That's from BBC online. It reports the results, but never once talks about why the British people suddenly rebelled against their entire elite class. And they did. The parties that had been 1 and 2 in every election for 100 years came in 3rd and 4th.
BBC News is broadcast on PBS here in America. I watched it yesterday. Not a peep about this. I'm sure the thinking in the BBC newsroom was: to cover it would legitimize it, so we'll just pretend it didn't happen and that will make it go away. And in the next breath, they'll wonder aloud why so many Brits no longer have confidence in great and storied British institutions (like the BBC).
The lack of self-awareness among the Western ruling class is truly breathtaking.
My suspicion is that the Western ruling class is perfectly aware of what it's doing and understands the implications for doing so. They understand who their audience is: the multicultural democracy plus normies. They're effectively playing dumb, but playing dumb always serves a purpose, often to keep the peace. When it stops working, they'll resort to what political regimes always resort to in the end: hard violence.
Great article, although it seems to be hinged on two opposing claims:
All post-WW2 historical evidence proves that White Westerners (Americans, Brits, Germans, etc.) will do absolutely nothing in the face of demographic replacement (and worse)…
But at the same time, “When will civil war in Western countries break out?”
As you hinted at, it is more likely than some non-White factions have a civil war in a “White” country than it is Whites will push back against multiculturalism.
The brutal fact is we need to accept that the game is over and whatever is over the next hill for US, UK, Canada, etc. will not involve Whites “taking back” anything.
They scored the mass immigration own goal a while ago, and it’s essentially illegal to disagree with replacement anywhere West of the Danube.
Outliers are often used as evidence that the median measure of a group is invalid. This is a statistical fallacy. A small percentage of dissenting, conservative blacks does not alter the basic characteristics of the dominant, American-black culture.
If Betz is correct and SHTF racially in America, conservative blacks will have the hardest time. Rejected culturally by their black, racial brethren but rejected racially by their white, cultural tribe, they will be, as Max says, "alone in the prison yard riot".
The only solution to this would be a' "American" tribal identity instead of a "white" identity, but that seems unlikely to me.
21% is enough to put a minor dent in the progressive black cultural milieu, especially since black males tend to be louder about their political and cultural views than whites, but it's still fair to characterize them as mostly outliers.
Whites tend to be extremely polarized over Trump; many progressives will gleefully unfriend you if they find out you voted for the Cheeto-Fuhrer. I wonder if that same dynamic plays out among blacks though? Are Trumpie blacks eschewed by their more-liberal friends and family? Whites' cultural training that "one doesn't talk about religion or politics" makes diffusing political disagreements very hard -- the only socially acceptable way I can express my disagreement with you it to unfriend you. However, blacks seem to be more willing to be "out and loud and vocal" about their views. Does that translate into more tolerance of diverse opinions? Does it give them more opportunities to challenge each other without having to resort to unfriending? My instinct is that the answer is yes, but I think that's a really interesting sociological question.
That's very interesting. My assumption is that at the individual level, Blacks are less likely than Whites to disconnect social relations over politics. However, I also think that it's more dangerous at the group level to not toe the party line, if it makes sense.
Whites basically orient their worldview at an individual level, while Blacks do so at the group level.
> a clash between “Colonizers” and the “Colonized.”
How is this different from the UK, US, Canada? The colonised subcontinent flows back into the UK and Canada. The colonised Latin America, the entire colonised world, flows back into the US.
> In the U.S., as well as Canada, the problem is growing anarchy, racial tensions, and a system which has been so subverted, nothing it does makes any sense to the common person
This exactly describes the UK, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, most of Europe apart from Hungary. I don’t even see how France is different.
Tangentially related, the British had a by-election (think state & local election) this weekend. They turned en-masse on both major political parties.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd925jk27k0o
That's from BBC online. It reports the results, but never once talks about why the British people suddenly rebelled against their entire elite class. And they did. The parties that had been 1 and 2 in every election for 100 years came in 3rd and 4th.
