Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Declining Birth Rate Threatens the Very Existence of Europe

  1. #31
    Senior Member cosmocreator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, January 18th, 2007 @ 06:36 PM
    Subrace
    Other
    Gender
    Age
    54
    Politics
    Living in the real world
    Posts
    3,864
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Folkvang
    :icon_redf I know... that's why I said it wasn't my place to tell her. It was just an observation, I apologize if I offended you Freja.
    You mean Guest. Freja is a different person here.
    .

    IHR Revisionist Conference, April 24, 2004, internet broadcast:

    http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.c om/

  2. #32
    Account Inactive Draugr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Last Online
    Monday, October 3rd, 2005 @ 02:25 AM
    Location
    CLAM ET OCCULTE
    Age
    36
    Occupation
    student
    Posts
    287
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Back on subject, the main reason why white fertility is dropping across the board is because we play games with our bodies as to when we get pregnant. From my observations of the young people around me, they want to screw without getting pregnant (which is the main point of coitus), then when it comes "time" to have children, wonders, they can't.

    As for all this damn fighting on the board, reminds me of a bunch of germanic tribesmen fighting in the time of the Romans. :

  3. #33
    Senior Member FadeTheButcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 5th, 2006 @ 09:46 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Newly wed
    Occupation
    Political Scientist
    Politics
    Racial Communitarian
    Religion
    Neoplatonic
    Posts
    426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Northern_Paladin
    Europe is actually more liberal about homosexuality and sex in general than America.
    That's very true. They continue to conveniently forget that it is they who pioneer things like gay marriage and export it over here.
    The Phora

    "There are no principles; there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior man espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them. If there were principles and fixed laws, nations would not change them as we change our shirts and a man can not be expected to be wiser than an entire nation."
    —Honoré de Balzac

  4. #34
    Senior Member FadeTheButcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 5th, 2006 @ 09:46 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Newly wed
    Occupation
    Political Scientist
    Politics
    Racial Communitarian
    Religion
    Neoplatonic
    Posts
    426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts
    Well, there are less germans that are marrying faggots than there are americans.
    Germans have been marrying faggots for years now. But hey. Why should that surprise anyone? It was the Germans who pioneered Communism too.

    Guess you feel luck when you as american love to defend gaypride and would like to spread it all over the world with your so called democracy that you like all other countries to have.
    I suppose you can say that I feel lucky that I do not live in a country like Sweden, one of the most left-wing nations in the world. Its very amusing how you continue to blame us for your own problems. Take queer theory for example. That is another European idea that was exported to the United States.

    "Queer theory is a theory about sex and gender within the larger field of Queer studies. It proposes that one's sexual identity and one's gender identity are partly or wholly socially constructed, and therefore individuals cannot really be described using broad terms like "homosexual" or "woman". It challenges the common practice of compartmentalizing the description of a person to fit into one particular category.
    In particular, it rejects the creation of artificial and socially assigned categories and group-entities based on the division between those who share some habit or lifestyle and those who do not, The Other. Instead, queer theorists suggest building up categories and groups by voluntary and especially aesthetic associations.

    Earlier historical influences on Queer theory include Jacques Lacan, Louis Althusser, and Jacques Derrida, but the primary influence in the development of Queer theory was Michel Foucault. Later theorists include Judith Butler and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick.

    The first known use of the phrase "queer theory" in print was by Teresa de Lauretis. In 1994, however, she criticized queer theory as a marketing ploy that had "quickly become a conceptually vacuous creature of the publishing industry."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queer_theory

    You are a perfect example on why father and daughter should NOT have children together...!!!
    Want to compare photos? :p
    The Phora

    "There are no principles; there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior man espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them. If there were principles and fixed laws, nations would not change them as we change our shirts and a man can not be expected to be wiser than an entire nation."
    —Honoré de Balzac

  5. #35
    Senior Member NSFreja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, October 11th, 2016 @ 12:05 PM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Bavaria Bavaria
    Location
    Vanaheim
    Gender
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    559
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FadeTheButcher
    I suppose you can say that I feel lucky that I do not live in a country like Sweden, one of the most left-wing nations in the world.
    We are lucky that you stay where you are...we don't need more of your kind in Sweden or Europe.

