Orange County's Illegal Alien Serial Killer: How the Dream Act Murdered the California Dream

In Orange County, a series of murders of homeless, aging White guys (that's them above) had everyone on edge. One even took place outside a local library. The latest one involved a man, ironically, featured in the LA Times being warned about the killer by local police. Bystanders chased the man down. He is, police say, the killer: twenty-three year old Itzcoatl Ocampo, brought (illegally) to the US at age 1 from Mexico, reportedly kicked out of the US Marine Corps, and 2006 graduate of Esperanza High School. His last victim was a Vietnam Veteran.


This is pretty much the Death of the California Dream, and the birth of the Dream Act in miniature. Ocampo (that's him above), the poster boy for "diversity" and "multiculturalism" hunts down and kills the most helpless, elderly or aging homeless White guys. Including a Vietnam Vet.


Even lunatics like Ocampo have people in his corner. A zillion relatives, the League of United Latin American Citizens, MeChA, La Raza, the US Department of Justice, the media (which has been careful to suppress that he came to America illegally and is Mexican), and the police. Unlike say, White, homeless and schizophrenic Kelly Thomas, Ocampo was not beaten to death (by a mixture of cops including one Mexican-ancestry cop). Unlike say, Douglas Zerby, Ocampo was not shot to death for holding a garden hose (by a Hispanic and White cop respectively). Nor was Ocampo given an elbow on the head, as a White, mentally disturbed, homeless (and retarded) woman got, caught on video and shown on local news.

Cops can and do deal out whatever they want to Whites without connections and power. Meanwhile they tread carefully around Mexicans, Blacks, Asians, and other non-White groups. Why?

Is it Anarcho-Terror, the idea of punishing ordinary Middle Class people while allowing thugs to do as they please? Nope, as that does not capture the racial and class component. As historian David Fischer noted in Albion's Seed, there were four basic folkways/cultures that settled and shaped America. The Puritans, the Quakers, the Virginia Aristocrats, and the Hillbillies. The Puritans and Quakers have long since combined, and the Aristocrats rapidly disappeared after the Civil War. Leaving an eternal war between the noxious combination of the Puritans and Quakers, and the Hillbillies on the other side.

It was not always so. Mark Twain aka Samuel Clemens, was part of the "Quality" of the Hillbillies, and worked as a River pilot as a young man (akin to being a 747 pilot today). He disliked intensely, many aspects of Hillbilly life, as seen in Huckleberry Finn: the pointless feuds, the cruel superstitions that caused unreasonable fear among children (the description of the Death-Watch beetle is obviously a personal one), the sudden mob violence, the credulity and cruelty, and the casual regard of Black people as less than human. Twain famously settled in Connecticut, and his Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court is basically a long explanation of why he disliked the Hillbilly culture so much, and preferred the Puritan one. The book was not about Dark Ages Britain and the resistance to pagan Saxon invaders, but about how much BETTER settled, ordered Connecticut was than violent Missouri.

On the other hand, Richard Brautigan, culturally a Puritan (raised in the Pacific Northwest in poverty) romanticized Confederate rebellion, with his first novel "A Confederate General From Big Sur" exploring an internal secession from the ugly Puritan reality, continued in books such as "The Hawkline Monster" and "The Abortion: An Historical Romance 1966." [Brautigan is unjustly forgotten, and was a unique and gentle critic of modern American life, in favor of the "old, weird" America.]

Be that as it may, the mingling of the utopian, pacifist, and universal Quaker viewpoints (all are beloved of God and God's Children, people are all the same, pacifism is the answer) and the Puritan ones (a select group of pre-ordained saved, a terrible unity enforced with violence, a lack of will to do anything but God's pre-ordained plan, everything wicked outside, and the tiny group of faithful inside) was inevitable as the two expanded Westward, particularly after the South and Hillbillies and Aristocrats were crushed in the post-Civil War era. The two groups became intertwined, and in conflict with the only remaining outsider White group: Hillbillies.

For while Twain's criticisms of Hillbilly life and culture were undoubtedly correct, Hillbillies remained as they were. Viewing government as something used to oppress them, by distant people. Trusting only themselves and neighbors who were related in some way. Independent, highly mobile, and disdainful of education. Filled with folk ways and superstitions, willing to fight, and taking pride in martial prowess of America. The only government they liked was the military, and foreigners were viewed with suspicion at best and hatred at worst.

Meanwhile Puritan-Quakers viewed themselves as the "only good White people" and that Hillbillies were cursed with "original racial sin" and responsible for all the bad things in history that had ever happened. Non-Whites were viewed as not merely God's Children but uniquely blessed with magical, spiritual qualities lacking the "innate racism" that plagued Hillbillies and the uptight conformity that drove Puritan achievement but made life "boring."

As time went on, various Ethnic Catholic Whites: Irish, Poles, Italians, Germans, and so on were lumped in with "the wrong sort of White people" and various attempts like Prohibition were made to control and eradicate them. Progressive Eugenicists in the US such as Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, and David Starr Jordan, peace activist, director of the Sierra Club, President of Stanford University, wanted the "wrong sort of White people" sterilized as much as non-Whites. "Defective" Whites, mostly Hillbillies and various ethnic Catholics, were sterilized in Puritan-Quaker states such as California, Oregon, Washington, and Maine along with non-Whites.

Anarcho-tyranny is just another name for the long-running struggle among White people, over how the world works, how it will be organized, and what the definition of the good life is. Puritan-Quakers believe, in an ironic twist, in a universal (i.e. Medieval Catholic) conception of mankind. One without God, but with Gaia. Forming the same function, the desire to create a universal, nationless world ordered by a universal priesthood (made up of them, naturally) for a universal good in harmony with Gaia's will. If not God's. Meanwhile Hillbillies and various Ethnic Whites (mostly but not exclusively Catholic) hold to nationalism, intense devotion to place (Philip Larkin's "Little England") and heritage. They reject universalism in place of localism, and you can see this from say, Tolkien's Shire (heaven is Lancashire, England or the Lake District or the Cotswolds), to Joss Whedon's "Firefly" (the Confederates are the GOOD guys). Perhaps the most liberal guy in Hollywood made a TV show and movie advocating localism and separatism.

For Hillbillies, tradition matters. For Puritan-Quakers, it is something to be abolished because it's "racist." Or something. Hillbillies revel in sin, and then ask forgiveness on Sunday morning. Puritan-Quakers believe all (Whites) but them are filled with sin, and therefore must be punished. Hillbillies want a nation, and Puritan-Quakers a world-order. Hillbillies want to enjoy sin, and Puritan-Quakers want to enjoy virtue. Drinking, smoking, eating bad but delicious food, versus outdoorsy exercise, "serving the community" by walking for AIDs or something, and virtuous abstaining from bad foods. These are fundamental differences in how to live life, how to order people in a group, how to create for the future (or not). There is no compromise, and in one sense this has been the central fight since the universalist, Empire-building Romans fought the particularist, individualistic/localized Celts, in Spain, Gaul, and Britain, starting in the 3rd Century BC.

Thus, the death of the California Dream and the birth of the Dream Act. For now, the Puritan-Quakers have won. Holding the commanding heights of the media, law, politics, and in explicit alliance with anti-White groups such as La Raza and LULAC, the Puritan-Quakers have helped ethnically cleanse the White Middle Class (uncomfortably Hillbilly) and the Beach Boy's California Dreamin' out of California. In favor of illegals, at least one of whom found it necessary to hunt down and kill elderly homeless White guys.

Itzcoatl (the name is derived from some Aztec warrior-chief) Ocampo is the very person the Dream Act is supposed to help. Grant citizenship to an illegal who went to school in the US, regardless if he was there legally or not. Certainly grant him citizenship if he serves in the military. While the media ties itself up in horror over (White) Marines peeing on dead Taliban, it ignores a real Mexican ex-Marine seeking out and killing White guys who were helpless. That is the Dream Act.

It is nothing less than a war of extermination, of annihilation, by the Puritan-Quaker group against the Hillbilly-Ethnic group. It is as old as Caesar's massacres of the Gauls. The California Dream is dead. The one place, where White middle class people of no particular connection or advantage (in a word, Hillbillies or Ethnics) could live, and achieve for themselves a higher living standard than their parents, and their kids still higher than them, is dead. Killed by mass immigration (nearly all illegal) from Mexico, notions of original White racial sin, ethnic cleansing of Whites by the mass immigration (through pricing out of ordinary people of limited desirable places to live), and what Steve Sailer called "the High-Low" team-up of rich White elites and poor non-Whites.

Instead of the California Dream, and the Beach Boys, we have the Dream Act, and the Mexicanization of California and the US, complete with a Mexican guy killing homeless White guys. Said Mexican guy being the very person the Dream Act was designed to help, killing those who are disposable. Old, sick/crazy White guys.

