit their crime to burglary of commercial property, drug and weapons, killings of other biker gang members, trafficking of prostitutes. Unless you intend to “prospect” as a member, you won’t encounter them.

  4. Sam J.

    Phil I commend you for looking for ways to decrease tensions between the races but I’m afraid it’s just a wasted effort. Not saying you should stop but I have lost all hope of this happening. We don’t just have Blacks and Whites in the US anymore. All kinds of races and this lowers the bargaining value of Blacks. I think Whites have tried. Maybe not enough to work things out but I don’t believe we can. We’re running out of time and money. I’ll bet we’ve spent in inflation adjusted dollars $5 trillion and it wouldn’t surprise if it was $10 trillion and we have nothing to show for it. Maybe a lot of Blacks in government jobs that are paid well but take those jobs away and they would become hostile rapidly.

    White people are going to become more tribal. We have to. We are a minority if you only count younger people. If we don’t start looking after our interest in a “Whites first” all the time manner we will eventually be killed off. Look at the White South Africans and you see exactly the place of Whites in 50 years. Some highly skilled Whites will still do ok but the average and less will be destitute and prayed upon constantly.

    Other races especially Hispanics don’t give a fuck about Blacks. I actually do although it’s hard to tell from the stuff I post. Thing is most of my caring is only a vestige from my youth. Now and in the future I may care and feel bad about it but if I could deport every Black person to Africa tomorrow I’d do it. My people come first.

    White people are being forced into integration with Blacks and everyone else. If we could have some sort of separation maybe it would work but the government is purposely putting Blacks into lower and middle class neighborhoods which they promptly make uninhabitable for Whites. We’re running out of territory. There’s no where for Whites to run and they can’t afford to keep moving. At some point they will have to fight. This will be a major really bad thing for Blacks. Whites are buying massive amounts of guns. Just about every person I know has a AR-15, Ak or both. If we start shooting back it will be a blood bath. If we just acted like Black people and attacked every Black person that wandered into our neighborhoods and then when cops come all the Whites said,”I didn’t see nothing”, it would totally fuck Black people. The White gun crowd is posting tactics for shooting Blacks that block intersections and attack Whites. This may seem extreme but it becoming more common for Blacks to block roads and to attack Whites if they get out of their cars to complain. Just a small step until they bust the car windows out and drag Whites out of the cars.

    I saw a video one time of a White guy trying to repair the phones in a Black area and they attacked him. What stupidity. He’s working on the telephone system. In many Black areas service providers refuse to service equipment without police escort. Not good.

    There’s also a great deal of Negro fatigue in this country. No matter what we do it’s just the same old shit. White people are evil and Blacks are attacking Whites in some of the most gruesome horror show manner. Most Whites know that they will be called racist no matter what they say or do. So why bother?

    I myself practice segregation. If I was a younger Man still I wouldn’t do it so much but being older now I can’t fight like I used to. I know if I do get jumped by several Blacks I could be easily kicked in the head until dead or at the least suffer severe brain damage. Blacks are making a habit of knocking people down then stomping on their heads. So if I’m attacked I’m going to start stabbing people immediately. Of course that means I could spend the rest of my life in prison. There is no winning ticket there. If I see more than two Blacks at a gas station I refuse to stop there. Sometimes even one. All stores owned by the Indians and Pakistanis I mostly boycott. They have all kinds of stuff in their stores that attract Blacks, So I don’t go there. I don’t go to their side of town, ever. If I see a gathering of Blacks I leave. There’s plenty of decent Black people but the ones that are bad tend to be really bad and there’s no way I can immediately tell the difference. In any case what would I gain from hanging around Blacks? Nothing. There no cultural or intellectual benefit to me being around them at all.

    I see no other path than that of what happened in Yugoslavia. Everyone sort of got along until one day a crisis came about and then it was every tribe for themselves and kill the other tribe. I think that will happen in the US before 50 years passes.

    • Jason Y

      Not all blacks are hoods. Hoods would never enter a white or middle or upper class black neighborhood cause they cannot afford it, not to mention the hositlity of the police. (Also some hoods are white)

      Yes, I agree with your point blacks having less to bargain with. With all the illegal immigrants coming in, the government has less power to use socialism to better the black condition.

      All in all, as you say, it simply creates tribal whites, at least among the poor ones. Case in point, how all these poor whites are gathering behind the Confederate flag so much lately.

      • Jason Y

        There’s plenty of decent Black people but the ones that are bad tend to be really bad and there’s no way I can immediately tell the difference. In any case what would I gain from hanging around Blacks? Nothing. There no cultural or intellectual benefit to me being around them at all.

        Plenty of bad whites exist also. Can we segregate against them? Watch how they worm thier way into your family. We are supposed to care for our own? How? Just wait around while these bad whites take everything we got and turn us all into their bitch? That’s family love?

        Finally, lots of white have plenty to gain by hanging around decent blacks or white, but little to gain hanging around bad ones of any race.

        • Again Jason, you need the consider prevalence of misbehavior between the two groups.

          Also, exactly what could whites gain from decent blacks that they can’t from decent whites?

        • Jason Y

          No, I am just saying people should treat everyone (that is decent) the same. Whites could learn from decent blacks, assuming they run into any by chance, but if they don’t then fine. I’m sure most decent Chinese never get a chance cause of geography to run into decent whites.

        • “No, I am just saying people should treat everyone (that is decent) the same. Whites could learn from decent blacks, assuming they run into any by chance, but if they don’t then fine.”

          But you act as if “decent” is something you could easily discern from a distance. Second just because they exist that doesn’t mean certain areas require precautions due to different risks of danger.

          “I’m sure most decent Chinese never get a chance cause of geography to run into decent whites.”

          In what context?

        • JASON

          “Bad whites” are mostly junkies who steal a radio from their uncle to purchase meth or do time for buying Oxy from an elderly woman to re-sell on the street.

          A few Black women-very few-might wind up being trafficked or prostituted by white biker gangs but this is rare. In one or two instances a 17 year old black car thief is used sexually in an adult prison by Aryan Brotherhood because he wants “protection” from other blacks.

          Whites in Biker gangs are usually doing better financially than the average middle-management white.

      • brian

        It’s so difficult for Americans to understand that don’t exist a “Hispanic” race? It’s ridiculous.

      • JASON Y In the North whites fly the flags of Poland, Germany, Ireland, Scandinavia or Italy (You see this flag everywhere).

        When wishing to eat Pizza blacks will actually approach an Italian flag and sometimes when wishing to purchase liquor will approach an Irish one (Blacks do not like engaging in bar brawls in white Irish pubs, however, so they usually order beer to go).

        In Chicago they see Polish flags every single day and sometimes when they want sausage they approach one.

        But it is only the Confederate flag that offends them.

        Why?

    • “Phil I commend you for looking for ways to decrease tensions between the races but I’m afraid it’s just a wasted effort. Not saying you should stop but I have lost all hope of this happening. We don’t just have Blacks and Whites in the US anymore. All kinds of races and this lowers the bargaining value of Blacks. I think Whites have tried. Maybe not enough to work things out but I don’t believe we can. We’re running out of time and money. I’ll bet we’ve spent in inflation adjusted dollars $5 trillion and it wouldn’t surprise if it was $10 trillion and we have nothing to show for it. Maybe a lot of Blacks in government jobs that are paid well but take those jobs away and they would become hostile rapidly.”

      Understood.

      “White people are going to become more tribal. We have to. We are a minority if you only count younger people. If we don’t start looking after our interest in a “Whites first” all the time manner we will eventually be killed off. Look at the White South Africans and you see exactly the place of Whites in 50 years. Some highly skilled Whites will still do ok but the average and less will be destitute and prayed upon constantly.”

      Exactly, I’ve shared quite the perspectives with Jason regarding the plight of Boer farmers.

      I would respond to the rest but I got a good idea where you;re getting at.

      Look, i know that fundamentally you are concern for your own safety, do whatever the fuck you have to do to stay safe and out of the way.

      Whether it’s through the numbers of whites, the lack of attention towards injustice, or the sheer prompting of Identity politics Whites as they were are limping if not dead in some fashion. If anyone can prove me wrong feel free to correct me on that.

      All I can recommend is this.

      https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2016/10/06/rabbit-adopting-a-minimalist-lifestyle-for-maximum-political-autonomy/

      • Jason Y

        With all the guns in the US, honestly, there is no way NAMS are going to make slaves of whites. It isn’t going happen. White rednecks are armed, they’re trigger happy, and they’re angry.

        The US could never reach the level of South Africa, not for at least a few hundred years or more.

      • Jason Y

        Blacks are not much of a threat really in the long run. Latinos are the ones invading. They will eventually be the ones bossing the whites and blacks. Soon the blacks will feel as threatened as the whites, and considering the fact Latinos have 1940s views of blacks, the blacks know they will get no pity from them.

      • Jason Y

        Smarter and more wealthy whites will never be killed off. They’re too smart and rich to live in NAM neighborhoods. It is the poorer whites that will have a rough time.

        • That’s exactly what Sam pointed out.

        • Jason Y

          Sam pointed out that he has a massive paranoia of blacks, but isn’t that being a bit mentally ill ??

          Note, I can sure tell who is bad and who is good. For one thing, nobody should walk out alone at night in a rough neighborhood (white or black).

          This paranoia is over the top, kind of like that scene on the old version of Hairspray where the racist lady is forced to go the black part of Baltimore.

          Give me a break..😆

          In the daytime, generally black neighborhoods are usually not the bad. Just mind your own business. If such neighborhoods were “hell on Earth”, then nobody would live there, not even blacks. It would be unliveable.

        • “In the daytime, generally black neighborhoods are usually not the bad. Just mind your own business. If such neighborhoods were “hell on Earth”, then nobody would live there, not even blacks. It would be unliveable.”

          And you would be the judge how?

        • Jason Y

          The era of crack cocaine was probably the height of crime in the ghetto from 85-90. I do not think violence will reach those heights again soon.

          Apprehension is easier as well. Every square inch of public sidewalk is videotaped.

          Sentencing is also harsher (Because of a Native American criminal named Richard Allen Davis and the three strikes law).

          Trash brought it up.

        • To Jason,

          But how does this apply generally in terms of how Black neighborhoods are?

          Drug sentencing reforms, btw, curbed violent crime minimally at best.

          http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272703000203

        • Jason Y

          To Jason,

          But how does this apply generally in terms of how Black neighborhoods are?

          Drug sentencing reforms, btw, curbed violent crime minimally at best.

          http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272703000

          To phil:

          Take it up with the original author Trash.

        • Uum…no. You used his point and I refuted it based on data.

          “OK Phil, we have a real opponent here. What’s your response?”

          I agree with his point on lead and gasoline, which I have read about, but that decline/doesn’t mean safe when you actually compare different regions to a national threshold.

          And as of now there has been a recent spike in Crime, though it’s different from the perception of a long increase in crime up to now.

          Also, as you love to quote trash, America may not be experiencing it but other Western nations are as he pointed out.

          “Crime in the UK and Canada has risen steadily. Immigrants are one reason, but there are some anti-social whites as well (Canada also has aboriginals).”

      • “With all the guns in the US, honestly, there is no way NAMS are going to make slaves of whites. It isn’t going happen. White rednecks are armed, they’re trigger happy, and they’re angry.”

        Except when you consider current trends in cases like Black on White in terms of proportion.

        “The US could never reach the level of South Africa, not for at least a few hundred years or more.”

        Depends on how you view it, as the point is that a decline is evident and fastening.

        “Blacks are not much of a threat really in the long run. Latinos are the ones invading. They will eventually be the ones bossing the whites and blacks. Soon the blacks will feel as threatened as the whites, and considering the fact Latinos have 1940s views of blacks, the blacks know they will get no pity from them.”

        Until both live in slums and compete to survive, who do you think will threaten who more impulsively?

        • Jason Y

          I fear a Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome World. Mel Gibson was a prophet, lol That anti-semitic racist douchebag…

        • CORPORATE LEVEL Not many Mestizos will be CEO’S bossing Anglo people around except for some pale pure-Spanish Cubans who look like Ricky Martin.

          Northeast Asians are also quite intelligent.

          Politically cities in the Southwest will become Mestizo to some degree but the police in the U.S. will probably always be predominantly White which undercuts some of the potential for corruption and lawlessness.

    • Tulio

      Meh…

      Crime has been on a downward plunge for decades. Spare me your crime apocalypse bullshit. Typical fact-challenged Trump voter.

      • Jason Y

        OK Phil, we have a real opponent here. What’s your response?

      • TULIO Except in WHITE AREAS because MOST METH USERS ARE WHITE while crack cocaine came and went from the ghetto and the barrio after 90-95.

        Drugs tend to have the biggest effect on crime rates. A new powerful drug comes into style like Oxy in Appalachia or Crack in Harlem, runs its course and then after a few years users are dead, in jail or rehabilitated.

        Crime goes down again.

      • Sam J.

        The crime statistics are totally faked. They are many that are not recorded and most all cases the crime is downgraded to one less serious. This is common knowledge. I strongly recommend you read James LaFond’s site. Look at the category “Harm City” on the side bar on the right. He lives Baltimore and writes about violence so he keeps track of crimes in his area and others through his various acquaintances. He says that you take your life into your hands to even ride the bus at certain times on some lines.I recently about a, I think 16 year old, girl that just disappeared off her porch and has never been found. He said it didn’t even make the paper. The crime is getting more and more gruesome. Very apocalyptic.

        http://www.jameslafond.com/

        I must remind you that James is not a racist. I don’t know why. I consider that a bit daft but he is very race realist. He doesn’t spare anyone.

        • Sam J.

          Forgot a link to faked crime statistics. If you look around there’s lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of stories about this. It’s no mystery and pretending that it is makes you a accessory to these lies.

        • Tulio

          No they aren’t faked. Unless you are accusing the FBI of fraud. Criminologist don’t even dispute that crime has fallen dramatically in the last several decades. Only wingnut white supremacists deny this because it takes wind out of their sails. They have to keep pushing the narrative that the niggers and spics are going are waging war against whites and it’s getting worse every day, even if the true stats show it’s bullshit.

    • SAM

      If whites did not or could not transport food into urban centers like New York NAMS would cannibalize one another within a week.

      Whites own the land and farm it. It is not fair that NAMS do not own enough land for mass-agriculture but the BOTTOM LINE is that Whites control the FOOD SUPPLY.

      NAMS-including most Jews-scrape a living in the cities off a surplus service economy: practicing law, selling drugs, making porn, owning a pawn store etc. They do NOT own the raw materials or extract the oil or gasoline from the ground.

      If such a Balkans situation occurred I think most barrios and ghettos would starve in a week or eat one another.

      • Tulio

        You realize only 1% of the nation farms for a living, right? That would mean all whites who weren’t farmers would starve to death right alongside the NAMs. How many whites who weren’t born and raised on farms know the first thing about agriculture? Drop the average white off in the wilderness and he’d be dead in a week unless sufficiently trained in survivalism.

        • Jason Y

          Farms are often targets of racial terrorism. Look at South Africa or Zimbabwe’s white farmers.