    Quote Originally Posted by FadeTheButcher
    Want to compare photos? :p
    Thanks but no thanks, i don't want to puke...

    /M
    I fly upon the blackest of wings - I soar through the dark night sky
    I answer no call but my own - I alone forge my reality
    For I am the Raven - The child of Odin

  6. #36
    Senior Member FadeTheButcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 5th, 2006 @ 09:46 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Newly wed
    Occupation
    Political Scientist
    Politics
    Racial Communitarian
    Religion
    Neoplatonic
    Posts
    426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts
    So, you really think it's ok for Fade and others to insult us, europeans...
    "Well can can you expect from people that haven't learned to respect people, laws and other countries? People that are still at the same level as the neanderthals were...hmmm...maybe that's where the neanderthals went, to America and settle down when they disappeared from Europe...hmmmm...have to check that up...

    I think they should be greatful that they was lucky enough to be able to steal german technology because otherwise they would still be like in the stoneage...but thieves will always be caught so one day it's payback time and we will never forget what the yanks did when they were messing around in Europe...

    Yanks are just a mix of everything and one day they will stand alone without allies because no one wants them, because they have messed around too much...
    They say that they are the last superpower, but don't forget China and Russia....they are still in the "game" and if necessary they would kick yank a*s just like that if needed and make them pay for everything they've done and i would gladly join them just to be able to kick a*s too...
    Yanks, j*ws = Untermenschen = same s*it, different name..."
    --Guest

    what Fade wrote was very low, even lower than i ever thought he would write, but well, that shows how americans think about us AND don't tell me that you want to be our friends...With people like him, that will never happen... You never wondered why europeans dislike americans so much? Not only the US system but many of the americans too?
    We were having a discussion about this just the other day in The Phora. Its true that Anti-Americanism is widespread in Europe these days. But it is also true that Anti-Europeanism is becoming increasingly more widespread in the United States.

    "A study should be written on the sexual imagery of these stereotypes. If anti-American Europeans see “the Americans” as bullying cowboys, anti-European Americans see “the Europeans” as limp-wristed pansies. The American is a virile, heterosexual male; the European is female, impotent, or castrated. Militarily, Europeans can’t get it up. (After all, they have fewer than 20 “heavy lift” transport planes, compared with the United States’ more than 200.)"Following a lecture I gave in Boston an aged American tottered to the microphone to inquire why Europe “lacks animal vigor.” (The word “eunuchs” is, I discovered, used in the form “EU-nuchs.”) The sexual imagery even creeps into a more sophisticated account of American-European differences: In an already influential Policy Review article by Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment for Peace entitled “Power and Weakness.” “Americans are from Mars,” writes Kagan approvingly, “and Europeans are from Venus”—echoing that famous book about relations between men and women, Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus.
    Not all Europeans are equally bad. The British tend to be regarded as somewhat different and sometimes better. American conservatives often spare the British the opprobrium of being “Europeans” at all—a view with which most British conservatives, still mentally led by Margaret Thatcher, would heartily agree. And Tony Blair, like Thatcher before him, and Churchill before her, is cited in Washington as a shining exception to the European rule.

    http://www.hooverdigest.org/032/ash2.html
    The Phora

    "There are no principles; there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior man espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them. If there were principles and fixed laws, nations would not change them as we change our shirts and a man can not be expected to be wiser than an entire nation."
    —Honoré de Balzac

  7. #37
    Senior Member FadeTheButcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Sunday, November 5th, 2006 @ 09:46 PM
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Confederate States Confederate States
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Newly wed
    Occupation
    Political Scientist
    Politics
    Racial Communitarian
    Religion
    Neoplatonic
    Posts
    426
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts
    We are lucky that you stay where you are...we don't need more of your kind in Sweden or Europe.
    We have no use for Gunnar Myrdal around here. Oh wait. I thought it was Americans who spread antiracism to Europe. Oops. It was actually just the other way around

