@NYTReader's banner p

NYTReader


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2025 July 24 20:35:14 UTC

				

User ID: 3836

NYTReader


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2025 July 24 20:35:14 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3836

"Legal immigration" is an even more insidious form of demographic replacement. In a couple more generations, the native white population will have virtually no political power.

Asians form their own ethnic interests groups and overwhelmingly vote for Democrats. These ethnic interest groups agitate to the disadvantage of the native population. When the native population protests they are called racist.

If any of these immigration measures were put to a referendum, they would be voted down every time. The native white population would never agree to replacement if given the choice. The white population of Georgia has a history that goes back hundreds of years, does anyone truly think they would agree to being displaced by foreigners?

If a majority of the population growth is non-native then the native population is proportionally declining. That's what the quote I provided says. It's not 1%, it's much higher.

The naive white population of Georgia didn't ask to be replaced by foreigners. I have found @Dean is quite articulate in explaining the insidiousness of demographic replacement. Maybe he can answer your questions better than I can.

Assimilation is largely a myth but even if it weren't, changing a name is hardly evidence of it. Do they speak foreign languages, eat foreign food, practice foreign customs?

Most importantly, do they politically agitate in favor of their racial group and dilute the political power of the native white population? Even if there economic benefits to the native population, and that's hardly a given, that doesn't excuse transforming the local community into a non-white area in a generation. The white Americans in this community did not ask to be abused and erased.

Of course the WSJ is sympathetic to the Koreans; it's a liberal and immigration friendly paper. What does that matter? The article states that foreigners are moving in and the population of the natives is going down. I would characterize this as demographic replacement through immigration.

It's spelled out in the article. Foreign food, foreign languages, and foreign customs are becoming dominant in place of the native white population.

Hyundai Raid Rattles a Hot Spot of Growth in Georgia

In the suburb of Pooler, that promise seemed to already be coming true. The population shot up 22% between just 2020 and 2024, according to census estimates, to around 31,000. Demographic data lags behind, but community leaders estimate half of that growth has come from Koreans.

Suddenly, the single Korean restaurant in town had to compete with around half a dozen others. The newly opened Costco, locals said, started carrying Kimchi, dried seaweed and mandu dumplings. New homes sprung up by the dozens, and Korean families moved into planned neighborhoods with streets named Blue Moon Crossing and Harvest Hill.

The raid and its fallout shocked the auto industry, and South Korea. Nowhere is that shock more apparent than in a place like Pooler, where a new Korean community had taken root. Some said they felt betrayed by the raid, especially after Korean companies made such a massive investment in the U.S. Others said they believe that improperly documented workers have brought undue scrutiny upon those who are here legally.

“You can feel the tension,” said 51-year-old Hoseong Kim, an American citizen and local pastor, also known as Robin. Like many Korean immigrants, Kim took on an American name to “fit in better” with American culture.

The result was demographic replacement.

Ezra Klein in the pages of the NYT on why the Democrats need to Shutdown the government.

TLDR: Trump is an authoritarian.

Back in March, Democrats justified keeping the government open by saying that the courts were restraining Trump, that a shutdown would only accelerate his executive power, and that markets were already punishing his recklessness re tarrifs. But now with Trump firing dissenters, using federal agencies against political enemies, and enriching himself and his allies through foreign investments and unchecked power, Klein says that none of those arguments hold anymore. The Supreme Court is now backing Trump on key issues, DOGE’s chaotic dismantling of the bureaucracy has slowed because Trump loyalists are running it, and the markets have largely adapted to the new normal.

Maybe the markets have normalized, but we shouldn't according to Klein. Democrats are politically and morally failing by continuing to fund a government that has become an instrument of authoritarianism. He outlines how Democrats could frame a compelling message around corruption and abuse of power, citing Senator Jon Ossoff’s July speech as an example of effective messaging that ties everyday struggles (like high medical costs and housing insecurity) to elite corruption. Specific examples the firing of agency heads like those at the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Defense Intelligence Agency for political reasons, targeted investigations into critics such as Senator Adam Schiff and Attorney General Tish James, the FBI’s raid on Bolton’s home, masked ICE agents now conducting raids without identification or warrants, and National Guard troops being deployed to cities LA and DC.

Similarly, in his earlier "How to Genocide Inferior Kinds in a Properly Christian Manner", he argues that you cannot just kill savages and take their stuff, because that undermines the high trust equilibrium of strong property rights that makes civilization great. Instead, he recommends legitimately purchasing the land and tempting them into committing unspeakable crimes, and then killing them and taking their stuff.

The beauty of this approach is that it will only work if the savages are genuinely inferior;

Like the Irish and Polish. In fact, quite a few European peoples could have been genocided under this framework.

I am on record that large-scale, open-ended political violence is a preferable outcome to the political outcomes Blue Tribe appears to me to be aiming for

Depends on what outcomes you're referring to.

I have argued at length that the Constitution and rule of law are dead

Too broad of a statement to analyze, need specifics. Aren't these things that Blue Tribe blame the Red Tribe for as well?

I have argued at length, and continue to argue, that reconciliation between Reds and Blues is probably impossible in the foreseeable future, and that the culture war is terminal for our society as presently constituted.

I don't see why this statement makes you an extremist. Maybe just a political realist?

If I am not mistaken, Jim himself, and certainly many others like him, argued that we were already past the point of no return, that political solutions were impossible, and that in fact we had already compromised our ability win an outright fight, leaving fighting immediately as a desperate last resort.