Very soon, we will have an outright conflict, in the open, over these matters. Particularly if the predictions of scarcity, and even more centralization, are accurate, the Hillbillies and Ethnics will start fighting. For now, the Puritans-Quakers have had it their way (mostly by peeling off professional White women by patronage and status). That is not likely to be permanent. The California Dream was murdered by the Dream Act. While Illegal Aliens were the trigger men, the ones who paid for the hit were Puritan-Quakers. And like all murders, the killings will ripple out. Hillbillies, as Mark Twain observed, are good at feuding. They've had about 4,000 years of practice, against Celts, Picts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes and other Vikings, Normans, Scots, and the English.
...Read more

England Falls

England has fallen. Quicker than I would have thought. Home Secretary Theresa May rules out use of the Army, Water Cannons. The situation is spiraling out of control. High Street areas, the ritzy places of Kensington, Notting Hill, and other "tony" areas have had rioters looting patrons of two-star Michelin restaurants. While Home Secretary May declares that "policing is done with the consent of communities." Code words for no action that the Black, Pakistani Muslim, and now Indian groups that have effectively colonized England would object to, will be taken. As the MP for Northern Ireland notes, both the Army and Water Cannon have been used within the past year in Ireland. But against ... Whites. Not Blacks, Pakistanis, or Indians. As the picture from the Daily Mail shows, a thug (Black) forces a White guy to hand over his clothes. The purpose being simple humiliation (the clothes won't fit).


Meanwhile riots have spread to other cities. Bristol, Birmingham, and Liverpool. Olympic officials are said to be mulling yanking the Olympics from London and awarding them to some other city on an emergency basis. There are not enough police, those that have been mobilized from other cities ... like Bristol are now stuck in London, where they have been fleeing rioters. The police can use no force against the mob, and the mob (nearly all Black or Pakistani or Indian depending on the section of the city) know it. The police are exhausted, working 18 shifts and limited when they do confront the mob to batons and pepper spray. Which will not cut it.

At this point, the utter weakness of England's rulers is exposed. The rulers cannot even secure the property and persons of people in tony, ritzy areas. Notting Hill and Kensington are very, very rich. Islamists and Jihadists will see this weakness and mobilize their own people to create their own mini-states. Enforced by brutal action. What will England do in response? Police by consent?

Here is the end of PC Britain. As feckless as JK Rowlings Ministry of Magic, against Voldemort. With a politically correct female Home Secretary ruling out anything that would offend Black or Muslim-Pakistani mobs. [There are a few White kids engaged in the mob violence, but is vastly Black or Pakistani-Muslim.] And of course if say, Choudary can set up his own mini Islamic Republic (and rest assured he will) inside Britain, so too can hordes of people from very poor countries in North Africa or Africa come there and simply set up where ever they want. Taking what they want. If a mob can rob the tony patrons of a tony restaurant, why not Buckingham Palace? After all, that's the consent of the Community! And why not have, say, half of Libya or Morocco show up at Dover Beach? Ready to take over? That's the price of PC weakness. Of diversity. Of Multiculturalism.


England is finished. Over. Done. Dead. There is no one in the Conservative, Liberal, Labor, or any other party save the BNP willing to use force to preserve what is left of traditional England. No one. [No, not even the UKIP.] And the BNP has no real support in Parliament to form a government. There is no one with any will. To save what is left of England would require shooting hundreds if not thousands of rioters, quite dead, at this point. Locking the rest up, in ugly penal colonies in the South Atlantic while they freeze to death (with ample documentation) and targeted payoffs to certain agitators with the promise of a trip to the Antarctic if deals are not kept (and making examples of deal-breakers). As Machiavelli wrote, it is far easier to rectify things when the situation has not reached a crisis. Early diagnosis of social ills offer remedies that are far less drastic. But no one in England has the courage or will to act, which at this point means killing lots of rioters and nothing else.

What will take its place, is rule by mob of certain enclaves. Black leaders emerging from the mob will rule certain parts of London, which will look like African hell-hole cities, only colder and with snow. Pakistani Muslim leaders will do the same with other sections of major cities which will also be hell holes. And fleeing mob non-White rule will be a host of Englishmen and women. Who will be the first but not last European refugees effectively ethnically cleansed out of their own nation.

France will probably take most of them. And they'll be the core of what promises to be an ugly and angry fight over the ethnic cleansing of Whites out of native European lands. No real effective action can be taken against the mob in the UK. The authorities retain enough power to prevent people from fighting back (as in much of the Harry Potter books the Ministry of Magic's main goal was preventing any fighting back against Voldemort). But people will vote with their feet, even as shuffling refugees into France.

Who will stop the violence? Who will prevent rioters from simply taking more, and more, and more? Who is stopping them now from stripping White passer-by of their ... CLOTHES!

No one. So the rioters will simply take more. Because there is no one to stop them. And they will rule. That is quite obvious. But would you want to live under the rule of the jumped up mob leaders sure to emerge as "rulers" of fragmented England? They won't even be able to keep the power flowing, or sewage processed, or trash picked up. Meanwhile the "government" will be a shattered hulk unable to provide much of anything other than endless punishment to the White natives who are now quite visibly second or third class people in their own lands. Perhaps a few goodies will be handed out, but that is it. Control over London, and most cities, have been given over to the mobs, and there is no means to take it back. Nor will this stuff be confined to cities, it will spread to the countryside as well. Because there is stuff there to take, and no one to stop them.

So out of desperation, people will shuffle into France like WWII refugees, with what pitiable possessions they have left, and form the most visible but not the last examples of ethnic cleansing of White natives in Europe.

England has fallen. It will never be restored to what it was. What will remain is fragmented, non-White kingdoms and Big Man pseudo republics run by folks like Choudary. Islamic mini-kingdoms and the like, conquering England without much trouble. An object lesson of the stupidity of PC, Diversity, Multiculturalism, and the rest. At least the French will know, as will the Italians, the Germans, the Spanish, the Irish, and the rest, what awaits them.

Camp of the Saints arrived in the form of London riots. Because the saints were already there, people just would not see them (again, like the refusal to recognize Voldemort in the Potter books). Of course, there are now a whole lot of people who had something, a bit of property, made dirt poor overnight, in a place where its terrible to be poor, and White. Burnt out shops, stores, homes, and such. Survivors of those undoubtedly slain in riots and arson. These people will make Travis Bickle look like Barney the Dinosaur. And they won't be a loner like Bickle, rather, organized. It was one thing for the OAS to try and retain a lost dream of Algeria. It will be another thing for a whole generation of Englishmen wanting to reclaim England, from exile in France. Ask the Israelis how it works out, with a camp of seething with resentment, exiles on your borders, dreaming of revenge and return of property. That is what awaits the new possessors of England, after their inevitable victory. As Machiavelli advised, humiliation is unwise, better to kill your enemy than leave him poor and alive. Undoubtedly the White guy forced to strip and hand over his clothes will have a life-long hatred for Blacks, and just as undoubtedly the picture in the Daily Mail will generate both fear and anger in the White British population. Which has no desire to experience the same.

Pictures have power. That picture, is bound to enrage most White Britons. Who fear it happening to them. And who are too numerous to kill.

Camp of the Saints is ultimately not sustainable, because it is one thing to force a man to hand over his clothes by reason of your superior legal and physical position (the White guy knows if he resists he will be both beaten by a much larger and stronger man, and go to jail in the bargain). It is quite another thing to keep trash off the streets, or the power going, or raw sewage safely processed. And another to build a modern military force capable of killing people efficiently in large numbers. Eventually those cleansed out will return, or their descendants, and they will be "Potter-like" in the battle finally against Voldemort, willing to make appalling sacrifices to end the threat once and for all.

The one caveat is that the UK Military, primarily the Army, could possibly step in with all other elements of society failing, and shoot half the rioters, with the approval of the Queen, and the majority British public. But that would entail a military rule and suspension of Parliament, PC, Multiculturalism, and the like. I don't see that happening, frankly. Just more of the same in the picture. There is a reason that the current government is not willing to have the Army act, and that Labor is not calling for them either. The concessions the Army would demand would be too great. So England will fall, very far, and very fast.

All that is left is the rising of the Cromwell figure, in exile, in France. Where the French White natives look in fear and wonder and demand something be done on their own situation.

Who wants PC and Multiculturalism and Diversity if all it gets you is being stripped of your clothes (and everything else)? And that's all it does get you, in the end.

...Read more

NBC's Diversity Bet Fails

[Editor's note: work/family issues required a break from blogging. Hence the lengthy hiatus.]

NBC's past season, from Fall 2010 to Spring 2011, was a massive bust. NBC's big bet on diversity failed. Gone, was "Undercovers" (a glamorous Black couple running a high-end catering service are also super-sexy uber-spies). The show failed fairly quickly, and was pulled in November 2010. "Chase" featuring a waify blonde woman all of 120 pounds beating up on hefty evil White guy fugitives, as an uber-US Marshall, in February of 2011. "The Event" with an Obama-like President uncovering an evil White guy conspiracy involving Aliens was canceled in May 2011. So too was "Outsourced," the wacky comedy about the hilarity of firing Americans and moving a call center to India. So too was "Law and Order Los Angeles," with the usual Law and Orderen lineup of evil White guys (is there anything they can't do?) and downtrodden non-White victims (not reminiscent of the Los Angeles I know, where the Azusa 13 Gang was indicted by the US Attorney for hate crimes against Blacks).


