RACE WAR Conquered California -- 1st hand thoughts from an American being replaced there

[MinnesotaSmith]

https://www.takimag.com/article/conquered-california/

Conquered California
by David Cole

July 23, 2019

"Last month, a prominent figure on the right asked me point-blank, “Why don’t you move?” He was referring to California, and my stubborn refusal to leave this high-tax, low-IQ, far-left, illegal-alien-riddled state.

I certainly could move if I wanted to. If I can afford a four-bedroom house in Beverly Hills, I can afford a mansion in D*ckweed, Montana.

But I ain’t moving. I was born here. I love this state. I’ve traveled all over the world, and I’ve never found a place as geographically and climatically perfect as Cali (sorry, Texans, you may have low taxes and such, but I’ve driven the length of your state twice, and it’s suicide-inducingly dull).

But the No. 1 reason I refuse to leave California is that I’d rather die here than give leftists the satisfaction of driving me out.

In the course of my Holocaust research, I spent a good deal of my youth in Germany. I got to know many Germans, usually in the context of “Hi, I’m a Holocaust Jew from America! Let’s be pals.” And in 1995 I toured Japan as part of an extended lecture gig sponsored by a professor at Tokyo’s Waseda University.

I was always curious what it’s like to grow up in a “loser” country, one that surrendered unconditionally only to be occupied and remade by its victorious foes. Because what did I know of defeat and humiliation? My house sits on land formerly occupied by wigwams and pueblos, the occupants of which got their butts royally kicked ages ago, and now the soil is mine. From the Civil War to the two World Wars, my family has always been on the winning side of everything. So I was keen to understand how the Germans and Japanese handled growing up knowing how badly they were pantsed and castrated after WWII.

The overwhelming majority of Germans I met dealt with the humiliation by apologizing, bowing, and prostrating themselves. It got to the point where I stopped mentioning revisionism to them, not because they’d chew me out (they couldn’t…I’m Jewish), but because they’d literally start crying like children. “We’re a bad people! We did bad things! We deserve the scorn, we deserve the punishment. We owe the world an eternity of apologies.”

Christ, I was embarrassed for them.

The Japs, on the other hand, handled their lot with greater dignity (no surprise there, due to the Japanese fetish for honor and the fact that postwar Japan was not subjected to the grotesque mindf*ck the U.S. and Soviets inflicted on postwar Germany). The most common attitude I found among my Japanese friends was “We took one for the team.” That “team” being humanity. “We were manipulated into a war with the U.S., and, as the only people to endure the horrors of large-scale nuclear bombing, through our misery, the world saw firsthand the terrors of such things, and that’s why it never happened again. Our dead did not die in vain.”

Fair enough. At least none of the little yella b*stards ever wept in front of me.

The bottom line of my fascination was, what are the psychological effects of living in a nation where a foreign force came in and told you “everything you were was bad. Everything you stood for was bad. And now we’re going to remake you into a good people and a good country, whether you like it or not. You were foul, you were vile, you were monsters. But now, we’ll try to make you into decent humans…not that you have any say in the matter.”

That was the question on my mind during every one of my extended stays in the former Axis nations. And if I’ve come off as a little callous toward the citizens of those countries, you can take some comfort in knowing that the joke is now firmly on me.

Because all of a sudden I’m in their place.

Governor Gavin Newsom’s June 22 Facebook and Twitter address to the people of California should have been a big story in the conservative media-sphere. It wasn’t, because the right dismisses California as too far gone. And yes, we are, but that doesn’t mean what’s happening here isn’t instructive, not with fleeing Californians resettling in red states and swing states, making them bluer. Not with anti-American immigrants settling in the heartland and taking over entire congressional districts. So, sure, mock us in Cali. But don’t ignore what’s happening here, because there are plenty of people who want the same thing to happen to you.

Pay attention to California as a cautionary tale.

“Stalin” Newsom’s social media address was the speech of an occupier to a conquered people. The gist of his lecture was essentially, “Everything this state was was bad. You Californians who were here in the 1990s were monsters. But we’ve vanquished you; you’re desolated, done. Your opinions no longer matter, your accomplishments are being dismantled, and better people are replacing you.”