    Sowing the Seeds of Destruction: Gunnar Myrdal's Assault on America

    Some of today's most destructive ideas were first popularized by a socialist from Sweden

    by Jared Taylor

    http://www.pat2k.com/civil_rights/gunmyr.html

    An American Dilemma, written by the Swedish economist, Gunnar Myrdal, is unquestionably the most influential book ever written about race relations in America. Published in 1944, this 1,400-page treatment of “the Negro problem” went through 25 printings--an astonishing record for a heavily academic work--before it went into a second, “twentieth anniversary” edition in 1962. It influenced presidential commissions and Supreme Court decisions, and established rules for public discussion about race that endure to this day. More than any other book, it laid the groundwork for integration, affirmative action, and multi-racialism, and destroyed the legitimacy of white racial consciousness.

    Although the title is as famous as ever, virtually no one now reads An American Dilemma. Partly this is because its exhaustive statistics are out of date, and the legal segregation it set out to eradicate has been gone for 30 years. Another reason is that by today's standards the book is grossly “insensitive,” not only to Southern whites whom Myrdal obviously despised, but even to blacks whose cause he championed.

    Yet another reason may be that for anyone with an interest in the ideas that have paved the way for an increasingly third-world America, this book is a gold mine. Every anti-white cliché is here, as is every excuse for black failure. What is more, Myrdal pronounces them in the starkest, most unsubtle terms. Liberal race policies had not yet been tried. Myrdal had not witnessed their failure and therefore did not temper his language as liberals do today. The result is the clearest possible statement of the calamitous ideas that have shaped the last 40 years.

    For Myrdal, “the Negro problem” has only one cause. Today he would have called it “racism” or “bigotry” but those words were not yet part of the liberal vocabulary. He writes instead of “prejudice” and “discrimination,” and this is perhaps his key passage:

    “White prejudice and discrimination keep the Negro low in standards of living, health, education, manners and morals. This, in its turn, gives support to white prejudice. White prejudice and Negro standards thus mutually 'cause' each other.”

    In other words, whites degrade blacks and then point to their degradation as justification for degrading them. Myrdal saw several ways out of this vicious cycle. If whites could be cured of prejudice, they would not oppress blacks so much, blacks would improve themselves, and their example would further cure whites of prejudice. Alternatively, the government could take measures to improve the circumstances of blacks, which would reduce white prejudice, which would permit blacks to improve themselves still further. Myrdal devotes an entire appendix to this “principle of cumulation,” whereby even the smallest improvement will constantly magnify itself.

    For this to work, though, blacks must be, aside from their oppression, no different from whites. Although anthropologists had been promoting this egalitarian view since the 1930s, Myrdal was the first economist to write that discrimination rather than low intelligence caused black poverty. Myrdal knew this claim was central to his argument and repeated it throughout the book.

    “Social research,” he says, is “constantly disproving inherent differences and explaining apparent ones in cultural and social terms.” He cites the assertions of Franz Boas and his disciples (but offers no data) to discredit conventional views about racial differences in intelligence and temperament: “[T]he popular race dogma is being victoriously pursued into every corner and effectively exposed as fallacious or at least unsubstantiated.” As a result, “the undermining of the basis of certitude for popular beliefs has been accomplished.” Myrdal was sure that science was on his side, and voices a complaint that is, ironically, echoed in the pages of AR--that there is a “wide gap between scientific thought and popular belief.”

    The difficulty, he says, is that unlike biological differences, the cultural explanation is just too much for rubes: “It requires difficult and complicated thinking about a multitude of mutually dependent variables, thinking which does not easily break into the lazy formalism of unintellectual people.” We can be optimistic, though, because “white prejudice can change . . . as a result of an increased general knowledge about biology, eradicating some of the false beliefs among whites concerning Negro racial inferiority.”