        • Jason Y

          To be fair though, also look at black farmers during Jim Crow. It goes both ways.

        • EPGAH

          You’re admitting the savages target white farmers–the Hand That Feeds–in South Africa and Rhodesia? Is someone holding a gun to your head?

          And what about Jim Crow? Did or did not it keep the peace and crime was lower then? Were there fewer unwed mothers or something?

        • “To be fair though, also look at black farmers during Jim Crow. It goes both ways.”

          One was a hate crime, the other lead to actual economic failure and borders along genocide.

          Second, most lynchings were based on issues of a crime, and considering whites were lynched for the same reasons it’s not easy to distinguish “Real vs. fake” cases. In South Africa, it was straight up murder.

          In practice, quite different in intensity.

        • Tulio

          Nobody asked whites to come to Africa. They weren’t dragged there as slaves. They came as colonizers that displaced the natives. If the sons and daughters of colonizers don’t like their treatment, they can leave anytime.

        • TULIO If NAMS did own agriculture and the military-industrial complex and sufficiently interested in roaming the exurbs doing drive-by shootings than our civilization would be threatened.

          However, they are urban-based and cannot function outside this zone.

        • Jason Y

          Ep-gah was saying crime went down due to lynching. But couldn’t they at least have had a trial? I mean, they would be phony, like Stalin’s show trials of the 1930s, but at least it’s an attempt at avoiding mob justice.

        • “Nobody asked whites to come to Africa. They weren’t dragged there as slaves. They came as colonizers that displaced the natives. If the sons and daughters of colonizers don’t like their treatment, they can leave anytime.”

          Tulio, The area the British first conquered in South Africa was land without and really ownership being populated by the Khoi-san who were nomadic hunter gatherers. In terms of other areas they consumed were other colonies like those started by the Boers and Bantu, both being settlers themselves and the latter of whom were not innocent of displacing native themselves.

          Also, you do understand Boers are Middle class, not the rich like the british descent so “Just moving” isn’t an easy accomplishment option.

          “Ep-gah was saying crime went down due to lynching. But couldn’t they at least have had a trial? I mean, they would be phony, like Stalin’s show trials of the 1930s, but at least it’s an attempt at avoiding mob justice.”

          That’s not really adding much to my comparison, but alot of these cases took place in isolated rural communities so sadly mob rule was inevitable.

        • Tulio

          @Phil

          If Whites had it as bad in Southern Africa as these white nationalists claim, why haven’t they left? You have impoverished black refugees risking their lives pouring into Italy on makeshift boats. Where are the white refugees heading back to Europe? That’s why I don’t buy their bullshit about white genocide. If they were under that much danger they’d be scrambling to get the hell out.

        • EPGAH

          1.) It’s their country, why would they leave? Maybe Sweat Equity keeps them there, maybe some variant of “These Colors Don’t Run”™

          2.) Who would take them in? When a savage country is in trouble, whites say, “OMG! We must let them in even if they rape and murder our people instead of their own!”. When a white country is in trouble, no such courtesy is extended, the attitude seems to be “Oh, well, suxxors to be them!” Robert earlier had a poscast where an interested Third Party was BEGGING for the survivors to be allowed to return to Europe!

          3.) IF some country did let them in, the white refugees would probably get stuck in with the rapey subhumans.
          http://observatorial.com/2016/10/26/isis-fighter-raping-little-girl-tells-rape-act-worship-draws-muslim-men-closer-allah-2/
          So it wouldn’t be an “Heroic Flight To Safety And Freedom”, at best it would be a lateral move, at worst, it would be a move “From Frying Pan To Fire”!

          4.) You claimed that only 1% of Americans farm? Well, in South Africa and Rhodesia, ZERO percent of the savages farm. Even when they steal the whites’ farms, they don’t know how.
          Without farmers, the savages would starve–except we wouldn’t let them starve. We’d step up food shipments to the violent, ungrateful savages who overthrew the country and made their own Hell, right?
          Why DO whites feed our enemies?

          Now explain why the “Oppressed” Blacks in America don’t flee en-masse to some country where they won’t be “Oppressed” so much? Or do you admit that it’s bullshit to extort more freebies?

        • “If Whites had it as bad in Southern Africa as these white nationalists claim, why haven’t they left? You have impoverished black refugees risking their lives pouring into Italy on makeshift boats. Where are the white refugees heading back to Europe? That’s why I don’t buy their bullshit about white genocide. If they were under that much danger they’d be scrambling to get the hell out.”

          http://thesoutherndaily.co.za/index.php/2016/03/07/canada-grants-white-south-african-refugee-status/

          http://newobserveronline.com/white-refugees-not-welcome-in-australia/

          http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/petition-calls-for-right-of-return-for-white-south-africans-to-europe/

          https://www.change.org/p/european-commission-allow-all-white-south-africans-the-right-to-return-to-europe

        • Tulio

          Epgah, there ARE black farmers in Zimbabwe. I’m getting sick of your lies. A simple google search will prove you wrong. Hell look under google images and you can see hundreds of pictures of them. Liar.

          And secondly I don’t give a damn about the white farmers there. They stole land from black people and are living in black people’s continent. If they don’t like it, they can get the fuck out. Nobody forced them to be there. Let them apply for refugee status in Europe or emigrate somewhere else.

          People like you just think whites should be entitled to take land from non-whites as they please, but if it was non-whites taking land from Europe you’d be calling for genocide.

        • “And secondly I don’t give a damn about the white farmers there. They stole land from black people and are living in black people’s continent. If they don’t like it, they can get the fuck out. Nobody forced them to be there. Let them apply for refugee status in Europe or emigrate somewhere else.

          People like you just think whites should be entitled to take land from non-whites as they please, but if it was non-whites taking land from Europe you’d be calling for genocide.”

          Except that

          A. That land was belonged to the Khoi-San if anyone, Blacks were settlers there as well.

          B. Secondly, either as hunter gatherer’s or pastrolist, the Khoisan were nomadic and didn;t made any real claims to that land.

          C. At this moment, Mugabe is actually wanting them back because of the lack of success of the farming industry. Blacks did farm but that was Subsistence farming, non commercial, so now that industry is falling apart without them.

          http://qz.com/458137/mugabe-is-asking-back-the-white-farmers-he-chased-away/

        • To Tulio,

          Furthermore, what Mugabe is supporting is unconstitutional by Zimbabwean law.

          http://www.news24.com/Africa/Zimbabwe/No-land-for-whites-in-Zimbabwe-says-Mugabe-20140703

          “no person shall be treated in a discriminatory manner by any person acting by virtue of any written law or in the performance of the functions of any public office or any public authority.”

          Chapter 3, article 23.

          http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=214484

        • Chinedu

          I see the fake black man Phil is once again aping white supremacist talking points, this time with regard to Southern Africa.

          First of all, Khoisians are blacks. Secondly, they were not the only black groups in Southern Africa. There were settled black communities there in addition to pastoralists. However black Africans regarded land ownership was their business. I can’t go to Germany or Norway or even Siberia and set up a “black country” in an unpopulated area. You and your fellow white supremacists seem to believe that if there weren’t black people standing on a piece of land, it was free for the taking.

          It’s all a moot point. The Africans kicked the racist colonizers out, which was their right and prerogative. Your revisionist history isn’t going to re-establish the white regimes in Southern Africa.

        • To Tulio, Furthermore the same applies to South Africa as well considering GenocideWatch finds the murders relevant.

          http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html

          Thus I’m pretty sure this holds leverage against any “fairness” of discrimination suggested by this note of South Africa’s law concerning discrimination.

          “(5) Discrimination on one or more of the grounds listed in subsection (3) is unfair unless it is established that the discrimination is fair.”

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_Nine_of_the_Constitution_of_South_Africa

        • Chinedu

          Mugabe does not want white farmers back. Quote where Mugabe says he wants white farmers back to live like princes at the expense of blacks–on stolen land. Zimbabwe never evicted whites. If experienced white farmers want to act as consultants to black farmers, they’re free to do so. That’s not the same as wanting white farmers back.

          There are alot of success stories among black Zimbabwe farmers. There’s no genetic code for farming. It was, after all, African slaves that taught slave owners how to farm various crops. Slaves created the rice farming industry in the United States with the experience, knowledge and knowhow they brought from Africa.

          And there is no white genocide in South Africa. That idiocy has been debunked left and right.

        • “I see the fake black man Phil is once again aping white supremacist talking points, this time with regard to Southern Africa.

          First of all, Khoisians are blacks. Secondly, they were not the only black groups in Southern Africa. There were settled black communities there in addition to pastoralists. However black Africans regarded land ownership was their business. I can’t go to Germany or Norway or even Siberia and set up a “black country” in an unpopulated area. You and your fellow white supremacists seem to believe that if there weren’t black people standing on a piece of land, it was free for the taking.

          It’s all a moot point. The Africans kicked the racist colonizers out, which was their right and prerogative. Your revisionist history isn’t going to re-establish the white regimes in Southern Africa.”

          No, Khoi-san aren’t black. Even if they were that doesn’t change the point that they were either Hunter gatherers or pastoralist with no actual claims to the land, with Bantus being colonizers into the region as well.

          http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v517/n7534/full/nature13997.html

          They fall in a separate “HG” Component.

          Second the rest of your point moot because I pointed out that what Mugabe and current conditions in South Africa are unconsitutional in terms of racial discrimination and how they are recognized by Genocide watch.

          The thing is also is that all those “White” countries you gave examples to have actual relevant borders In a modern legal context to respect, so you again fail to refute my point.

        • To Chinedu

          “Mugabe does not want white farmers back.”

          Yes he did.

          http://qz.com/458137/mugabe-is-asking-back-the-white-farmers-he-chased-away/

          “Quote where Mugabe says he wants white farmers back to live like princes at the expense of blacks–on stolen land. Zimbabwe never evicted whites. If experienced white farmers want to act as consultants to black farmers, they’re free to do so. That’s not the same as wanting white farmers back.”

          Yes That is the same as wanting them back, and that land was seized by the government. That not exile but that obviously was limiting their economic ability and that seizure resulted in deaths, deaths I may add, are recognized as genocide.

          “There are alot of success stories among black Zimbabwe farmers. There’s no genetic code for farming. It was, after all, African slaves that taught slave owners how to farm various crops. Slaves created the rice farming industry in the United States with the experience, knowledge and knowhow they brought from Africa.”

          Except that fact that the reason Mugabe wants them back was because of low productivity without them as my article noted.

          Teaching how to grow certain crop is different from knowing how to farm on commercail sclae, hence why whites are asked for once again.

          “And there is no white genocide in South Africa. That idiocy has been debunked left and right.”

          See my link to Genocide Watch.

        • “Teaching how to grow certain crop is different from knowing how to farm on commercail sclae, hence why whites are asked for once again.”

          I meant farming on a commercial scale. Also, from my article.

          “<Zimbabwe’s transformation from exporter to importer of food is blamed by some analysts on the land reform program, which saw white commercial farmers lose farms to landless blacks who are said to lack the skills to farm or capital. Agriculture used to contribute some 40% of the country’s foreign currency earnings through exports.
          What has been Zimbabwe’s loss, has been a gain for neighboring Zambia, where some of these farmers moved bringing with them decades of expertise for farming similar arable land.>”

        • Chinedu

          Phil,

          If Khoisans aren’t black, then Norwegians aren’t white. Race is a social construct driven mainly by phenotype. Even Australian Aborigines and Papuans are black even though they are the most divergent people from black Africans genetically.

          Once again, why would you expect Africans to accede to foreign, alien notions of land ownership? Africans venerate land. That’s why they kept fighting until all racist occupiers were evicted. In fact prior to the late 19th century, Europeans were routinely defeated by Africans. It was only with the introduction of machine guns and other modern weapons that they were able to colonize Africa. But the colonization happened late and was never of sufficient scale to do a manifest destiny in Africa. Consequently colonization could be reversed in Africa, unlike the Americas, for example.

        • EPGAH

          Yes, but if they are trying to reverse colonization, then shouldn’t they be left to their own devices and allowed to starve as a consequence?

          And what about the reverse colonization of MILLIONS of Africa’s dregs invading Europe and raping their betters? I bet you’re in favor of that, right?

        • EPGAH

          The savages don’t really WANT colonization to be reversed. They want to steal what the whites built up. To coin a phrase, they want a white lifestyle without the whites who made it possible.

          Otherwise, they would’ve demolished all the whites’ fancy houses and power plants and everything else they stole rather than taking it over and letting it decay slowly through neglect!

        • “If Khoisans aren’t black, then Norwegians aren’t white. Race is a social construct driven mainly by phenotype. Even Australian Aborigines and Papuans are black even though they are the most divergent people from black Africans genetically.”

          Except that’s not how race works in terms of genetics, in which it’s based on genetic cluster so no they are not “Black” in the sense that they are genetically aligned with black africans.

          https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/09/20/are-australoids-and-pacific-islanders-negroid-a-reply-to-pumpkinperson/

          “Once again, why would you expect Africans to accede to foreign, alien notions of land ownership? Africans venerate land. That’s why they kept fighting until all racist occupiers were evicted. In fact prior to the late 19th century, Europeans were routinely defeated by Africans.”

          The only Europeans in that region that they fought until the 19th century were Boers who were simply a bunch of farmers from Europe.

          The actual British empire didn’t even expanded into the settlements of the Bantus till the 1870s

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War

          “It was only with the introduction of machine guns and other modern weapons that they were able to colonize Africa.”

          Pfft, yeah those Europeans were only able to take on those African tribes with their superior technology that they created.

          “But the colonization happened late and was never of sufficient scale to do a manifest destiny in Africa. Consequently colonization could be reversed in Africa, unlike the Americas, for example.”

          Yet that doesn’t change my point about the sociological injustice being committed now. Mugabe’s way of “removing colonization” failed thus why He’s asking for Boer Farmers back for expertise. Just because they aren;t in the same positions as before doesn’t change the fact his first tactics were had little forsight, a plan he let lasted for 15 years.

        • Chinedu

          Phil,

          Whites are free to participate in farming in Zim, as are Chinese, black Americans and others. But keep in mind, the conflict was over stolen land and the abuse and dehumanization of blacks on those stolen lands and elsewhere. If whites behave like constructive, respectful and non-exploitative human beings, no one will say they don’t belong in Africa. The Chinese go to Africa and familiarize themselves with local customs and marry local women. That’s why the Africans prefer the Chinese to the Europeans.

          Nobody is begging white farmers to come back. But some former farmers to consult with the new black owners. That’s a much different relationship than they had in Rhodesia. Also, some white farmers remain in Zim and are unmolested because they worked with the government to try to get a settlement that was fair, unlike the greedy racists that refused to compromise at all while sitting on vast tracts of stolen land.

          There is also the Zambia, Mozambique and Nigeria models whereby former Rhodesian and South African white farmers lease land from those governments and have to comply with a strict set of standards. In other words, they can’t create their own fiefdoms and behave like 19th century imperialists.