The speech is only a minute twenty-five. Amazingly, not a single site on the ’net has bothered to transcribe it, so I’ll do it myself (Newsom’s words are in italics), with heckling where appropriate.

In California, I want folks to know you have rights. Know your rights, learn more about your rights, your legal protection.

Uh, who’s he talking to here?

Know that you should continue to send your kids to camp, summer school, know that you should feel confident going to work. We have your back.

Ah, he’s talking to illegals. Even though in this speech he uses the words “us,” “we,” and “Californians,” it’s clear that he’s speaking to only one type of Californian—illegal immigrants.

You know, we’ve been through this before, we lived through this same political theater in the 1990s.

According to the governor of California, what the people of California voted for in overwhelming numbers in the 1990s was merely “political theater.”

Prop. 187…

Nineteen ninety-four’s Proposition 187, also known as the Save Our State (SOS) initiative, was a ballot measure that established “a state-run citizenship screening system and prohibited illegal immigrants from using non-emergency health care, public education, and other services in the State of California.” Prop. 187 passed in a landslide: 59 percent to 41 percent. Sixty-five percent of white voters supported it. A majority of black and Asian voters supported it. Sixty-two percent of independents supported it. But apparently it was only “political theater.”

…three strikes you’re out, the fear of the other…

Cali voters passed the “three strikes” law in 1994 by a whopping 72 percent to 28 percent margin. All we were asking of our criminals was that they not commit three felonies, yet Newsom thinks we were being very unreasonable indeed. To him, three strikes represents “fear of the other”…the “other” being murderers, thieves, and rapists. And who could possibly fear them? And by the way, it’s a well-known fact that in ’94, policies like three strikes had the widespread support of black leaders looking to reduce crime in their communities. So who exactly were the “others” they feared?

…we had people talking down to people, talking past people…

Is he saying we were “talking down” to three-time felons by telling them, “You should have stopped after your second one”?

And now, back to Newsom “talking down” to us:

We’re better than that. We’re resilient. We came out stronger than ever on the other side. That’s the spirit of our state, and spirit defines this moment.

Who’s we? We passed Prop. 187. We passed three strikes. We voted to end affirmative action in universities. We voted to end bilingual education. We voted to ban gay marriage (2008!). Not all Californians who were here in the ’90s have fled. Many of us remain. But we’ve been neutered by demographic change and partisan redistricting, to the extent that “we” no longer matter…to the extent that Newsom spends the rest of his speech addressing those who are not “we”:

I just want to say to folks that are anxious about a knock on the door, when we talk about knowing your rights, no abras la puerta [don’t open the door]. Without a warrant, you don’t have to open the door. Without a warrant, you do not have to open the door. You have the right to due process, you have the right to legal representation. We’re going to make sure you know more about that. We’re going to make sure that our judicial system sends that message out, our educational system, our health-care system will send out the same message. We’re Californians; it’s a special place. The spirit of this state is a spirit of reconciling all our interesting differences…

…unless those differences include being right-of-center…

…uniting, as we like to say, around our common humanity. We’re better than this moment in the United States of America, and know we’re gonna get through it stronger than ever.

This isn’t a governor addressing his constituents; it’s Henry Morgenthau ostensibly addressing the conquered Germans, but in fact only speaking to the Jews and communists. “Hitler’s dead. His day is over. His supporters will be hunted to extinction and beaten down by denazification laws. You are Germany now. No one else’s voice matters. In fact, no German has the right to even knock on your door.”

To Newsom, the commonsense reforms of the ’90s were Hitlerian, and people like me are vanquished Nazis.

There’s something unique about Newsom’s speech. He’s not only badmouthing the people of his own state, he’s celebrating population replacement. “The Californians who used to live here were evil. Thankfully, we’ve silenced them or driven them out.” Maybe I’m wrong, but I can’t recall a previous example of a U.S. governor saying, “This state used to suck because bad people lived here. Now it’s finally getting to be an okay place!”