Diversity just did not pull in viewers. NBC's big bet came a cropper. The failure was so bad, across the board, that NBC even ... renewed "Chuck" for a fifth and final season (a limited 13 episode run). Likely that move was taken in consideration of a likely NFL lockout. Given that "Chuck" is the only NBC show (and outside Fox's Sunday animated shows, one of the few on network TV that at all) that skews male. NBC tried betting big on "diversity" and hoped that would draw in lots of female viewers. Who in turn are mostly White. The dirty little secret is that while Univison and Telemundo are posting dramatic gains in audiences, their night-time audiences are still tiny. Less even than the CW, itself a baby netlet often drawing fewer than one million viewers for some shows. NBC thought that going all out for "Diversity" would provide an alternative to what other networks were doing. In this they were correct. Where NBC went wrong was in thinking that the mostly White/Female audience was interested in this diversity. By and large, they were not.

Now NBC has resorted to lots of comedies, crummy reality shows, and hoping NFL football comes back in its new 2011 Fall Lineup. The only things original are the "Sliding Doors" type dual-reality show "Awake" (in one reality his wife is dead, in another his son), and "Grimm" (about a police procedural involving ... Grimm Fairytale characters). These may fail. But NBC should be applauded for at least taking the risk. Both are a bit different, offbeat, and not the same old procedural stuff.

[Interestingly enough, both NBC and CBS, during their fireworks broadcasts on the Fourth of July, heavily promoted their upcoming shows, the first time I can recall them doing so. It seems they feel the need to expend more time/money in promotion than in years past.]

CBS only has "Person of Interest" with Jesus (Jim Caviezel from "the Passion") and Michael Emerson (the bad guy from "Lost") about a covert op teamed with a software mogul aiming to stop crimes before it happens. Basically, a variant of the Equalizer, done decades ago, but hey that was a good show. Everything else is either a renewal or tired re-run (Poppy Montgomery from "Without a Trace" has a new show "Unforgettable" about a detective who cannot forget anything). "A Gifted Man" is a weepy-ghost-chick-flick show (so naturally it should do well). I'm shocked Katherine Heigl is not in this one.

ABC has a "Mad Men" clone ("Pan Am") and a Charlie's Angels remake, plus a woman in jeopardy Lifetime Movie Network series ("Missing") with a global twist, and another with a "Lost" in the Amazon style twist ("the River") and a couple of night-time soaps ("Revenge" and "Good Christian Belles") the latter of which was changed from "Good Christian Bitches." Nothing of interest to anyone not gay and possessing a Y chromosome. "Once Upon a Time" has again, the Grimm Fairytales characters inhabiting the modern world, in the town of "Storybrooke" seeming to mix Harry Potter with conspiracy-theory heavy shows like "Lost" or "Fringe."

Fox has the usual assortment of lame comedies, plus the dramas "Terra Nova" (much delayed) about a family moving to the Earth of 80 million years ago to escape Global Warming and pollution, or just the neighbors, or something. Plus mid-season replacements "the Finder" (about an Iraq War vet with a talent for finding things that have gone missing) and "Alcatraz" (another "Lost" clone about criminals from Alcatraz who never age and go on killing sprees, or something.

CW has "Ringer" with Buffy herself, Sarah Michelle Gellar, as a woman on the run from the mob posing as her missing twin sister ... who is herself pursued by unknown enemies. The rest is teen witches, teen vampires, and so on.

FX has picked up for pilot Brian Michael Bendis (who did an excellent turn on Marvel's "Daredevil" years back) based on his own comic book (he retains ownership in other words) "Powers." The series features gritty cops investigating crimes committed against ordinary humans and super-powered people by people with ... powers. Meanwhile ABC is prepping for the following season a number of Marvel properties, including "the Incredible Hulk," "AKA Jessica Jones," and "Cloak and Dagger." [Sadly for ABC/Disney, Marvel's drop-off in superhero quality from their first tier is substantial. "Jessica Jones" and "Cloak and Dagger" are both "diverse" and low-rent superheroes, who while having been around since the 1970s never really caught on. By contrast DC has tons of superheroes, poorly used, with rabid followings.]

As usual, AMC has a violent/provocative show ("Hell on Wheels" about the building of the Transcontinental Railway) and various other basic cable and premium cable outlets have new series they will premiere in dribs and drabs.

But of all of them, NBC has fallen the farthest, and the hardest, from a state of grace. NBC, after all, was the network of such male-oriented shows as "the A-Team," "Miami Vice," "Hunter," "Misfits of Science," along with "Hill Street Blues," "Seinfeld," "St. Elsewhere," "Crime Story," "Private Eye," and even "the Rockford Files." Heck what I would not give for a DVD release of "the New Maverick," (the abortive, one-season western with the great James Garner replaying his Brett Maverick character). While CBS may have had "the Equalizer," and ABC briefly "Max Headroom," NBC remained the place for guys in the 1980's and even into the 1990's. Heck as recently as 2009, NBC aired "Life," one of the most shockingly tough-guy shows ever put on network TV.

As Newton Minnow said in his Vast Wasteland Speech


When television is good, nothing — not the theater, not the magazines or newspapers — nothing is better.

But when television is bad, nothing is worse. I invite each of you to sit down in front of your own television set when your station goes on the air and stay there, for a day, without a book, without a magazine, without a newspaper, without a profit and loss sheet or a rating book to distract you. Keep your eyes glued to that set until the station signs off. I can assure you that what you will observe is a vast wasteland.

You will see a procession of game shows, formula comedies about totally unbelievable families, blood and thunder, mayhem, violence, sadism, murder, western bad men, western good men, private eyes, gangsters, more violence, and cartoons. And endlessly commercials — many screaming, cajoling, and offending. And most of all, boredom. True, you'll see a few things you will enjoy. But they will be very, very few. And if you think I exaggerate, I only ask you to try it.

While Minnow is often quoted as noting the vast wasteland, the first part of his speech is often forgotten. I have seen over the course of my life TV go from a purveyor, even though flawed, of a mass culture and matching model of traditional masculinity (do the right thing, don't stop trying) to one of total camp, attention-whoring, and paralyzing uniformity. A place where men exist only as female-oriented studs or gays, without even a smidgen of action, adventure, and excitement.

TV, when it is good, is simply unbeatable. Its restrictions on budgets and effects are matched by the advantage of time. A typical movie will have to clock in at around 2 hours, more or less. A TV series, going 22 episodes, even with only 43 minutes devoted to story (less commercials) can still clock in at around 17 hours. That 17 hours allows for a richer story to be told. One with more detailed and developed characters, one with more complex and emotionally arousing storylines. TV at its best helps unify the country and provide (all the more necessary with the collapse of church attendance and religion) a unified morality, and one based on what the people themselves believe, not what elites in Hollywood and NYC believe.

So, it has been good and refreshing to see NBC's diversity line-up fail. Other networks have followed suit. None have launched copies of what has failed at NBC. No laugh-a-minute yuks about outsourcing to India, or super-glamorous super-spy couples who are Black, or Obama-clones fighting off Aliens and corporate White bad guys. Instead, NBC has basically punted, relying on junk reality, a final season of "Chuck," (at least Adam Baldwin will be on TV again in the role of John Casey, he's completely hilarious) and two new series trying something a bit different. Even so that network will have a huge Sunday night hole if the NFL (hopefully) remains on lockout. ABC, CBS, FOX, and CW are merely repeating in new shows what they've always done before. More soaps for ABC, more procedurals for CBS, more big-budget Sci-Fi for FOX, and hunky magic teens for CW.

Eventually, one network will have to take a chance to break from the pack. More of the same fighting over a constantly declining female audience will not cut it. "Diversity" and other tricks, aping "Lost" or pushing a big-budget (soon to be trimmed) Spielberg-driven Dinosaur show won't do it. "Terra Nova" seems set for the success of "the Young Indiana Jones" or "Amazing Stories." Back when Spielberg was not corrupted by a posse of toadies telling him his every brain fart was genius, he made some pretty compelling movies. He's been consistently bad in TV, however, not realizing that TV requires story-telling emotion over a budget always under assault. The network most desperate is obviously ... NBC. So it was good that "Diversity" failed. Nothing gets network attention (and all the networks pay attention) like spectacular failure.

Sooner or later someone at a network will take a gamble on men, and provide a staple of cheap, entertaining, and amusing male-skewing shows. The country will be better off, because traditional male-oriented shows for the most part must embody fairly conservative values. Honor your word, show physical and emotional courage, stand up and fight, protect the weak, punish the wicked. Those are the stories men of all ages are interested in, and are almost completely absent on the TV screen every night. Let's hoping those stories return soon.
...Read more

Will K-12 H1-Bs Peel Off Obama's Support?

As noted here, Obama still has some core White support: College Educated White women. Who alone benefit from Affirmative Action (non-College White women have the highest disapproval rates for all Whites). And are a good cultural fit for Obama as First Rockstar, the Celebrity to rule Celebrities. But the Center for Immigration Studies has a new report that suggests a wave of H1-B usage is breaking upon Education, particularly K-12, and could spread to other areas. Which might finally put College Educated White women in the same boat as their male counterparts, and non-College Whites of both sexes.