          Oh, and land reform has had many successes in Zimbabwe:

          http://www.channel4.com/news/land-reform-brings-prosperity-to-black-zimbabweans

        • “Phil,

          Whites are free to participate in farming in Zim, as are Chinese, black Americans and others. But keep in mind, the conflict was over stolen land and the abuse and dehumanization of blacks on those stolen lands and elsewhere. If whites behave like constructive, respectful and non-exploitative human beings, no one will say they don’t belong in Africa. The Chinese go to Africa and familiarize themselves with local customs and marry local women. That’s why the Africans prefer the Chinese to the Europeans.”

          That doesn’t change the abuse their and how the land reform failed.

          “Nobody is begging white farmers to come back.”

          Yes, Mugabe is, due to low production due to lack of skills in running commercial farms, See my link again.

          “But some former farmers to consult with the new black owners. That’s a much different relationship than they had in Rhodesia. Also, some white farmers remain in Zim and are unmolested because they worked with the government to try to get a settlement that was fair, unlike the greedy racists that refused to compromise at all while sitting on vast tracts of stolen land.”

          That’s simply making new terms, doesn;t change the fact that Boers supported the farming industry and were killed for their homes.

          “There is also the Zambia, Mozambique and Nigeria models whereby former Rhodesian and South African white farmers lease land from those governments and have to comply with a strict set of standards. In other words, they can’t create their own fiefdoms and behave like 19th century imperialists.”

          Ignoring how the original land deals caused many to

          “Oh, and land reform has had many successes in Zimbabwe:”

          http://www.channel4.com/news/land-reform-brings-prosperity-to-black-zimbabweans

          Except it mentioned how its success was from Britain’s aid once it felled.

          “The strongest agricultural economy in southern Africa collapsed. There are now only a handful of white farmers left. Most farms are now black owned.
          In response, Western countries led by Britain imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe and as a result the country’s economy collapsed. Millions of Zimbabweans fled the country to seek a better life elsewhere.”

          And that doesn’t change also how the country then needed white zimbabweans, the artilce I had also pointed out how the country of Zambia increased in production when receiving them.

        • Chinedu

          Phil,

          You moron. European/African conflict occurred throughout the continent, not just in Southern Africa. But even in Southern Africa, the blacks did in fact kick European ass on numerous occasions. African military resistance was the main factor that kept Europeans from establishing a defensible foothold on the continent. In the early days Europeans were confined to small coastal areas at the pleasure of African kings. The Europeans did not have a technology advantage in terms of weapons and therefore could not impose their will.

          The Southern African people like the Zulus were actually quite primitive in terms of weapons and tactics in comparison to Africans further north. Africans had heavy cavalry, firearms, poisoned arrows, navies, artillery etc. How the hell were Europeans going to colonize such people? They didn’t and couldn’t.

          In terms of technology, it is all adapted from experience and through interaction with other cultures.

          Africans weren’t no Native Americans or Australian Aborigines. They fought. They didn’t die from European germs and they were just as fanatical about land as the Europeans.

          Here, let me help you out:

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_military_systems_to_1800

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_military_systems_(1800%E2%80%931900)

        • EPGAH

          Except that the savages lost when they tried to take Rhodesia and South Africa by force, UNTIL Russia gave the savages guns, bombs, and training to be a terrorist force. Would you like a list of their terrorist attacks?

          Don’t pretend they’re “freedom fighters”, they made very sure to explicitly attack civilians who could not fight back effectively, culminating in a campaign of land-mines in the farm fields! They were terrorists, and only at the pleasure of Russia, they couldn’t fight effectively without cheating, outside help. When the Civilized World refused to help the South Africans and Rhodesians, their fate was sealed.

          Imagine if someone gave the Indian savages guns&bombs?

        • “Phil,

          You moron. European/African conflict occurred throughout the continent, not just in Southern Africa. But even in Southern Africa, the blacks did in fact kick European ass on numerous occasions. African military resistance was the main factor that kept Europeans from establishing a defensible foothold on the continent. In the early days Europeans were confined to small coastal areas at the pleasure of African kings. The Europeans did not have a technology advantage in terms of weapons and therefore could not impose their will.”

          That and the fact they couldn;t adapt to the climate due to their extreme conditions and they intially formed treaties with chiefs prior to actual colonization for trade.

          “The Southern African people like the Zulus were actually quite primitive in terms of weapons and tactics in comparison to Africans further north. Africans had heavy cavalry, firearms, poisoned arrows, navies, artillery etc. How the hell were Europeans going to colonize such people? They didn’t and couldn’t.”

          You mean the guns and horse they they acquired from neighbors including Europeans?

          “In terms of technology, it is all adapted from experience and through interaction with other cultures.

          Africans weren’t no Native Americans or Australian Aborigines. They fought. They didn’t die from European germs and they were just as fanatical about land as the Europeans.

          Here, let me help you out:”

          You do understand that it doesn’t defeat my point about how you pitifully tried to minimize the significance of another place having the ability to develop technology to have and advantage in war.

          Second you act as if trade prior to colonization doesn;t occur during first contact due to the facts you stated before along with climate. Why waste time getting land before you even know it;s value by putting in resources for military occupation?

        • Chinedu

          Phil,

          Who cares where or how any people acquire technology? Humans are able to adapt and assimilate all human technology. Absent contact with other cultures Northern Europeans might still be in caves today.

        • EPGAH

          If you accept some other culture “uplifted” us, why are you against us “uplifting” savages when we’re ahead?

          Lemme guess, you believe the Moor invasion “civilized” Europe, and completely ignore those rumors of the Roman Empire, right?

        • “Phil,

          Who cares where or how any people acquire technology? Humans are able to adapt and assimilate all human technology. Absent contact with other cultures Northern Europeans might still be in caves today.”

          And with that said, how would African you talked about faired had they not had contact from Europeans or Northern Africans to even get the guns and horses?

        • Chinedu

          Phil,

          Without borrowing, stealing and co-opting the technology of others Europeans wouldn’t be in Africa in the first place.

          Secondly, prior to the late 19th century indigenous African technology and tactics were enough to cope with European armies even without guns and horses. A flint lock rifle is not more effective than a poison arrow.

        • hil,

          “Without borrowing, stealing and co-opting the technology of others Europeans wouldn’t be in Africa in the first place.

          Secondly, prior to the late 19th century indigenous African technology and tactics were enough to cope with European armies even without guns and horses. A flint lock rifle is not more effective than a poison arrow”

          Except any rifle would produce more force with their ammo than a arrow.

          Also, that technology you talked about like calvaries and guns WASN’T indigenous.

          And that doesn;t defeat the point that what turned the tides was technology they invented.

        • Tony Swagger

          Tulio wants boers to leave south africa and says he doesn’t give a damn about the plight of whites. Phil, the intelligent black man has demonstrated clearly that Blacks inhabiting SAF currently have no more claim to the land than the Afrikaners who developed the nation. Tulio also views whites in south africa as evil oppressors. By the same logic, why can’t blacks take it easy when some feral nigger criminal is put down by the law enforcement? why all the protests and paranoia by other blacks during such incidents? Why should whites care when a feral thug who wants to destroy their families gets put down.? Why are these NAMS often roaming with a sense of entitlement in foreign lands? There was lot of hue and cry when there was a rally that went by name white lives matter. Why do organisations like black lies matter even exists?

      • Chinedu

        Phil,

        Only hardcore white supremacists (like yourself) in and out of South Africa spout this nonsensical white genocide propaganda. Normal whites in South Africa do not believe there is a white genocide going on there.

        Should we believe whites that actually live in South Africa or a clown like you?

        Fact: On a per capita basis, more blacks than whites are murdered in South Africa, this includes murders on white-owned farms.

        Do you understand what genocide means? Please point out the mass graves filled with whites. Where are the concentration camps?

        Whites still have a privileged position in South Africa. So it’s kind of ironic that they are crying about a fake genocide when many of the blacks are seething with anger at the privileges they continue to enjoy. If people like you keep spouting this propaganda, there may one day be a real and tangible genocide of whites in South Africa.

        Racist white Boers in South Africa are never going to be satisfied with anything other than the return of apartheid and complete white hegemony. It may be that eventually they will either have to die off, be evicted or destroyed.

        • EPGAH

          What privileges do they still enjoy IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY?
          Why shouldn’t the people who BUILT the country have some kind of privilege vs. those who invaded it and overthrew it?

          How many whites are there now vs. how many at its height?

        • “Do you understand what genocide means? Please point out the mass graves filled with whites. Where are the concentration camps?

          Whites still have a privileged position in South Africa. So it’s kind of ironic that they are crying about a fake genocide when many of the blacks are seething with anger at the privileges they continue to enjoy. If people like you keep spouting this propaganda, there may one day be a real and tangible genocide of whites in South Africa.

          Racist white Boers in South Africa are never going to be satisfied with anything other than the return of apartheid and complete white hegemony. It may be that eventually they will either have”

          Except the rich whites are the british descent, not the boers.

          I gave you a actual genocide site that recognizes their situation as genocide, so should we believe one person in south africa or a actual site on modern genocide?

          “Fact: On a per capita basis, more blacks than whites are murdered in South Africa, this includes murders on white-owned farms.”

          Proof?

        • By your note on murders, per capita between black and white doesn’t account for control for boers in particular who has been faced with violence with land reforms, reforms I might add, were failure and were not constitutional in terms of how it applied to whites.

          You haven’t looked at my link I gave you before, so here.

          http://www.genocidewatch.org/southafrica.html

          Also on the “Advantaged” Boers.

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3462336/The-white-squatter-camps-South-Africa-home-hundreds-families-enduring-terrible-poverty-blame-fall-Apartheid.html

        • EPGAH


          Why do the whites need to live with so much security if the savages aren’t murdering them?

        • Chinedu

          Yeah, Phil, there are white squatter camps in South Africa. So what? Does that mean that whites as a whole don’t have a privileged position in South Africa? Do you even have a brain in your head?

          Obviously, without apartheid to prop them up, lazy, stupid, alcoholic and drug addicted whites are going to fall through the cracks.

        • EPGAH

          So if someone stole your house, you would just give them the Finger and buy another, rather than stay homeless? And if you stayed homeless, I could say you’re lazy, stupid, alcoholic, and drug-addicted, right?

        • “Yeah, Phil, there are white squatter camps in South Africa. So what? Does that mean that whites as a whole don’t have a privileged position in South Africa? Do you even have a brain in your head?”

          And do YOU understand that I’m distingusih british whites from Boers?

          “Obviously, without apartheid to prop them up, lazy, stupid, alcoholic and drug addicted whites are going to fall through the cracks.”

          From article- “Hospitals refuse residents care and those living at the camp are regularly rebuffed by potential employers at job interviews.”

          Seeking to undo years of racial inequality, the ruling African National Congress (ANC) government introduced laws that promoted employment for blacks and aimed to give them a greater share of the economy
          This, along with the global financial meltdown, has meant many white South Africans have fallen on hard times.

          So if they are vulnerable to massive economic turmoils, how privilege are whites at the working class?

        • Also Chinedu, the Boer population of SA is 1.6 million, with 400,000 in Poverty.

          Exactly how is that privilege with a quarter of that ethnic group in poverty?

          And for you apartheid note, remember how i mentioned how zambia’s agricultural production grew by taking in Boers?

        • Correction,

          The Afrikaner figure for South African is about 2.7 million, making it closer to 15.8 percent. but the farming population was close at 1.5 at least in 2011/2012

        • Sam J.

          Chinedu,”…If whites behave like constructive, respectful and non-exploitative human beings, no one will say they don’t belong in Africa…”

          If Africans behave like constructive, respectful and non-exploitative human beings, no one will say they don’t belong in America.

          If Africans behave like constructive, respectful and non-exploitative human beings, no one will say they don’t belong in Europe.

          When the Boers got to South Africa there was no one there. Very small amount of hunter gathers. The Africans in South Africa now largely came from the North. They didn’t build or own anything in South Africa. They just moved in.

          If you complain about the Boers and are in the US you should leave the US and go back to Africa as you are displacing the Native Americans. You can’t whine about displacing one group of people while you’re doing it yourself. Actually you can whine about it but it makes you look foolish.

        • Chinedu

          Sam J.,

          If when the Boers arrived there was no one there, who did they fight all those wars with? Who did they rape to create the colored population? How did entire tribes like the Xhosa lose their land to the Boers if the Boers were on empty land?

          You’re propaganda is moot. Like Rhodesia, South Africa was defeated militarily. The Africans were never going to stop fighting for their rights and their land. White supremacy in Africa was always a hopeless proposition.

        • To Chinedu

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boer#Origin

          The Initial land, bought from KhoiKhoi

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boer#Origin

          “The Xhosa are part of the South African Nguni migration which slowly moved south from the region around the Great Lakes, displacing the original Khoisan hunter gatherers of Southern Africa.”

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xhosa_people

          So the Xhosa weren’t exactly innocent either.

        • To Chinedu,

          Also my point was that Xhosa were also settler displacing and aparrantly raping Khoi people considering many of them are mixed with such.

        • Chinedu

          Phil,

          Yeah, and in Britain the Saxons displaced the Celtics who themselves were displaced by the Vikings who were displaced by the Normans, etc. So what? Does that mean that I can invade Britain and establish a black supremacist republic?

        • Chinedu

          Phil,

          Do you have any idea of the titanic rape, pillage, murder and plunder that went on in Europe? The Xhosas and other Africans are boy scouts in comparison. By your warped “reasoning” black people should be able to go to Europe and subjugate them, because after all, they did it to themselves before the blacks showed up.

        • Tulio

          I don’t feel the least bit sorry for any white colonizers in Africa or their descendants. I don’t care what happens to them. Sub-Saharan Africa is for the black race. Whites never even belonged there, so they should feel lucky they’ve even been allowed to live and that some Idi Amin type didn’t execute them all for their crimes. Once again, if they don’t like their treatment, then they can go back to Europe. If they want to play fair, mind their business and not continue to exploit the resources, I don’t care if some live there.

        • Chinedu

          Tulio,

          I feel the say way as you. We have to put up with racism and unequal treatment outside of Africa. I’ll be damned if I’m going to put up with it in Africa itself. Where else can we go to be treated equally? They want to take that away from us in our own homeland also? Fuck that.

          Africans have been fighting this scourge for hundreds of years. Finally they cleared out the remaining bastions of white supremacy in Africa and people like Phil are crying about it. If Mugabe had lined up every white person and put a bullet in their head I wouldn’t blame him. But he didn’t do that. He simply asked for stolen land to be returned and that’s what sets off white supremacists like Phil.

        • Tulio

          @Phil

          I think you may be infected with a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome.

        • “Phil,

          Yeah, and in Britain the Saxons displaced the Celtics who themselves were displaced by the Vikings who were displaced by the Normans, etc. So what? Does that mean that I can invade Britain and establish a black supremacist republic?”

          You’re missing my point of you trying to single out the Boers in such actions. Second you missed my point of how their inital piece of land was bout from the KhoiKhoi.

          “Phil,

          Do you have any idea of the titanic rape, pillage, murder and plunder that went on in Europe? The Xhosas and other Africans are boy scouts in comparison.”

          Except now you are comapring the whole history of europe to one event of africans instead of the whole continent history with warring ethnic groups.

          “By your warped “reasoning” black people should be able to go to Europe and subjugate them, because after all, they did it to themselves before the blacks showed up.”

          No, my reasoning was that you can;t single out whites for such actions.

          “Tulio
          October 28, 2016 at 7:27 PM
          I don’t feel the least bit sorry for any white colonizers in Africa or their descendants. I don’t care what happens to them. Sub-Saharan Africa is for the black race.”

          Except Blacks only made up a portion of western Africa prior to expanding south and east.

          “Whites never even belonged there, so they should feel lucky they’ve even been allowed to live and that some Idi Amin type didn’t execute them all for their crimes.”

          You mean the crimes committed by those who simply descended from people who colonized the area rather than being the colonizer themselves.

          “Once again, if they don’t like their treatment, then they can go back to Europe. If they want to play fair, mind their business and not continue to exploit the resources, I don’t care if some live there.”

          You mean the exploiting working class boers?

          “Africans have been fighting this scourge for hundreds of years. Finally they cleared out the remaining bastions of white supremacy in Africa and people like Phil are crying about it. If Mugabe had lined up every white person and put a bullet in their head I wouldn’t blame him.”

          So you’re including descendants who actually didn’t contribute to colonization as well? Even if that went against their constitution?

          “But he didn’t do that. He simply asked for stolen land to be returned and that’s what sets off white supremacists like Phil.”

          What sets me off when that plan results in low production no matter how you rationalize it resulting with him asking for them back to to actually teach commercial farming.

          Excuse me if I’m upset that his plan was shortsighted, resulting in a deficit for both the country and others as well.

          “@Phil

          I think you may be infected with a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome.”

          And I think you have some false sense of nationalism for a continent you generalize.

          Excuse the fuck out of me if I’m upset at

          an economic decision that resulted in families being hurt and forced to move to other countries ON TOP of hurting the country itself.
          Others consistently using historical events as strawmen for current injustices which get little attention.

        • Mike

          Chinedu is right. Afrikaners aren’t going satisfied any less than wanting apartheid to be reinstated so that they can reign supremee always. They want to be dominant at any cost. They want blatant racial hierarchy with them at the top and colored at the bottom. Any attempt to change it will lead to them scapegoating jews or other “orcs” for all their failures. It’s the truth everywhere be it in SAF or Usa. Whites want to reinstate white supremacy for which they will go to any extent. Thats the main reason behind their feigned imagination white genocide and fske cry of white race under attack propaganda. Truth hurths. They must remember the uncountable no of lynchings they did during the bygone era. It does help them to have fake black man like PHIL do the lobbying. I doubt even if this guy is a black as he proclaims. Anybody can post a picture and do the pretending.

        • EPGAH

          Face it: Whites make better countries. Savages want to live in them, and to a certain extent, that’s fine, as long as they don’t attack their hosts. At first, some might even behave! BUT once they get to a certain Critical Mass, they stop behaving, and start attacking their betters, even trying to takeover the country!

          What is wrong with those who MAKE the country KEEPING it?

        • EPGAH

          Why was there a 143X jump in MURDER ALONE when whites lost control of the country, if savages are so damn peaceful?

          You bitch about “racism” and “unequal treatment”, but you EARN that with your actions. Those that act like monsters should be considered subhuman and even killed.
          Robert has even countenanced the use of the word “subhuman” to describe such entities.

          We should be killing the savages and getting EXP and coins for them.
          You act like Orcs, you get treated like Orcs. And I mean Orcs from Tolkien or the first two Warcraft games, the Orcs in WOW, have suddenly seen the light and gone good. Unlikely in South Africa or Rhodesia, don’t you think?

        • Chinedu

          “America WAS trying to force stability in the region.”

          Haha. Very funny. America considered all black liberation movements communist terrorists. America hasn’t been on the right side of any national struggle for at least 60 years.

          “And why did the savages want the whites’ land?”

          There were no white lands and whites were the savages.

          “Phil has already proven those areas were bought from the savages, so why doesn’t the buyer get to keep what they bought?”

          Phil is an idiotic racist troll who’s too dumb to recognize that a certain level of temperance would go a long way toward making him more credible. Notice that on every subject, Phil is on hair trigger alert to defend whites and castigate blacks. It makes no difference to him what the actual facts are. And then he’ll start quoting and linking to racist bloggers as “proof” of the stupidity he is writing. If you truly are pro-white, you should be embarrassed by Phil. You might want to quietly tell him to shut the fuck up. He isn’t helping you.

          Oh, and no “contracts” allegedly executed by colonialists is going to be taken seriously by anyone. Don’t make me laugh. But you keep missing the point. The whites had a right to recognize all the fake agreements they wanted, but the blacks are not obliged to do the same. But if the whites thought those were actually valid agreements, why didn’t they pursue legal action in the UN or the world court? They didn’t because they know they didn’t have a case.

          “As to no stink over the aircraft, it’s because the media didn’t even bother covering it.”

          The global media knew the Rhodesians were massacring black civilians so they accepted the shoot downs as casualties of war.

          “However, by Wikipedia, “The majority of Rhodesians, both black and white,[4] saw the attack as an act of terrorism.” and I bet it provoked a backlash. The savage “insurgents” start the fight, then expect not to have their civilians hit?”

          Who polled black civilians to discover what the majority of them thought of the attacks? Answer is no one.

        • Barack Thatcher

          The thing is…
          It’s not like the Blacks purposefully want to destroy civilization in SA.

          EPGA acts as if all that Blacks do, is on purpose.
          IF you’re an HBDer (I assume you are) you’d HAVE to admit that Blacks Can’t help it.
          https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/a-major-contradiction-in-hbd-theory/

        • EPGAH

          Because they weren’t LIBERATION movements, they were not LIBERATING the savages, who were already free to LEAVE! They were trying to overthrow countries that were allies of America! And their methods were those of terrorists, so yes, they would be treated as terrorists.

          If you ACT like a terrorist, you get TREATED as a terrorist. It’s that simple.

          And no, the savages were not under any compulsion to obey their deals.
          But the whites trusted the savages.
          Any commerce is based on trust. What would your reaction be if next time you’re shopping, the cashier tried to kill you and take back what you bought? I bet you’d fight. Whites though, fight in a very restrained manner since WWII, otherwise, Moslem terrorism would be a distant memory as the Middle East would be the world’s largest contiguous fulgurite.
          South Africa and Rhodesia would be whites’ territory still because they would’ve not let the savages in and killed those that tried to cross.
          Illegal immigration would be dealt with similarly.

          What would the World Court or UN do? Shake their finger saying, “Don’t do that! Don’t you DARE do that!”?
          The President of Sudan has been indicted by the World Court, and he’s still running, rather than turning himself in and accepting punishment, right? And what about this new idea to SUE terrorists?
          Cue Laugh Track

          It’s the WHITES, not the savages, who are too conciliatory, bend over backwards for savages, and get stabbed while doing so.

        • EPGAH

          William: The argument isn’t whether they’re doing it on purpose or just as a consequence of their existence in an area, it’s what to do to STOP them!
          From just keeping them separate to drastically reducing their population, what does it take to keep ourselves safe from That?

          In some circles, it’s WHETHER to stop them–as if because they can’t help themselves, they don’t deserve punishment.

          Do you avoid spraying a vicious dog because it doesn’t know any better than to attack you? Do you avoid taking antibiotics because infecting is just what pathogens do, and they don’t deserve punishment for it?

        • Barack Thatcher

          Yes, I understand.
          It’s a very difficult balance to strike, but anti-Black vitriol isn’t going to help.

        • EPGAH

          Well, William, when they overthrow a country with organized terrorist strikes, it looks like it’s on purpose.

          I admit I sound vitriolic, but have you read Chinedu here?
          My point is: Whites need to take back what is ours, and what to do about the savages to stop them from overthrowing another of our countries?

        • EPGAH

          My problem is that I don’t have my own army to fix South Africa, Rhodesia, Syria, Iran, etc. I’m not sure how else to help.

          Savages won’t give the country back willingly with a heartfelt note, “We Were Wrong. Sorry! Won’t Do That Again!”

        • Chinedu

          Epgah,

          So you would endorse returning the United States to the British crown. After all, George Washington and his band of terrorists used organized terror to steal the country from Britain.

        • EPGAH

          How are railway stations and banks not civilian targets to you?

        • EPGAH

          Two problems with your analogy:
          1.) British Crown was an outside force that treated America as an enemy but still wanted to control us. The whites were the ones that built both America and South Africa, so they have legal ownership.
          The savages were/are an outside force that took the country away from those who built it.
          If anything, the overthrow of South Africa would be something akin to England winning the Revolutionary War or France conquering America once we got free of England.

          2.) Americans only targeted Brits, not our own people. No attacks on banks, and railway stations would not even exist for multiple decades.

        • EPGAH

          Remember, the savages only overthrew South Africa and Rhodesia AFTER they had gotten their independence, not while they were a colony of anyone. Therefore, you can’t call it liberation.

          Rhodesia got free of Britain and South Africa, whom do you say they were a colony of? But I think if you ask them, they’d rather return to being a colony rather than run by the savages, don’t you?

          But because they’re “independent” countries, their former colonizers decided not to send aid. Possibly as a “That’ll Learn Ya For Declaring Independence” kind of spite?

        • Tony Swagger

          I remember Sam having posted an very big image containing the photos of white victims murdered by feral thugs in SAF. Somr of the photos were so brutal thst it was so hard to have a second look. Sam, can u post it again? for chinedu, you can lie whatever you want.Ask the blacks in SAF how was it during apartheid regime and how’s it now when they are being ruled by thugs and terrorists.

      • Chinedu

        Epgah,

        The Rhodesians had allies in South Africa, Portugal, Israel, the United States and the entire white supremacist community worldwide. Why should the black freedom fighters go without their own allies?

        Regarding starving, no such thing existed prior to the arrival of Europeans. It was Europeans that caused the African famines. Prior to colonization famine was something that happened in Europe, not in Africa. Africans had fed themselves for thousands of years.

        Anyway, you hate black people so what do you care if they starve? Just get on with your miserable life. Africans don’t need or want you.

        • “Regarding starving, no such thing existed prior to the arrival of Europeans. It was Europeans that caused the African famines. Prior to colonization famine was something that happened in Europe, not in Africa. Africans had fed themselves for thousands of years.”

          Well one prior to European contact there were no real records for such events.

        • Mike

          Even if phil is a black man believing he says the truth, for the alt right crowd he will still be a nigger. I wonder if he does like being called as magic nigger. Everyone in the alt right crowd hates blacks. What makes him think he will be treated different from other blacks is being me. He can do the lobbying for them, be viciously antiblack, may be even suffering from Stockholm syndrome but still it is not gonna change an iota of racist alt right dogs’ opinions. Is it worth it really Phil? Assuming you are a black man as you say.

        • EPGAH

          Where do you get that the whites had allies? What military aid did South Africa or even America provide? If anything, Kissinger was the one who pushed Britain to abandon Rhodesia and South Africa to the savages. Israel provided rhetorical support, but that’s worthless.

          I don’t hate Blacks, I want them to behave or leave. Preferably set aside a Reservation for the ones who can’t behave. South Africa and Rhodesia each did that, but the savages wanted the parts the whites owned. Why?

          And yes there were famines before in Africa, but the population was nowhere near as high, so they could tough it out with minimal losses. White agricultural tech created a population explosion among the savages, because the whites kept feeding the savages. BUT that made them dependent on their betters for that food. AND when that food was taken away, or they murdered the farmers, it was called a “famine”. The larger population cannot be supported anymore by the savages’ subsistence farming. THAT is the only way you could say whites “caused the famines”…By causing eutrophication.

          Why do you care if whites own a country? Why do you want whites to lose their bastions of safety, in all the continents?
          Why do you hate whites so much?

        • “Even if phil is a black man believing he says the truth, for the alt right crowd he will still be a nigger. I wonder if he does like being called as magic nigger. Everyone in the alt right crowd hates blacks. What makes him think he will be treated different from other blacks is being me. He can do the lobbying for them, be viciously antiblack, may be even suffering from Stockholm syndrome but still it is not gonna change an iota of racist alt right dogs’ opinions. Is it worth it really Phil? Assuming you are a black man as you say.”

          And who said I was for the alt right? Just because I don’t like the predicament of Afrikaners that means I’m automatically anti-black? So because I am “black” I have to share the same opinions as other blacks?

          “Chinedu is right. Afrikaners aren’t going satisfied any less than wanting apartheid to be reinstated so that they can reign supremee always. They want to be dominant at any cost. They want blatant racial hierarchy with them at the top and colored at the bottom. Any attempt to change it will lead to them scapegoating jews or other “orcs” for all their failures. It’s the truth everywhere be it in SAF or Usa. Whites want to reinstate white supremacy for which they will go to any extent. Thats the main reason behind their feigned imagination white genocide and fske cry of white race under attack propaganda. Truth hurths. They must remember the uncountable no of lynchings they did during the bygone era. It does help them to have fake black man like PHIL do the lobbying. I doubt even if this guy is a black as he proclaims. Anybody can post a picture and do the pretending.”

          Imaginary genocide? Except that an actual genocide website recognizes what they are going through as genocide.

          Also I find it funny how Mugabe didn’t mask for others to teach them commercial farming but asked for the Afrikaners back.

          You think I’m anti-black when my points were that

          removing afrikaners forcefully from their farms resulted in low production, and the government stubbornly held this reform to flop for 15 years thus harming both Afrikaners and the Nation at large.
          What they did was against their constitution regarding racial discrimination.

          If that upsets you then to bad.

        • Chinedu

          Epgah,

          South Africa’s apartheid regime provided Rhodesia with massive aid. They even did much of the fighting on behalf of Rhodesia. They attacked and destabilized neighboring countries on behalf of Rhodesia. They killed thousands of black civilians. Read about the shoot down of the South African helicoptor in Mozambique:

          http://puma164.net63.net/

          This will give you an idea of how heavily invested South Africa was in Rhodesia’s war. Both apartheid regimes, by the way, developed banned chemical weapons to use on black civilians. Rhodesia actually deployed those weapons. They even poised drinking water:

          http://peterbaxterafrica.com/index.php/2012/04/15/biological-warfare-in-rhodesia/

          The reason why the world didn’t raise a stink when black insurgents took down two airliners is because everyone knew how brutal and despicable the Rhodesians were and that they deserved a little payback.

          America too supported Rhodesia. The CIA provided money, arms and intelligence, including satellite imagery. They created fake anti-revolutionary groups and conducted assassinations of key freedom fighters. They destabilized neighboring countries. All sides considered the United States a combatant in the Southern African wars.

          Portugal supported Rhodesia because they saw them as kindred spirits. This of course would end with the Carnation revolution in 1975.

          There were no parts of Southern Africa that whites owned. The blacks had every right to take their land back. In the same way, Native Americans have a right to take their land back, but they’re no longer fighting. The blacks never stopped fighting, which was their right. A land grab or conquest only becomes a fait accompli if the dispossessed accept it and stop fighting.

