In the 1st World Western countries, Alpha Whites, Hispanics and East Asians are all right-wingers of some sort: Republic, Libertarian and weight-lifting racists.
Of course this is the case in the US. But is it the case anywhere else?
No, Alpha Whites in Europe are still very leftwing. Well, at least they are socialists. Hispanics in the West are liberal Democrats by 65
Alpha male Asians in the West tend to be the older generation, and they tend increasingly to be more or less liberal Democrats of some sort or another. Like the Jews, their wealth does not seem to turn them rightwing for whatever reason, probably their innate collectivism which automatically works against an individualist economics. I don’t know much about young Asian Alpha males. Do they even exist lol? Chinese, Filipino, and SE Asian street toughs will vote liberal Democrat if they vote at all. I’m not aware of any segment of the Asian community that goes rightwing.
As far as racism goes, yes, Alpha Whites in the US tend to be racist but I’m not sure that’s true anywhere else so much. It might be true in the UK but those are working class British. There’s a racist hypermasculine reaction in Spain right now, but all the men are macho anyway. That movement is just the male reaction to feminism. There are few out racists in the rest of Western Europe. It’s a death sentence. In Italy the racists are in the north and the antiracists are in the South. But Nothern and Southern Italians are masculine but the Southern Italians tend to be moreso. In Eastern Europe and Russia, all the man are Alpha and they’re all racists too so there’s no distinction.
All Hispanics are more or less racist anyway, at least against Blacks, but the lower classes are more hypermasculine and are actually less racist against Blacks than the less masculine upper classes. And they’re all Alpha so there’s no Alpha/Beta distinction.
All Asians are racist, especially among Blacks. The older Asian men are more Alpha than the younger men, and yes they are more racist against Blacks.
transformer: What do you think of this article Robert? I don’t trust right wing sources but how literate was Cuba back in 1959?
That website is falsely named. It is not an “intellectual” website dedicated to the intellect and the pursuit of knowledge. Sure, it is an erudite, bright, and educated website, but the only intellectuals it appeals to are hard rightwingers. It’s basically the philosophy of your average American conservative Republican. Those sites are run by ideologues, and they are not very honest.
I will try to take apart this argument as best as I can, but if you Google these questions, there are many leftwing websites who offer far better rejoinders than I offer here, especially with more facts, figures, and dates.
That argument is not good because there was vast poverty in the countryside along with terrible health and dental care. There was vast inequality in Cuba. There was quite a bit of wealth in the cities, particularly in Havana, but the conditions in the countryside were awful, pure 3rd World.
To give an example, I believe that there may have been no doctors in Cuba outside of Havana. All of the doctors and dentists lived in Havana serving people with money for cash so they could make a lot of money. The Mafia owned Cuba, and Havana was a sleazefest full of criminals, gangsters, and prostitutes.
Blacks had essentially no rights at all. They actually lived under a strict Jim Crow-like segregation that was as bad as what existed in the South. The Blacks in Cuba were fucked.
The whole country was owned by foreign, mostly US, interests, including the sugar cane and tobacco fields, the cigar and nickel industries and the casinos and bars. A few country-sellers latched onto the large US corporations that ran everything in Cuba and got their fair share of the loot.
But the Cuban people as a whole, meaning the Cuban state, barely saw a nickel of profits from any of those foreign-owned fields and industries. There also was little or no trickle down effect from the foreign-owned industry. Most Cubans felt that Cuba had once more become a colony of the US. After all, it was more or less owned by US companies, right?
Cuba used to be a colony of the US. We stole it from the Spanish after the Spanish American War. US rule was not popular. Jose Marti is known as the liberator of Cuba. He led an insurrection in 1898 in which Cuba gained its freedom. The Philippines was also rebelling at this time.
But after the US left, in 1911, a new law was passed called the Platt (?) Amendment that basically said that the US still ruled Cuba and had a right to intervene in Cuba’s affairs anytime it wanted to.
Even the most rightwing anti-Castro Cubans are not particularly pro-US, and if you bring up that amendment, they’ve all heard of it, and they act angry about. After all, most anti-Castro types are Cuban nationalists. Cubans are very nationalistic and proud people. That amendment remained in place until Castro won the revolution in 1959.
Batista’s army collapsed without even much of a fight because at one point in the revolution, even the middle classes in the cities went over to Castro. When the middle class supports a revolution, you are out of power. Previously the middle class had probably been mostly neutral.
Batista was also horribly corrupt and no one was happy about that. As Castro overran Havana, Batista and his government flew out to the US on airplanes. The US lifted them out. There are still quite a few pro-Batista Cubans in the Cuban community in Cuba. That’s why the Cuban exiles are not popular in Cuba.
A lot of Cubans in the countryside were not literate. Even schooling was bad out there. And Castro did run a literacy program that got the country to 99
Castro was middle or even upper-class himself. He was Galician of almost pure Spanish blood (Cuba is full of Galicians). He had just graduated from law school, and he was in fact an attorney. So he was a very smart guy.
Che was actually a physician! He graduated from medical school in Argentina and was granted a license to practice medicine. I’m not sure if he ever actually practiced medicine. He was also a very smart guy.
Che took a motorcycle tour around Latin America, and he was appalled at the poverty he saw there. He had grown up in Buenos Aires in a moneyed family, and this was a hidden secret about the continent for him. A book called The Motorcycle Diaries was later published using the notes he took as he traveled around South America.
He became radicalized by his bike tour. He heard about the Revolution in Cuba, and he went there to help them out pure idealism with stars in his eyes. Che was also White like Castro and came from old Buenos Aires money. He probably had Italian and Spanish blood at the least, like most Argentines.
He married in Cuba and had a couple of kids before he was murdered by the CIA in a hospital in Bolivia in 1967 after being arrested in the nation for rebellion. He was very good to his wife and young children. The wife and children are still alive. You can even go see his son if you go to Cuba and have the right connections.