    Already in 1944, Myrdal sensed the demise of theories about racial differences: “Most of them never reach the printing press or the microphone any more, as they are no longer intellectually respectable. The educated classes of whites are gradually coming to regard those who believe in the Negro's biological inferiority as narrow-minded and backward.”

    The better class of whites now understood that “the Negro problem in America represents a moral lag in the development of the nation,” and this was, in fact, the American dilemma. Blacks were in every respects the equals of whites, yet were treated as inferiors. This injustice was particularly jarring in the United States because it violated what Myrdal calls “the American creed” of equality.

    Why did Americans persist in violating the creed? In the South, Myrdal discovered elaborate mechanisms of racial separation that he called the “caste system.” He notes that although caste rules govern virtually all contact between blacks and whites they serve one central function: to keep blacks from marrying or having sex with whites. In both the North and the South Myrdal found a universal revulsion among whites for miscegenation and the “amalgamation of the races” that this would bring. In virtually all the states, this revulsion was reflected in laws that forbade interracial marriage.

    Myrdal scoffs at this. He even “jestingly argues” that amalgamation “might create a race of unsurpassed excellence: a people with just a little sunburn without extra trouble and even through the winter; with some curl in the hair without the cost of a permanent wave; with, perhaps, a little more emotional warmth in their souls; and a little more religion, music, laughter, and carefreeness in their lives.”

    Myrdal never even accepted white opposition to amalgamation as genuine. With no data to support his view, he insisted that opposition was nothing more than a pretext for keeping blacks out of economic competition. He went on to call it “an irrational escape on the part of the whites from voicing an open demand for difference in social status between the two groups for its own sake.” Whites, he said, have a purely tyrannical desire for supremacy, but claim that they are trying to prevent miscegenation.

    What, then, underlies the desire for supremacy? Myrdal claimed to understand white Americans better than they understood themselves: “Without any doubt there is also in the white man's concept of the Negro 'race' an irrational element which cannot be grasped in terms of either biological or cultural differences. . . . In this magical sphere of the white man's mind, the Negro is inferior, totally independent of rational proofs or disproofs. And he is inferior in a deep and mystical sense.”

    The Vicious South

    This form of mysticism was particularly prevalent in the South; some of Myrdal's comments about Southerners beggar the imagination:

    “[It would be correct to say that] the white South is virtually obsessed by the Negro problem, that the South has allowed the Negro problem to rule its politics and its business, fetter its intelligence and human liberties, and hamper its progress in all directions . . . .”

    “The issue of 'white supremacy vs. Negro domination,' as it is called in the South, has for more than a hundred years stifled freedom of thought and speech and affected all other civic rights and liberties of both Negroes and whites in the South. It has retarded its economic, social and cultural advance. On this point there is virtual agreement among all competent observers.”

    “White Southerners are prepared to abstain from many liberties and to sacrifice many advantages for the purpose of withholding them from the Negroes.”

    These charges--that Southerners are obsessed with blacks, that obsession retards progress, that whites deny themselves liberties in order to withhold them from blacks--are tossed off without elaboration or substantiation.

    Although Myrdal conceded that by the time he studied race relations lynchings were unusual and widely condemned, he finds great significance in them:

    “The South has an obsession with sex which helps to make this region quite irrational in dealing with Negroes generally. . . . The sadistic elements in most lynchings also point to a close relation between lynching and thwarted sexual urges.”

    Oddly, he thought that Southern Christianity was partly to blame for lynching:

    “[Another factor is] the prevalence of a narrow-minded and intolerant, 'fundamentalist' type of Protestant evangelical religion. Occasional violently emotional revival services, and regular appeals in ordinary preaching to fear and passion rather than to calm reasoning, on the one hand, and denunciations of modern thought, scientific progress, and all kinds of nonconformism, on the other hand, help to create a state of mind which makes a lynching less extraordinary.”