Thirty years ago, I looked at defeated peoples as curiosities to be studied. I never thought one day I’d join their ranks.

Reflect for a moment on how healthy Cali was in the ’90s. Now look at your own state. Are you confident it can never go ass-up like mine? Don’t be. It can happen to you. Because Newsom is hardly an anomaly among today’s Democrats. He just happens to be in a position where he can “let loose” a bit more than other Dem governors. He no longer has to pay lip service to that segment of the population that disgusts him.

So, yes, it’s too late to fight for Cali. But if you live in an unconquered state, fight for it. Fight against demographic change from outside the U.S. and from within.

And if there’s a home for sale on your block, and you see a car with Cali plates drive up to the open house, don’t immediately get hostile; it might be one of our “good” expats. Just calmly approach the new arrivals and ask them how many genders there are.

Based on the response, invite them in for pie…

…or get a rope and find a tree."

 

[MinnesotaSmith]

Related...

https://www.takimag.com/article/integration-and-immigration/

HOME FRONT

Integration and Immigration
by Steve Sailer

July 23, 2019

"Respectable opinion is trending toward once again viewing “segregation” as the great problem afflicting America.

For example, Senator Kamala Harris is demanding another round of busing in order to use white children to integrate distant schools. (Amusingly, back during the 1970s busing fad, Kamala’s husband, crack Los Angeles lawyer Douglas Emhoff, appears to have white-flighted to exurban Agoura High School out near Malibu Canyon.)

But one obvious problem is that America is running out of white students. While whites made up 84.5 percent of public school students in 1970, according to a 2014 Pew Research Center forecast America’s public schools will be only 46.2 percent white in the coming school year.

Similarly, celebrity economist Raj Chetty’s Big Data analyses of your tax returns have discovered that the best places to raise children are quite white cities like Salt Lake City and rural counties like Sioux County, Iowa. The worst places are Indian reservations like Pine Ridge and heavily black locales, often fast-growing Sunbelt cities like Charlotte.

Even though the top of Chetty’s rankings for best counties in the U.S. are dominated by virtually all-white places in the northern Great Plains and Great Basin, he still blames “segregation” for bad outcomes. That leads him to call for more programs to move inner-city blacks to whiter neighborhoods.

For example, Chetty has tracked down what would be the last working-class white neighborhood within the city of Charlotte, East Forest, and is demanding slum blacks be moved there so he can find out if having white neighbors (at least until they flee) solves welfare blacks’ problems.

Of course, there aren’t many such white working-class refuges left in urban America to use in Chetty’s integration experiments. For instance, Chetty’s designated victim hood, East Forest, is today only 28 percent white.

One obvious policy response to The Establishment’s need for more white people to use in integration schemes would be to reform the immigration system to bring in more of that much-demanded commodity: whites.

For example, the U.S. could recruit Boer families fleeing the high rate of racist violence tolerated by the South African regime.

Or the government could merely adopt objective Big Data measures for assessing the potential impact of immigration applicants, such as their likelihood of evading taxes, going on welfare, being entitled to affirmative action, committing violent crime, drunk driving, littering, and so forth. Rather than dream up ever more ingenious ways to ruin your neighborhood’s property values, Professor Chetty could use his data-crunching skills to figure out how the U.S. could let in only the most beneficial would-be immigrants.

Many sensible immigration reforms would likely lead to a higher percentage of whites being allowed to immigrate, which would somewhat ameliorate Senator Harris’ craving for white children to bus and Professor Chetty’s hunger for white neighbors to absorb the dysfunctions of poor blacks.

And yet reforming the immigration system in a manner that would increase white immigration is considered unspeakable in today’s intellectual world.

For example, there was a recent conference on “National Conservatism” in Washington where one of the speakers was the brilliant Penn law professor and neurologist Amy L. Wax.

As a legal scholar, Wax is well aware of the concept of disparate or adverse impact discrimination in which policies that inadvertently have a negative impact on a protected group can be ruled discriminatory even without disparate treatment by race.