His wife and kids remember him very fondly. Che was a selfless and altruistic man. There is a slogan in Cuba: “Be like Che.” It is very popular. It means to be selfless and idealistic and sacrifice for others, to not be selfish and greedy. The slogan is popular among university students in particular. If you go to Cuba, you will hear Cuban university students, male and female, saying that their philosophy is to “be like Che.”
There must have been something wrong with the Batista system because a lot of university students, teachers, etc. took part in the early demonstrations against Batista. At some point, the Left went to the mountains and took up arms.
Either before or after, Batista ran death squads that rampaged through Cuba’s cities, murdering teachers, students, and the unarmed Left in general. They murdered thousands of defenseless and unarmed Cubans this way.
The army would not even fight for Batista. That’s how corrupt he was. In fact, many of the anti-Castro Cubans fought with Castro in the mountains to get rid of Batista, but they turned on him when he went Communist. They felt betrayed. I don’t mind these exiles so much. I have spoken with some of their children. At least they fought with Castro. But they tend to be very bitter. They think they got double-crossed and backstabbed by Castro.
Castro was originally simply a social democrat, and the initial revolutionary program was a social democratic one.
However, it was a very nationalistic revolution, and they started seizing foreign-owned businesses very quickly. The Cubans offered to pay off the owners for the market value of the businesses over a 30-year period. That offer it still in effect. 100
So their businesses didn’t really get confiscated. Castro offered to pay full value for them, but these stubborn reactionaries turned down the offer. It’s their own damn fault they lost their businesses.
The seizing of the foreign-owned property went on for a couple of years and was extremely popular among the extremely nationalistic Cubans. So you can see that Castro’s revolution, like Mao’s and Ho’s, was also and perhaps primarily a nationalist revolution.
Castro went to New York soon after he took power, and he was greeted with large crowds of cheering supporters. Castro talked about how much he loved America and Americans. I believe he was sincere. A lot of the US ruling class – the rich and corporations – were very suspicious of Castro from the start. They didn’t trust him. They didn’t hate him. They were just very leery of him.
Castro asked for US support and aid to help rebuild the country, but the US had turned hostile by then due to the business confiscations and refused to give him a nickel. This went on for a couple of years with each side getting more hardened until Castro finally turned to the USSR in desperation in 1961 for support since the US was flipping him off.
Castro’s argument was that he tried to have a relationship with the US, and we told him to go to Hell, so we forced him into the arms of the Soviets. He sealed an alliance with the USSR in 1961. The US promptly imposed a cruel embargo on Cuba which has been there ever since.
The embargo’s official justification was to cause so much poverty and misery in Cuba that the people would rise up and overthrow Castro. Here it is 60 years later, and we still give the exact same reason for the embargo. If the embargo is intended to cause the people to overthrow Castro, when is it going to start working? So far it’s been 60 years of utter failure, but we keep chasing the White Whale.
Over the next year, Castro grew increasingly radical, and by 1962, he abandoned social democracy, his originally ideology, and took up Marxism-Leninism. After Castro went Communist, a lot of his old comrades turned against him along with many others who were not happy with his turn to the hard Left. These contras took up arms, formed guerrilla bands in the mountains, and waged a brutal civil war that went on until 1970.
Yes, the Cuban government executed 10,000 people between 1959-1970, but almost all were for “rebellion,” typically armed rebellion. There have hardly been any executions since.
Polar Bear: You should leave the South. A # of Southern people I’ve met hate the South and left. Some even want it to burn down, which disgusts me. There are progressive areas in TN, Nashville for one. It feels a bit like the Hatfields and McCoys – progressive self-hating Southerners vs the old South.
Or at least move to a liberal big city, as the commenter suggested.
I went to Atlanta recently, and trust me, Jason would fit right in. Mostly liberals of one stripe or another, and most people, even Whites, vote Democrat. There is a huge hipster scene and in Five Points, you may be forgiven for thinking you are in San Fransisco by mistake.
There are transplanted Northerners everywhere, and there are hip, liberal Southerners from places like Mississippi and Alabama without a trace of a Southern accent who would not be out of place in any hipster paradise. I did some research and Atlanta is the 2rd most liberal metropolitan area in the US.
One thing I noticed though is that a lot of Whites who move to Atlanta from the North eventually turn rather racist against Blacks.
The women I was staying with, my girlfriend at the time, had come from Michigan and was a total antiracist when she showed up. Well, twenty years of living around Atlanta Blacks took care of that ideology.
I don’t think she was all that racist though because we often dealt with Blacks when we went out, and she was always very friendly and kind to them. Are hardcore anti-Black racists actually like that? I’m not sure if I am bothered. If they keep their racism to themselves, it’s just a thought crime, right? Why should anyone care if there’s no consequences flowing from their racist thoughts? I mean who cares? Let her think whatever the Hell she wants. When it translates into action is when we can start worrying.
I met a friend of hers, a guy from New York state who just seemed like your average hipster liberal, who said he was moving to Washington state. He seemed to have made a similar transformation. I asked him why he was moving, and he said, “Too many Gros, number One.” I’d never heard the word Gro (pronounced Grow) used before as racist slang, and for some reason I thought it was funny.
One of her roommates was a guy from Nicaragua. He was one odd bird – I believe he had Avoidant Personality Disorder – but he absolutely despised Blacks, and he was an extreme racist. You would be surprised at how many Hispanics are much worse anti-Black racists than your average White person is. The lack the shame that keeps a lot of us Whites from going over the edge. They don’t feel bad about being racist, whereas a lot of us Whites do.
What do Mexicans, Central Americans think of Asians? Surely they know that they are descended from Siberian Mongoloids who crossed the Bering Strait ages ago.
We will deal with the second half of the question first. Those people are so stupid that they don’t even understand that they are part Indian and part White! If you tell them that, they either look puzzled or get angry. The ones in the US get angry because they are Latino Nationalists who don’t like whites, and it’s an insult to tell that they have White in them. They want to be 100
One idiot had a (hopefully useless) university BA degree, and he got mad when I told him Hispanics were mixed Indian and White. Also, he was mostly White, and I pointed that out. He was into Latino “hate Whitey” politics, and he wanted to believe he was all Indian. Not only that, but his people went back to the original Californios before California was a state, when it was part of Mexico. Californios were mestizos, but they were quite White (Spaniard). Dumbfuck.