BBC News is broadcast on PBS here in America. I watched it yesterday. Not a peep about this. I'm sure the thinking in the BBC newsroom was: to cover it would legitimize it, so we'll just pretend it didn't happen and that will make it go away. And in the next breath, they'll wonder aloud why so many Brits no longer have confidence in great and storied British institutions (like the BBC).
The lack of self-awareness among the Western ruling class is truly breathtaking.
My suspicion is that the Western ruling class is perfectly aware of what it's doing and understands the implications for doing so. They understand who their audience is: the multicultural democracy plus normies. They're effectively playing dumb, but playing dumb always serves a purpose, often to keep the peace. When it stops working, they'll resort to what political regimes always resort to in the end: hard violence.
Great article, although it seems to be hinged on two opposing claims:
All post-WW2 historical evidence proves that White Westerners (Americans, Brits, Germans, etc.) will do absolutely nothing in the face of demographic replacement (and worse)…
But at the same time, “When will civil war in Western countries break out?”
As you hinted at, it is more likely than some non-White factions have a civil war in a “White” country than it is Whites will push back against multiculturalism.
The brutal fact is we need to accept that the game is over and whatever is over the next hill for US, UK, Canada, etc. will not involve Whites “taking back” anything.
They scored the mass immigration own goal a while ago, and it’s essentially illegal to disagree with replacement anywhere West of the Danube.
So we need to start talking about what’s next
> Black Americans, whose French equivalent are the Arabs. Black Americans, as a group, don’t believe in America as a people, a place, or even an idea.
This is just incorrect on both points
Yes, I am a racist.
Ahhh the classic “racist” counter, dating today aren’t we?
If you can support that blanket statement about American blacks then yes you are both ignorant and a racist.
Tell me you’ve never interacted with blacks without telling me you’ve never interacted with blacks.
Tell me you’ve never interacted with small c conservative blacks without telling me you’re an ignorant racist.
Outliers are often used as evidence that the median measure of a group is invalid. This is a statistical fallacy. A small percentage of dissenting, conservative blacks does not alter the basic characteristics of the dominant, American-black culture.
If Betz is correct and SHTF racially in America, conservative blacks will have the hardest time. Rejected culturally by their black, racial brethren but rejected racially by their white, cultural tribe, they will be, as Max says, "alone in the prison yard riot".
The only solution to this would be a' "American" tribal identity instead of a "white" identity, but that seems unlikely to me.
What are their percentages in reality? Of those that actually voted it was still 80% democrat if I remember correctly.
21% Trump for black men. 7% for black women.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/exit-polls
21% is enough to put a minor dent in the progressive black cultural milieu, especially since black males tend to be louder about their political and cultural views than whites, but it's still fair to characterize them as mostly outliers.
Whites tend to be extremely polarized over Trump; many progressives will gleefully unfriend you if they find out you voted for the Cheeto-Fuhrer. I wonder if that same dynamic plays out among blacks though? Are Trumpie blacks eschewed by their more-liberal friends and family? Whites' cultural training that "one doesn't talk about religion or politics" makes diffusing political disagreements very hard -- the only socially acceptable way I can express my disagreement with you it to unfriend you. However, blacks seem to be more willing to be "out and loud and vocal" about their views. Does that translate into more tolerance of diverse opinions? Does it give them more opportunities to challenge each other without having to resort to unfriending? My instinct is that the answer is yes, but I think that's a really interesting sociological question.
That's very interesting. My assumption is that at the individual level, Blacks are less likely than Whites to disconnect social relations over politics. However, I also think that it's more dangerous at the group level to not toe the party line, if it makes sense.
Whites basically orient their worldview at an individual level, while Blacks do so at the group level.
Higher in men, higher in young and middle aged men.
> a clash between “Colonizers” and the “Colonized.”
How is this different from the UK, US, Canada? The colonised subcontinent flows back into the UK and Canada. The colonised Latin America, the entire colonised world, flows back into the US.
> In the U.S., as well as Canada, the problem is growing anarchy, racial tensions, and a system which has been so subverted, nothing it does makes any sense to the common person
This exactly describes the UK, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, most of Europe apart from Hungary. I don’t even see how France is different.
Steve Sailer has written the big thing preventing National Divorce in the US is who gets the Black Underclass.