As noted in the report, H1-Bs have been used with great success in the Computer Science area in replacing older, more expensive American workers with visibly cheaper Foreign ones, who are younger besides (lower health care costs, perceived "hipness" etc.) The report for the Center for Immigration Studies notes:

n FY 2010, the Department of Labor certified 6,578 new K-12 jobs to be filled by H-1B workers, about 10 percent of the new certifications within the 65,000 general purpose ceiling; many other H-1B workers were approved for the 20,000 ceiling for those with advanced degrees, and others who came into the system outside of the numerical ceilings (primarily people in higher education.)

The H-1B K-12 educators were thus a small minority within the H-1B program, and a much smaller minority within the universe of kindergarten, elementary, and secondary teachers, but what did the use of this program by some school districts show?

My sense, after pouring over the detailed DoL data on this single year’s worth of K-12 certifications, is that some of the implications of this limited database are troublesome (in two different ways), some are bizarre, and others are puzzling.

[The report author notes that the Dept. of Labor, unlike other Federal Depts, makes their raw data available. The link to the Dept. of Labor data, sadly all in Microsoft Access files is here. For those unable to run MS Access directly, and needing a dump into CSV or directly into MySQL, there are instructions here that have been known to work. From the reports by users at the link it seems the best/safest way is to make a CSV dump of each table, and then import them manually into manually created tables in a new MySQL database. Tedious but effective.]

Among the findings were: the employers using H1-Bs in K-12 were concentrated in Texas (1,426 certifications), California (247), and Louisiana (313), besides Maryland with 632 certifications. Houston and Dallas accounted for most of the Texas certifications. Baltimore most of Maryland. For occupational breakdowns, most of the certifications were for special education teachers (305) , or bilingual teachers (664).

The implication is that K-12 is transitioning to H1-B visa employment. These holders are significantly cheaper, younger, and most of all, compliant. They can't fuss to the Union, because they can be replaced at any time and sent home with near unlimited manpower in other places. So far this usage of H1-B visas in K-12 is limited to the bigger city school systems. But the advantages for hard-pressed school boards (cheap teachers who can be easily replaced without union fuss) is obvious. So long, "nice White lady" from "Teach For America!"

Interestingly enough, bilingual teachers form a large portion of the H1-B visa pool in K-12. Suggesting that school boards (and charter schools) want cheap, compliant non-natives brought over on the H1-B visa rather than native Spanish speakers. This is quite interesting because it kicks a major prop out from under school system support -- local Hispanic patronage. Most Latino majority school districts are not oriented towards teaching students but maximizing job patronage. Since the school is often the city's biggest employer. Even Latinos can get hurt by diversity, a useful point to make. As Machiavelli noted in the Prince, a man will forgive the murder of his parents sooner than being made poor.

H1-B visas mean only one thing for wages: considerably lower ones. Essentially we are seeing teaching being lowered to Third World levels, and probably quite rapidly. Because we have a Third World population, particularly with K-12 students, but demands for a First World education system. Something has to give, and that will be, first, teacher salaries. Those hanging on to their jobs will do so at H1-B visa rates, just like in computer programming and the like.

Also notable is that Charter Schools are the worst offenders in participating in H1-B visa programs, and have the most complaints against them (for teacher abuse, fees, and the like) lodged against them with the Dept. of Labor. Bizarrely, there is a fellow named Fethullah Gülen, a Turkish Islamist of mixed reputation foolishly granted a green card by the US State Dept. after first being denied, who has gamed the US Charter school system.

Essentially what Gülen is doing is gaming the Charter School system. He sets up a Charter School, gets federal money (a lot of it, with very little oversight) and imports lots of teachers, on the H1-B visa program to ostensibly teach Turkish. The demand for which is near zero. It is basically a corrupt scam to create a massive kick-back and patronage system. Once again an ethnic, nepotistic network scams a government system set up for trustworthy Calvinist New Englanders.

There are also massive pay differentials among the H1-B visa holders, in places right next door to each other (New York and New Jersey, Elgin and Chicago IL) amounting to as much as $30,000 or more. Could there be … kickbacks?

Yes Obama's education bubble, with massive amounts of federal stimulus money (now expiring) shoveled into schools, created the same kind of exploitation and crook-dom that the housing bubble, and its no-document loans did. Not surprising.

Essentially, the market as it existed for K-12 teachers, employing "nice White ladies" and men, would not and did not last. We are seeing its dying already. Regardless of "mean Republicans" cutting state budgets, local districts and shady businessmen, running "regular" and charter schools respectively, are sure to pick up on the ability to create cheap and compliant labor forces. Not just for teachers, but every type of administrative function except the top. For the Charter School operators, most being "not-for-profit" (but that's a mere bagatelle) the ability to kick-back a portion of above market salaries that are paid for by federal and state funds must be an overwhelming temptation. Particularly since Education is not built on the assumption that people operating it are mostly crooks. Rather, it is built on the trust that nearly everyone involved sincerely loves teaching, education, and a better future for the students.

People vote their pocketbooks. College Educated White women are overwhelmingly employed in places like K-12 Education, the media, health care, corporate finance, human resources, and the like. Instilling bare, naked fear that they could be replaced by a person younger, more subservient (conservatives cannot stress this enough), and CHEAPER than themselves … and will be, unless a nationalist approach is taken through conservatism, is probably the most productive action conservatives can take against Obama. Obama's great weakness is that his coalition is prone to fighting amongst themselves over the limited spoils. White Women with College Education can be made to fear. Know the fear that their male peers in Engineering, or Finance, or Accounting, have already felt: replacement.

Particularly if "subservience" is stressed, the idea that say, a "fat and brassy" White College Educated woman will be replaced by a "meek and mild" Vietnamese girl at half the cost, and with deference to (beta) White males at the very top, is something that will go over like gangbusters. There's nothing White women hate more than being told they're being replaced by a younger, more subservient (to beta males) model. Since most of the top management at most places resembles a cross between Tim Geithner and Don Knotts, rather than say Charlie Sheen or Russell Brand, this wedge has some power.

Already, nursing save the ER staff is mostly H1-B. You can't visit a hospital room or floor (save perhaps ICU or CCU) and not find mostly or all H1-Bs (now from Vietnam or the Philippines). Trust me on this, I know. The same can be true, for HR people, or media ad buyers, or really almost any office work. While it is true that Mexican-origin illegal aliens from Chiapas or Cuidad Juarez won't be good fits, women and men from India, or the Philippines, or Vietnam certainly will. Many of them already are, in occupations like Radiology, or dental assistance, or even now K-12 education.

Yes, the usage of K-12 H1-Bs is small now. So is the first trickle of water bursting through a fractured dam or dike. Eventually it will be a tidal wave. With nowhere for College Educated White women to go. What will they do? How will they work? How can they support themselves? They can't. They won't. And this is precisely the argument conservatives should make to this target. Obama is bad for their bank account because he'll replace them with H1-B visa holders. Younger and more subservient, and definitely cheaper.



...Read more

Viva Los Dodgers: Hispanicization and Culture

Diversity has its price. Giants fan Bryan Stow was beaten by two Latino gang members, in the parking lot of Dodger Stadium, on Opening Day. He remains in a coma in critical condition with permanent brain damage, if he survives. Stow, a paramedic, had saved for over a year to attend Opening Day at Dodger Stadium. Dodger Stadium, under the original owners, the O'Malleys, was the jewel of West Coast ballparks. Clean, orderly, affordable, and filled with middle class White baseball fans as late as the mid 1990's, with little advertising plastered around the stadium, Dodger Stadium was representative of "old Los Angeles." Staid, White, and very middle class. Now, Dodger Stadium is a gang-filled war-zone, considered by fans to be more dangerous than attending an Oakland Raiders game in Oakland. In part this transition was understandable, but the Hispanicization of America will not turn out to be Brazil or Mexico. Something more akin to the Balkans is in the works, and in particular entertainment will be the first casualty of this Hispanicization. Everyone in media and entertainment will have to adjust to radically different shifts (and less money) as culture finally reflects the undeniable changes adding half the population of Mexico has wrought.


A short history of the Dodgers. There have been many owners, but the O'Malley family (the owners who moved the Dodgers West from Brooklyn in 1958) has been the most famous group of owners. From 1950 till 1998, when the team was sold to Fox Group/News Corp. for $311 million, the O'Malleys ran the Dodgers as, well a family oriented, White middle class baseball tradition. During the Fox Ownership era, from 1998 to 2004, investment in the Dodgers declined, and the stadium was filled with ads on every available surface. Fox was so desperate to unload the Dodgers that they loaned $145 million. McCourt is estimated to be $430 million in debt, according to CBS Sports, and the Dodgers have marketed heavily towards the Latino market, and the young Latino (read: gang member) segment inside Latinos generally.

2010 saw "Viva Los Dodgers with celebrations of Hispanic Heritage.


In addition to Viva Los Dodgers Day, the Dodgers will celebrate the Hispanic community throughout the 2010 season: Cinco de Mayo (May 5), Dodgertown Venezuela (May 25), Dodgertown Cuba (June 6), Dodgertown Fernando Valley celebrating Dodger Legend Fernando Valenzuela (June 13), Dodgertown Puerto Rico (July 25), Dodgertown Dominican Republic (September 5), Dodgertown Mexico (September 19), and the 13th annual La Gran Fiesta Viva Los Dodgers festival (September 19).

Since 1958, the Dodgers have championed Hispanic market outreach. More than 40 percent of Dodger fans are of Hispanic descent and more than 7 million Hispanics call Los Angeles home. Each season the Dodgers attract more than 1 million Hispanic fans. Fifty-two years ago, the Dodgers instituted the first and now longest-running Spanish language radio broadcast. Currently it runs on KHJ/LA Ranchera 930 AM and features Hall of Famer Jaime Jarrín, Pepe Yñiguez and Dodger legend Fernando Valenzuela.

Doyer Dogs (so named for the Mexican pronunciation of "Dodger Dogs") catering to Latino fans are a new addition to ballpark fare. All in all, the Dodgers have been quite successful in attracting lots of Latino fans.

In part this is necessity. As the Wall Street Journal pointed out, in 1960 Whites were 80% of the population, now only 40%. From 2000, to 2010, Whites declined to 40% from 47%. Meanwhile Hispanics make up 38% of the population. Hispanics are surging in number in California, while Whites are fleeing.

This is significant, because as the Freakonomics blog points out, Baseball is not the NFL. Whereas 80% of NFL revenue is shared among the owners, less than 25% of MLB revenue is shared among baseball team owners. Team revenue depends not upon national TV contracts, mostly, but local attendance, local TV deals, and local team luxury boxes.

As such, about 80 percent of the nearly $7 billion of the N.F.L.’s annual revenues are divided evenly among all 32 teams. Before the New York Giants or Kansas City Chiefs ever play a game, they’re each entitled to about $150 million in annual revenue. According to a Forbes estimate, all but one N.F.L. team brought in between $182 and $255 million in 2006 (only the Redskins exceeded $300 million). With the Jets and Giants in the middle of the pack, earning less revenue than Tampa Bay, Carolina, or Denver, it is clear that market size has little impact on the revenue base of an N.F.L. club.

By contrast, an M.L.B. team is essentially a local business. Less than 25 percent of all revenues are distributed evenly among the 30 teams. More than three-quarters of the $6 billion in annual revenues are earned and kept at the local level, with a disproportionate share going to teams in large markets with strong team brands and greater on-field success. Unlike the stable, “money-in-the-bank” revenues of an N.F.L. team, the primary revenues of a baseball team – attendance, ticket price increases, luxury suite rentals, and local broadcast ratings and subsequent rights fees — can rise and fall with winning and losing seasons. (I discuss these nuances in depth in my book, Diamond Dollars.) I’d estimate the 2007 Yankees generated nearly $400 million in annual revenue, while the Tampa Bay Devil Rays barely generated $100 million.

We need only to look at broadcast ratings of the two leagues’ respective championships to underscore this local-national dichotomy between baseball and football. The Super Bowl’s broadcast ratings have virtually no connection to the participating teams, while World Series ratings rise and fall with the size of the market of the N.L. and A.L. champs. Whereas both leagues have seen solid appreciation in franchise values in recent years, the lower variability associated with N.F.L. revenues and costs yield a more favorable risk adjusted return than the up-and-down fortunes of an M.L.B. owner.

Under first Fox, and then Frank McCourt, the Dodgers were hammered, revenue-wise, by the demographic tide hitting Los Angeles. White, middle class fans were leaving. Those entering Los Angeles and largely replacing them, were mostly working class or lower Mexican immigrants. Desperate to keep up revenues, and likely blinded by PC nostrums, the Dodgers made an appeal to the Latino community, over and above what the O'Malleys had done. The appeal to Latino fans was amplified by what amounted to, ethnic cleansing of Whites by Latinos. Not by armed Balkan militias, grim men with AK-47s, but the relentless tide of illegal immigration making Los Angeles a very pricey place to live a middle class lifestyle.

What is notable about LA, is how little cross-cultural adoption has occurred between the declining White population and the surging Mexican one. Hip neighborhoods remain the same as in the 1980s: Santa Monica, West Los Angeles, and parts of Venice. Gentrification even of places like Echo Park are now fading away, as the real estate bubble turned to dust, and Echo Park has come under gang-related assault. Meanwhile, despite the huge population of Mexican immigrants, Los Angeles film-makers and writers live in a separate cultural universe. There are more famous Spanish film-makers working in Hollywood than Mexican ones. Steve Sailer noted that in popular music, Mexican influence seems to have peaked with Los Lobos in the 1980s. Mexican culture remains, for the most part, relentlessly lower class. Cock fighting has become a major problem in Southern California. Shows such as "Sabado Gigante" not Spanish language versions of "Nurse Jackie" are popular among Hispanic audiences.

The Hispanic fan base that the LA Dodgers transitioned to from the late 1990s to today, is radically different from the old, White middle class fans the Dodgers used to draw. They are significantly lower income, far more inclined to fight, and tend towards harassment of anyone deemed "weak." Bryan Stow texted his wife that he was afraid in Dodger Stadium. Stow, a fit paramedic, did not use that term lightly. Hispanic fans, particularly older ones complaining about abusive behavior, have been attacked in the same pattern: security did nothing, and the abusive fans, young with gang tattoos and attire, follow the complainers out to the parking lot where they are beaten. One unfortunate elderly Latino man, suffering from leukemia, was attacked in this manner. His leg was broken, and never healed, requiring amputation. The assailants were never arrested. Callers to local radio stations covering the story report that women, children, the elderly, and especially White fans are routinely harassed, and sometimes beaten, in the parking lots. [Anti-White racial slurs shouted by groups of Latino men at any White fan foolish enough to sit in most seats save the field level were reported as routine, and something security did nothing about.]

Stow himself was visiting with friends, fellow firemen, all fit and tall. They tried to save him, to no avail. Stow was hit from behind, in the head, and pitched face first onto the pavement, likely unconscious. His friends tried to shield him with their bodies, throwing themselves in front of the two gang members (out of a crowd of nearly a dozen) who were kicking the prone, likely unconscious Stow in the head. I cannot emphasize how shocking this is, a fit, robust White man attacked and possibly killed, while with a group of friends. In Dodger Stadium!

All of this flowed inevitably from the changing demographics of Los Angeles County.

Fox had found that the Dodgers, far from being a sports-centered "synergy" that would add to the bottom line, was a drag on revenues. The corporation did something unheard of, they lent the buyer (McCourt) the money to purchase the team, they wanted to unload the Dodgers that much. Revenues were matched to the local fanbase. Which was in transition from a White, middle class population able to pay top dollar for tickets, and souvenirs, and food/beverage, to one largely unable and unwilling to pay anything close to top dollar. Advertising rates on local TV dropped, as the middle class population was replaced by one largely speaking Spanish, significantly poorer, and unwilling to watch much English language TV at any rate. Thus, local TV revenues were dropping. Demographic changes have consequences, the Dodgers unlike the Yankees, are in a revenue trap. The team's fanbase is essentially that of Tijuana, with the disposable income to match. No wonder McCourt did everything he could to court the Latino fanbase, hoping to make up in volume what he lost in every transaction. A fallacy common to those entranced by the "New Latino Dawn."

It is quite true that Hispanics are now an increasing part of the population. But, marketers and in particular, sports teams must realize that this population is and remains, generation after generation, significantly poorer than Whites. Which means less disposable income, meaning lower margins for everyone. The population growth of Latinos does not offset the revenue advantage of a declining White middle class. For example, Hispanics are major users of pre-paid cellphones, and often don't have bank accounts. Less than 25% of Mexicans in Mexico have bank accounts, so this is not surprising.

Or, put it this way. Yankee Stadium, with high prices (main level seating for a Monday, 7:05 start time against the White Sox, is running $150 per ticket plus a $10 convenience charge on the Yankees Website), can generate a lot more revenue from fans in the ballpark or watching at home, than can the Dodgers. The Dodgers charge $90 for an equivalent ticket (Loge Box) plus a $7.35 convenience fee. That amounts to about $62.65 for the equivalent (second row from the field, before first/third base) seat. Or nearly 70% on a per-game ticket basis for the equivalent seat. TV revenue is likely higher as well. New York City has become Whiter (and richer) while Los Angeles has become more Mexican and poorer.

This has profound implications. Major League Baseball is likely to collapse significantly, with a number of franchises in major Metro areas simply unable to draw a middle class fanbase needed to create winners. Meanwhile, supposedly "minor market" teams like the Seattle Mariners have the revenue potential to compete, as do the Washington Nationals (the DC area is also being gentrified, with Whites pushing out Blacks). Teams in places like Detroit, or even Miami, are likely doomed. Everyone can see Detroit's decline, but Miami lacks a middle class foundation for a long-term path to financial success. Unless baseball's owners embrace revenue sharing, teams in "diverse" (read: poorer, transitioning to majority non-White) areas are likely to suffer the harvest of replacing a middle class White population with one largely non-White and significantly poorer. Which is lower margin with the same high operating cost. Losing money, in simple terms.