    Of course, lynching was part of the “amazing disrespect for law and order which even today characterizes the Southern states in America and constitutes such a large part of the Negro problem.” Thanks to this lawlessness, “a white man can steal from or maltreat a Negro in almost any way without fear of reprisal . . . .” This is part of a long tradition: “[A] main way to get and remain rich in the South has been to exploit the Negroes and other weaker people, rather than to work diligently, make oneself indispensable and have brilliant ideas.” Exploiting blacks is apparently known as “mattressing the niggers.”

    Myrdal writes that although Southerners claim to understand blacks, this is “one of the most pathetic stereotypes in the South.” On the contrary, the Southern white is willfully ignorant: “The ignorance about the Negro is not, it must be stressed, just a random lack of interest and knowledge. It is a tense and highstrung restriction and distortion of knowledge, and it indicates much deeper dislocations within the minds of Southern whites.”

    Mental dislocations characterize Southern politics: “[F]ear of the Negro shadows every political discussion and prevents the whites from doing anything to improve themselves.” This, says Myrdal, results in “an amazing avoidance of issues in Southern politics.” Debate is one-sided: “Even at present the South does not have a full spectrum of political opinions . . . . There are relatively few liberals in the South and practically no radicals.” He describes Southerners as the only true reactionaries in the developed world; their goal is “to accept the static state as ideal and to denounce progress.”

    What little hope there may be is found in Southern liberalism, which he finds “beautiful and dignified.” As for its proponents, “they are the intellectuals of the region and are responsible for a large part of the entire high-grade literary, journalistic and scientific output of the region. . . . They are, indeed, the cultural facade of the South.” This “gives to liberalism in the South a flavor of intellectual superiority . . . .”

    Victims of Discrimination

    As these passages suggest, when An American Dilemma turns to analysis, its subject is whites rather than blacks. This is consistent with Myrdal's view that “the Negro problem” begins and ends in the minds of whites. Without discrimination, blacks would be perfectly ordinary Americans, so it is only whites who must be dissected and denounced.

    The descriptive passages, on the other hand, are largely of the circumstances of blacks, with detailed accounts of agriculture, education, the professions, social life, criminal justice, government employment, black churches, protest movements, and much more. Myrdal finds a great deal that is unpleasant, even “pathological,” but he always has explanations: slavery, Jim Crow, and discrimination.

    If blacks riot it is because their just resentments have boiled over. Blacks have been given a place in popular music but “have been greatly hampered in more serious music.” Violent crime is a reaction to Southern lawlessness. Slavery broke up the black family. Discrimination causes poverty--and prostitution, drug addiction, even bad manners and anti-white crime.

    What is striking about these arguments is not that Myrdal made them--in the pre-civil rights 1940s they were powerful and persuasive--but that people make them today. This habit of trotting out white wickedness to explain every form of black failure is one of the most persistent and destructive elements of liberal thinking. Myrdal was its most influential progenitor.

    On the other hand, it may have been Myrdal's confidence in his explanations for black deviance that allowed him to write about it with candor that would today be called “racist.”

    “[M]any Negroes, particularly in the South, are poor, uneducated, and deficient in health, morals, and manners; and thus not very agreeable as social companions,” he writes. Any given black is “more indolent, less punctual, less careful, and generally less efficient as a functioning member of society.” He notes that blacks are more likely to be repeat criminals, and that “Negro criminals have become more addicted to crime and less corrigible.”

    Myrdal finds black thought narrow and sloppy: “Negro thinking in social and political terms is thus exclusively a thinking about the Negro problem. . . . Particularly in the lower classes, and in the Southern rural districts, the ideological structure of Negro thinking--even in its own narrow, caste-restricted realm--is loose, chaotic and rambling.”

    He also notes the hypocrisy of middle-class blacks who denounce segregation but profit from the monopoly business of serving black customers. He also writes that much as blacks may claim to be proud of their race, they often describe themselves as lighter-skinned--and never darker--than they actually are. He observes that successful black men invariably marry light-skinned women.