Most of these people have no understanding that Indians are descended from Siberians. Even here in the US, many Native Americans reject that view. I worked for a tribe for a while, and they all rejected that view. Their ancestors told them that they were always here, so that’s what they believe. Retarded.
In many anthropological documents now, the “Indian view” is given first. It’s totally retarded and says we were always here or we crawled out of the mouth of a whale or some stupid shit. Then there is the “Anthropologists View” which is the real science.
Most Indians hate the anthropologists, and a lot of them reject all of the ethnographic work that was done back in the old days as “lies told by evil White anthros.” They even reject a lot of the linguistic data. I kept running into this emotional shit over and over when I worked for them, and it was hard to deal with!
I’ve spoken to many Mexicans and told them that they look a little Asian because they have Indian in them and Indians came from Asia. Usually they’re never heard of that, and a lot of times they get sort of mad.
Mesamerican Hispanics are not stupid, but they are frighteningly ignorant. Native Americans are just willfully ignorant. It’s a pride thing.
As far as what they think of Asians, they don’t seem to have anything against them. Asians have lived in Latin America in small numbers for a long time, and the Hispanics have gotten along quite well with them. In the US, Asian numbers are small, and Asians are just not important to any racial group, Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, no one. No one cares about a group until they get some numbers.
Color is a taboo subject in Mexican society, but the elite is mostly White or at least light skinned. There is more colorism as in lighter vs. darker. A lot Mexican Whites refuse to identify as White because that means gringo. They will just identify as Mexican. But others will identify as White, or more usually, as Spaniard, Frenchman, etc.
I know a guy whose family comes from Mexico who tells me he’s “French.” But he refuses to identify as White. That’s gringo, racist, etc. He also identifies as “Hispanic.” It’s like they would rather be Hispanic or Latino than White.
But a lot of them, I tell them, “You’re a Mexican? You’re as White as I am!” And they break into these huge grins and say that their families came from Spain. They clearly think they are better than the others.
One guy was insulted when I asked him if he was a Mexican. The guy was born in Mexico! He was a Spaniard, 100
But others get a little upset when I tell them they are White, even though they are as White as I am. To say that they are White is calling them a gringo, and Mexican nationalists don’t dig imperialist gringos. They will deny being White and say that they prefer to identify as Mexican.
Also, the word “White” is sort of racist in Mexican society. Mexican society is seriously racist, but it’s also European Spaniard with regard to manners. There is a color line, sure, but officially, all Mexicans are “mestizos,” that is, there are no Indians or Whites. Everyone is mixed.
Also Mexicans are in denial about their Black heritage. Your average Mexican is as Black as a Sicilian – 4
My Mom took a trip to Mexico once and got into a funny conversation with the Mexican guide about that subject.
Also the guide kept referring to the miltars. My Mom calmly told her that the English word was soldiers, not militars, which is not a word in English. The female guide got really mad, insisted that militars was the right word, and kept saying militars for the rest of the tour.
Blacks are saying that the White line of, “You just wait, Blacks,” about White decline is disingenuous and is not being said out of concern for Blacks at all. These Whites don’t even like Blacks.
Truth is it doesn’t matter why Whites say it or what they feel about Blacks. The truth is the truth. A White majority nowadays is good for Blacks. A non-White majority will be less so.
We know objectively how Hispanics, Asians, etc. feel about Blacks. They don’t like them. They are way more racist towards Blacks than Whites are anymore. It’s quite common to hear Hispanics say that they hate Blacks. There’s no guilt in saying that. In White society, you don’t hear that too much. Whites will say that they like Blacks, even while they won’t date one, vote Republican, live in all-White towns and go to Tea Parties.
What you’re seeing is White anger at Blacks for rejoicing in the reduction of the White majority, and in many cases, egging it on. Whites know full well that Blacks see Whites as the enemy (you can see it even in some of the Black commenters on here now and then, when they let if peek out).
The grudge is largely historical, and in that sense, it’s preposterous. It’s over and done with. Sure, Whites have been really shitty to Blacks in the past, even the near past, but there is probably no group on Earth as non-racist and as tolerant of minorities as Western Whites these days, 45 years on from the 1960’s.
The Abagonds, the Tim Wises, can argue all they want about the evil racism of Whites, but I know my people. I grew up White and lived White almost my whole life, except for the past 2 years. I’ve socialized White most of my life too, once again except for the past 2 years. I know my people! Yes, we did used to be much more racist. You can see that in politics and in society. But in the past 30 years, even in the past 20 years, White racism has dramatically declined.
These Hispanics and Asians are like what we used to be, in the 1930’s-1950’s. They are unashamed of being racist or being called racist and are often mystified that it is some kind of a thought crime.
In Los Angeles, Hispanic street gangs are actually ethnically cleansing Blacks from entire neighborhoods, presumably to the cheers of the local Latinos. Around here, the Blacks I know hear Hispanics yell, “Pinche mayate!” at them a lot. If they go to a nearby White town in the foothills, no one’s going to yell “Nigger!” or anything else at them. That’s not done anymore.
Also in Los Angeles, in Lynwood, a Black town that is turning Hispanic, Hispanics recently became a majority. The local Hispanics engaged in a clear conspiracy to cleanse the Blacks out of local politics. In the elections, they ran Hispanics against Blacks in all the open seats. All of the Blacks lost, and the local government is now 100
The local Blacks are like 40
Whites don’t do that anymore. In a town that is 60
But the Hispanics can do it, and no one says a word. See how that works. Only Whites can be racist, you know.
It’s not that Whites say this out of any concern for Blacks, but we feel that we have a bum rap in Black World these days. We are treated as evil racists and as the enemy. The Abagond/Tim Wise crowd and the whole US Left makes this clear. But it’s increasingly hard to make that case as White racism recedes into subtlety and shades of its former self.
