Free Blonde Swedish Girls

Saturday, January 16th, 2016

This is not about just refugees from Syria’s civil war, Henry Porter notes:

At a feeding station run by Greek volunteers in the shadow of Mytilene’s castle, I discovered young Moroccans, Tunisians, Pakistanis, Nigerians, Ethiopians, and one man from Mali. An entire generation seems to be on the move. You are struck by their good nature and the resourcefulness that propels them across continents. There is also acute loneliness on the long road into Europe. I met a charming Afghan man of about 20 who was giving half his free meal to a gang of friendly dogs. He told me he did this every day simply for the company.

Demographics, poverty, and communications are driving economic migration. According to the research group Youthpolicy.org, young people aged between 15 and 24 constitute about 20 percent of the populations in Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen.

Because many are poor, they cannot marry — half of men in the Middle East between the ages of 25 and 29 are single. They have little money and few ties; however, they do have the Internet on their phones (an indispensable item on the road), and they know about the wealth and opportunities of Europe, and these are what put them in a dinghy, even if they have never seen the sea before. But there are other enticements — one people-smuggling Web site is reported to have promised speedy asylum procedures in Sweden, “free blonde Swedish girls,” and accommodation in a luxury hotel.

Comments

  1. Bob Sykes says:

    One wonders how these young men will change Europe. Two World Wars devastated the European gene pool. These immigrants/invaders might improve it.

    First, the Cro-Magnon hunter-gatherers, then the Anatolian farmers, then the Indo-European charioteers, now the African/Middleeastern Muslims.

  2. Tim says:

    Bob:

    Nothing like inbred 3rd world tribes to improve the gene pool.

  3. Slovenian Guest says:

    I certainly wasn’t thinking good natured when i was zig zagging towards the police station the other day, while a few mid eastern looking refugee types were following me after dark…

    More like winter is coming or what would James LaFond do? And to better upgrade my Swiss army pocket knife, which is really more a throwing weapon than a knife. You can’t stab, rip down and in, in a reverse C cut with that unless you are wrestling a fish.

    Which was LaFonds post mortem tip for the cyclist killed in harm city recently:

    “The victim in this attack looks, forgive me, like a ready made target. Nice white guys die in Baltimore. Mass transit is just as unsafe. Unless you can afford a car in Baltimore you are a hunted animal. Most people just do not have the skill set to deal with this type of predation.

    To deal with this type of attack you must use a knife from a concealed hand position—do not brandish it—grab one shirt and stab under the heart, rip down and in, in a reverse C cut and then get another one. If you do not gut two you will do serious time. If you only cut/stab one, the rest are all witnesses. Cut and stab as many as possible.”

    Indeed, nice white guys die, nice white gals get raped, hooray for diversity.

  4. William Newman says:

    Nothing like using technical nonsense to push one’s political talking point of race contamination.

    There are various politically incorrect conclusions which happen to be technically correct implications of genetics and natural selection. However, your politically incorrect conclusion that inbreeding leaves a gene pool persistently insidiously contaminated is not one of the ones that is technically correct. It appears to be a politically motivated talking point argued incoherently from the authority of Science in the tradition of the eugenics tract at issue in the Scopes Monkey Trial.

    (http://volokh.com/posts/1099763167.shtml — the claim that Caucasians are the “highest type of all” is not technically reasonable, because natural selection not only does not tend to create any simple one-dimensional sueriority describable as “highest type” and “lowest type” among adjacent competing interbreeding subpopulations like Caucasian vs. various Asians further east, it tends to work against it. So while “highest type” is a natural political talking point, technically it’s an extraordinary conclusion which’d need extraordinary evidence. Obviously there are consistent regional differences on important individual axes — like malaria adaptations or alcohol adaptations or dairy adaptations or brownness, plus many many others we often don’t know the molecular genetics of — but “higher” was not an honest description of what was known then, much less justified from extraordinary evidence known then, and it wouldn’t be an honest description of what we know now either.)

    The usual acute problem with inbreeding is that offspring too commonly have the exact same gene paired up in the chromosome inherited from mother and corresponding chromosome inherited from father, roughly the opposite of hybrid vigor. That problem simply goes away, *poof*, in the first generation of cross-breeding into an unrelated population, in roughly the same way that characteristically hybrid outcomes mostly go *poof* if you try to breed two first generation hybrids to get second-generation offspring.

    There also tend to be some chronic problems with an inbred population not having as much genetic variation as it could, but granting for the sake of argument that genetic variation is a good thing with no qualifications, the outcome of mixing some random outsider population (inbred or not) with the larger native population tends to be good. Even if the immigrant population is inbred, it is generally enough different from the native population that the resulting mix has more variation than either population did before.

    E.g., the admixture of some Neanderthal-ish genes was probably net helpful for our ancestors, maybe very significantly helpful. (That was an extreme case of unrelatedness, likely extreme enough to cause a high proportion of individual grossly bad outcomes like stillbirths and sterile mules; but the individual winners of the crossbreeding lottery likely won so big compared to what could have been expected from ordinary evolution over the same period, that after winners had exponentially many descendants the population was pretty consistently improved.) Even if the individual Neanderthals involved had happened to be very few in number and/or seriously inbred — the isolated population of some small island, e.g. — it still would have probably been similarly helpful.

    There could be an inbreeding problem in the mixed population if explicit inbreeding *customs* are introduced by the immigrants, or if other changes caused by the immigrants encourage inbreeding practices. But such a possible problem of ongoing bad breeding practices is very different from your supposed problem of a previously inbred gene pool inevitably contaminating the outbred gene pool when mixed in.

  5. Tim says:

    William:

    I believe all people born healthy, genetically and otherwise, are equal. I did not mention race or color. Inbreeding damages societies as can be seen in the Amish and Ashkenazi communities.

    You missed a significant part of my comment. Try again.

    Nice cut and paste by the way.

  6. Kirk says:

    “I believe all people born healthy, genetically and otherwise, are equal.”

    I have to disagree with you, and a bit of objective examination of the world around you will promptly disabuse you of this notion, a most pernicious one.

    People are not “born equal”. I operate under a genetic inheritance that includes a bunch of health issues that have affected the trajectory of my life. Likewise, I have a set of genetic “bred in” characteristics that have made my life a lot easier than some of my peers who did not have those advantages.

    I think that anyone who has done any reading about the various congruencies found between the lives of twins separated near birth and raised separately will have to admit that there are apparently heritable genetic programming features that affect the “software” of our lives. This being the case, it is not a difficult inference to make that there are also likely heritable genetic features that are expressed in cultural features of the population possessing them–Which puts a huge question mark in all this “equality of culture” bullshit that the multiculturalists have been shoving down our throats for the last several generations.

    I’m going to go out on a limb, and suggest that the likelihood of successfully integrating the refugee populations coming into Europe over the next few generations is minimal, and that we’re going to see a disastrous series of changes to European culture as it attempts to take these people in and make them a part of the European community.

    Not even China has really managed to pull this off, with their invaders, over the centuries. What’s wound up happening has been a tremendous culling of the invading population, as those who are ill-adapted to civilized life are gradually co-opted and bred into line with Chinese civilization. In China’s case, a lot of this has taken place due to the “put a drop of wine into a bucket of water” effect, where the massive Chinese population has basically absorbed every invading culture into itself. Go looking for the remnants of the Mongols who invaded, and who didn’t go home to the Mongolian plains–They’re simply not there, any more. Similarly, the Tarim peoples are similarly no longer identifiably distinct from the Chinese population, as are many of the other ethnicities and cultures which once bordered China.

    In short? Equality? At birth, with the way our genetic lottery works? Not a valid concept, at all.

  7. Bill says:

    Slovenian Guest: “The victim in this attack looks, forgive me, like a ready made target. Nice white guys die in Baltimore…”

    We were visiting friends in Baltimore over the holidays, and stayed in a hotel that was within a ten minute walk of this horrific stabbing incident. I told my two college age kids that they absolutely were forbidden to walk around Johns Hopkins campus after dark and got eye rolls. I’ve sent them copies of articles about this story, we’ll see if the eye rolls persist in the future.

    On New Year’s Eve, local Baltimore stations played down the riots, played up the harbor fireworks and didn’t mention the late-breaking homicides that put Baltimore up to 340 killings last year.

  8. Tim says:

    Kirk:

    By saying ‘born healthy’ I am implying no genetically based diseases, maternal malnutrition, abuse, etc. Of course heritable differences will exist in healthy populations, but that doesn’t make them unequal. Born equal doesn’t mean identical or staying equal since many factors, mostly cultural/tribal, will dramatically influence a person’s development.

    My primary criticism by using the pejorative ‘inbred third world tribal’ is to highlight an almost total incompatibility of two cultures. Western culture of egalitarianism that considers all people fundamentally equal will not long survive an invasive tribal culture because it will accommodate tribalism instead of insisting on assimilation. We see this illustrated as we are told by Merkel to welcome the ‘refugees’ and criticized for defending our culture.

    The stability of China against invasions, Manchus for example, is likely due to it’s population mass. Such a mass does not exist in the West. Add that to accommodation and the West is under a existential threat.

Leave a Reply