Revenue-sharing sports like the NFL, apart from their thug issue, are better positioned to survive longer in their current form, because most of their revenue derives from a national TV audience, and is shared relatively equally, among teams. The NBA (with the Maloof family wanting to move from Latino majority Sacramento to Latino majority Anaheim), Major League Baseball has the same problem, while the NHL (a revenue sharing sports league) does not. College football, to a large degree, generates revenue from national TV audiences, not local ones.

And it is on the local level that cultural change will be felt first. The Dodgers are unlikely to be the only team to slide into irrelevancy and perhaps dissolution. The Angels, the Padres, the Arizona Diamondbacks, the Texas Rangers and Houston Astros, are all on a path to destruction, because of their fanbase demographic changes. It's All Over in Texas for Anglos, or so it goes.

The gang banger based thuggery that has driven the remaining Anglo fanbase in Los Angeles away from attending (along with high ticket prices) is the fruit of diversity. To Whites who were long-time fans of the team, diversity means in effect one more public institution they've been ethnically cleansed from. It is not likely to generate positive feelings or goodwill regarding the population shift. The same is true, in the end, for the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, of Southern California, of the Western Hemisphere. Or the LA Lakers. Or the Clippers, Kings, and Ducks. Indeed the arc of the Anaheim Ducks, originally owned by Disney, and sold off when the team could not generate money, despite the synergy (of ABC-ESPN), goes directly to middle class Whites being replaced by poor Latinos. Who knew, poor people don't have much money?

This has happened with shopping malls (in Orange County, the Block and Mainplace come to mind). It is happening with baseball, and basketball teams. [Hockey has not appealed much to Latinos, rather the cleansing of the White fan base erodes ticket/food-drink revenue.] The "deal" offered the average White person is ... ethnic replacement and a whole lot of "no-go" areas and institutions that are "taken over" by a Mexican underclass. Accompanied by a relentless need to secure good housing in good (read: non-Minority) school districts. In the Los Angeles metro area, that requirement is quite expensive. LA being constrained by both mountains and the sea.

California is about $26 billion dollars in the red, with the current budget. Jerry Brown, the new governor, seeks to impose about $14 billion in new taxes, by referendum, and about $12 billion in cuts. Brown is basically asking an aging, ethnically cleansed out of Dodger Stadium (and elsewhere) White middle class to fund schools for Mexican kids, welfare for Mexican kids and their mothers, and so on. The spending won't be on people like the (bare) majority White taxpayer. The spending will be on people who've just put the boot on their proxy, a White paramedic who saved up for nearly a year to attend opening day at Dodger Stadium.

The tax revolt is about who pays, for whom. Coercive taxes are always evaded, and the legitimacy of government itself is in question once ethnic cleansing becomes routine. This is why, after being AWOL on the whole issue, for days, the LAPD has decided to swarm Dodger Stadium (and bill the Dodgers for the cost) during the next home stand. The issue is too explosive for those developers foolish enough to have sunk money into Downtown, which risks becoming a White no-go zone itself (as Lakers championship riots, almost exclusively Mexican, have shown). Some money can always be extracted from the remaining White population, but human nature and history suggests that any tax that can be evaded, will be evaded or minimized, if the taxpayers feel they are being victimized and targeted. Robert Putnam's work on diversity shows the results: an angry, isolated and distrustful populace that avoids anything to do with public life.

The Hispanicization of Dodger Stadium, has been accompanied by the cleansing of historically White communities by a tidal wave of Mexican immigrants. A "hunkering down" effect means a more tribal, "White Zionist" attitude among Whites both cleansed to other areas, and those remaining. This does NOT mean a White Supremacist, or White Nationalist attitude. Whites ethnically cleansed or remaining in areas that switched to Hispanic dominance (with former White public institutions like baseball teams or Universities) are NOT in the mood for cross burning or street fights. They merely wish to be left alone, are angry and resentful, see no meaningful place for themselves in society, and avoid any and all civic engagement. Volunteering in America ranks ultra-White Utah as the #1 volunteering State, and California #42. The top 15 states are all ultra-White. The bottom 15 all heavily non-White.

And culture, both sporting and entertainment, are part of public life. A White population subject to constant no-go areas, and relentlessly ethnically cleansed, is already exhibiting tribal behavior. In the 1980's, alternative music fans embraced groups like Los Lobos or artists Tish Hinojosa. Now alternative music is pretty much exclusively White, both ethnically and musically. Latinos might be the dominant ethnic group in California, but on TV and in movies, they are invisible. Even Black actors and actresses have found the largely White audience, indifferent. Black lead "Undercovers" on NBC was canceled, and "the Event" seems fated to follow. TV commercials seem to depict a 70% Black majority population (instead of the actual 12%), but then TV commercials are made not to sell products and services, but win advertising creators awards. Meanwhile Hollywood suffers fewer and fewer people buying tickets (and limited ability to charge premium prices to an increasingly poorer Latino audience wanting endless Fast and Furious sequels), and TV fewer and fewer viewers.

The "winners" are likely to be those sports that fully embrace a White tribal identity, a "Zionism for Gentiles." Beleaguered Whites are unlikely to embrace (save educated White women) non-White dominated institutions or mediums. The losers will be those sports that retain high operating costs while deluding themselves that they can make a profit based on lots of poor fans who are non-White coming through the turnstiles. The same is true for entertainment, particularly given the move away from communal spaces (where some Latino Gang member may decide to kick your head in, even if you are a fit and active 41 year old paramedic). Instead, diversity implies lonely consumption of video, and books, in electronic format. Social isolation is the fruit of diversity. As is tribalism and the longing for a "space of our own" articulated by Theodore Herzl. This process is likely to be organic, and although informed by inflection points, driven largely by interactions on the personal level, multiplied by a million. As Yogi Berra once pointed out, people don't wanna come out to the ballpark, how ya gonna stop em?

That doesn't mean a call to hatred, or even violence. Rather, the social landscape is likely to be smaller, more intense (where it exists in Whitopia, places like Seattle, or NYC, or New Hampshire) or moved away from public spaces entirely, which makes it incidentally free from the PC censors and pressures. Most White people take a dim view of being ethnically cleansed out of their own country, and the notion of collective racial punishment, for sins past. White people are likely to respond to a White fan getting his head kicked in by Latino Gang Bangers, because the fan was White, with a simple response. Not going to Dodger games, or even watching them. Even, abandoning baseball altogether. In favor of something else.
...Read more

Asians In The Library: UCLA's Diversity Comes Home

The standard view of "diversity" is everyone holding hands dancing around rainbows and unicorns denouncing how awful White Beta Males are. Great for everyone but White beta males. But even smoking hot Alpha White girls don't like diversity. Because it brings stress, conflict, and turf battles into everyday life, which is already stressed out from a non-stop acceleration due to technology creating a 24/7 connection to the world. UCLA coed and model Alexandra Wallace (that's her above) put a Youtube video (since removed, below is a copy) about how Asians in the Library annoy her (with rude behavior):




While certainly not a deep thinker, the young lady's main points are: 1. Asian students at UCLA are coddled, and kept immature by uber-helicopter parents, with negative fallout for Whites (who are left to fend on their own), and 2. Asian students at UCLA are rude and don't follow the rules (keep quiet in the Library) that White students do. [Presumably the very few Black and Hispanic students who actually do visit the library, follow the rules.]


Wallace has since "apologized" and no doubt UCLA will punish her. The UC Chancellor said he was appalled and University officials are "evaluating whether there have been any violations of the student code of conduct and what sanctions, if any, are appropriate."

Youtube is great. People cannot stop posting to it. Nor Twitter or other social media. Recently Gilbert Gottfried was fired from Aflac, as the voice of the Duck after Twitter "tweets" such as:

"I just split up with my girlfriend, but like the Japanese say, "They'll be another one floating by any minute now."

"I was talking to my Japanese real estate agent. I said 'is there a school in this area.' She said 'not now, but just wait.'"

As the proprietor of Dlisted notes, "You know, we've really come a long way as a society, because we don't even need to change out of our stained sweats or leave our houses to get fired. Just spew out some offensive fuckery on Twitter and wait by the mailbox for your final check to show up."

The Internet is really an outlet for people to post unfiltered by politeness and social repression, what they really think. For Charlie Sheen, it was mainlining crazy. Social media, and video, allowed him to exhibit his full on crazy, taking him from rebel Alpha male that women dream of taming, that bad boy magic, to just plain crazy and sick. Spelled U-N-A-T-T-R-A-C-T-I-V-E.