The Blacks gloat as we decline. We see this and it makes us angry. “Those Black bastards, Goddamn them,” we think. Not only that, but these Blacks are total idiots. They laugh as we lose power, but they won’t realize how good they had it. Things are going to get worse for Blacks as the White majority declines, not better. Look to Latin America as a model. It won’t be pretty. Further, the Hispanics are mostly Mexicans and Central Americans, and they don’t like Blacks at all in their societies. Just do some research if you don’t believe me.
A conservative Black writer recently wrote that a White majority is good for Blacks, and a non-White majority will not be, as it will be worse than the Whites. She’s right! She said that Blacks should strive to keep a White majority and a White culture in the US, not because Whites are wonderful, but because nowadays US Whites are better for Blacks than any of the alternatives.
As usual, Blacks think emotionally and can’t figure this out.
This is an attack on the Colombian military base in Miraflores in Guaviare Province. Guaviare has always been overrun by FARC, and it still is. Even today, when they are on the verge of defeat and collapse, they still control the province. Funny how that works.
This attack took place in August 2008. At this point, the capitalist world media was already saying that the FARC were on the edge of collapse, and “at their lowest point in 44 years.”
That’s manifestly untrue. That means that they are at their lowest point since 1964, when they were founded with a few dozen ragged forces. Forget it. Even in the late 1970’s, they only had 2,000 fighters or so. In 1998 they easily had 18,000 fighters. I figure a good 55,000 “militia” too. Militia are just peasant farmers and whatnot in the daytime, but at nighttime they may well be armed fighters.
The attack starts at 4:30 AM and utilizes a force of 500 troops. By 9 AM, they have seriously overrun the base and are carting away supplies. The battle continues all through the day, and by 4 PM, the military has finally sent in helicopter air support, but they can’t seem to do much. By this time, the remaining troops at the base have all been taken prisoner.
It’s not so bad to be taken prisoner by the FARC. Better than being killed. They keep you alive, don’t torture you, give you medical care, etc. If you try to escape, you get punished, but that’s how it goes. The majority of the “hostages” who have been “kidnapped” by the FARC are just POW’s like the guys seized in this video. They would not have to be held long if Colombia would agree to a POW swap, but they’ve never done that in 46 years, and they never will. Amazing, even the Israelis agree to such things.
There is nothing lower than a bourgeois Latin American, I am quite sure of that. Very uncompromising folks, if even the Zionists in Palestine have softer hearts.
This conflict is all about class, and a lot of it is about race. Notice that every time they interview a Colombian military guy on the media, he’s a White guy. A spokesman for the Colombian state is always a White person. But videos of the FARC are very interesting. Many mestizos, often dark mestizos, and many who look very Indian. And many mulattos or even Black FARC troops. Fact is that racism is endemic in the Colombian military, as is extreme and overt class hatred by the light-skinned officer class towards the darker-skinned conscripts.
Here it is two years later, and the FARC are supposedly even more collapsed than when they epic failed and captured this military base two years before. I suppose now they can only overrun half a base and take half the force POW.
Although reports of their demise seem to be premature.
I’ve gotten reports out of Colombia recently (I forget which region) but there is a government-death squad offensive in the area that has long been held by the FARC. Reports indicate that in this region, “many young people are joining the FARC every day.” Not that that matters, since they are defeated, right?
That sounds like Castro propaganda. There are no strict meritocracies anywhere on earth. I have no reason to think one exists in Cuba, especially in was is still by western standards a corrupt Latin American nation. Things like bribing officials are still standard fare as is common the Latin countries.
You don’t see so many Blacks and mulattos in the top positions probably because their IQ’s are lower and they can’t cut the tests, etc. Cuban education is extremely competitive and if you can’t cut it, you’re gone. Cuba has no US style affirmative action.
There’s discrimination across the board, even lucrative jobs like tourist service and driving cabs. They don’t take high IQ and these jobs mostly go to white Cubans. So I don’t thing it’s just a matter of IQ. I don’t know what the average IQ of black vs. white Cubans is anyway.
Well, whether it’s a meritocracy or not, that’s what the WN’s on American Renaissance say it is. They all hate Communism and Castro, and they hate Blacks. If there was discrimination, they would openly admit it.
But as I can see in the article, there is indeed still racism and discrimination in Cuba. But it’s not true that if you bring it up, you go to jail. Lots of Black revolutionary Cubans have been talking about this for a long time. For the tourist industry, I guess they figure that the tourists would rather deal with a White person than a Black person. Cynical thinking there.
Cuba has the lowest poverty rate in Latin America at 1
As far as jobs requiring a good education, it’s well known that the Blacks and mulattos do poorly in school, get poor grades, etc. Further, they commit a wildly disproportionate amount of street crime, so that’s why the cops harass them. Black Cubans work in the worst jobs because they have the least education.
There is also a certain amount of ghetto type behaviors that started in the Special Period. The government would build brand new housing for Cubans, a bunch of Blacks would move in and in a few months, it would be ruined as they took apart everything they could unscrew to sell it on the Black market. It’s widely acknowledged that Cuban Whites would not have fouled their own nests like that.
Contrary to this lying article, there has been a huge debate in Cuba for many years about the Blacks and their elevated rates of various pathologies. Cuba has many sociologists, and they debate this all the time in their journals and publications. The current fashionable theory is Oscar Lewis’ “The Culture of Poverty” theory. So it’s not true that the regime doesn’t care about race or never talks about it.
The educational system is a meritocracy. There’s no affirmative action in the schools. The Blacks and mulattos do poorly in the schools and on tests. The Cubans test you all the time, and the educational system is very competitive. There’s no passing people along. A lot of the Blacks just can’t cut it academically, and Cuba doesn’t have educational affirmative action to inflate their numbers at the colleges.
However, I think that Raul should take an anti-racist stand and encourage the Blacks to form civil rights organizations. I don’t think he should worry it’s going to bring down the state.
That article seems wrong about other stuff. I’m not aware that Internet is illegal in Cuba. I thought it was legal. There are lots of Cuban bloggers, some anti-government, openly blogging and no one does anything.