Disparate impact originated in the Supreme Court’s 1971 Griggs case in which a utility company giving an IQ test to job applicants was ruled to be discriminating because blacks average lower scores.

Griggs didn’t outright ban the use of cognitive tests in employment, but did make them more difficult to justify to the EEOC without augmenting them with racial quotas. As Wax wrote in 2012:

Contrary to the Supreme Court’s assumption in Griggs, the comparative power of IQ extends even to relatively uncomplicated positions requiring modest skills, such as clerical or retail work. What this means is that hiring on the basis of intelligence—as opposed to other, non-cognitive personal attributes or talents—will almost always produce better-performing workers…. The paucity of non-Asian minorities in competitive positions reflects real differences in human capital and skill.

Similarly, just about any rational reform to our system of selecting immigrants, such as adding an IQ test, would have disparate impact by race.

Wax specifically argues for orienting immigration policy around what she calls “cultural-distance nationalism,” in which America would prefer immigrants from cultural backgrounds more like those of historic America. As she wrote in her 2018 Georgetown Law Review article calling for a less intellectually childish debate over immigration policy, “Debating Immigration Restriction: The Case for Low and Slow”:

…if we want to preserve our country’s culture and signal strengths, it follows that we should favor newcomers who are “more like us.”

Wax itemizes the cultural deficiencies typical of immigrant-sending cultures:

More broadly, we must ensure that bad habits from the Third World—lack of respect for law, rampant corruption and kleptocracy, despotism, weak markets, insecure property rights, lassitude, lack of enterprise, tribalism, superstition, distrust, rampant violence, misogyny, and unreason—are not allowed to infect and undermine the First.

As a resident of the San Fernando Valley, which has been inundated by ex-Soviets, I’d add that Second Worlders from Eastern Europe don’t always bring the neighborliest customs either.

But Wax is well aware that selecting immigrants for cultural compatibility (or for any other desirable criteria) would have disparate impact by race and thus be inevitably demonized as racist, even by conventional conservatives:

Embracing cultural-distance nationalism means, in effect, taking the position that our country will be better off with more whites and fewer nonwhites. Well, that is the result, anyway. So, even if our immigration philosophy is grounded firmly in cultural concerns…. And, no matter how many times we repeat the mantra that correlation is not causation, these racial dimensions are enough to spook conservatives.

Pundits were indeed enormously spooked, denouncing Wax for all sorts of sins against the Prime Directive of the zeitgeist, which is that whites will never, ever discriminate.

At the National Conservatism conference, Wax eloquently summed up:

That fear leads conservatives to avoid talking about cultural distance, or questioning the happy fantasy of “magic dirt,” or discussing forthrightly the practical difficulties of importing large numbers of people from backwards states into successful ones. And as long as these taboos exist, and acceptable mainstream conservatives defer to them, it will be hard—maybe impossible—to change course.

But we’re running out of time to continue playing Let’s Pretend:

Our country’s future trajectory, however, will not be determined by political correctness but by reality and facts on whether cultural differences really matter, whether they are stubborn, and whether they have consequences. And by the time that that becomes clear, and plays out, it may be too late to turn the ship.

Hilariously, the conventional wisdom was especially outraged by Wax’s contention that the diverse tend to litter more:

One of my pet peeves, one of my obsessions, is litter. If you go up to Stockbridge, Massachusetts, or Yankee territory, versus other places that are quote-unquote more diverse, you are going to see an enormous difference, I’m sorry to report. Generalizations are not very pleasant. But little things like that aren’t little. They really affect our environment.

Of course, this is true. Latinos litter.

For example, in Southern California, littering Latinos have trashed some of the loveliest natural sites, such as the Rock Pool in Malibu Canyon, Stoney Point in Chatsworth (the historic origin of California rock climbing), and the East Fork of the San Gabriel River.

Yet, littering is one of the problems most amenable to the kind of social engineering that progressives claim to favor. Americans had a big problem with littering in the postwar era when wrappers, such as from McDonald’s, increased enormously in number. In response, the long Keep America Beautiful campaign culminated with the famous 1971 “Crying Indian” TV commercial that successfully racially shamed Americans into cutting back on littering.

But nobody would dare racially shame Latinos today for their bad manners in throwing their trash on the ground. It’s just not done.

Another clear problem being caused by immigration is an increase in tax evasion.

For example, in 2006 I served on a jury in a simpleminded tax scam perpetrated by a clan of Iranian used-car dealers. The brains of the operation, a guy so crooked he’d been banned for life from the used-car profession (think about that), had gotten back in the game by having his brother-in-law sign all the legal forms to be the nominal CEO of their new car lot.

The hidden partner then sent off to Sacramento only half the $4 million in sales tax he collected from customers, spending the rest on his San Clemente golf course McMansion.

But, it turns out, the state of California employs auditors to catch you when you do that. Eventually, Mr. Big fled back to Iran, leaving his fall-guy brother-in-law to take the fall.

But when we got into the jury room, the only other juror with a high enough IQ to have understood the testimony was a Bulgarian immigrant used-car dealer, and he sure wasn’t going to vote to convict somebody over some American obsession about paying your taxes.

Interestingly, our Big Data era makes feasible a far more sophisticated system of selecting the best immigrants, which could utilize both individual differences, as the Canadian and Australian policies do, and demonstrated national tendencies. Just as, say, Harvard doesn’t assume that all high school GPAs are equally valid, but knows from experience that straight A’s from Stuyvesant or Harvard-Westlake are more impressive than straight A’s from Manual Arts, it would make sense to adjust for cultural propensities.

One smart criterion for choosing immigrants might be whether you are more likely to make a good spouse for an American, both because immigrants who marry Americans are likely to assimilate more thoroughly and because helping Americans marry is a good thing.

We should look for nationalities where the gender gap in intermarriage rate is close to nil. For example, East Asian immigrant women are much in demand by American men, but American women don’t think too much of East Asian immigrant men. This leads to Bitter Asian Men. Similarly, the greater demand for black men leads to Angry Black Women.

My impression is that the greatest equality of intermarriage is found among Europeans.

How to evaluate immigrants would be a far more useful project for a data maestro like Chetty to undertake than his long, futile search for the Magic Dirt.

Ironically, this “National Conservatism” gathering in our capital was hosted by Yoram Hazony, author of The Virtue of Nationalism, who is an Israeli political philosopher.

Hazony concluded his keynote by triumphantly quoting President Bill Pullman in Independence Day:

“Today, we celebrate our Independence Day!”

Perhaps someday in the distant future the patriotic intellectuals of our own Republic will be ready to thank our Israeli friends for their help, while noting that we Americans are now finally able to celebrate our own independence day."

 

[Hermantribe]

We seriously considered moving to Idaho or Arizona. But I won't give up the fight. People who left are now moving back. Other places may be cheaper but they don't compare. I see the hate, bitterness and disparaging remarks on this board, but I consider it jealousy. I won't give up the state. There's a guy named Wes Schaffer who is planning on running for gov against Newslime. Hope springs eternal and the fight goes on.

 

[20Gauge]

We seriously considered moving to Idaho or Arizona. But I won't give up the fight. People who left are now moving back. Other places may be cheaper but they don't compare. I see the hate, bitterness and disparaging remarks on this board, but I consider it jealousy. I won't give up the state. There's a guy named Wes Schaffer who is planning on running for gov against Newslime. Hope springs eternal and the fight goes on.

Good for you. I wish you well!

 

[The Mountain]

To the OP (and by extension anyone else who can't bring themselves to move out of California), especially in light of his "I won't give them the satisfaction" sentiment:

What. An. Idiot.

The Leftists don't want to drive you out. They desperately want you to stay, and they're counting on your inability to deal with someone "moving your cheese" e.g "I'm not giving up the fight", "[other places] don't compare". You're the willing sheep keeping their pie-in-the-sky utopia afloat. I will concede that parts of California are photogenically beautiful, no question. But you can't eat picturesque landscapes, or pay your taxes and fees with sunsets or mediterranean climate. Remember TINVOWOOT? That goes double for California. There are too many there who count on the Welfare State, more than there are of you, and they're not going to let you vote to take their rice bowl away. The recipients of the state's largesse want it to continue because it means they don't have to put out any effort, and the providers want it to continue because it means they have power.

And quite frankly, I've been to Sacramento and the Central Valley. Other than having mountains in the distance, there's no difference between it and Texas. It's all flat, boring, and the urban areas are grimy because it rarely rains. The coast might look nice, but it doesn't outweigh the huge and mostly awful interior.

I understand the sentiment, coming from New England. Seeing the communists sullying the cradle of our nation is hard, and I keep hoping something will change, but it's not. New England is beautiful almost everywhere, with lush green valleys, mountains, seashore, an actual 4 seasons, plus a lot more history than California. But it's being overrun by communists. I managed to stay in one of the more sane states (NH) for a while, but even it is succumbing to the rot, so I'm getting out.

 

[Hermantribe]

To the OP (and by extension anyone else who can't bring themselves to move out of California), especially in light of his "I won't give them the satisfaction" sentiment:

What. An. Idiot.

The Leftists don't want to drive you out. They desperately want you to stay, and they're counting on your inability to deal with someone "moving your cheese" e.g "I'm not giving up the fight", "[other places] don't compare". You're the willing sheep keeping their pie-in-the-sky utopia afloat. I will concede that parts of California are photogenically beautiful, no question. But you can't eat picturesque landscapes, or pay your taxes and fees with sunsets or mediterranean climate. Remember TINVOWOOT? That goes double for California. There are too many there who count on the Welfare State, more than there are of you, and they're not going to let you vote to take their rice bowl away. The recipients of the state's largesse want it to continue because it means they don't have to put out any effort, and the providers want it to continue because it means they have power.

And quite frankly, I've been to Sacramento and the Central Valley. Other than having mountains in the distance, there's no difference between it and Texas. It's all flat, boring, and the urban areas are grimy because it rarely rains. The coast might look nice, but it doesn't outweigh the huge and mostly awful interior.

I understand the sentiment, coming from New England. Seeing the communists sullying the cradle of our nation is hard, and I keep hoping something will change, but it's not. New England is beautiful almost everywhere, with lush green valleys, mountains, seashore, an actual 4 seasons, plus a lot more history than California. But it's being overrun by communists. I managed to stay in one of the more sane states (NH) for a while, but even it is succumbing to the rot, so I'm getting out.

Interior? There's an interior? I'm never 50 miles further than San Diego or LA. Oh yea, I went past San Fran once. Hillsides covered in a vanilla colored glory of sunshine. Beautiful. I go where I want, which is limited to historical sites, fun places and places with palm trees and surfers. I have been to New England- my dad is from Old Greenwich, CT. MIL from outside Boston. Trust me, there's a lot of problems in those places too. Pick yer poison I guess. I'm not "not giving them the satisfaction." And I was reared too well to call anyone an idiot. That just reflects on your character.

 

[Hermantribe]

Good for you. I wish you well!

Thank you. I feel like the colonials who had to decide if they should stay in this new country or drag their sorry behinds back to England. I know the choice my ancestors made. The white ones that is. The Cherokee and Choctaw were here long before that, and know what it means to be forced out of your home.

 

[SSTemplar]

Just one fault I find with the article. No concrete ways to fight back listed. I find that people are real quick to point out problems but never offer realistic solutions. Do something real or STFU. I watching from the most boring part of Texas.

 

[ArisenCarcass]

There's a reason we call them the Left Coast and the Commie Northeast.....they are both lost to the Socialists.

Other places may be cheaper but they don't compare. I see the hate, bitterness and disparaging remarks on this board, but I consider it jealousy.

Jealousy? Nope. It's just that your cup-o'-tea ISN"T mine.
After visiting 14 countries (Go Navy) and visiting/living in a bunch of American cities, I wished to be back home in Appalachia....

There is no amount of money that would make me move (or probably even take) my family to any state on the Left Coast.
I guess the price of not being "bored" is living in a Blutopia, where only boring people get bored.
I personally don't need the external stimulus to be entertained.