More and more comments, tweets, Youtube videos, and the like are pushing back on diversity. Which makes even those most socially powerful (attractive young UCLA coeds who have probably most of the straight male population panting after them) annoyed. Ms. Wallace may be the top of the social heap, but even she needs to get work done at the library, and not be distracted by rude cell phone behavior. Nor be stepping over expat Asian kids relatives doing laundry, cooking, shopping, and other things. [No doubt fighting for washers and dryers in the laundry room is not particularly fun with elderly Asian relatives ruthlessly cutting in front of "nice, polite," White kids.] You can see the frustration build, even poorly articulated, with her description of being raised to be "nice, polite" and have her cautions ignored. And focus interrupted by loud talking on cell phones. Because rules are just for White kids, not the rest.

And that's Ms. Wallace's main beef. She has to follow the rules, the others don't. Even the hottest girl on campus finds that annoying. She still has to get work done.

Diversity creates a thousand and one petty annoyances, and with California being ground zero for White ethnic cleansing, the annoyances build up heavily. The internet, with social media a draw for 24/7 rants/soap-boxing statements, is almost irresistible. I have no doubt whatsoever that Ms. Wallace's social circle said much the same thing, over and over again. No doubt it is enraging to be a numerical minority, and the only one held to the rules, while everyone else flouts it.

Ms. Wallace should not have apologized. She should have stood her ground, and demanded the University enforce rules equally, not just for White students. No doubt an "example will be made" of Ms. Wallace, but it will not change White students minds, nor that of the average White person. Who will see merely another PC jihad, by the usual suspects, while those of more privileged races skate.

Ultimately, the internet by giving voice for those who speak out about the cost of diversity (second or third class status for Whites, with no payoff for the social friction, daily) will erode the elite's ability to enforce orthodoxy. Efforts will be made to contain the damage, but the internet is too big, and the lure of saying what you really think too strong, particularly for young women who seem more than young men focused on self-expression, to be walled off by a PC firewall. Huffington Post may have a five minutes of hate, but most Whites are likely to find themselves in broad agreement that diversity imposes a constant social friction with no benefit for them.

And the strongest argument of all is "What's in it for me?" [The motto of one John Dortmunder.] For most Whites, the answer is, a daily kick in the face. That's not a winning proposition, any more.
...Read more

When Will Hollywood Turn on Diversity?

Hollywood is a weird place. It celebrates "diversity" yet its people live as far away from Black and Hispanic people as possible. No place on earth is Whiter than Malibu. And as much as Hollywood hates ordinary White people, they have proven complete failures at reaching Mexican audiences. Funny, semi-ironic hipster stuff like Juno, Little Miss Sunshine, the Office, 30 Rock, and Sideways don't appeal to working class or poorer Mexicans. Who prefer broad, very Mexican stuff like Sabado Gigante.


Any quick views of Telemundo or Univision (which Conan O'Brien likes to mock) reveals a huge and unbridgeable culture gap. Hollywood is good at making SWPL movies and Television and books (Lovely Bones, Tuesdays with Morry) that SWPL hipsters love. Semi illiterate dishwashers, car-washers, day laborers, and waiters from Southern Mexico? Not so much.

Nor is Hollywood prepared for the economic difference, when very poor Mexicans make up the largest consumer of entertainment. If Hollywood is hurting with Redbox, Netflix, Amazon, Apple, and now Facebook offering movies for dirt-cheap, how will it handle an impoverished Mexican population that can only spend say, $1 or so for the biggest hit movie? Hollywood and its entire infrastructure, from movies to ad-supported TV to cable-supported TV, depends on a White middle class audience that will buy/view/support the culture of Hollywood, and reward them very well financially.

Sooner or later, Hollywood movers and shakers are going to go bankrupt (like former NFL Star Tiki Barber, trying to return to the NFL at age 35 after his fling with a hot blonde 19 year old intern left him unable to pay for his divorce, and fired from the NBC Today Show). Because they will be unable to reach the new Mexican majority audience, at cheap enough levels. Mansions in Malibu are great, but someone has to pay for them. That means, on a certain level, most projects have to make money, or some make enormous amounts of money, to support that level of wealth.

This means, ultimately, Hollywood has to either become very, very Mexican, with Mexican producers, writers, actors, and such replacing the nearly all White SWPL cadre in place now, with those replaced happy and delighted to be replaced, or somehow Hollywood White SWPL folks all become "Mexican inside" speaking fluent Spanish, completely immersed in Mexican culture, and able to churn out movie after movie with masked Mexican Luchidors driving around doing Luchidor like things.

The likelihood of either happening is so close to zero as to be statistically insignificant. Therefore, Hollywood is bound to fail on demographics alone, leaving aside the transformative nature of technology. As it does, and Hollywood hipsters are shocked to find their mansions foreclosed upon, expect a massive turnabout. A Mexican majority nation won't support a SWPL Hollywood. Simple as that.
...Read more

Ethnic Cleansing In Orange County and White Zionism

Ethnic cleansing has a nasty ring about it. Typically, people envision some grim Balkan village, with Serbian death squads exterminating "Good Muslims" (reality: all sides engaged in this behavior, only the Serbians were publicized in the West and charged in the World Court). But ethnic cleansing has another side: one of (so far) rather bloodless but relentless pushing out of Whites (and Blacks) by a tidal wave of mass migration, on the part of Hispanics, and to a lesser extent, Asians. No place in California was more emblematic of idyllic, White Middle Class America than Orange County California. The film Dragnet, with Dan Akryod as an idiotic Sgt. Joe Friday, and Tom Hanks as "Pep Streebeck" even mocked the idea of the "virgin from Orange County" back in 1987. Today Orange County is majority non-White, and no better picture is available than the story at the Orange County Register.


Among the highlights, Orange County lost about 14.6% of its White population from 1990-2010, or about 227,000 people. In return, it gained about 363,000 Hispanics (almost all Mexican) and about 165,000 Asians over that period. Hispanics increased by 64.37%, over the period, and Asians increased by 68.58%. If the dreams of multiculturalism were true, and everyone danced around holding hands hating "White Hegemony" or something, and income and demand on government services were all the same among populations, and household sizes were all the same, and ethnic groups did not resent being pushed out of places they had lived in for a long time, well then everything would be roses. But it is not.

From the US Census Bureau Factfinder, we can find out that household sizes are 4 for Mexicans/Hispanic (Any Race), 3 for Asians (Any Race), and 2 for White (Alone).


That is a significant difference. Hispanics/Mexicans have much larger families, and that alone puts a bigger burden on schools, on welfare, on health systems. Even disallowing for median income differences and percentages in poverty. Asian families are more akin to Hispanic/Mexicans than Whites.

Then there is Median Household Income. The Census Bureau reports that in 2009, the median household income for Whites alone was $54,461 (shared by two people, or $27,231 per person, median income). For Asians, it was $65,469, or $21,823. For Hispanics, it was $38,039, or only $9,510 per person. Now, obviously this is merely the median (midpoint) income of households. Without knowing the shape precisely of the income distribution per household by race, this is merely back of the envelope, ball-park estimation. Pretty rough stuff. Nothing to bet the house on. But the same press release by the Census Bureau tells us that 12.3% of Whites were at or below the poverty line in 2009, 12.5% of Asians, and a whopping 25.3% of Hispanics (Any Race). For Native Born Americans, the poverty rate was 13.7%, for Naturalized Citizens it was 10.8%, and for "not a citizen" it was 25.1%

Therefore we can make the following rough assumptions and not be completely off-base: Whites are wealthier, and have smaller households, making them ideal from a tax perspective because they contribute taxes and don't use much social services. Asians have higher per household incomes, but also bigger households, implying both bigger expenses (more people to feed, clothe, house, etc.) and more usage of social services. Worst of all, from a tax base/usage perspective, are Hispanics who have large households (remember at least half have MORE than 4 in a household) and very low household income. Asians and Whites have about the same levels of poverty, but Hispanics far more.

What places are nice to live in, based on how the government acts? Why, places that don't spend all their money on the desperately poor, and have money for parks, or libraries, or efficient and well trained police, who keep order without being thugs or goons. Where animals are treated well, and those in need get comprehensive help, not a lick and a promise. An orderly, safe, secure, well mannered society requires at an absolute minimum a population that produces wealth (that is taxable) and does not make huge demands on that taxable wealth. The kinds of nice places to live (weather aside) that people think about are Switzerland, or New Zealand (Christchurch was perhaps the nicest, safest, most serenely secure city I had been to, pre-Quake days). Seattle, Portland, Salt Lake City, Boise Idaho, Sun Valley Idaho, would also qualify.

What places are not very nice to live in? Why, very poor places, where public services are a joke. Where what little tax money there is, is promptly consumed by corruption or the mass demands of the very, very poor. Such places would include Egypt, Pakistan, Mexico, Brazil, Haiti, the Congo. Haiti has nice weather. Would you live there, or Switzerland, if you could afford both?

But ethnic cleansing of Whites out of Orange County (a quarter of a million Whites did not suddenly up and die, they all moved out) has more than just a fiscal impact on the government. Replacing low-usage populations that generate taxes with high-usage populations that don't generate much taxes. Ethnic cleansing of Whites does two things, little noticed among the media, conservative commentators, and the like.

