Previous 11 - 20 Next
That question was to you, Corlyss.
I speak of historical realities since 1965, not "projections". However, I would be VERY interested what the basis might be for these projections of yours, that the historical trends in demographics will not simply continue their present course until the extinction of white people. If these new projections have a real-sounding basis, that would be good news. What you got on this?
Why don't you give it a try. Compare the number of men in all of ancient Rome's legions, around the reign of Augustus Ceasar, compared to the number of people in the general population. And compare that ration to the number of men mobilized in the United States during the Civil War or WWII, compared to the size of the general populations.
Interesting column. Maybe Krugman figured out that in ancient times, men were not so easily induced into a war as in modern times. Their armies were almost always smaller in number relative to the general population, and wore armor and ate fresh meat and bread. Nowadays it is all about ideas which people lap up. And so now whole nations are mobilized. And those nations who oppose them must conduct war similarly or lose. Mathematical equation. It's not about who is right or wrong, but just that ideas make wars more dangerous. Who would have guessed that the blessings of modernity, technology and plenty, would create societies more open to sacrifice all for war? Paradoxical. But thinking outside the box might be a path to peace.
In response to:

Scotland's Future Hangs in Balance

Chip. Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 3:59 AM
I think..methinks I should say here, that there is a certain need and right of a distinct people to have their own country. Certainly the English would not like the Scotts, Irish or Welsh running their government....And the English understand this. Perhaps they all would do well as part of the same Commonwealth, or else some other way remain aligned together militarily and economically, not as a single unit, but as strong allies and partners.
In response to:

Blacks Must Confront Reality

Chip. Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 3:51 AM
I suppose that we can also derive from these statistics that more than half of all people murdered in the US are murdered by blacks.
Why would BHO destroy what he worked so hard trying to create? Anyone doubt BHO created the "Islamic State"? This column shows it is common knowledge: "...despite the U.S. having contributed significantly [at BHO's insistance] to the Islamic State's creation in Syria in the first place." A few divisions of US forces would pass through that whole land area in a matter of days and the "islamic State" would be about as helpless and alone as a senile old rabbit in the middle of a pack of hungry wolves. But BHO loves his fellow Islamic dirt bags--the dirtier the better-- and so we know that won't happen.
Excellent article, but stepping a few more paces back to take in the whole battlefield, we can see that over the course of this war, General Sharpton's forces are slowly eradicating ours. Black population keeps growing, while white population keeps declining. And with 95% of blacks happy about what people like Sharpton are doing, I am thinking they actually are not as stupid as they seem. We should adopt their methods, and look for racism everywhere it can be imagined, and unlike them, we will often find it.
In response to:

No Facts, No Peace

Chip. Wrote: Aug 23, 2014 4:23 PM
Blacks seem to have a double standard about proper behavior. They seem to be assuming that a large black male who strong-arm robs a store, then minutes later ignores a cop asking him to not obstruct traffic, is something other than big trouble already happening, pure as the driven snow, a saintly victim martyr whom for generations ill be immortalized alongside MLK and Jesus. If that had happened to a white person, the blacks would be smilingly high-fiving the vigilance of their local police. That's part of it. Other part is the lack of info about the cop's eye injury. The problem here is that if there were no visible injury to the eye, a bump there can be so overpoweringly painful that it could debilitate the victim long enough to allow an opponent to overcome them, and if that happened, Wilson, who was alone at the time, might have ended up being beaten to a pulp by a pack of street hyenas. But a fracture to the eye socket would be easy to show to the public, and if that is what the claim is, it would be easy to show and document, and placate these mobs.
Is there a single source for all of this history? If so, I'd like to read it?
In response to:

Marijuana vs. Scotch and a Low IQ

Chip. Wrote: Aug 21, 2014 2:06 AM
The debate would surely be richer when a more important matter is resolved, although it may have by now in the case of marijuana itself. But the big matter to resolve is that Illegal drugs in general should be marketed and regulated in the same way legal prescription drugs are. That is to say, without the criminal world involvement. Without the illegal growing, manufacturing, smuggling, distribution, dealing, money laundering, bribing, turf wars, and negative effects on the general economy for all this waste, and then the flip side for everything the consumers must suffer through, and cause suffering upon others, to get their drugs. Same arguments that did away with prohibition. "Coping" would also be something there would be less need for in that scenario. And, hopefully, with a lively education of the populace, people would mostly let go of these things, and thereby this would lead to a further reduction in the need for "coping", as the problems the a drug adled segment of society and it's illegal suppliers bring with them requires much additional "coping' by all sides. Just thinking about it makes me want to reach for a scotch.
Previous 11 - 20 Next