          Regarding famine, there were no records of such going back at least 500 years as recorded by European explorers themselves. So you’re lying. Famine was something that happened in Europe and they brought it to Africa by replacing a more efficient and egalitarian system with their own.

        • EPGAH

          So by that logic, the dispossessed white should fight and take back their country from the savages?

          You keep talking about how “brutal” the Rhodesians or South Africans are, but they were fighting a brutal enemy that by your own statements, refused to give up. So wasn’t the brutality necessary to hang onto their country for a little longer?

          But you’re right, the savages never stopped fighting. Even after they “won” and overthrew the country, they keep massacring innocent whites. Why don’t you tag that as “brutal” and “deserved a little payback”?

          Why is it OK for savages to be brutal, but if whites fight back, THEN you start bitching?
          Might Makes Right Unless It’s White?

        • EPGAH

          America WAS trying to force stability in the region. A better question is not only why did we stop, but why was there a sudden massive Anti-South-Africa program in America? Stop buying their products, stop supporting them, etc. So not only did we not help South Africa, we made it so they couldn’t even BUY help! The most reasonable explanation is that once the Cold War stopped, America stopped protecting our pawns, and assumed Russia’s pawns would stop too. Or do you have a better explanation?

          And why did the savages want the whites’ land? Phil has already proven those areas were bought from the savages, so why doesn’t the buyer get to keep what they bought?

          As to no stink over the aircraft, it’s because the media didn’t even bother covering it. Due to each of us not having our own fleet of Drones to monitor and in my case, stabilize the world, we rely on media to tell us what’s going on–but they do more than that, they tell us what to think about it, not only by what they cover, but by the spin they put on it.
          Philando Castile is a household name, but do you know who Alton Nolen is without looking it up?

          However, by Wikipedia, “The majority of Rhodesians, both black and white,[4] saw the attack as an act of terrorism.” and I bet it provoked a backlash. The savage “insurgents” start the fight, then expect not to have their civilians hit?

        • EPGAH

          So basically, my point is, South Africa and Rhodesia are valid countries that got overthrown by terrorists and wrecked because the terrorists were more interested in destroying and stealing–making a lasting impression– than making a lasting country.

          Get rid of the terrorists, give the countries back to their original owners.
          If they reinstate Apartheid, they have good reason to now, as they’ve seen what the savages do if left unchecked.

          South Africa during Apartheid = 170 murders per year
          South Africa NOW (after Apartheid) = 24,206 murders per year

          Do you see the problem?

        • EPGAH

          Call it an “experiment” if you like? An Experiment In Savage Misrule Through Violence. When Haiti just isn’t a good enough Object Lesson?

        • EPGAH

          The “Native” Americans invaded from Mongolia, so I agree, they have every right to their land back, but I don’t think China or Russia would like having ANOTHER parasitic nation nearby.

          They have no more right to the land that became the country America than we do, because despite invading several thousand years earlier, they failed to make a country here. Maybe they were awaiting your permission? They too sold land and tried to take it back by force.

          The difference is, those savages had little to no outside help (Once France stopped interfering, I mean) so they lost.

          And the savages clearly don’t care about egalitarian, they want dominance, so why should their betters–those who made the nation that those terrorists stole–care about being egalitarian, especially to terrorists?

          Our egalitarian nature leads to us feeding the scum that try to kill us and steal what we build up, doesn’t it?

        • EPGAH

          Again, though, why do you call the terrorists “freedom fighters”?
          They kept attacking CIVILIANS, instead of military who could fight back.
          And they’re still doing so.
          That’s TERRORISM, not “freedom fighters”.
          Freedom fighters attack the military, terrorists attack the people.

          http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/hrvtrans/submit/anc2.htm#Appendix%204
          This list would take up the whole site if I copied and pasted, so here, read for yourself all their terrorist attacks.

        • Chinedu

          “So by that logic, the dispossessed white should fight and take back their country from the savages?”

          First of all, the whites are the savages. The white savages did fight and they lost. They’re welcome to continue fighting and you’re welcome to join them. But make sure you bring a body bag for the trip back home.

          “You keep talking about how “brutal” the Rhodesians or South Africans are, but they were fighting a brutal enemy that by your own statements, refused to give up. So wasn’t the brutality necessary to hang onto their country for a little longer?”

          The blacks weren’t brutal. They could’ve ended the war much faster by killing more white civilians. They didn’t. While the white savages were targeting black civilians, the policy of the black freedom fighters was to avoid white civilian deaths. The blacks risked their lives and often got killed going after hardened military targets when civilian soft targets were readily available. In retrospect, they should have killed more white civilians in order to bring the war to a speedier close. The shoot down of the airliners went a long way toward ending the war, as it convinced white civilians, who were all white supremacists, that they weren’t safe anywhere. Ending the war by killing white civilians meant that fewer white civilians would die in the long run. The terrorism you talk about was actually in the planning stages when the war came to a close. The freedom fighters had adopted a policy of bombing the whites’ only hospitals, department stores and other places. They decided it was long overdue, given that the racist regime had policy of brutalizing and killing black civilians. Be thankful the war ended before more white supremacists could be killed.

          “Even after they “won” and overthrew the country, they keep massacring innocent whites. Why don’t you tag that as “brutal” and “deserved a little payback”?”

          Whites were not massacred after the war. You’re lying. Even Ian Smith remained unmolested on his stolen farm with his black servants. He should have been tried summarily executed. You see, this is the problem. You racist clowns will never be satisfied with anything other than total domination of other people. Even when black people bend over backwards to be magnanimous and conciliatory, in spite of over 100 years of racist brutality meted out against them, you continue to fabricate stories about massacres and genocides. If you continue lying and making shit up, you’re going to cause blacks to actually commit these acts you are falsely accusing them of.

        • EPGAH

          No, the whites are not the savages, the whites made the country and had to protect themselves from the savages who poured in “For A Better Life” or because they would be massacred by their fellow savage, Shaka Zulu.

          Magnanimous and conciliatory would’ve been “We Don’t Like Your Country So We’re LEAVING It”, not “We Don’t Like Your Country So We’re Overthrowing It With Terrorist Attacks”.
          Maybe killing more savage “civilians” would’ve convinced the savages to quit attacking their hosts?

          The savages were anything but peaceful, and indeed did NOT go out of their way to avoid civilian casualties. I gave you a link to a list, did you read the list? How many of those do you think had civilian casualties? AND remember, that’s not even a complete list, that’s only a list of the ones they “forgave” themselves for at the “Truth And Reconciliation Committee”!

          What happened to Eugene Terreblanche? I heard he was murdered in his home by a pair of savages.

          And yes, savages are still murdering white farmers, have you not read the news lately?

          Since you prefer YouTube over facts, try this one.

        • EPGAH

          Remember also, Mandela–your “hero”–was offered an early out of jail. All he had to do is tell his fellow terrorists to stop the violence. He didn’t!
          So where’s that “conciliatory and magnanimous” bullshit?

          To protect themselves from the savages, whites need walls and guards. Isn’t that all Apartheid was? Protecting civilians from savages?

          Why did the whites let the savages into the country in the first place?
          For that matter, why did the savages WANT to live there if whites treated them so “horribly”?

        • EPGAH

          http://www.awsg.us/south-african-farm-murder-photos/
          Look at the savages’ handiwork, white farmers chopped up like some bad B movie! That is why I say that the savages haven’t stopped massacring white CIVILIANS!

        • Chinedu

          Epgah,

          You want to prove that black freedom fighters were targeting civilians and yet the link you provided listed ANC attacks on government buildings at night, power stations and statues. Virtually no white civilian victims appear on the list that YOU provided, but plenty of ANC cadres were killed trying to make political points by attacking these worthless sites.

          Thanks for proving my point with your own sources.

        • EPGAH

          I’m pointing out they’re terrorists because they were attacking CIVILIAN installations instead of military. Do you see any military bases on the list?

          Are they so cowardly they couldn’t attack anything that might fight back?

          If these installations were so “worthless”, why attack at all?

          And thank you for admitting these were WHITE CIVILIAN INSTALLATIONS!

        • EPGAH

          Attacking power stations and banks disrupts CIVILIAN life. Hell, I bet you were one of the ones that bitched when we destroyed terrorists’ power stations and infrastructure in Iraq, right?

        • EPGAH

          If savages don’t need or want whites, why invade and overthrow our country? Why not AVOID it, give it a wide berth, AKA STAY OUT?

        • Chinedu

          Epgah,

          Those installations were guarded by apartheid police and military. They were government installations, not civilian installations. The point is the ANC did not attack white civilians. Period. They could have easily blown up shopping malls or buses or simply gunned down white civilians. They didn’t. Meanwhile the apartheid regime was murdering black civilians and peaceful activists like Stephen Biko. Even Mandela was caught while planning attacks on government infrastructure, not people.

          You’ve debunked yourself with your own source. Thanks.

        • EPGAH

          Just having police or military guarding them during a terrorist alert doesn’t make them military installations.

          As to Mandela, if he didn’t want to get caught, he shouldn’t have been “planning attacks” at all. How many TONS of explosives did they catch him with again?

          All countries fight those who are trying to overthrow them. I bet the current regime doesn’t just let the whites take their country back, do you?

        • EPGAH

          What about planting landmines in farmers’ crop fields? You want to pretend that was military too?

        • EPGAH

          Remember, unless it’s explicitly military, even a Government installation is a civilian target, and supposed to be excused from warfare.
          Remember Timothy McVeigh’s attack on the IRS? That was a CIVILIAN target! Even though the IRS is THE biggest wing of the Government!
          Yes, I know it’s technically a private contractor, but it has Government powers!

          Or are savages not supposed to follow Rules of Warfare, only the Civilized World?

        • “Epgah,

          Those installations were guarded by apartheid police and military. They were government installations, not civilian installations. The point is the ANC did not attack white civilians. Period. They could have easily blown up shopping malls or buses or simply gunned down white civilians. They didn’t. Meanwhile the apartheid regime was murdering black civilians and peaceful activists like Stephen Biko. Even Mandela was caught while planning attacks on government infrastructure, not people.

          You’ve debunked yourself with your own source. Thanks.”

          Except Epagh pointed out how those attacks disrupts civilian lives and how currently they are attacking civilians by killing farm workers.

          BTW, see my comment on how Mugabe is “for blacks and against corruption and exploitation” with his own genocide.

        • Tony Swagger

          Epgah has tapped on the sense of alienation whites have been facing in our own countries. Why should we be willing to sacrifice the land we created for some NAM scum who destroys everything that it touches. southafrica, Haiti and zimbabwe are the prime examples of what will happen if we let the apes run amok. It’s the Jew scum which created the mess in south Africa and rhodesia by fostering the feral savages and they are plotting the same shit in other white countries by inviting NAM scum all over the world. What has happened in SAF and rhodesia are just the tip of the iceberg of what they’ve plotted in other countries. Would the yids allow Israel to be filled up with all kind of orcs?

        • Tony Swagger

          Thanks epgah for your very insightful responses.

  5. Jason Y

    Again a third of the black population being bad isn’t enough to justify the hate of the alt right etc…and I doubt if the situation will rise to 50 percent.

    However, it is true Latinos are invading and we can only wait and see if the results will be positive or negative, Im guessing negative.

    • EPGAH

      It is when fleeing doesn’t work and we’ve seen in other countries–call them “Experiments” or “Object Lessons”, if you like?–where we lose control of our countries.

  6. Jason Y

    Well, I bet Trash has some words to add to all of this which aren’t supportive of Phil and the rest… I’m waiting…

    • We’ve already seen Los Angeles but remember that these places were Spanish administrations while Boston, Maine, West Virginia were not.

      Quite possibly Hispanics view places like Seattle or Boise or Maine as so forsaken that they do make attractive settlements. Chicago is one example of a city which is heavily Latino but not the power structure itself.

      Blacks will be in a worse position because they are urban for the most part.

      • Jason Y

        I seem to ramble quite a bit as Phil pointed out, but I don’t really see what Trash is saying here. Is this relevant?

      • EPGAH

        Latinos ARE making a grab for power structures, from judge positions to Congress. What do you suppose happens to the areas where Latinos take power? (Hint: Look at the countries they already ruined and invaded America from!)

        • In Latin America corruption has to run top-to-bottom to turn the place into a complete sinkhole.

          It could be worse because Spanish white elites have always run Latin American countries like Colombia or San Salvador while the Hispanics who take power in the Southwest are poor Indians/Mestizos.

          New Hampshire could get an Hispanic governor but because the police, mayors, town council and population will remain white these places will probably not degenerate to the extent of East Los Angeles.

          Former Spanish colonies like New Mexico, Southern California, Texas and South Florida are a different matter altogether.

        • EPGAH

          And do you not think once they get into power HERE, the Mexicans will be just as corrupt as they were in their own country? At best winking and nodding at their fellow Mexicans’ crimes and only punishing Americans, at worst, actively trying to turn their fiefdoms into the same Hells they pretended to flee?

        • EPGAH

          What do you suppose the objective of La Raza is?
          Hint: Their slogan is “For The Race EVERYTHING, For Others NOTHING”.
          And I have a suspicion that they don’t mean the WHITE race.
          What are the odds?

        • Barack Thatcher

          Sununu was genetically Arab.

          His family were ME migrants to Latin America/new world.

        • Barack Thatcher

          Now I have no great beef with Epga but he should really not be this purposefully obtuse.

          The latinos ‘making a grab for the power structure’ are all criollos, they also run Latin America.

          It’s not low IQ beaners in power, it’s a caste system in Latin America that causes a lot of issues.

        • Barack Thatcher

          you’ve been duped like a low IQ mestizo…lol


          These are stereotypical “latinos”?

          Latin American Whites= THE REAL Jews in terms of Alt-Right conspiracies.

          They want to have a bunch of mestizo sharecroppers under their thumb in the U.S.

        • EPGAH

          Look at people like Luis Guitierrez, founder of La Raza. He didn’t earn any Brownie Points with me with his “We Must Kill The Gringo [to takeover]” speech. He’s been walking it back ever since, trying to explain what he really MEANT, but it was just an admission of willingness to use violence to takeover MY country and ruin it!

          I would have no beef, of course, if Americans were allowed to kill invaders who couldn’t behave without consequence, but sadly the invaders are another protected class now, not even being deported, much less killed for their crimes.
          http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/07/11/sanctuary-cities-not-changing-san-francisco-shooting/29979357/

        • Barack Thatcher

          I personally think they’re all retarded.
          They should not be Federal Judges.

          regardless, the ‘beaners can’t run their own country and are going to make our country shit when they run it’, is not exactly correct if you consider the race of those running it…,..

          IQ of the leaders is not the issue, it’s something else.

    • See my response regarding his recent words on a by and large basis concerning his point on Cocaine in relation to other crimes such as violent crime.

    • Crime in the UK and Canada has risen steadily. Immigrants are one reason, but there are some anti-social whites as well (Canada also has aboriginals).

