RE: Fred on Immigration

The New Colossus
The New Colossus

I had the pleasure of meeting Fred Reed at AmRen’s 2008 Conference. He’s married to a Mexican and devoid of loyalty to his White American countrymen, but he’s a very creative thinker with a gift for getting to the heart of whatever matter he’s engaging. In his most recent blog post, he picked apart several conservative arguments on the subject of immigration from a frank and politically incorrect perspective, then concluded with “What now, gang?”

His recent eye surgery has temporarily impaired his ability to read, so it’s important that I respond rapidly, while I still have the advantage.

Fred Reed
Fred Reed

Immigration is not something Mexico did to the United States, but something the United States did to itself [emphasis added]. Decades ago it changed its laws to favor Latin immigrants, gives immigrant children born in the US citizenship, avidly employs the ilegals, forbids police to check their papers, give them social services and schooling, establishes “sanctuary cities,” and in general does everything but send them engraved invitations. And then expresses surprise when they come.

Americans have consistently voted for restricting immigration, even legal immigration, to no avail. The lax laws themselves were imposed on an unwilling nation by a Jewish elite hellbent on weakening our traditional White American ethnonational foundation. I recommend that you read Professor Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique for a complete analysis of this well-documented usurpation.

Update: For a more concise introduction to this topic, I recommend KMac’s Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review (hat tip to Tanstaafl from Age of Treason).

Yet, even then, the laws are relatively restrictive. But a law that the people force the government to pass is a mere scrap of paper to be deliberately misinterpreted by judicial activists and simply ignored by the bureaucrats entrusted to execute it. Birthright Citizenship was never the intent of those who drafted the legislation in question, and all the laws in the world are useless when “our” government simply chooses to ignore them.

From a Mexican perspective, it does indeed appear like something the “United States did to itself”. But we, the White American people, have been shafted in broad daylight by the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of “our” federal government. At no point did the American people ask their government to abolish them and appoint a new citizenry.

We hear endlessly that Mexicans are “taking the jobs of Americans.” Not quite. Reflect that every time a Mexican gets a job, it is because a shiny white noisily patriotic American businessman gives him that job.

A game which enriches scoundrels and bankrupts honest men will find scoundrels willing to enrich themselves at America’s expense. If there’s hatred to be had in all this, it should be toward these fratricidal monsters who’ve sold our birthright for a bowl of soup. There is no race or nation so perfect as to be devoid of traitors and quizlings. On the positive side, we have a real opportunity here to quietly take notes and names.

Don’t expect a lot of sympathy when Mexicans move back into what they regard as theirs in the first place.

I don’t. But they shouldn’t expect a lot of sympathy when a reinvigorated American people reassert their sovereign borders. In your article, you seem to genuinely give a shit about the feelings and entitlements of Mexicans in America who’ve been granted “citizenship” by the ruling regime. This giving of a shit is not reciprocated toward the actual Americans from whom this birthright was stolen. I accuse you of having that curious White Supremacist bias in which Whites are to be treated like adults and deal with tough reality while people of color are to be cared for and protected as inferiors.

You’re sounding like a veritable Lawrence of Acapulco.

Speaking of getting over it, the US will sooner or later will have to entertain the idea of getting over Latin immigration. Allowing the immigration in the first place was a terrible idea, since diversity regularly proves disastrous, but now there is precious little to be done about it. Nativist fantasies notwithstanding, the US is not going to round up thirteen (give or take) million people at gunpoint and force them across the border. If it doesn’t do this, few ilegals will  leave.

Are Americans Still Badasses?
Are Americans Still Badasses?

While White Americans don’t currently have the will to defend their right to exist, it would be foolish to accept this as an inalterable and permanent reality. Our will to live was, after all, only extinguished within the last several decades. It’s unthinkable to the contemporary mind that White Americans could awaken and rally to the defense of their birthright. A historical process has been set in motion in which either one unthinkable or the other must occur. Either one of the most gifted and vigorous nations in history will welcome a hostile foreign invasion and cease to exist, or tens of millions of alien usurpers will be displaced.

Somebody’s feelings will be hurt. Somebody will be clutching a worthless piece of paper asserting his birthright as an American citizen. At some point the multicult music will stop and somebody is going to be left without a chair. These papers asserting that Mexicans are American citizens may matter as much in the future as laws on the books to deport illegal immigrants matter now.

Personally, I already reject the legitimacy of this regime and I reject its alleged authority to declare who is and is not a countryman. I believe that more people share my attitude with each passing day. You scoff at the possibility of Mexicans who aren’t technically Mexicans being deported and you offer some cutesy absurdities like this one about how we would go about reasserting our birthright…

Perhaps at three a.m. you put a lightning cordon of Marines around a ten-block region and then go house to house, kicking in doors and dragging screaming people out. These you would throw into sealed eighteen-wheelers, drive them to the nearest border, and perhaps literally kick them across.

You’re sort of challenging us to engage in cruelty, with the implicit assumption that we’re so broken as a people that we’re incapable of decisive action even when cornered. As a combat veteran, I would think you would be the first to recognize how thin and fragile the veneer of civility can prove to be when human beings are frightened, threatened, and confused. You might just be surprised by the wrath of the awakened saxon.

I do admit that the birthright of myself and my family is not something I’m willing to compromise on in face of even the most absurdly horrific hypothetical scenarios. But I think you’re failing to recognize how rapid and complete an ethnic cleansing can be without a single shot being fired or a single child being rounded up. Perhaps you’ve never visited Detroit.

Okay, so there were plenty of shots fired at Whites and the government actually did try to round up our children in buses. But you get the idea!

As you admitted yourself, they’re here for the jobs. They’re a highly mobile group of people who arrived very rapidly for short term gain. With some relatively minor and humane tweaks in America’s political, economic, and cultural milieu, the polarity of the magnet can be reversed and the bulk of the migrants will quietly deport themselves.

The underlying problem is that no solution, or attempted solution, has enough support to get put into effect. Business wants the labor, politicians eye the vote, polls show young Americans as being much less worried about the whole question than their elders [For now].

Conservatives—those, anyway, who are not profiting by immigration—talk of putting the military along the border, but support seems lacking [For now]. On Fox News I see people urging the characteristic American solution: high-tech this and that. Anyone with experience with dispersed guerrillas will see the prospects of success [Agreed].

[…]

As is so commonly the case in semi-democracies, whatever might work is politically impossible, and whatever is politically possible won’t work.

I agree with your analysis of the present political reality, but I don’t believe you’re taking into account the possibility that maybe, just maybe, the slumbering giant of White American identity will awaken. If that happens, and only if that happens, these disorganized and poverty-stricken foreigners in our midst will be the ones up against steep odds.

Best wishes and best of luck with your recovery, Fred. I’ll be making a toast to your sacrifices tomorrow.

20 Comments

  1. Svigor: “Oh, and the “white businessmen are hiring them” thing ignores the fact that in business, you compete or you die. If you’re running a business in a sector that utilizes lots of brown labor, and all of your competitors are cutting costs by using brown labor, you have to, too.”

    Very true. I grew up in one of the industries that has most utilized mestizo labor – construction. I’ve known small builders and independent contractors all of my life. There was no clamor for mestizos. Throughout the eighties and into the nineties, construction crews around here were almost all white. This in central Virginia with a large black population.

    Then, in the nineties, the mestizo invasion got underway in earnest, and by the 2000’s it had become a tidal wave. Mestizos started making major inroads in the construction crews. Drywall, roofing, things like that came to be dominated by mestizos. But again, there was no great clamor on the part of businessmen to make this happen. What happened is that a small minority of white builders started using them, and it spread from there. Many white businessmen adamantly opposed any form of non-white immigration and avoided using mestizo labor, but in time, you have to hire the mestizos or you go out of business. As the mestizo labor undercuts white labor, surprise surprise, fewer whites go into that particular line of work. The vicious cycle continues. Fewer white workers = even more need for mestizos. But this didn’t need to happen. The market was artificially distorted.

    Construction has gone from being a bridge to the middle class for those that aren’t particularly academically gifted, to being a losing deal for whites. To be a worker on a construction crew means hard work and real risk of injury (but you can’t afford medical insurance), typically for very limited pay. Frankly, I’m amazed so many whites are still in it at all. White labor can’t compete with mestizos that live ten or fifteen to a house, don’t care about housing ordinances, don’t keep insurance on their vehicles (lots of hit and runs), and basically cut corners and break laws in all sorts of ways, while scooping up government freebies whenever possible. Privatize profit, socialize costs. What a deal!