    Although many authors praise the black church, Myrdal was repelled by black worship services and writes disapprovingly of “rolling in a sawdust pit in [a] state of ecstasy, tambourine playing, reading of the future, healing of the sick, use of images of saints, footwashing, use of drums and jazz music, etc.” “These 'rousements,' “ he goes on to say, “bring most of the congregation into some degree of 'possession.' “ “There is a tendency to emotionalize the collection so as to elicit more money.”

    Preachers are worse than congregations: “The chief prerequisite for becoming a minister in most of the denominations to which Negroes belong is traditionally not education, but a 'call' which is more often the manifestation of temporary hysteria or opportunistic self-inspiration than of a deep soul-searching.”

    Myrdal doesn't see much use for church at all: “The small upper class of Negroes tend to belong to the Episcopalian, Congregational, and Presbyterian churches, since for them a main function of church membership is to give prestige.” Furthermore, “Negro preachers condemn extra-marital sex relations, but they seldom take any specific steps to stop them because usually so many of their congregation engage in the condemned behavior.”

    Even when he is complimenting blacks, Myrdal can adopt a contemptuous tone:

    “Negroes have acquired the art of enjoying life more than have whites. Because they have no direct background in puritanism, they have taken sex more as it comes, without all the encumbrances and inhibitions. . . . The habit of spending a good deal of leisure time out-of-doors, due in part to the over-crowdedness of the Negro home, has contributed to the social pleasantness of Negro life, since being outside involves meeting friends and having no worries about destroying furniture.” Destroying furniture?

    Myrdal professes to admire the “wholesome” way blacks entertain themselves while working: “Singing, for example, accompanies all work, even on the chain gang; gambling while working is another example.” Gambling while working?

    Myrdal can't seem to decide whether black illegitimacy is good or bad. He notes that the black rate is eight times higher than the white rate but adds that “the Negro community also has the healthy social custom of attaching no stigma to the illegitimate child . . . .” This means that “the Negro lower classes, especially in the rural South, have built up a type of family organization conducive to social health, even though the practices are outside the American tradition.”

    On the other hand: “The over-crowdedness of the homes and the consequent lack of privacy prevent the growth of ideals of chastity and are one element in encouraging girls to become prostitutes.” Myrdal sometimes seems as sex-obsessed as he claims Southerners to be. Indeed, he spends several pages in fascinated speculation about the illicit couplings that gave blacks so many white genes.

    Social Engineering

    Today, one of the most striking aspects of An American Dilemma is its touching faith in social science. Myrdal writes with much satisfaction about his “scientific” methods and solutions. Rather more ominous is his infatuation with “social engineering.” The following passage is one of the clearest statements imaginable of the goals and tactics of liberalism:

    “Many things that for a long period have been predominantly a matter of individual adjustment will become more and more determined by political decision and public regulation. . . . [T]he social engineering of the coming epoch will be nothing but the drawing of practical conclusions from the teaching of social science that 'human nature' is changeable and that human deficiencies and unhappiness are, in large degree, preventable.”

    This passage, which could have been written by Karl Marx, is worth rereading for its breathless arrogance. Society will make all sorts of decisions for people that they used to make for themselves. Social engineering will then prevent unhappiness by changing human nature. It was, of course, enlightened liberals like Myrdal who would boss us around for our own good. The first project for Americans was to stamp out their pathological attitudes towards blacks and their false opposition to racial amalgamation.

    Myrdal's arrogance leads to contempt for American institutions, especially if they stand in the way of “social engineering.” He writes of the “nearly fetishistic cult of the Constitution” and goes on to complain that “the 150-year-old Constitution is in many respects impractical and ill-suited for modern conditions and . . . drafters of the document made it technically difficult to change . . . .” Once again he sounds like Marx when he writes, “the Constitutional Convention was nearly a plot against the common people.”