  7. Jason Y

    Despite the bleak future, the hate is really over the top with Sam and the bunch.. Time hasn’t progressed to justify such hate, so what’s the point ???

    ???

  8. The era of crack cocaine was probably the height of crime in the ghetto from 85-90. I do not think violence will reach those heights again soon.

    Apprehension is easier as well. Every square inch of public sidewalk is videotaped.

    Sentencing is also harsher (Because of a Native American criminal named Richard Allen Davis and the three strikes law).

    • Jason Y

      According to Sam J. black ghettoes are still a war zone. Surely as you say, this is an exxageration.

      • EPGAH

        Not really, let’s check the murder rate of a known warzone, Chicago!

        http://heyjackass.com/
        This site keeps as close to real-time as possible, and arranges it with graphs and pictograms–you don’t even have to read!

        • Jason Y

          Nice website name !!!😆

        • EPGAH A drunken 23 year old thug shooting another 23 year old thug after being hit in the head with a bottle over some “pass” at a woman.

          Real HEZBOLLA-level paramilitary guerrilla war tactics there.

          Interestingly, most of these people are apprehended at the scene or within an hour of committing the crime.

          As for robberies and parking-lot shootings. Sure, a great many NAMS are out of their gourds on crack-cocaine and fortified liquor. They commit impulsive crimes.

          But this will not lead to a Hezbolla level of organized guerrilla warfare.

          If Arabs could finance NAMS and arm them then the U.S. would be in real trouble. I’m sure it’s crossed their minds but people in the ghetto are to adrift on drugs and Hispanics with a few Spanish ancestors who fought the moors in Spain are too steeped in Catholicis.

        • EPGAH

          My point is, the crime doesn’t magically keep contained in the ghetto.
          They can easily drive to the good side of town and kill a white person, if they’re of an impulse to. As you said, impulsive crime, right?

          http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/teenagers-allegedly-murder-college-baseball-player-boredom-article-1.1431445
          Remember this case? Thugs got “bored” and wrote about wanting to kill someone, but rather than kill one of their own, they went to the good side of town and killed a good person instead of a Public Service Kill.

  9. In terms of organized para-military violence New Jersey’s Italian-American executions most resemble “war zones” with bombings, long-range executions, cyanide poisonings, torture victims found in corn fields.

    White Southerners outside of New Orleans have not known this because the mafia has never had a presence South of Cleveland.

    NAMS for example, never detonate bombs. Why don’t Bloods and Crips use remote-controlled devices? I’m too PC to answer.

    They cannot get their hands on army ordinance (C-4, grenade launchers). In Miami they never dominated the drug-trade.

    NAM IQ’s do not seem interested enough to carry out an actual “war” (20% have been in the military but still know nothing about supply lines or strategy) with supply lines or even urban guerrilla warfare of the Colombians, Sicilians.

    Any white IN the ghetto itself wants drugs or prostitutes, or is one.

    • Jason Y

      True, in the movie American Gangster, the FBI head (someone like that) refused to believe Russell Crowe’s claim that the head importer of heroin from from Asia to NYC was black. It was well known at the time that Italians controlled most crime, and it was assumed blacks were too dumb to organize on the same level as Italians.

    • Tulio

      “NAMS for example, never detonate bombs. Why don’t Bloods and Crips use remote-controlled devices? I’m too PC to answer.”

      Stupid question. Why don’t white mass shooters use remote controlled devices rather than spraying kindergartens and movie theaters with bullets? Because bombs and explosive devices are best used on stationary targets like buildings. If there is someone specific you want to kill with the least risk of getting foiled, a gun is as effective as it gets.

      • White shooters (Always Anglo and not Italian mobsters) intend to kill themselves during or after the act.

        They are Anglo, loners, male, usually under 30, do not care about apprehensions.

        • EPGAH

          Yes, but how many mass shooters are white vs. Blacks or Moslems?

          Start with the Chuck E. Cheese shooter, if you like, or the Orlando shooting?
          There was even an Asian shooter at Virginia Tech!

        • Jason Y

          Oh my gosh !!! Even an Asian serial killer. Now how often is that probability? 1 in a billion? You crazy WNs. What will you say next?
          😆

    • Barack Thatcher

      TRASH-
      Production of items needed in warfare, is key.
      Obviously, by definition guerilla warfare relates to previous knowledge of an area and is ‘extra IQ’.

      But the ability to supply food, is an issue.
      If you look at the 1990s in Liberia & Sierra Leone, there was cannabalism, although I’m not sure if nutrition was the reason. They also had mass hackings (machetes, etc.) of innocent civilians, because of low impulse control; and this seems to be more exclusive to Blacks and not Mestizos.

      Otherwise war is raged in just about the same way…..

      • Jason Y

        There are plenty of guerilla wars in Africa. In fact, Africa has always been torn apart by war. Also, look at Angola. Why is Trash stating this false fact, claiming NAMS cannot wage war?

        • Because no foreign power (Soviet Cold War Russia, Middle East) is going to finance NAMS in Detroit as they did in Angola.

          Furthermore as was mentioned the average NAM would starve in a week in the sticks or even the exurbs.

          NAMS in the U.S. involved in crime are not disciplined soldiers, they are drug addicts in the late stages of crack-cocaine dependency whose assaults on whites are for material gain (robbery) or immediate gratification (Rape).

        • EPGAH

          Russia DID support the NAMs to overthrow civilization. So why hasn’t Russia fixed their mistake and put the whites back in control of their own country…Since after all, Russia has changed, mended their ways, etc., right?
          Cue Laugh Track

      • EPGAH Urban areas have already become no-go areas for whites except those doing some sort of illicit business in NAM ghettos or barrios (Drug addicts, bikers/mafia, sex maniacs seeking prostitutes). Watch COPS and how easy it is for Police to simply follow the white kid from the project to the highway because they know that he purchased drugs.

        NAMS who block highways into their areas would stop doing so if they interrupted the transport of food from white-owned agribusiness for 5 days. Whites control the food supply, along with some pale HIspanic elites in the Southwest who are more or less like Italians. So there is no way such a Balkan conflict could be won by NAMS. They are too concentrated in urban wastelands from which resources cannot be extracted or food can be grown.

        The military industrial complex would not assumed by NAMS (Or Jews or Asians in the U.S.). Those means of production are impossible.

      • BARACK

        In the few instances that the U.S. military has to deploy the National Guard into these areas within 2-3 days the rioting has ceased.

        But even a long-term guerrilla war would not necessarily effect the lives of whites even 50 miles away from these urban zones.

      • BARACK

        As SCARFACE and MENACE II SOCIETY have accurately depicted, most of these NAMS are out of their minds on drugs and alcohol in the late stages of addiction which fogs the windows up a little bit in terms of long-term strategic occupation of suburban, exurban or rural zones of North America.

        Possibly guerrilla war is already occurring in 10 square miles of barrios and ghettos as it did at the height of the Italian crime syndicates in Philly or New Jersey.

        “Waging war” is not really possible for NAMS.

  10. Jason Y

    Sam J. mentioned that he doesn’t want to go to a gas station seeing blacks, thinking he might get jumped. However, why hasn’t he considered just traveling 200 some miles to Appalachia. There are not enough blacks here to possibly hurt him. (Note he could get scammed by some criminal whites, but there’s no immediate threat of violence.)

    See, that’s the problem I see with these people. They complain, but they don’t leave, and obviously they have the resources to leave.

    • Southern whites do not ignore the cheap self-assertiveness or aggression of NAMS. They react to it, getting injured or if facing jail time if they establish dominance by inflicting serious injury on a NAM.

      Blacks lack the gasoline to jump somebody 40 miles outside of Chicago much less the exurbs of Kansas.

      Their crimes are opportunistic and random, for the most part. Usually they are fogged-up on some substance or another.

      Whites at the greatest risk simply have underwater mortgages in ghettoized areas or lack the initiative to leave. So they stay as the economy gets so bad that nobody will have a job and they themselves have less opportunities.

      Usually they had to raise a family in their twenties and were doing so during the de-industrialization of these cities so by the time their kids were out of the house and they were in middle-age their options were diminished.

    • JASON Y Tweakers seem to rip off one another more than anything else.

      If you were a “prospect” for an outlaw motorcycle gang than you might face a serious threat of violence or if you want to hang out with junkies who will leave your sliding glass door open when you are not looking to return to burglarize the place.

      Unless you are Italian you’ll never be an associate or soldier anyhow, so most whites are not killed by the mafia.

    • JASON Y Americans who trace their ancestry to Colonial Roots in the South have some weird dominance thing going with NAMS.

      Northern whites have accepted that after 400 years they are certainly going nowhere and can only be avoided/ignored.

      A sub-set of poor whites are mixed up in drugs, increasing negative interaction with NAMS. Take Oxy instead of smoking crack, junkies. You won’t get jacked in the hood.

      • EPGAH

        How far are you willing to go to avoid them? You’re no longer allowed to keep them out of your neighborhood, so the avoidance doesn’t work!

        So what are you suggesting? Pick up and move every time the scum decide to move into your neighborhood instead of staying in the areas they’ve already fucked up? That gets expensive fast, as well as getting old fast, right?

        • EPGAH

          Some of what you say is true.

          1) NAMS rent and move into rental neighborhoods. Low-rent, I should add. If you are white and rent efficiency, you’ll run into them unless its a college town.

          2) They do not like neighborhoods with a strong police presence that is white because their sources of income-drugs, prostitution, fencing rings, dog fights and other gambling-get busted too often. You cannot sell cocaine or put women on the “stroll” in areas where police will bust you twice a week.

          3) If you smoke crack, you’ll meet them. Grow your own marijuana if you smoke it.

        • EPGAH

          Wouldn’t it be better to keep them out in the first place than to keep “busting” them as you put it?

        • Jason Y

          How far are you willing to go to avoid them? You’re no longer allowed to keep them out of your neighborhood, so the avoidance doesn’t work!

          Horseshit !!😆

          Most whites can easily get away from ghetto NAMS, because ghetto NAMS are so poor they, themselves, cannot get out of the hell-hole they live in.

          Therefore, only the absolute poorest whites live among ghetto NAMS, and those whites can even get away from them, but they choose not to. Again ghetto NAMS have to interest in leaving even though, possibly with strong motivation they could, cause they’re not welcome anywhere. They have no life outside the hood.

          So ep-gah is really talking about middle class blacks who aren’t a threat to anyone. Yes, legally we cannot keep them out of a white neighborhood, but really they’re not a threat middle class white people. Only assholes would want laws to keep them out.

        • Jason Y

          Possibly the dark side that Sam J. and ep-gah are not revealing about white homies in the hood, is just that, they are white homies who are no different than the black ones. They don’t really want to leave a poor neighborhood, which ironically and schizophrenically they also hate, cause they don’t want to get busted by cops, just like blacks ones don’t. (as Trash pointed out).

          Of course, where I live there is a way around the situation. These white trash freaks can always move out in some rural area (some choose to do that). In that case they’re away from NAMS, but basically they’re low culture characteristics haven’t changed.

        • Jason Y

          So Sam J is this KKK white supremacist preacher trying to liberate his poor white brothers. But what he doesn’t get is it’s not about race, but about character. The reason the ghetto whites are in the negative state they’re in is cause they’re no different than the ghetto blacks

          I see this shit too much with my relative who is poor, working class, and thinks just like Sam. J. Again, he runs in a circle with his bullshit cause he cannot see that the problem lies in the character, not the race..

        • Jason Y

          Note I have used some negative terms to describe poor whites. But a lot of it is sarcasm. I realize that poor whites, like poor blacks are afflicted with a high negative culture, drugs, sexual abuse, etc…

          However, I’m just trying to point out that Sam and ep-gah are totally ignoring the whole negative scene around these people which is the real root of the problem (white, black, you name it)

          You take classy people of any race, and mark my word they don’t want to hang around poor Kid Rock type whites, nor ghetto blacks. To them they’re all niggers. They see them as disgusting. They smoke cigarettes too much, even around kids. They get angry easy. They steal and everything else under the sun cause they’re hooked on meth, pain pills.

        • Jason Y

          Recently I went over to one poor white guy who is a small time drug dealer. His fucking place was so damn disgusting. Trash all over his house except in a few rooms. Looks like something off the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Also, you can easily point out other poor whites with trash in their yard, no different than how a ghetto black would keep it up.

          No doubt, Yuppie faggot ass snobs, so to speak, don’t want to have anything to do with these people, nor ghetto blacks.

        • “Therefore, only the absolute poorest whites live among ghetto NAMS, and those whites can even get away from them, but they choose not to. Again ghetto NAMS have to interest in leaving even though, possibly with strong motivation they could, cause they’re not welcome anywhere. They have no life outside the hood.”

          Proof that only poor whites live near NAMS?

          “So ep-gah is really talking about middle class blacks who aren’t a threat to anyone. Yes, legally we cannot keep them out of a white neighborhood, but really they’re not a threat middle class white people. Only assholes would want laws to keep them out.”

          You do realize Robert has actually mentioned that Middle class blacks commit more crimes still than whites of the same SES?

          “You take classy people of any race, and mark my word they don’t want to hang around poor Kid Rock type whites, nor ghetto blacks. To them they’re all niggers. They see them as disgusting. They smoke cigarettes too much, even around kids. They get angry easy. They steal and everything else under the sun cause they’re hooked on meth, pain pills.”

          Except even at same SES, magnitudes are greater. Your are again confusing existence with prevalence.

        • Jason Y

          Your grouping all NAMS together. All NAMS are not the same, some are ghetto-ish. Some are not.

        • Jason Y

          Middle class blacks commit more crime than middle class whites? How much more? Is it even worth mentioning?

        • “Your grouping all NAMS together. All NAMS are not the same, some are ghetto-ish. Some are not.”

          Except I never did.

          “Middle class blacks commit more crime than middle class whites? How much more? Is it even worth mentioning?”

          Robert said double the amount of crime, this data showing the association

          https://randomcriticalanalysis.wordpress.com/2015/11/16/racial-differences-in-homicide-rates-are-poorly-explained-by-economics/

          However what is also close is single parenthood. I’ll admit that single parenthood could be an environmental effect, but even that’s partly genetic seeing that’s how it has been often done in Africa aside from Islamic cultures.

      • Jm8

        “…but even that’s partly genetic seeing that’s how it has been often done in Africa aside from Islamic cultures.”

        Single parent hood has not been particularly common traditionally (as I explained a while back)—at least in many-most cultures there (not just the Islamic ones.) Though it may be more common in Central than West Africa—though this I am unsure of this and then it would vary widely by sub region (the Central African region is quite varied too, esp. East to West, so there may not be a huge benefit in making the comparison anyway, but then again there might be). And some of that which exists is due to widowhood and labor migration (both of which tend to be high in Africa, as they are in parts of Latin America).