I’m also not aware that satellite TV is illegal. If you go to the richer parts of Havana, you will see those dishes everywhere. If they’re illegal, no one is doing anything about it.
The Cuban dissidents, unlike the dissidents in Eastern Europe, simply have no support. Or very little support. That’s why they’re not popular.
There are ~2,500 dissident organizations on the island and ~500 political prisoners. You do the math. Most of dissidents, the government just leaves alone and ignores them.
But some of the dissidents are working with the US government and the CIA to bring down the government. They are working hand in hand with the US Interests Section (We have no Embassy). They go there, get money, advice, plans, etc. That’s illegal in Cuba. That’s what most of those arrests are for.
tulio notes, remarking on the “Chilean economic miracle” under Pinochet.
I have a Venezuelan…he fled Venezuela and now lives in Chile, a more free market country, and btw the most prosperous in Latin America. And Pinochet had a lot to do with Chile’s prosperity, even though he was a bastard. If it weren’t for him, it would be another 3rd world Latin American country. He turned that country’s economy around.
First of all, Chile is not the most prosperous in Latin America. Mexico is quite a bit wealthier than Chile. Mexico seem like a First World country to you? 27
Second, it’s debatable whether Chile is more free market than Venezuela. Chile has long had a deep social democracy in place, and Venezuela has never had crap. Much of Chavez so-called evil socialism is just him trying to put the basics of a social democratic system and a civilizational infrastructure in place where there never was one – he’s spending money on education, medical care, roads, literacy, land reform, food subsidies, housing, electrification, plumbing, sewage, water, etc.
At least in Venezuela, you have a President who is committed to the entire low income and working class portion of the population. There’s no need for him to care about, work for or help the well-off, since they’re already sitting pretty as it is.
In Chile, the low-income and working class population pretty much get a gigantic Fuck You. The state only works for the 1/3 or so upper middle class, and everyone else can buzz off. I imagine this is still the case under Bachelet, but I’m not sure.
Pinochet had nothing whatsoever to do with Chile’s “prosperity.” Truth is he ruined that country. His radical libertarianism from the Chicago School quickly caused one of the worst depressions in history. In order to climb out of it, he had to repudiate neoliberal orthodoxy and involve the state, government spending and labor in his economic project (Keynesianism).
Even that more statist project did not do well. All of that economic growth under that Pinochet clown was just the climback from the damned Depression that he caused at the start! Big deal! By the end of his term, in 1989, Chile’s GDP finally matched of Allende, the socialist whom he replaced. IOW, 16 years of total economic flatlining and failure.
To illustrate, let me give some hypothetical figures, since I don’t know the real figures. Say per capita income was $8,000/year when Allende left office. Pinochet so nuked the economy that in a few years, PCI was something like $2,000/year. From 1978-1989, there was huge economic growth, true, but they were just climbing out the rut. By 1989, his last year in office, PCI finally made it up back to $8,000 year again. Talk about spinning your wheels.
The upper classes did much better though under Pinochet, maybe the top 1/3. Everyone else got royally screwed. Average wages declined by 35
Chile is doing ok now with a much more state-interventionist economic scheme under a Socialist President, Bachelet. Much of Chile’s relatively good human development figures are due to its deep socialist and social democratic, especially health care and education: Chile has been a pretty socialist state for a long time now. Chile has a decent national health care system, and that’s the reason for its commendable health figures. Malnutrition figures are also very low; Chile does a good job of feeding its people.
Education is another matter. About 1/2 of the public schools are literally falling apart. I mean literally, as in collapsing. There’s no agenda to fix them, because the pricks who run the country all send their kids to private schools (this is how it works all over Latin America).
It’s no surprise tulio has been brainwashed about Pinochet. The US media has told nothing but lies about the guy.
The gap between the rich and the poor in Chile is absolutely insane, and the racism and class hatred is rife and toxic. The light-skinned well to do live in gated compounds or with high walls around their sumptuous homes, often with barbed wire and guard dogs. They live that way because of the out of control crime rate, especially theft, by the darker-skinned lower classes. The crime rate is a symptom of the insane inequality and class hatred in that place. Chile is just another typical Latin American shithole, a little fancier than the rest of them.
I’ve known some Chileans; their contempt for poor and working class people was palpable, and they were openly and outrageously racist against Chilean Indians. And these people were supposedly “leftwingers.”
Update: In the comments section, the brilliant James Schipper adds some good hard figures to the argument. The rich-poor gap he talks about can be represented as a Gini coefficient.
The main thing about the Chile was that the upper classes, maybe the top 1/3 or so, totally cleaned up under Pinochet. Pinochet merely dramatically shifted income from the bottom 2/3 of the population to the to top 1/3, so obviously he’s wildly popular among the well to do in Latin America. As a socialist, I’m not supposed to support Reverse Robin Hood policies. Any socialist doing that may as well hang it up and just become a Republican. Or join the Democratic Leadership Committee (DLC), same thing.
It’s fascinating that neoliberals and libertarians continue to rave about this fake “miracle”. Either they’re lying, or they’re idiots.
Some people never learn.
Excellent post! In the early 1980s, the unemployment rate in Chile reached 25
Pinochet also privatized pensions, but guess what, the military kept their government pension plan.
According to the CIA World Factbook, the richest 10
It seems that any government that pursues neoliberal economic policies will be praised by MSM in the West while any government that does the opposite will be excoriated.
This link is from Niggermania, but the site is a good resource for learning about racism against Black people. I’ve found that the White racist sites are the most straight up honest about the low-down on how racist a place is. If a country or culture is racist as Hell against non-Whites, the racists love it and cheer it on. Cultures or nations that are more tolerant are routinely derided by the racists as PC, hopeless, brainwashed, nigger-lovers, anti-racists, liberals, etc.
Now, these guys have no reason to lie. If a place is racist and nasty, they come right out and say so. If a place is relatively tolerant, they think that sucks, and they call that out loudly. I have some commenters who insist that racists would see a very tolerant place as a viciously racist place. But why would they do that? They hate tolerant lands.
On the other hand, there is a serious problem with misrepresentation of nations by their nationalist citizens, especially Latin Americans, who don’t like gringos in the first place, don’t like to be compared to unfavorably to Gringo Americans. Many middle to upper class White or mestizo Latin Americans will insist that everything is groovy down there. Easy for them to say; they aren’t feeling any pain. But ask a Black Latin American, and you might get a different story.
Anyway, according to this link, 20 years ago (1990) there was de facto Jim Crow discrimination against Blacks in Ecuador. For all intents and purposes, Blacks were not allowed to serve as police or military officers. They were effectively barred from medicine, law and most other high-paying professions. Instead they were largely relegated to field work.
That’s a screwed up situation, and it would be interesting to see if it’s still going on.
Here is another post that talks about being a tourist or ESL teacher in Ecuador. Apparently being a temporary foreign worker or bucks up American tourist of any color is a different matter altogether down there.
Black American tourists are unlikely to encounter serious problems, and the scene on the beach is a lot of fun for Black people, with lots of Black Ecuadorians and Black Colombians hanging out at the discos and partying. It looks like the scene on the beach is different from the rest of Ecuador in that the Blacks have created their own reggae – party scene on the coast.
On the other hand, it’s perfectly possible for de facto wealthy American Blacks (if you have the money to travel to Latin America as a tourist, you’re a rich American in their eyes) to go to a country and have a good time while the native Blacks are still suffering serious institutional discrimination. That’s because the American’s skin tone is washed away by his Rich American image.
Unfortunately, my only source for this is Niggermania, but I’m upholding it as valid anyway, as it confirms my suspicions. According to the poster, racism against Blacks is much worse in Colombia than it is in the US. This is in line with my general experience too. Latin Americans (Whites and mestizos) generally hate Blacks with a passion. The possible exceptions are the most mixed states such as Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela.
However, this post gives the lie to the Colombian tolerance ethnic. Of course Colombians are not PC-tolerant! That’s a Western thing. Hispanics are not into this PC crap. That’s an auto-toxin peculiar to Western Whites. One problem is that Latin America is full of liars who want to say there is no racism in their lands. They say this as a nationalist way of making their country look good to gringos. I have long been deeply suspicious of this, and that is why I used Stormfront as my source for the Whites in Latin America post.
The PC or relatively anti-racist Latin nations were of course called out on Stormfront as such and derided for their heresy. For the rest, it was call em as I see em.
It’s almost better to use flagrantly racist sources for some things, like gauges for the racism level in a community, although it requires some finesse. These folks often call out PC regions and nations with indignation, while areas rife with racism are hailed accordingly. On the contrary, a lot of the rest are too nationalistic or parochial to give you a straight-up report on what is going on and tend to give you PR “nothing to see here, move on” type reports.
It’s probable that the Caribbean is not all that racist, but it’s mostly Black and mulatto by now. Racism is less in Cuba and the Dominican Republic than here in the US. For Puerto Rico, it’s a bit different, but it’s hard to tell. The thing is, once a place goes majority-Black or mulatto, racism against Blacks tends to subside. Anti-Black racism works best in places were Blacks are a minority.
To be honest, Niggermania is not a White nationalist site. It’s just a site for anti-Black racists. In general, they don’t seem to hate Hispanics, Asians, etc. In fact, they are supportive of them. It’s also really hilarious, but it’s a bit bad for my soul. I like Blacks, or at least I don’t dislike them, so sites like that tend to get under my skin at best and are painful to read at worst. Painful because I like Blacks. Get under my skin since I have a racist heart alongside my anti-racist one, and like all living entities, it likes to be fed.
I really don’t use words like nigger much except in jokes with certain people, and even then it’s used in such a light-hearted way that it’s almost devoid of much racism (hard to explain, you would have to be a White liberal to understand, but it’s almost like saying fuck or shit, it’s sort of an intensifier). In fact, I’m so PC, I usually don’t even like to think the word nigger, much less say it.
As far as why I’m reading Niggermania, well thank my ex-acquaintance Abagond for that one. Call a man a thief enough, and he might start stealing from you just to prove you right. Thanks Abagond, you just turned me into a Niggermania reader, or was that your intention all along?
If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.
Just not for Whites! I dig this blog, but I have issues with Western Maoists guys for the usual reasons. White nationalists may be interested to note that they support ethnic secessionism in the US! Just not for Whites. They support the execrable Aztlan Chicano secessionist movement in the US and the Black secessionist movement in the US South, which aims to create a state out of the US Black Belt (map here). They support these absurd causes because supposedly Blacks and Hispanics are both oppressed minorities in the US, hence have the right to self-determination according to Marxist (specifically, Leninist and Stalinist) theory. I figure if you’re going to give Blacks and Chicanos the right to secede, why not give Whites the right to secede too? Some other questions remain unanswered. Would the Blacks and Hispanics have the right to throw all the Blacks and Hispanics out of the Black and Hispanic states? I assume these guys are completely hostile to White nationalism, but it’s interesting that they see both US Blacks and Hispanics are members of oppressed nations. I guess Whites don’t get to secede because they are not an “oppressed minority?” The independent Black state in the South would be a disaster. The whole place would probably turn into some combination of Detroit plus the Mississippi Delta. Being an oppressed minority in the US is the best thing that’s ever happened to US Blacks. We’ve gotten rid of slavery and Jim Crow, and racism has been declining for 45 years since the Civil Rights Act. Anywhere else on Earth, they would be worse off. Want to go back to Africa? Didn’t think so. Want to move to those wonderful Black countries in the Caribbean? Nope. How about moving to that wonderful state of Brazil, where they got rid of racism once and for all? Guess not. Blacks in the US and the rest of the West have it better than anywhere else on Earth. Granted, we could certainly treat them better, and that’s a task that anti-racists at their best moments continue to hammer away at. But Blacks and Whites in the US evolved in a symbiotic relationship. I don’t know about Whites needing Blacks, but I’m convinced that US Blacks need US Whites. They’d fall apart without us. An independent Black state in the South would be a massive fail. Segregation in the past did not work for Blacks. Ask how many Blacks want to go back to segregation? The independent Black state would in effect be a return to segregation. What happens when you pull all the Whites out of a city and return to an effectively segregated Black ghetto? No matter what it’s called, Oakland, East St. Louis, the Bronx, Harlem, South Central LA, South Side Chicago, Newark, Gary, Hammond, Baltimore, Washington DC, New Orleans, the result is much the same. A Black ghetto, with sky-high rates of crime and every other social pathology you can think of. We can argue on and on about why Black ghettos end up the way they are, but the fact is that they are what they are. When Blacks are more spread out and not living in heavily-Black communities, it seems obvious to me that they do better, though I haven’t seen any studies yet. For example, my city is 4
But could you imagine what this city would be like if it was 67
Repost from the old site. I am not convinced that being a market-dominant minority is the smart thing to do, but some groups just outcompete others. Jews outcompete White Gentiles (the real reason for most anti-Semitism) and Overseas Chinese outcompete Malays, Indonesians and Filipinos. After a while, the people in the country get tired of a group of “outsiders” numbering perhaps 1-3
Still, I think there is a smart way (Overseas Chinese, Armenians, East Indians, Lebanese) and a dumb way (Jewish) to be a market-dominant minority. Uncle Milton commented on a previous post of mine that dealt peripherally with the overseas Chinese. I will deal with his comments at the end of the article:
Robert Lindsay: There are differences between Jews and Overseas Chinese. The Overseas Chinese tend to keep their heads down, keep out of politics, and are not endlessly meddling in the cultural and political affairs of the nation – they just focus on making money. Jews focus on making money too, but they can’t seem to help trying to change society, a habit that arouses mountains of anti-Semitism. Uncle Milton: I would say this is incorrect. Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister of Thailand (and one of the richest if not the richest men in Thailand) was deposed by a military coup is ethnically Chinese. There were also many ethnic Chinese who were very close to Suharto and received special favors and privileges from the Indonesian government. The Chinese in Indonesia, however, have had to play a background role because the Indonesians, especially the Muslims, resented them. Basically, as recently as 1998 there were pogroms against ethnic Chinese. (One could also say the anti-communist purges of the mid 60s were heavily directed against ethnic Chinese.) In other words ethnic Chinese in Indonesia were never tolerated previously as much as Jews have been in the US in the past five decades, so they had no basis on which to build a political or cultural movement. In recent years however, China has given aid and been an important foreign investor in Indonesia. I suspect ethnic Chinese influence using mainland China with it’s rising economic prowess (and potentially it’s substantial army) will increase (outwardly) in Southeast Asia. As for the Philippines, their national hero Jose Rizal was part Chinese as was the first president after Marcos’ dictatorship ended: Razored Aquino.
I really do not know much about the Overseas Chinese. I do not think that they would go on Jewish-type jihads to wage radical change in Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines no matter what. Overseas Chinese just do not care about such things. They just care about making money and keeping the pogroms away and little else. Sure, they have gained quite a bit of political power, as one might expect due to their money. However, I believe that Indonesia and certainly Malaysia still have some very anti-Chinese laws on the books. The Communist revolutionaries in Malaysia were mostly Chinese, but the Chinese got into this movement not due to any love of Communism so much as a way of changing a government that they saw as heavily biased against the Chinese. In this way, they may be somewhat comparable to the many Jews who flocked to the Bolsheviks in Russia and the Communists in Poland during and after World War 2 not necessarily because they loved Communism so much, but more because the Communists were offering to crack down hard on anti-Semitism, and Polish and Russian anti-Semitism has not been a picnic for the Jews. It’s quite common for Filipinos, especially the urban university educated middle and upper classes, to be part-Chinese. The Chinese have been coming to the Philippines in large numbers for 800 years now and they bred in pretty heavily with the locals. Filipinos with some Chinese ancestry are quite common. The real Overseas Chinese are the pure Chinese who are 3
Uncle Milton responds: I would say any ethnic minority group that controls 70
Ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia (with the exception of Thailand) are probably in a position similar to Jews in the US around 1950 with the although the ethnic Chinese control a much larger percentage of the wealth in the Southeast Asia than Jews control in the US. The rise of political and cultural influence from Jews (US) came fairly soon after WWII and the formation of Israel and really got rolling by about the mid-60s. In my view US Jews have probably hit their peak influence or are past it. Basically it’s a numbers game, Jews are declining rapidly in number both nominally and as a percentage of the population. The average number of children born to Jewish women is 1.1; even this number is skewed towards Orthodox Jews, who tend to have larger families and generally do not get involved in politics. The ongoing Hispanicization of the US will, in my opinion, ironically (since multiple Jewish groups promote immigration to the US) mark a decline in Jewish influence. Latino Catholics tend not to be interested (and if anything are somewhat anti-Semitic) in Judaism unlike many evangelical Whites, many of which are Zionists and and tend to be very pro-Jewish. I tend to believe the Overseas Chinese influence will strengthen in coming years, basically in conjunction with the rise of economic power in China. Effectively, over time, I believe we will see a Sinicization of all of East Asia with the exception of Japan. In regards to repression of ethnic Chinese in Indonesia: those laws have been reversed. As for Malaysia, basically the laws are similar in scope to our affirmative action laws. It’s up to each individual, I suppose, to determine how oppressive affirmative action is. In addition, Malaysia has some quirky laws about Islam; the Constitution states that all Malays are Islamic and anyone marrying a Muslim has to convert to Islam. I am convinced that any further pogroms against Overseas Chinese will be met with some sort of response by the PRC. Likely first an economic threat and if severe enough, a military threat.
I respond to Uncle Milton: I am not going to go round and round about this. My perception is that the whole Overseas Chinese (OC) thing has been to keep their heads down, focus on making money and getting along, and stay out of cultural stuff. They are the complete opposite of the Jews. Now, why so many OC got involved in the Indonesian Communist Party in 1965, I have no idea. First of all, I am not even sure it is true. I am sure that there must also have been huge numbers of Indonesians involved. After all, that party was one of the largest political parties in the nation. It’s been outlawed since 1965 because the ruling Indonesian elites are so terrified of it coming back bigtime. Communist parties (CP’s) are still a pretty big force in that region. Vietnam and Laos are ruled by CP’s, Cambodia had a ruling CP until just recently (not the Khmer Rogue, but instead a pro-Vietnamese CP whose leader was named Hun Sen), the Philippines has a vast CP that is outlawed and has taken up arms in a huge insurgency, Nepalese Maoists are about to seize power, Indian Maoists are tearing up India, there is a Maoist insurgency in Bangladesh, there is an active armed CP in Burma, and China, the largest nation on Earth, is ruled by a CP. Communism goes right along with the cultural and economic realities of the region very well, particularly with Confucianism and Buddhism. Indonesia still has one of the most horrible and inequitable semi-feudal economies in the region. It’s not that different from the Philippines. A ruling elite who are little more than criminals has teamed up with the military to steal about every spare dime in the land. Hunger and malnutrition are widespread, and wages are ridiculously low. The state for all intents and purposes as a guarantor of the rights of the poor, who are the overwhelming majority, simply does not exist. The ruling system under Suharto (pangasila) – an alliance between capital and labor along with very close ties between capital, the military and state, along with all sorts of para-state organizations – bears quite close resemblance to classical fascism. The state even has bands of street thugs (usually Islamists) who conveniently assault striking workers. Leftists, dissidents and labor activists are also just out and out murdered by the state. I am not sure about the Sinicization of the whole region, because so many nationalists in those countries are hostile to the OC. Even in Vietnam there is a lot of hostility towards the OC and to Chinese in general. Fact is, no one in Asia likes the Chinese. This is what I have been told by Asians. They are an 800-lb gorilla romping through the backyard and everyone is scared of them. There is a Chinese nationalist who comes here every once in a while and he is furious at the way that these countries have treated their ethnic Chinese. He is urging the OC’s to just pack up, sell off their assets, and go back to China or Taiwan. You may be correct that China may intervene in the next anti-Chinese pogroms, assuming that they occur. The Jews are total morons for letting all of these anti-Semitic Mesoamerican Catholics in here. Jesus Christ, what were they thinking? I talk to these Hispanics now and again, and they are, as a group, way more anti-Semitic than the average US White Protestant. Jews are so stupid sometimes. You know that probably 80-90
Jews play dangerous games a lot, and this is one more case of it. They don’t want to oppose immigration because that will set off White racism. They like immigration because it weakens the dominant ethnic-religious group in the nation – in this case, White Christians. Thing is, the Jews have done their work and the job is done. White Christians are already sufficiently diluted that there is not going to be any racist backlash that is going to turn anti-Semitic and go after the Jews. Whites are like 64
Amy Chua’s World On Fire is an excellent example of a modern-day Overseas Chinese polemic. Her OC aunt living in the Philippines was murdered by her Filipina maid, possibly in a fit of ethnic pique.
Say what you will about the White Nationalists, and they are some of the biggest assholes in the whole world, but they also tell it like it is. And like them or not, for us Whites, they are the only people defending our people: From a comment on the White Nationalist website American Renaissance:
And when the country is filled with Hispanics, America will look and run like a Third-world banana republic. Plenty of crime, poverty, corruption, litter, graffiti, drugs, and teenage pregnancies. Kind of like how much of Los Angeles looks now.
But of course. Import 3rd World people and you get a 3rd World country. I would qualify that in some ways. If we carefully selected high-quality legal immigrants from the 3rd World, they would assimilate well. We don’t. We let the peasants and urban poor of the 3rd World, especially Mesoamerica, pour in here. They have, on average, a 5th grade education. They are very low-quality immigrants. They are not even here legally; they are all breaking the law. They create slums and cause crime epidemics and massive job losses for natives everywhere they go in our country. There is no reason for them to be here. A Marxist analysis of this issue totally fails from someone here on the ground. The poor of Mesoamerica simply recreate Mesoamerica, in all of its stupidity, backwardsness, awfulness and sickening squalor. How can they not? This is what they are programmed to do. Would the elite of Latin America be any better? I don’t know, but I doubt if they would create ghettos, squalor and crime and gang epidemics everywhere they hunkered down. Perhaps they would create a lesser set of problems, but we have not had that conversation yet. We’re too busy importing Tijuana’s shantytowns, and Tijuana itself, to America. No sane 1st country would commit suicide like this. Why are we doing this? Because the Whites of the US are suicidal. Because the Hispanics are as racially and ethnically loyal (with all the racist connotations that that carries along with it) as we Whites are not allowed to be, lest we be Nazis. No group is more ruined by the illegal Mesoamerican criminal invader attack than the Blacks, but the US Blacks are so PC-wrecked that they can’t even defend themselves. A few reactionary Blacks have had the brains to point out that as bad as we Whites are to Blacks (and we’ve gotten dramatically better in 40 years), just about everyone else would be worse, if not much worse. There is no debate about Hispanics. When Hispanics supercede Blacks in a city, the first thing they do is ethnically cleanse the Blacks from official positions. They are not shy about this. They go door to door announcing their intentions, in the way we Whites cannot, for fear of being Nazis. In Lynwood, California, the Blacks were cleansed right out of government as soon as Hispanics got a majority. In Los Angeles, Hispanic gangs openly murder Blacks in plain sight. Even the most racist of Whites have hardly done that in years. The dirty little secret of illegal immigration is that the illegals are imported so that employers do not have to hire US Blacks. Illegal immigrants are objectively and provably devastating to working class Blacks, yet the Blacks cheer on their worst enemies. They hope to replace us Whites (and no one on Earth is kinder to them) with a post-White America, which will assuredly be crueler to Blacks. It’s almost like PC is Swine Flu Of The Brain in the way it afflicts so many of those colonized by the virus. Like Mad Cow Disease eating away at the brain, Political Correctness Virus compels many of those afflicted to charge headlong, cheering, into the wreckage of their own people. Go figure.