I think you misunderstand the far-right position. Jim thinks we're past the point of no return because 50% of newborns are non-white. What's your political solution to that?

No, you're just operating from totally different first principles.

With respect, I think you're trying to have it both ways; you call yourself as an "extremist", but your suggested proposals and the congeniality with which you express them are not really outside the mainstream in 2025. Maybe a bit outside the Overton window, but not by much. Like this

Rolling back LGBT's influence on our society does not require exterminating LGBT people, only creating general awareness of the concrete harms their movement has caused and an understanding that their social control can and must be resisted. This, again, appears to be working.

is not a controversial statement. Uttering it does not make you an extremist.

It sounds like you want to go back to the 90s; Jim wants to go back to...I don't know, the 16th century and also kill a lot of people in the process.

As with all these conversations between "normie" right-wingers and people like Jim, the distinguishing factor is race. Race is of paramount importance, and by extension immigration and demographics are the only issues that matter.

Has he ever talked about how many children he's fathered?

This is the only forum I know of, outside of X where it's not nearly as convenient to have back and forth discussions and there are too many trolls, where extreme right-wingers are given any credibility. Further, this places is a repository of knowledge on obscure far-right bloggers. @erwgv3g34 in particular seems to be an expert, which is not surprising given his other interests. It's quite impressive; I don't know of any other existing forum like this place. So yes, he is certainly fringe in the mainstream – in fact, he's totally irrelevant – but from what I've gathered there are more than a handful of people here who share his opinions. Is there any other message board (again, outside of X) where Holocaust deniers, the openly racist, and male supremacists commingle? It's very impressive.

As such, this was just a summary meant to start a conversation on the feasibility of his suggested solutions.

The Dread Jim weighs in on the "moderate right".

Basically, to him the right isn't progressing at anywhere near the rate it needs to in order to enact radical change. He uses Asmongold, the popular live streamer, as an example. Asmongold is perceived to be anti-woke, but in reality all of his positions (in Dread Jim's opinion) are moderate/centrist.

For Dread Jim, the only way to save civilization is through the following:

  • Eliminating voting rights for the vast majority of "normies", and all women
  • Executing gay people ("poofs off roofs")
  • "Conscripting wombs"

He seems to view this last solution as the most important. Fathers should once again be responsible for marrying off their daughters, and if that's not possible, the state should step in. Similarly, adultery should be punishable by death.

Barring these radical changes "failure to murder everyone who is insufficiently left is likely to also be 'extreme far radical right'".

  • -15

Can immigration be considered a form of gerrymandering that dilutes the voting power of the existing population? Just a thought that occurred to me, I welcome pushback.

You say that the Dems clearly started it. Others says the Reps clearly started it.

Without reading (at least) 50 years of redistricting history, how does one possibly get to the bottom of this? As time goes on it becomes increasingly obvious to me that it's a folly to believe there is anything resembling objective truth on almost any contentious issue.

I read something on TheMotte that appears to be well-argued, some guy replies with what appears to be an equally compelling argument, and some other website has information that contradicts them both. My brain feels like it's going to explode. There is no hope.

https://substack.com/home/post/p-169701612

My impression is that almost everyone on the Grok and OpenAI teams are either the children of immigrants or people who came to the US as the children. This seems to be the case for almost all of our very highly successful first and second generation immigrants.

If they leave their country for a better life once, they can do it again if the situation changes.

Lots of these people are second or third generation immigrants by now. They're Americans.

In my opinion, US immigration seems to be broadly work. If Arctotherium had made these predictions 30 years ago, he would have been proven wrong. Sure, we can reduce immigration, but what we do re Chinese and Indian immigrants seems to be working very well.

It does make sense that you would stop watching after this episode. After all, the episode was speaking directly to someone like you.

don't really understand the current issues

What are the current issues?

Now, the problems are (and we know now, as hindsight is 2020) 100% factually caused by one side- the side that calls itself "left"-

Most of the people watching South Park don't think this.

What's left to mock?

MAGA. I think South Park is overcorrecting after 4-5 years of mocking "woke", but mainstream conservatism as expressed through MAGA is content rich when it comes to parody.

Why does mocking ICE work? Because the average illegal immigrant isn't a gangbanger or a rapist; it's some poor guy with a family mowing a lawn or scrubbing a hotel toilet after Cartman takes a massive shit. The Trump administration implicitly understands this and it's why they have to continuously emphasize ICE is deporting the "worst of the worst" or whatever.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't deport every single illegal. I don't watch South Park to form my political opinions but I can acknowledge that the substance of their critique is correct.

Is this egregious by South Park standards? Didn't they regularly mock minorities in episodes prior to this one?

What episode was that?

This guy summed up a lot of my internal thoughts though.

The "anti-vaxxers" and “conspiracy theorists” were not "right about everything".

Apart from Biden's senility, what other low-hanging fruit were there from the administration? South Park didn't attack Dems per se, but it did mock Dem-adjacent policies. And what other show makes fun of fat black women?

MAGA and its menagerie of spokespersons are, unfortunately, cartoonishly easy to lampoon. There are "serious" right-wing intellectuals on Twitter and Substack, but these people are not represented as the public face of MAGA.

It's not a great sign that it's been 8 hours and you haven't been arguing with any of the responses.

The post was filtered pending mod approval. I believe it's been more like 2 to 3 hours.