    Given that he seems to make no attempt to conceal his politics--he even refers to Eleanor Roosevelt as the President's “gallant lady”--it is baffling to find an appendix in An American Dilemma on how to avoid bias in social science. Mere description, Myrdal writes, is actually bias because it implies that society cannot or should not be changed. His approach--vastly superior--is to analyze rather than describe, and to do so with the clear intent of transforming society. Unlike many who followed him, he was at least honest about his goals, yet he makes the astonishing claim that his analysis was unbiased:

    “In a particular problem where public opinion in the dominant white group is traditionally as heavily prejudiced in the conservative direction as in the Negro problem, even a radical tendency might fail to reach an unprejudiced judgment . . . .”

    Just as remarkable is another appendix called “A Parallel to the Negro Problem.” He argues that men oppress women just as whites oppress blacks, and predicts massive social transformation. Myrdal concludes that the Soviet Union is perhaps the only country in the world to get sex roles right.

    Without Opposition

    Why, though, was the Myrdal vision of race able not only to sweep everything before it but prepare the ground for all the other “liberation” movements? One reason, undoubtedly, was selective reporting, combined with repeated assertions of moral superiority. But there is another reason that Myrdal himself unwittingly suggests. He notes that even the most conservative whites rarely defend segregation personally, but say that “community feeling” or “tradition” requires it. He says this about the intellectual bases for white solidarity and an understanding of racial differences:

    “They live a surreptitious life in thoughts and private remarks. There we have had to hunt them . . . . When they were thus drawn out into the open they looked shabby and ashamed of themselves. Everybody who has acquired a higher education knows that they are wrong.”

    He then adds the very interesting observation that the white man “does not have the moral stamina” to codify and defend a system based on explicit racial differences.

    Those who would promote white consciousness today face the same obstacles. The Myrdal vision triumphed because there was no thoughtful, moral argument to oppose it. Many conservatives were ashamed of their views and afraid to voice them. Compared to maintaining segregation, the goal of preserving a people and a way of life should, by anyone's terms, be morally irreproachable. And yet hesitancy, shame, and fear of opprobrium are still the greatest obstacles to the pursuit of legitimate white interests.

    It is for this reason that the expression of group interests, which for others is simply a matter of stamina is, for whites, a matter of moral stamina. The Myrdal vision succeeded because it harnessed, in a dangerously deluded way, the moral energy of whites. Only by directing that energy toward their own survival will whites break the shackles that Myrdal and his followers forged for them. <195>

    Although Gunnar Myrdal is best known in the United States for his work on race, he was primarily an economist and politician. From his student days in Sweden he had dreamed of a “party of the intelligent” that would manipulate the masses and guide the nation. He was radicalized in 1929 when he first visited the United States. The depression-era contrast between millionaires and paupers convinced him that “market forces work to perpetuate inequality.”

    Myrdal had already served in the Swedish Riksdag and had established himself as an architect of the Swedish welfare state by the time the Carnegie Foundation asked him, in 1936, to do a study of American blacks. Myrdal writes that he was chosen for the job because the foundation wanted a foreigner's untainted perspective. A Swede was the perfect choice because the foundation thought blacks would trust an author who was not from a nation with an overseas empire.

    The foundation gave Myrdal $300,000--a huge sum at the time--and free rein to hire staff and commission research. One reason the book was so well received is that Myrdal deliberately involved as many prominent liberals as possible in the project. They became co-authors, in a sense, and promoted the book in universities and the press. Myrdal called An American Dilemma his “war work,” because he considered its message an attack on Nazism.

    After the war, Myrdal returned to Sweden and was Minister of Commerce from 1945 to 1947. He continued to spread a socialist, redistributionist message, and even argued that once enough welfare states had been established in the advanced countries, they could inaugurate a global “welfare world.”

    Not everyone approved of Myrdal. The FBI compiled a list of 41 people acknowledged in the preface of An American Dilemma, noting that many were Communist Party members, sympathizers, or members of front groups. Myrdal's wife and son, Alva and Jan, were investigated by the FBI for pro-Communist activity. Alva Myrdal was eventually denied entry to the United States and Jan Myrdal went on to organize a communist “festival” in Bucharest.