        Present rates (except for South Africa’s which is not typical) are roughly similar to those in Latin America and North America. Often in Africa—in many cultures at least— (and likely other places) when parents are not together/coresident, they continue to raise the child jointly (as have been observed by anthropologists).

        http://worldfamilymap.ifstudies.org/2014/articles/world-family-indicators/family-structure

        • “Single parent hood has not been particularly common traditionally (as I explained a while back)—at least in many-most cultures there (not just the Islamic ones.) Though it may be more common in Central than West Africa—though this I am unsure of this and then it would vary widely by sub region (the Central African region is quite varied too, esp. East to West, so there may not be a huge benefit in making the comparison anyway, but then again there might be). And some of that which exists is due to widowhood and labor migration (both of which tend to be high in Africa, as they are in parts of Latin America).”

          Well could you restate them again? Last I’ve checked you mentioned some form of support from the father through resources as well as extended family helping, but not actual direct investment on the father’s behalf. That link you should me btw not only shown the latter to be the case very often, but also this.

          -‘In much of Central/South America and sub-Saharan Africa, children have higher odds of living with either one or neither of their parents than in other regions.’

          “Present rates (except for South Africa’s which is not typical) are roughly similar to those in Latin America and North America. Often in Africa—in many cultures at least— (and likely other places) when parents are not together/coresident, they continue to raise the child jointly (as have been observed by anthropologists).”

          While true, the actual nature of parenthood that I describe doesn’t disprove the genetic component to this form of raising, only that it’s phenotypically different based on physically form of living as South Africa is much more Urbanized than Nigeria, like the U.S.

          Third while two parent system may be comparably prevalent in SSA, exactly how stable are they?

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_in_Nigeria

        • Jm8

          “”Much of Central/South America and sub-Saharan Africa, children have higher odds of living with either one or neither of their parents than in other regions.’

          Widowhood and labor migrations contribute to this (not that they’re the only factor necessarily of course). Much of Central and South America (esp Central) is of course Amerindian/Mestizo rather than (or much more so than ) black

          “While true, the actual nature of parenthood that I describe doesn’t disprove the genetic component to this form of raising, only that it’s phenotypically different based on physically form of living as South Africa is much more Urbanized than Nigeria, like the U.S.”

          South Africa has a unique history of extreme male labor migrations on a more mass scale—some existed in other colonies but less so— (many of the men in many black communities being resettled in mining camps long-medium term during apartheid for instance). Blacks were also legally ocupationally during apartheid. As far as I know the single parent problem is not restricted to cities (many blacks lived in townships outside the cities. where many still live. Until recently they were generally not allowed to live in the cities proper).

          Nigeria also has very large and populous cities, like Lagos (this being a newer one compared to others)—historicaly many Yoruba lived in small to medium towns at least, though it of course has large rural populations also.

        • Jm8

          Edit: “Blacks were also legally restricted ocupationally during apartheid.”

        • Jm8

          “Last I’ve checked you mentioned some form of support from the father through resources as well as extended family helping, but not actual direct investment on the father’s behalf.”

          Resources from the father (to children) would constitute investment from him. But extended family investment (including from male members) existed as well.

          “While true, the actual nature of parenthood that I describe doesn’t disprove the genetic component to this form of raising,”

          I wouldn’t quite say it disproves it, but nor can/should it (necessarily) be assumed.

        • “Widowhood and labor migrations contribute to this (not that they’re the only factor necessarily of course). Much of Central and South America (esp Central) is of course Amerindian/Mestizo rather than (or much more so than ) black.”

          Yet we still see prevalent trends when such is not the case such as in America.

          “As far as I know the single parent problem is not restricted to cities (many blacks lived in townships outside the cities. where many still live. Until recently they were generally not allowed to live in the cities proper).”

          While not unknown, what are the rate disparities?

          “Resources from the father (to children) would constitute investment from him. But extended family investment (including from male members) existed as well.”

          By investment I meant direct household investment in raising. Granted I’ve read of apprenticeships being the case in SSA so role figures weren’t devoid but not necessarily that of the father.

          “I wouldn’t quite say it disproves it, but nor can/should it (necessarily) be assumed.”

          Well by and large the parenthood structure is comparatively looser, we have info dealing with the developments of modern breeding differences in populations as well as other likely genetic correlates that contribute to it (see my link on the correlation of crime and single motherhood with race), and how even with relatively comparable two parent rates in Nigeria we see significant levels of domestic violence.

        • To Jm8,

          Still I concede that, even if genetic, it’s cannot be simplified in the context of heritage regarding to notes you gave on it’s traditional habits in SSA.

        • Jm8

          On the other hand, urbanization likely can can contribute in some cases in groups without much of a history of it (and where the men are unnacustomed to working and providing in an urban context/economy). Thomas Sowell talked ahout this regarding the Irish in his book “Ethnic America” and possibly other writings (whose singe motherhood rates greatly increased when they migrated to cities in American and Britain.

        • Jm8

          “Yet we still see prevalent trends when such is not the case such as in America.”

          America, like South Africa has a unique history. Chattel slavery greatly weakened the role of the father (in other new world colonies also to varying—sometimes significant— degrees but in some way the effects may have been especially severe in the US). In said system the goal (esp in the United states where the slaves were most replaced by “natural increase” rather than new shipment from Africa) was to breed as much cheap labor a possible.

          as I commented on another thread on this site:

          “I would agree that this may be a major factor (later things like the effects of extreme feminism etc probably contributed). The method more attempted/invested in in the United States of maintaining the slave population was “natural increase” (instead of new slaves from Africa, to replace dead ones). The attempt was often (though likely significantly more in some regions than others; less in the rice growing “Gullah” region and possibly a bit less in parts of coastal Virginia and the small-farming South Appallachians) to breed as many slaves as possible. Requiring slaves to breed serially and promiscuously (and forcing or at least incentivizing such) was part of this effort (because it was profitable). Some plantations were known for producing children for sale, often sold at very young ages, essentially functioning as breeding farms. The selling of slave children was profitable, and these outfits (according to some scholars at least) were an important part of the slave economy. Slave narratives often mention these kinds of things; including family separations, not only from fathers, but from mothers too, at young ages. The provisioning of slaves and their children from the “big house”, unrelated to the efforts of individual parents may factor too.
          There is some debate though about the extent and efficiency of these practices. It’s hard to imagine it didn’t add somehow to the problem.”

        • To Jm8,

          Alright, I do agree that those unique history of those nations does contribute to the resulting parenthood statistics we see in the present, but keep in mind of the evidence available of overall looser parent relations as well as the evidence behind the genetics of such structures in society, especially when such is correlated with crime rates which in turn does have population relevant connections to genetics.

  11. EPGAH

    You can minimize risks but not rule them out. That’s true.

  12. Barack Thatcher

    Jews are White….
    Syrians are White…
    up to half of “Hispanics” are White, and their leadership is 90%+

    This is not genocide. It’s a White civil war.

  13. White Hispanics are happy to dump Indians and Mestizos anywhere but their Hacienda.

    I don’t think the average son of Spanish immigrants in Mexico City cares about Anglo people either way. He’s just indifferent to Indians and Mestizos.

  14. And for you guys who are so glad about the end of genocide and tyranny in Zimbabwe, a test to Mugabe’s integrity.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/19/mugabe-zimbabwe-gukurahundi-massacre-matabeleland

  15. Chinedu

    Epgah,

    This is pointless. Your apartheid regimes are gone, never to return. Blacks won’t put up with white supremacism in Africa. Those lands were stolen by force and they were liberated by force. I suggest you get on with your life.

    • EPGAH

      The savages stole the lands by force. When will they be liberated?

    • EPGAH

      Remember the ID Politics post: Dominate or Be Dominated.
      Rabbit wrote something about that too on Robert’s blog.
      And when the savages “dominate”, they murder.

      Whites might use nasty means to maintain control, but under white rule, you don’t generally get killed or even jailed unless you’re doing something to earn it.
      Like say, trying to overthrow the Whites’ country? That’s kind of a big one.

      • Jason Y

        The poor Kid Rock whites, themselves, are dirty trashy savages, no different than the blacks they hate (or are rather in competition with)

        Your speaking of Yuppie white motherfuckers who in no way are under threat by NAMS or ghetto whites. They’re is no way in a fucking million years these poor groups are going to step into Yuppie-land, for reasons explained by Trash (They don’t want to be busted by cops for all the drug use etc.. they’re doing.)

        • EPGAH

          Didn’t you read what Phil just posted? Whites of a given economic class still behave better than Blacks of a given economic class. How do you explain that?

          Also, look at what Robert just posted. Hint: STOP PICKING ON POOR WHITES WHO DON’T WANT THE NAM CRIME/VIOLENCE/DRAMA!

    • EPGAH

      The reason I’m so hot on Haiti/Rhodesia/South Africa is that it sets a dangerous precedent for Europe’s–and particularly America’s–own future: WHEN we lose control of America, due to being outnumbered in our own country, THAT is how the savages will treat us.

      • Barack Thatcher

        Mexicans=Black?

        Whites are working Mexicans to death on plantations causing them to resent us?

        • EPGAH

          Actually, it’s more like we’re working ourselves to death to support them on Welfare. Can’t even afford to have our own kids when we’re supporting theirs!

          I know Robert said that the Mexicans will treat us as some kind of over-class, but the ones around here don’t even respect whites, much less treat us as some kind of over-class IN OUR OWN COUNTRY!

        • EPGAH

          The genocide of whites in Haiti took place a full TEN YEARS after the savages overthrew the country. They promised the whites they’d be safe, remember?

        • Barack Thatcher

          Mexicans are on welfare as a subsidy, not as a primary source of income.

          They are ‘taking the jobs’ after all, but some do get subsidies of welfare for their chillens’.

          I thought you referring to the 1804 rebellion (killed slave owners and stuff) in Hate-E, not anything later on.
          Sorry.

        • EPGAH

          Remember, they take the jobs, but they lower the wages below what can support a family, and they keep breeding anyways. After all, even an illegal in America makes 5X what they would in their own country. But they only have to be polite to the Bosses, and they can treat other whites like shit–and they do!

          As to the Haiti Massacre, that is what I was referencing, but they only exterminated whites, slaveowners or not, and didn’t touch a single Black slaveowner.
          https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2010/04/15/the-apartheid-fed-the-people-bullshit/#comment-20590
          Robert talked about it here.

        • EPGAH

          PS, how stupid is it that we pay for our own invasion and replacement by foreign scum? I can’t even think of a parallel of this throughout history!

        • EPGAH

          America’s policy USED to be “You Are Welcome To Join Us, But You Will Not Lead”. BUT judging from history, the invaders only accept that until they outnumber their hosts. America used to shut down immigration of groups that threatened to overwhelm us…What changed?

        • Barack Thatcher

          Part of the idea is that the population is below replacement, but I don’t think that’s the case in America (only in really k-selective NE Asian nations).
          Obviously large companies are going to flex their political muscles and lobby against restricting illegal immigration, a la Citizen’s United….

          Yet Trumpy wants to appoint Judges in the mold of Scalia and Thomas!

        • Jason Y

          I know Robert said that the Mexicans will treat us as some kind of over-class, but the ones around here don’t even respect whites, much less treat us as some kind of over-class IN OUR OWN COUNTRY!

          Well, honestly though I know the feeling (of the Mexicans). In South Korea, I did what I could to respect the natives, but they just keep bullying, so eventually I began to hate them, even though I was living on thier land. It’s just human nature.

          Well, on the flip side, don’t you see why white South Africans might hate blacks despite living in a a black majority land? Shouldn’t they respect the blacks since it’s thier land?

        • Jason Y

          Ep-gah is actually complaining about Mexicans (or blacks) sticking together. Note, that’s what he argues for whites, yet finds massively annoying in NAMS.

          So of course, some of the Mexicans are more bold and will display passive aggression toward whites. That’s the whole “sticking together” ethnic group mentality that develops from resentment and also as a way of protection in a hostile area.

        • Jason Y

          Ep-gah’s assertion that Mexicans are ungrateful guests assumes that the whites are ideal hosts. However, like the South Koreans or the majority black South Africans, they often are not, but rather bully the minority.

        • EPGAH

          South Africa was the whites’ land until the savages took it over.
          It was a desert that even the savages just passed through, rather than settled, until the whites settled, irrigated, and otherwise terraformed it.

          The savages were the “guests” and once they outnumbered their hosts, they overthrew their hosts. Given the aggression our “guests” show, I have little trouble believing they’ll behave the same once they outnumber their hosts by any significant margin.

          And what is this excuse “We pick on them”? They are parasitic “guests”. We pick on them for their behavior, the same way you are CONSTANTLY complaining about poor whites. They fucked up their own country, we don’t want them to fuck up ours too, right?

          Do you or do you not believe the best way to judge whether you want a given group in your country is to look at what they did to their country, and/or to the areas of your country they already invaded?

          In general, whites make better/cleaner/safer countries, which is why everyone wants to invade our countries. But they bring their old behavior with them, which trashes the new area. Only their fellow criminals would want more like that–and sometimes even criminals bitch about the competition!

        • EPGAH

          William: Our population lowering isn’t an inherently bad thing!
          Those “Better Jobs” illegals, outsourcing, or automation were supposed to free us up for? They haven’t materialized. And I believe they’re not GOING to materialize, because they’re already filled or just don’t exist.

          So we don’t need more people, especially with less jobs.
          And if we did need more people, for whatever reason, we could get someone better-behaved than the dregs even Mexico doesn’t want, right?

        • EPGAH

          ” “sticking together” ethnic group mentality that develops from resentment and also as a way of protection in a hostile area.”

          Funny, that’s exactly how I’d put it. White Identity Politics is starting to become a thing. Whites are starting to stick together as the NAM scum turn formerly “our” territory into hostile areas!

          My only question on that is why has it taken so long for whites to stick together, when the savages have done so all along? Is sticking together in honest enterprise really that unthinkable compared to sticking together in crime?

        • EPGAH

          The fundamental contradiction of our political system is that it depends upon Whites acting only as individuals while encouraging every other group to organize along ethnic lines to promote their interests. This might have been somewhat viable if diversity had been kept to a bare minimum and Whites never felt existentially threatened, but the rising tide of subhuman behavior has started to awaken “Racial Consciousness” in whites!

          For the first time in my life I see the Establishment–Commissars of Tolerance, all, of course–throwing every dirty trick our way and it isn’t working. Calling someone a “racist” just doesn’t intimidate and shut us up anymore. The mainstream media has lost all credibility and can’t seem to control the narrative like they used to.

          Segregation, legal or defacto, used to be a near-universal right for White Americans seeking safe space from thugs, criminals, and rapists.

          Like you keep saying, segregation is a privilege only for those who can afford it. Rich people can afford to segregate themselves from Black thugs. (But this makes them more sympathetic to Blacks since they don’t have to deal with Black criminality. They can choose to rub shoulders with only nice and successful blacks. Since they get along with Charles Barkley and Bill Cosby, they wonder why poor whites aren’t so enthused about blacks. It’s because poor whites have to integrate with the Mike Tysons of the world while rich ones get to integrate with the Cosby Family.

          Segregationists were acting in fear that was justified on grounds that Blacks are more muscular and more aggressive. But they didn’t put this narrative out there in front. So it looked like to you and those like you, that Blacks were just being “picked on”, the “For No Reason” part optional but usually present.

          Has noone ever looked at our prisons and predicted our future?
          What do you think happens when there’s no longer enough of the hated Whites to subsidize the subhumans’ continued existence?

          Here’s a clue:

          This was just when they ran out of their betters’ houses to give away.

      • Jason Y

        Actually South Africans generally have been able to keep themselves from being harmed by the NAMS etc.. However, as with my parents who are having a rough time being robbed by white trash, some of the Yuppie whites are unable to adequetely provide security for their homes in Johannesburg or farms out in the Veld.

        The big problem with South Africa is a weak police force. On the other hand, the US has a strong police force, at least in Yuppie-land, but less so in rural areas where my parents live.

        As long as the US police force is strong and continues to protect the Yuppies, which mark my word it will for another thousand years, then NAMS and ghetto whites are of no threat to Yuppie neighborhoods.

        • Jason Y

          Sam J and ep-gah in their typical KKK (Be a Man Support the Klan) bullshit alpha male rehetoric, are trying to make it seem like the US is South Africa and Rhodesia when it sure as hell isn’t Almost all the facts point out the US and those places are vastly different.

        • EPGAH

          It is not a WEAK police force in South Africa. The problem is a police force made of the very savages who are robbing them! You can’t appoint foxes to guard a henhouse, right?

          As to the link between America and South Africa, we too are being overrun by savages who have hostility to us and a real risk to become the majority in our country.

          Is it a weak police force or military that’s not keeping them out?

    • They can have it as Chinese can have Philippines as far as Spanish and Americans are concerned but it is the plight of white Africans that is a concern for Caucasians.

  16. Whites are the minority in Mexico…yet they run the place. As well as most of Latin America.

    What is likely to happen is that Andalusian-descended Vincente Fox and PITBULL types who are of pure European ancestry will run the Latin territories.

    In Florida, Cubans who have assumed political power are the White over-class.

    • Barack Thatcher

      In Florida, Cubans who have assumed political power are the White over-class.

      Really?
      Little Narco Rubio was pure token.

      • Barack Thatcher

        What will happen all the power that can be squeezed from 17% of the populace (Hispanics), will be concentrated in the hands of a group like Cubans (0.6%).

        Looking at the Presidential field both Hispanics were Cuban, hence you have 0.6% of the population with the backing/clout of 17% of the population, although Hispanics probably don’t control 17% of the wealth.
        Maybe 10%?
        Idk.

        • I’d put Spanish Cubans at the level of Italian-Americans in New Jersey-they are basically the same people which is why Pacino plays Cubans and Garcia plays Italians.

          They are white but bring that Mediterranean corner-cutting and corruption to their communities.

          Italian-Americans could be ignored if parts of New Jersey became shabby and corrupt or they murdered one another in gang wars.

          But as overseers of a population of minorities they privately dislike I am not sure.

        • EPGAH

          Who says they’re going to stay 17% of the populace? They’re the fastest breeders, and more are invading all the time.

          They already exhibit a disproportionate influence in America in that you almost can’t get hired unless you’re “bilingual”–and “bilingual” has turned to mean ONLY Spanish as the other language. I’m Trilingual myself, I know Japanese and French, either though neither group is going to invade America and ram their language down our throats.

          Let’s make the ingrate invaders learn our language or get out and make room for those who can! 168 years is JUST BARELY long enough to learn English!

          If we’re going to learn another language, let’s learn the language of a group that could be beneficial to us, rather than these cholo parasites that even Mexico doesn’t want!

        • Barack Thatcher

          TRASH White “Blanco” Cubans are some of the Whitest of the White Latin Americans.

          They tap in about 78% European, 8% NW African, 8% Amerind, 8% Black according to wiki.

          I’m half Guisano and I’m 96% Caucasian (94% European).

        • Barack Thatcher

          6% Black, otherwise it doesn’t add up to 100%
          lol

      • Spanish Cubans, specifically. Not Afro-Caribbeans.

  17. SOUTH AFRICAN WHITE EXODUS – U.S. CITY PARALLEL

    Exits are a case of social Darwinism, whether we like it or not:

    Whites with money or marketable skill DO LEAVE. Immediately and without a shred of hesitation, as Polish-Americans left Detroit or South Chicago. They are the first to leave.
    Whites who leave do not depend on local government or local sources of employment at all because BETTER OPPORTUNITIES EXIST ELSEWHERE. British South Africans moved to Australia, mostly. Immigration costs $20,000 and requires some education so it is not as simple as Midwestern families moving to Seattle.
    White YOUNG, MALE DREGS leave if they are of medium intelligence. They have no children, mortgages, or other community ties to give a shit about. Ones from Detroit move West and ones from South Africa move to London or Amsterdam.
    Hot young single women of medium or above-medium intelligence leave. They can latch onto a man anywhere. Charlize Theron was not going to hang around a white squatter camp.
    Old people who made decent money in their professional lives leave like those in the Northeast U.S. who retire to Florida. Poor older whites who worked hard to pay off a mortgage and have little savings will be the ones who a house of no property value in a bad area. Most often they are victims.
    Young, stupid, unskilled, poor whites (20-35) with children will stay because they are as reliant on government services as young blacks: their children are the ones who have to attend public schools and have the worst exposure to blacks on the street. They are the unfortunate whites who live in squatter camps in South Africa or in NAM areas in the U.S.
    Hopeless white drug addicts who come from poor families will remain there.

    BOTTOM LINE

    Skilled whites, shiftless single males or better-looking single females, wealthier older people will all leave without hesitation.

    Poor older whites, unskilled middle-aged ones, young women with children who rely on government services will all stay.

  18. WHY DON’T THEY LEAVE? – SOCIAL DARWINISM FOR WHITE AMERICANS FLEEING NAMS

    N.B. I’ve encountered White South Africans overseas.

    Educated middle-class white collar accountants, lawyers, dentists and doctors LEFT SOUTH AFRICA IMMEDIATELY AFTER A.N.C. because the Rand had no value. 40% of them. They could because they belonged to the British Commonwealth. Most were British South Africans who immigrated to Australia. Jews, who may have had some liberal influence on the adjustment of politics, will soon flee themselves as they did from Detroit (Where blacks targeted Jewish businesses).
    RESULT Poor remain will be white Christians (More white than Indian-blooded Appalachian Southerners in fact) with a long history in South Africa who trace their roots to Belgian/Dutch settlers. They have nowhere to go and the worst antagonism towards the blacks (Like Appalachians in Flint, Michigan).

    They lack the money or skills to emigrate ($20,000 roughly for process) anywhere-even to another African country. Holland views them as a “lost colony” so they cannot return there even though they speak the same language.

    Young males WILL LEAVE. They’ll try their luck in the informal labor force somewhere else like whites males who drive their car out to California.
    Hot single young women will leave. They can attach themselves to anybody in a new country or dance nude in a strip club if need be. All they need is a plane ticket. None of the white women in the squatter camps will look like Charlize Theron. Plain, uneducated women with children will remain in the camps along with the older women. Any white South African female attractive enough for her pussy to be of any value will hit the road.
    Young unskilled people with children remain in South Africa. Just as poor whites end up remaining in a bad neighborhood in a de-industrialized part of a U.S. city. Their kids are the ones who have to attend the same schools and play in the same streets as the blacks, which hones animosity for them.
    Some of the poor whites in South Africa who do not leave are dope fiends who are doing business with blacks and also engaged in mutually profitable criminal activity. These junkies cannot be clean for a ten hour plane ride to exit the country.
    Older people who paid a mortgage on property with no value remain. Unlike the U.S. where they can move to Florida if they have a little money, moving from South Africa is impossible because Immigration bars people over 50 as a medical burden on tax payers. These are the victims of black’s worst deprivations and in the case of old women, the rape victims when blacks wish to have a human sex doll to hump.

    • EPGAH

      Thank you for that analysis, and sadly it’s true. So how do we rescue the Dutch descendants and old people? The ANC has not issued any order to “Leave The Whites Alone”, which hones the idea that they’re just savages looking to rob and rape.

      • EPGAH Rescuing poor whites and elderly who are trapped on the outskirts of Detroit is difficult enough. If your mortgage is worth nothing then you are screwed, essentially.

      • “IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT LEAVE” Is often stated but hard to actually do.

        Canadians LOATHE American liberals for example, whom they perceive as cowards and nutcases, that sometimes immigrate. They make the process extremely difficult in comparison to Indians or Jamaicans.

        As stated, South Africans with prerequisite skills as well as footloose young men who were drifters hit the road.

        Those stuck behind are like the rats that are too old and feeble to swim.

    • Barack Thatcher

      It also has the reverse effect.

      W.V. is 93%-94% White, one of the Whitest states in the union because no Hispanics can find jobs here; there’s not much going on anymore (0%-1% Hispanic here)

      It has the reverse effect where shitty areas don’t attract NAMs and remain pure White.

      • BARACK

        West Virginians have always been internal migrants in the North.

        Scotland was the last country to overrun West Virginia with immigrants 200 years ago. But let us remember that they shoved the Cherokee and the Indians straight out. A HUGE number of Scots came, something like 15% of some regions.

      • NAMS really do not like being off downtown city streets. Neither do modern-day Asians although at the dawn of time Cherokee who originated in East Asia clearly adapted.

        Something about the harsh mien of Scots is unappealing to NAMS. They can co-exist with Jews and Irish-Catholics and Italians and Slavs easier.

        Life in the country with its constant upkeep-lawns to mow, leaves to blow, snow to shovel-does not really suit them.

        They like to be near well-paying jobs, drugs, prostitution, gambling, fencing of stolen items, dog fighting, corruptible local police and all other features of urban life.

        You cannot work at a factory and then use some of the money to trade crack for 20 minutes with a hooker. You cannot buy a stolen car or gun whenever you feel like it. Most police will not accept $1,000 a month from some pimp or Gangster Disciples organization to look the other way. None of it is much fun for NAMS.

      • BARACK

        SCOTLAND OVERRAN West Virginia. Let’s remember that so many Scottish people showed up from the same villages in Middle West Virginia that they sometimes opened the same stores that they did back in their Scottish city.

        They had AN OCEAN between them and West Virginia and they still overran the place.

        • Jason Y

          There were too many immigrants for the Cherokee and the they don’t have the army, police etc.. to keep them out. Basically the Amerinidan birth rate and disease rate had wiped out so many of them that resistance to the Euro invasion was a joke at best.

          You can’t ask nature to be fair. The strongest survive.

        • Jason Y

          Cherokee nationalists like you see on Facebook mastrurbate to the idea that the red man will take America back. But again, given circumstances in the past, the Euro invasion could never have been stopped.

        • Jason Y

          Scots are always trouble. Look at AC/DC😆

        • EPGAH

          What about the Mexicans overrunning America, “Make America Mexico Again” and all that?

      • Cherokee Indians approached the Crown to prevent Scots from mass immigration to Central Virginia but what good did that do?

        Bear in mind it was only a few counties in Scotland as well, not the whole country.

        But a full million showed up in West Virginia.

        Where are the Cherokee now?

    • Jason Y

      Seems like the people heading to South Korea to English are also losers even though they aren’t fleeing some South Africa hell hole situation. That’s one gripe the South Koreans have with foreign ESL teachers. They claim they were failures in thier own land, hence why they came there.

      • Jason Y

        Well, actually there were a lot of refugees from New Orleans teaching in South Korea, some New Yorkers depressed by 9/11.

        • Getting a citizenship is impossible. Even Westerners who marry a Korean woman will not get a citizenship, forget it.

          So it is a vacation that is paid.

          Immigrating anywhere worth living is really difficult. You could immigrate to Cambodia or Latin America but you’ll starve in the street if you do not have income from home.

          Australia, New Zealand and all the European countries make it impossible to immigrate for other Western countries.

        • Great vacation but you’ll never actually be a citizen. A few English teachers who lived overseas for years wind up in trouble when they return at 55. They’ve never paid into the system and the last time they held a job in the U.S. was part-time in college.

        • Jason Y

          Good point about ESL teachers. Perhaps they should save up, as they won’t get social security.

      • How would you get a citizenship in South Korea? Impossible.

        Americans who were failures in their own land cannot really immigrate anywhere easily. You have to have immense qualifications to immigrate to Australia, Canada or New Zealand. Latin American will take you but if you run out of money you’ll starve on the street.

        A American GI’s hang around Korea for a few years afterwards but you’ll be sent home eventually.

        • Jason Y

          No you cannot really immigrate, but you can fuck around for say 10 years or so teaching English. A lot of people do that. The demand is huge for ESL over there.

          I know one English guy who has been over there since the 1990s.

        • EPGAH

          Boy is he in for a surprise when the money runs out.

          Our countries make exceptions for Third World subhumans, but not our fellow First Worlders, or even tail-between-legs expats!

  19. Barack Thatcher

    TRASH there aren’t many pure Spaniard White Latin Americans.

    There’s always some degree of Black or Amerind admixture; in Cubans it’s 14%.

    Contrast that to Anglo-American Whites who average 99.6%
    There simply was more of a history of race mixing…

    now that doesn’t mean there aren’t some pure White Latinos or mixed Anglo-Americans but on average that’s not the case.

    • Cuba’s wave of Spanish immigrants came in the late 19th century. Both of Fidel’s parents were immigrants from Spain, for example.

      For someone to be “9%” black their family would have to in Cuba 400 years to have such a far-flung single black ancestor and most White Cubans are the grandchildren of Spanish immigrants from the late 19th and early 20th centuries to Cuba.

      Cuban Spanish immigrated from NORTHWEST Spain “Gallegos” so they would not have Arabic blood from Northwest Africa as somebody from the far South of Spain in Andalusia might.

      Indeed, the number of whites in Latin America is only 10% in any given country and that is where the wealth remains through the Hacienda system.

      In any event, America’s problems are basically with Indians plain and simple. Or an Indian with a small amount of Spanish blood.

    • Indians were dead in Cuba long before the Spanish immigration of the late 19th and early 20th century.

      “SCARFACE” had a scene where Tony Montana expresses his dislike for Colombians because they’re Indian and indeed the motel exchange goes wrong.

      At the bottom of Cuban superiority in the Hispanic hierarchy of Latin America is the fact that they are the most Spanish in Latin America and Mexicans are the most Indian.

  20. EPGAH

    “Tail between legs” expats get a distance view of how quickly things have disintegrated back home.

    Poor whites who live in NAM neighborhoods have lacked the initiative to move on and everyone else with their “tail-between-their-legs” is someplace else.

    Old, uneducated, druggies, single-mothers with multiple children, the completely lazy and feeble-minded. These are the folks who will stay in a place like de-industrialized Southeast Michigan when the writing is on the wall.

    I left in 1999, for example which was a fairly prosperous time-I’ve returned home for a total of one month in 17 years-and cannot help observing how fast things have disintegrated in my own birthplace of Southeast Michigan.

    Living in another First World country will also open your eyes to how behind the U.S. has fallen.

    Social security? Not many of us who pay into that will get anything anyhow, will we?

    I’m 43 and would be eligible in 22 years in 2038. Gee Whiz, will the NAMS leave anything in the Kitty by then.

    So

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s