First, ethnic cleansing generates resentment among Whites who are "stuck" and switch from a situation like in Orange County, which went from almost 65% White in 1990 to 44% White today. "Diversity" brings what exactly to the White population that remains? E-X-C-L-U-S-I-O-N. That is what it brings. The White population is essentially transported into Mexico, as an alien and discriminated minority, or perhaps China or Taiwan. [Irvine went from 73% White to 45% in the same time frame, with Asians increasing from 18% to 39%. Hearing nothing but Mandarin or Cantonese in much of Irvine and seeing no faces like your own is not a particularly positive experience.]

There are those who argue (I've had this told to me personally, by older White men) that "Whites stole America from the Indians" and so deserve minority status. "Making things right" by punishing later generations of Whites. As John Dortmunder, the character created by Donald E. Westlake (one of America's great authors, and no I'm not kidding either), noted, "What's in it for me?" While older White men might think it right and proper to punish younger ones for sins past (note they don't volunteer to punish themselves by moving to the barrio), for almost everyone else the experience of being a minority fairly suddenly, and experiencing exclusion and isolation, is not positive. "Diversity" is touted all the time, but all it involves for Whites (particularly White men) is being made into a numerical minority, facing exclusion and third-fourth class treatment. Arguments about "moral payback" for the Edmund Pettis Bridge, or Segregation, or Slavery, generate only resentment for the Whites stuck as minorities. Almost none of them had anything to do with it, and they are being punished (and punishment it is) for sins of men long dead.

But the other aspect is the experience of those who leave. If you're pushed out of your home, because the schools are suddenly crowded with Mexican kids who speak little or no English, form gangs, beat up White kids, and demand nearly all the resources of the school district (for ESL, remedial math/science/reading instruction, Special Education, teen mother programs, and so on) leaving none for you, the effect is akin to that of the Enclosure movement or the pushing off the land of the British Borderers, on both sides of the border, or those forced off the land in Ireland. What this forced early ethnic cleansing did, was cement inside those made victim to it, of attitudes about government and other peoples.

As Fischer makes clear in Albion's Seed, the Scots-Irish believed that government was a means by outside, distant people to oppress them, take what little they had, and in general treat them like servants in bondage. Leaving a widespread, and deep distrust that lasts to this day, of government. As something that only oppresses, and never does any good. That is inevitably in the hands of evil outsiders intent on eradicating them from the land. The attitude persists because it was based soundly in fact. Distant governments did indeed force people off their land, and government was used only to punish the people for existing, never to help them in any way.

Essentially, the ethnic cleansing of Whites out of Orange County has created a quarter of a million Whites moved out by pressure from both Hispanics and Asians. On the Hispanic side, a crowding out of schools, and heavy public service usage, with declining quality of life, while on the Asian side, pressure from high-achieving minorities (who have the added benefit of not being White, thus having at least some preferential treatment above native Whites). And for both, constant exclusion with Asian or Hispanic dominated local radio stations, business with signs not in English, and physical minority status. Race riots and lynchings do not need to occur, as in Malaysia, the Philippines, or Indonesia (against the Diaspora Chinese) to push populations out of places, including those they've live in for years.

And along with the negative attitudes towards government, comes negative attitudes towards those of different races. Lectures, moralizing, speechifying, a good dose of "anti-racism," and the like are not going to change beliefs or behavior of people ethnically cleansed out of their homes by pressures from Hispanics and Asians. Populations of Whites are well-disposed to other races, when they are specifically rewarded for being so, and face no real penalty for holding and acting on those beliefs. By contrast, screaming about "racist White people who like Whiteness" ala NPR and PBS executives, is like beating a mule. The beating might make the one giving out the beating feel better, in expressing his anger, but it won't change the mule's mind. He'll just get more … mulish. Stubborn. And angry on his own account.

Essentially, to provide for Hispanics and Asians, about a quarter of a million Whites had to be moved out. About half a million combined Hispanics and Asians moved in, and the Whites were moved out. Roughly a two to one ratio. To provide for (likely almost entirely non-citizen) Hispanics and Asians, every two meant displacing one White. And what reward did the displaced Whites get? Better weather? A better standard of living? More income?

Indeed, while Hispanics openly talk of "Reconquista," the actual mechanics of White ethnic cleansing in Orange County (which again, was not violent, but done by economic/social/exclusionary pressure) means only that there will be a sizable amount of people thinking of their own "Reconquista," their own "recovery," their own "Next Year in Irvine" type of sentiment. As yet, this is likely deeply unexpressed. But you cannot imagine that that all those people were real happy about moving from one of the best climates, and one of the best places in California, to someplace where snow is on the ground six months of the year.

Serbian desire to recover their lands were driven by a constant influx of refugees who were fairly brutally ethnically cleansed out of their homelands. It is certainly true that death squads did not operate in Orange County, but those who were forced out are hardly likely to thank the Hispanic and Asian populations that in effect, moved them out. And as Whites are forced out of: California, Arizona, Texas, Nevada, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Virginia, all the nicer places to live, all that will be created is a desire, given expression by the first person to tap it, to "recover" the lost lands by re-conquering them. By kicking basically, Hispanics and Asians out. Little love or loyalty is created by the Asian entrepreneur or "Red Princeling" from China who moves his family to such nice places and flaunts his wealth and power over the natives, secure that being non-White gives him legal, social, and political power over ordinary White people (against White elites is another matter). The same holds true for the exclusionary power of very poor, and rough, dangerous, and often anti-White Mexican immigrants, nearly all of them illegal. Santa Ana's White population went from 23% down to 9.2%, over the past twenty years, and in Anaheim, from 57% to 27.5%. While Hispanics grew in Santa Ana from 65% to 76%, and from 31% to 52% in Anaheim over the same period.

Diversity, for Santa Ana, Anaheim, and Irvine Whites means just another word for ethnic cleansing of people like them. While the elites plow forward, with Utah poised to open itself completely to illegal aliens (the Mormon Church wants mass illegal immigration to make converts), the Republican delegates have threatened the governor, sure to sign the bill, with defeat in re-election.

It is quite likely, however that the time for political solutions has ended. The example of the Union mass disobedience, thuggery, intimidation, threats, violence, mobs, and so on have probably not gone un-noticed. As Whites are more and more ethnically cleansed out of nice climates into snowy places they'd rather not live, they'll have less to lose and more anger, and more desire to recapture a lost paradise. Their "Jerusalem." Call it "White Zionism" if you will, this the natural and inevitable outcome for a White America made suddenly into a non-White majority nation.

America is not South Africa. Whites are still the majority, and don't feel much (if any) racial guilt. They have in any effect nowhere else on the planet to run to, and lack the extensive financial resources that allowed most White South Africans to in effect, cut and run for other places. Flight is the dominant mode now, because it is easiest. Eventually, that flight will cease and fight begin.

Congress believes that the US Military is too White and Male, apparently because a White Male dominated institution, that can get things done, is widely respected, and has extensive fighting experience along with well, control of the US military, simply cannot be allowed to stand in a non-White run/majority nation. Others can read the tea leaves. An angry, displaced populace dreaming of recovery of lost territory. Feeling betrayed by a government that they do not trust, and disliking intensely (with sound reasons) other peoples? With the military firmly in their control, and as Steve Sailer points out, a non-White and non-wealth generating majority voting punitive taxes on a White minority to fund a massive welfare state, one that amounts to nothing more but a massive transfer of wealth of already ethnically cleansed Whites to non-Whites? Well that's a recipe for a "Whiskey Rebellion Plus." A supersized fiscal Fort Sumter.

One obviously not likely to happen today, or ten years from now. But inevitably.

[The attempt to make the US military a female and non-White dominated institution is destined to fail. The US will not cease to fight in places, if for no other reason than to secure oil -- oil at $200 a barrel, gas at $10 a gallon, will not generate the windfall for Obama's cronies and himself, invested heavily in electric cars. It will generate an impeachment and conviction on whatever matter can be conveniently found. Americans might have more margin than poor Egyptians, in terms of revolt when daily living becomes unaffordable, but they are only marginally different, not people on another planet with fundamentally different behaviors. Raise the price of gas and oil that much, and Obama and company will be tossed out, and the military unleashed to generate plenty of blood for oil. What, you think America's men and women are longing to bike to work in August, 40 miles each way, or January for that matter? Living in houses with no heat or air conditioning? Please. Besides, folks who find jumping out of airplanes, blowing stuff up, or living in cramped quarters on ships and subs a good time, with the risks of combat added on top, are always going to be almost exclusively White and male.]

America is embarked on a goal that has never ever been done in history: replace one population with another, markedly poorer, and manage that with no conflict or violence whatsoever, and maintaining a high standard of living. This has never been done before because it is impossible. So it is destined to fail in the way that the US debt has already failed: Pimco's Bill Gross has dumped all US government debt. Pimco of course being the world's largest hedge fund. Wow, what a surprise! A nation destined to become Mexico Norte, without changes, has no possibility of paying off its debt, and widespread inflation is killing what little economic recovery has occurred.

Failure of Diversity is inevitable. And so, therefore, is "White Zionism." In one form or another, it is coming, inevitably.
...Read more