    Meanwhile An American Dilemma was helping change the United States. Myrdal was a personal friend of Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, and his book was cited in the Brown v. Board of Education decision. When President Truman established a presidential commission on civil rights, its members used An American Dilemma as their central text. In 1947 the commission issued a report, “To Secure These Rights,” which followed Myrdal's recommendations. Truman implemented the report in his 1948 civil rights program that abolished segregation in the armed forces, set up a civil rights division in the Justice Department, and promoted national legislation to combat racism. During the first sit-in demonstration, in Greensboro, North Carolina, blacks cited Myrdal as an important influence.

    In the 1960s, Saturday Review asked American intellectuals which book of the previous 40 years had been most influential. Only John Maynard Keynes' General Theory got more votes than An American Dilemma.

    Myrdal went on to win the Nobel Prize in economics in 1974, and cultivated a role as international elder statesman. In his later years he lost faith in “social engineering” and began to see that it led inevitably to tyranny. At the time of his death in 1987, he was working on An American Dilemma Revisited. The black sociologist, Kenneth Clark was to be co-author but withdrew because of Myrdal's “egocentricity and desire to dominate the project.”

    Not surprisingly, blacks still cite An American Dilemma. Last year, the W.E.B. Du Bois Institute for Afro-American Research held a three-day conference to mark the book's 50th anniversary. Black academics from two dozen universities gathered at Harvard for the occasion. As a spokesman for the Du Bois Institute explained, “Myrdal was not only on the mark 50 years ago but continues to provide a scathing analysis of the contemporary scene.” Wilbur Rich of Wellesley College no doubt summed up the thinking of many blacks when he said that, compared to 50 years ago, “blacks are more complicated and whites are less enlightened.” The spirit of Myrdal lives on.

    This article was first published in the April, 1996 issue of American Renaissance. The AR web page address is AmRen.com.

    The Phora

    "There are no principles; there are only events. There is no good and bad, there are only circumstances. The superior man espouses events and circumstances in order to guide them. If there were principles and fixed laws, nations would not change them as we change our shirts and a man can not be expected to be wiser than an entire nation."
    —Honoré de Balzac

  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Last Online
    Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009 @ 03:34 AM
    Ethnicity
    N/A
    Gender
    Posts
    2,606
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    An administrator and several moderators are anti-American, so how is it you are always the victim of insults? Americans' posts are always being deleted. I remember a member the other day saying all of America should be "atomized." I know that I would be instantly banned if I said that about a European country. I don't appreciate that B/S about how Europeans criticisms are righteous and ours aren't.






  9. #39
    Senior Member NSFreja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Last Online
    Tuesday, October 11th, 2016 @ 12:05 PM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Bavaria Bavaria
    Location
    Vanaheim
    Gender
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    559
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    No use to continue this discussion...it will just bring more hate than it already is.

    Thread closed

    /M
    I fly upon the blackest of wings - I soar through the dark night sky
    I answer no call but my own - I alone forge my reality
    For I am the Raven - The child of Odin

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Germany's Falling Birth Rate - Source of National Alarm
    By Aeternitas in forum The German Countries
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 2 Weeks Ago, 08:59 PM
  2. Austria Has Second-Lowest Birth Rate in EU
    By Verðandi in forum The German Countries
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Sunday, August 1st, 2010, 12:12 PM
  3. Can Northern Europe's Low Birth Rate Be Remedied?
    By Northern Paladin in forum Germanic Europe & Outlying Islands
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: Saturday, July 3rd, 2010, 09:02 AM
  4. Iceland Tops European Birth Rate Chart
    By White Iceland in forum Iceland
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 26th, 2009, 03:25 AM
  5. Is the White Birth Rate Too Low to Sustain Our Civilisation?
    By Aspire in forum Politics & Geopolitics
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Tuesday, May 5th, 2009, 10:47 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •