Re: All Immigrants are Not the Same!

"C Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

All Immigrants are Not the Same!
2005-07-31

There, I said it....

by H. Millard

MANY ANTI-IMMIGRATION activists are quick to say that their positions
are not based on race. I understand the reason for such race denial in
the present climate, and I know that many, maybe most, of these folks
may really believe it, but I think this is sometimes said too quickly
and too often and that this may have the effect of closing the minds
of many people who might be better served by keeping their minds open
so facts can come in.

My guess is that the U.S. is headed for some deep doo doo unless we
start talking about and understanding the importance of race -- more
properly, genes -- in immigration. Denying reality doesn't change
reality, it only blinds people to it; and that's how you get
blindsided.

We have no compunction against discussing the differences between
different breeds of dogs, so why should we be so afraid to discuss the
differences among different breeds of humans? Why must we be held
captive to the small-minded and bigoted flat-world types in our
society who put all sorts of ignorant restraints on the human mind and
its craving to understand?

Understanding and true knowledge come from being able to tell the
difference between this and that and not simply lump all things and
all people into large undifferentiated baskets. "What's in that basket
over there?" asks someone who has just pulled up to a roadside fruit
stand. "Oh, fruit," comes the answer from the seller. "Fruit? Well, I
was looking for an apple." "Sorry," says the seller "we don't
discriminate. It's all just fruit to us. We don't see any difference
between apples, pears, cherries, oranges, lemons and all the rest.
Those names are just social constructs. We're not fruitists around
here. So, do you want some fruit or not?"

We need to boldly, but politely, get past the fear of being called
names. Are we just against "illegal immigration" as some people like
to say? If that's true, then we should all be happy if President Bush
makes all illegals legal, as he apparently wants to do. Somehow, I
don't think that would make most of us happy. If not, why not? The
answer is that illegal vs. legal is not the real issue. The real issue
is that our society is being transformed into something different than
it has been and this is being done through the invasion of our land by
those who are upsetting the traditional genetic balance we have had in
this country.

As we fearlessly (I hope) travel down this path of discussing the
importance of genes to the immigration debate, we have to realize that
admitting that there are genetic differences between different peoples
is not the same thing as racial hatred or animosity any more than it
is hatred or animosity when we admit that different makes of
automobiles have different features or that different breeds of dogs
have different abilities. We also have to understand that genetic
differences are causes that lead to different effects in the resulting
societies.

Few are saying it these days, but the U.S. became what it has become
because its dominant genetic strain was European and it was a European
nation, albeit in a new land. Different peoples, no less than
different kinds of ants or birds, build their societies and the badges
of their societies based on their genetic determinants as adapted to
various environments and conditions (both internal and external). What
the European immigrants built in America was a new Europe. It was a
particular type of ant hive built by this particular type of human
ant. Put the same humans in a million different lands, and they'd
build the same basic things over and over again with various
modifications dictated by circumstances and various other variables.
It's part of their genes. That's why the nation prospered and became
the world power it is today.

America was not made great because of genetic diversity or
multiculturalism or multiracialism; that's the stuff of grade school
level propaganda. To think that genetic diversity is our strength is
to enter the lala land of the humanity-denying liberal loonies with
their noblesse oblige racism that, at its heart, posits all humans as
being one-size-fits-all White humans under the skin -- who are just
dying to let their inner Whiteness shine through their non-White skins
and who just need the motherly and fatherly help of White-skinned
liberals to help them do this. We need to start seeing and respecting
humans as they truly are, not as we want to pretend they are. We are
all different, and not just because of different paint jobs.

Just as different peoples are not identical, they are also not
fungible. You can't replace one group of genetically closely related
people with another group of people who are not genetically closely
related to the first group and expect the same results in society. To
think you can do this is a little like thinking you can blithely
substitute brown sugar for white sugar in a cake recipe and that you
will end up with the same result.

Let's cut to it. Immigration is inextricably wrapped up with genes
because humans and human populations are inextricably wrapped up with
genes. It can be no other way. That's nature. That's reality. That's
how living things are engineered. As living creatures we are all
products or projections of our genes and it is our genes that have
made us of different races and which have given us different abilities
and talents and different instinctive approaches to this process we
call life, as surely as genes have done this with the aforementioned
ants and birds.

When we consider these things, we are faced with the thought that
well, yes, these "lower" creatures -- these ants and birds -- are
programmed by their genes to have certain instincts, but we humans are
higher creatures and we have free will. Well, in fact, we do not have
as much free will as we arrogantly and vainly think we have. We, too,
are a product of our genes, and we, too, are directed by our genes.
Twin studies clearly and convincingly, and sometimes head-scratchingly
so, demonstrate this.

What about that hoary saw: the melting pot? It's mostly nonsense in a
genetic sense. When the term "melting pot"was coined, there wasn't
much understanding of genetics and it referred to people from Ireland,
England, France and all the other European countries coming here and
melting together into an English-speaking American. But, what was
really melted together? Mostly just unessential nationalities and
national customs and languages. Not genes. All of the European peoples
were closely related genetically long before they came here. They were
all White Europeans. They were of a very similar genotype and
phenotype.

Fast forward to today when immigration is not primarily from White
Europe, but from the Brown Third World. Will a Brown America be the
same as a White America? Of course not. The genetic mix will determine
the nature of the country, as it always has and as surely as the
ingredients and their quantities in a recipe in a kitchen determines
the nature of the meal. If current trends continue, we're going to be
a Brown Third World nation, not a White First World nation. You may
think this is a good thing, or you may think it is a bad thing, but
that's where we're heading unless things change. And it has little to
do with illegal vs. legal immigration.

So, what does becoming a Brown Third World nation mean in a practical
sense? Well, just for the heck of it I grabbed some statistics on two
states that I knew were different from each other genetically but
which were similar in other important ways, such as income and
population size, to see what a less-White America promises. You can do
the same thing for different states and will probably come up with
even greater disparities, but here's what I came up with between New
Mexico and Maine. New Mexico is the 39th most populous state and Maine
is the 40th. If humans are fungible, you might expect to see similar
violent crime rates among different populations. That's not what we
see in these two states and its not what we see in any examples that
I've ever seen. My guess is that if you took all the people of Maine
and put them in New Mexico and you took all the people of New Mexico
and put them in Maine that the violent crime rates of the two states
would be reversed. It's not the geography that matters, but the
people.

According to the 2000 Census, the estimated population of the state of
Maine was 1,274,923 and it was 96.9% non-Hispanic White. The violent
crime rate was a very low 109.6 per 100,000 people. This makes it the
49th most violent state.

Contrast that to the state of New Mexico with 1,819,046 residents and
which was only 44.71% non-Hispanic White. The violent crime rate was a
very high 757.9 per 100,000 people. This makes it the 4th most violent
state.

As the percentage of Whites in the population of America drops, so
too, among many other things, will the crime-free First World quality
of life drop. Think not? Prove me wrong with facts and figures. I have
an open mind, and I'm willing to listen to logical arguments. But
don't try to tell me that apples are the same as pears.

It's had to get the wimp public to talk about immigration alone. Bring in
the racial factor and watch them slink away!

Hank

Quoted message said: