Recent News

The U.S. added a scant 114,000 new jobs in September—and remember the Main Stream Media never mentions that Washington is giving foreigners around 100,000 work permits a month—but the unemployment rate fell below 8% for the first time since Barack Obama took office. The disparity prompted a now-notorious tweet from former General Electric boss Jack Welch:

Unbelievable jobs numbers…these Chicago guys will do anything…

Can’t debate so change numbers.

Without putting anything past the Obama team, I believe this was a naïve reaction. Employment growth certainly was startling—I can’t remember anything comparable in my 25 years in economic journalism—but the sample sizes involved are very small and noise happens. Next month may see the reverse.

The real story is the long-run trend: the relentless displacement of native-born Americans by immigrants. Neither the Democrats, the MSM (but I repeat myself) or Conservatism Inc. want

Before I ever met John Philippe Rushton I saw him on the Geraldo Rivera television program. It was in 1989, shortly after his ground-breaking work on race differences first began to get international attention. One of the guests was that weasel Barry Mehler of Ferris State University, who has tried to make a career of denouncing scientists if he doesn’t like their research.

Prof. Mehler could hardly control himself. “I am trained in unmasking academic racism,” he shouted, “and you are a racist!” Phil smiled and replied quietly, “I am an academic.”

Another guest was a black man named Charles King, whose understanding of science was even spottier than Prof. Mehler’s. “Are you saying I am your inferior?” he thundered. “No,” replied Phil, “I am saying we are different.” The program was a tour de force of reasonable explanations and unflappable manners on the one hand, and fulmination on the other.

I met Phil not long after that impressive performance, and through many years of friendship until his death two days ago, the qualities I saw on that program always impressed me. Phil had an intense desire to know the truth, to understand our species in all its complexity. He was also polite to a fault, even in the face of the vilest provocation. But it is as a man of science that he will be remembered—a great thinker in the distinguished lineage of Francis Galton, Charles Spearman, and Arthur Jensen. In a sane world, Canada would recognize him as the national treasure he was.

John Philippe Rushton was born in 1943 in Bournemouth, England, and received a Ph.D. in 1973 from the London School of Economics for work in the development of altruism in children. In 1974 he emigrated to Canada, and in 1977 he took a post at the University of Western Ontario, where he became a full professor in 1985.

Phil’s first important scientific contributions grew out of his studies of altruism in children. During a sabbatical year he spent in Berkeley, California, in 1981, he could not help noticing that in a multi-racial society, people care most about their own group. Hispanics supported recognition of Spanish as an official language, Jews were interested in what was happening in Israel, and blacks associated with and supported each other. This led Phil to develop Genetic Similarity Theory, according to which people are most altruistic towards those to whom they are biologically close, and less altruistic and even hostile to those who are biologically distant. He studied how people sense genetic similarity, and the consequences this has for society.

During this period he began to investigate race differences—in particular race differences in intelligence and brain size—but broadened his research to include all physiological and behavioral race differences. This led to his ground-breaking application of r-K theory to human races—and, of course, to his demonization.

Phil’s crucial insight was to realize that different races show consistent patterns that reflect different reproductive strategies. At one extreme are East Asians,

The first thing to grasp about Romney’s surrender to Obama’s Administrative DREAMnesty:

• It envisages an upcoming Amnesty.

Romney told The Denver Post

“The people who have received the special visa that the president has put in place, which is a two-year visa, should expect that the visa would continue to be valid. I'm not going to take something that they've purchased," Romney said. "Before those visas have expired we will have the full immigration reform plan that I've proposed.

…Romney said in a sit-down interview with The Post aboard his campaign bus ahead of a Denver rally that he would work with Congress in the first year to pass permanent immigration reform legislation. [Emphasis added]

Mitt Romney would honor Obama administration's illegal immigrant work permits by Allison Sherry October 2, 2012

The only way to avoid the legal obligation to deport these thieves is to give them amnesty

As Patrick Cleburne blogged earlier, Romney has morphed into Rick Perry—adopting the dovish stance on illegal immigration that justly destroyed Perry’s candidacy.

But secondly, and even worse:

• Romney has acquiesced in what amounted to a Coup d’état –

Obama’s short-circuiting of the legislative process was called by Senator Sessions “a direct threat to the rule of law.” This coup is so egregious that Senate candidate Ted Cruz (like Sessions a lawyer) has declared that the policy should be reversed and deportations commenced.

The correct response to Obama’s action – regardless of the merits of the policy itself—would have been to defend the Constitution. If need be by Impeachment.  American love their Constitution and Romney would have been a hero.

As it is, he appears–like a politician.

Why? Surely this businessman cannot be so innumerate to take the Hispanic vote myth seriously. Does he really think that having repelled the Paul vote and Blue collar women by his belligerence and the social conservative vote by his arrogant blunder over Chick-fil-A, he can afford dishearten immigration patriots too?

John Derbyshire has suggested that Romney is

A cluelessly unimaginative member of the "Extreme Center"…genuinely uncomfortable dealing with ideas outside the narrow scope of core conventional wisdom (as defined, of course, by the media lefties, academic log-rollers, and corporate PR flacks).

An alternative explanation, unfortunately, is that he has been corrupted by the same mysterious force which induced the House Republicans to flout their mandate after the 2010.

Either way Romney’s fitness to be President is in question.

But since the likely consequence of this stupidity is a low white turnout, the question is probably academic.

Peter Brimelow [Email him] is the editor of VDARE.com.

Peter Brimelow writes: This is the talk I just gave to The Social Contract’s 2012 Writers Workshop on Sunday (Sept. 30). We’ll link to the video when it becomes available. Many thanks to everyone at TSC.

Let me start off with good, or at any rate interesting, news: Mitt Romney is going to be the next President of the United States.

I know this because FAIR’s President Dan Stein told me so. He told all of us who attended the FAIR Board of Advisers meeting yesterday so.

Now, it’s not often that Dan says anything crazier than me! So I thought this news was worth passing on.

And I should add that Dan also had this new hot young elections analyst for RealClearPolitics speak. I always thought he had the ideal name for an election analyst: Sean Trende! But it turns out that he pronounces it “Trend-y”

At VDARE.com we like Trende, because he agrees with us! He’s started to say things that I can modestly we’ve been saying for the last twelve years. Such as “the Hispanic vote is much exaggerated.” And “the real target of opportunity in American politics is the white working class; the white working class is up for grabs.”

Anyway, it turns out Trende takes Romney’s chances quite seriously too.

Now one of the functions of the Main Stream Media is to explain, after the fact, why whatever happened was inevitable.

So how did Mitt Romney become inevitable?

Maybe it was any one of a series of statements, made within the last year and throughout this summer.

Here’s one–from his landmark speech to the US Chamber of Commerce. Romney said:

Nuestra Belleza México,  Cynthia Duque of the northern city of Monterrey.

The expression “white privilege” is in vogue, although I haven’t yet discovered how I, as a white American, have any. After all, I’m not eligible for Affirmative Action or similar programs, nor could I sue on the basis of “Disparate Impact”. And, according to Attorney General Eric Holder, I’m not protected by the Obama Administration’s “Hate Crime” legislation. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that, in today’s America, “white privilege” is a delusion.

But not everywhere. Consider Mexico, our neighbor to the south. It definitely has white privilege in its beauty pageants.

According to CIA stats, Mexico’s population is 9% white, 30% indigenous, and 60% mestizo (i.e. both white and Indian ancestors.) This is roughly compatible with the Mexican Genome Project, which calculated that 65% of Mexican genetic material is indigenous (i.e., American Indian) and 35% is non-indigenous, varying greatly by region and social class.

So the majority of Mexicans are mestizos. But technically speaking, the "mestizo" classification includes every Mexican with any white/Indian mixture—whether that's 99% white and 1% Indian or 99% Indian and 1% white. There are mestizos at the white end of the spectrum who can pass as whites and for all practical purposes are white. Conversely, there are mestizos who are, racially speaking, Indians. There are no hard and fast lines between the groups.

Nevertheless, the groups do exist and have a distinct hierarchy. Generally speaking, in Mexican society, the higher you climb, the whiter the Mexicans are—the lower, the darker.

This is very obvious on Mexican television. The actors, actresses and po

Paul Kersey recently reported on VDARE.com an emerging trend: for white suburbs to secede from larger urban jurisdictions and so form, in effect, whitopian enclaves.

But he did not mention that there are powerful forces on the other side pushing back hard—using a concept called “Regional Equity.”

Americans can be forgiven for not being familiar with Regional Equity. I had not heard the term myself until just a few weeks ago, when I caught Stanley Kurtz on the radio talking about his new book: Spreading the Wealth: How Obama is Robbing the Suburbs to Pay for the Cities.

Put Regional Equity into a search engine and the language of the collectivists surfaces: transportation equity, environmental equity, healthcare equity, social justice, smart growth, and especially, sustainable communities.

The essence of Regional Equity is the use of centralized political power make things equal over regions—disregarding jurisdictions.

President Obama is very much on board with the Regional Equity movement. The White House website says:

“President Obama will also take a regional approach that disregards traditional jurisdictional boundaries [my emphasis—JM], setting policy that takes into account how cities, suburbs, and exurbs interact. President Obama’s urban policy agenda will use this integrated approach to enhance economic competitiveness, sustainability, and equity in our cities and metropolitan areas.”

Furthermore, PolicyLink (a pro-minority think tank run by a woman graduate of Howard University