    Point is, there was no broad clamor for brown labor. Instead, what happened is that once the camel’s nose got into the tent, it gradually transformed the industry. Eventually, it becomes the inescapable norm. Those whites that oppose immigration are ultimately forced by economic reality to hire mestizos. Somehow, that sort of race to the bottom – where people are eventually forced to do that which they would have rather not done – counts as “freedom” in the eyes of open borders libertarians, but that’s another story.

    By warping and distorting the market, it can be made to appear that we “need” this labor, but in reality we certainly don’t. In fact, we had a much more skilled and capable construction workforce twenty years ago that was nearly all white. Those guys supported themselves, didn’t game the system through failure to pay things like auto insurance or scooping up government handouts, and operated as a normal part of the middle class. In the coming white nation, we can certainly have that again. As usual, Fred offers a bit of insight, but combined with cheap shots and ad hominem.

  2. Matt Parrott: Excellent point in your last paragraph. We may be casting our pearls before swine when we debate anti-Whites, but not all onlookers are swine. We recruit among the sheep.

  3. Fred “on everything” Reed is a self-centered, smug, wise guy who never impressed me with any of his smarmy, smart ass scribblings. The few articles of his that I came across were always the same devil-may-care, ‘me, fun, now’, cutesy expostulations of a classic White wastrel. He may have thought that he was ‘entertaining’ & ‘funny’, and a ‘cool’ cookie, but so is the dead-end sports bar crowd type of Whites that his lampooning tripe would appeal to. That being said, I do congratulate you Matt, for thinking outside of the box in your counter efforts to end-run subsumed libtard icons like Reed. It is refreshing to see people like you engaged in innovative ‘mind war’.

  4. Like ATBOTL said, whites in small towns in Vermont, Maine, Iowa, and so on are not responsible for any of America’s problems. I do not understand so-called “white nationalists” who dislike these people so much and wish them ill. These types feel they are superior for living around throngs of non-whites and resent whites who live in mostly-white areas. They delight when things go wrong for whites in such areas and gleefully hope for these nice places to be destroyed by an influx on non-whites. I guess misery loves company. With friends like these, who take pleasure in the ruining of the lives and homes of nice, decent, white people, who needs enemies?

    I don’t know how productive it is, but yes, I revel in schadenfreude when I read about New Englanders discovering what southerners have always known. No, I don’t feel bad for people in Lewiston. Yes, I regard New Englanders discovering what southerners have always known with a “sooner rather than later” attitude. If that’s “wishing them ill,” so be it.

  5. I’m like the Russian who dreamed of cutting a deal with the Mongols for safe passage for the hordes, through to parts west; so the rest of Europe can see what they’ve been getting for free while they insult me and mine.

  6. Who was the Russian who had that dream?

    Anyway, I kind of like the cut of your jib, svigor. Revelling in schadenfreude isn’t always wrong. It’s not good for us in the long run, of course, but still…

  7. “Hilarious. Blaming the disaster of Chicago on “punks from rural Michigan [and] Iowa.”

    I wasn’t, the disaster is caused by Blacks and Mexicans, I was having a chuckle at the foolishness of paying $1600 a month for an apartment in that cesspool. I guess I need to clarify, most kids from the lily white suburbs, and rural surrounding states don’t move to Wrigleyville. But the ones involved in the “High School Theater” clique “artsy fartsy” crowd sure as heck do!

  8. Who was the Russian who had that dream?

    Some guy I made up. 🙂

    Anyway, I kind of like the cut of your jib, svigor. Revelling in schadenfreude isn’t always wrong. It’s not good for us in the long run, of course, but still…

    Yeah schadenfreude’s an emotional thing. It’s not like I’m going to try to justify it. Misery does love company. But there’s logic there, too. Whites spared the pain are a big part of the problem. I bet there are whites in Lewiston who agree.

  9. “It’s not like I’m going to try to justify it. Misery does love company. But there’s logic there, too. Whites spared the pain are a big part of the problem.”

    In some parts of the country, a bigger problem than others. Some people assume that the liberalism of these areas is simply because they are lily white. But the reality is that most lily white areas of the country still refused to vote for Obama. In fact, the whites in many lily white areas voted for Obama at far lower rates than most southern whites did. When I studied the electoral results, that somewhat surprised me, but indeed it is true.

    So, no matter how one slices it, New England and a few other areas are outliers amongst white regions. Something is going on there, and historically speaking, “it” has been going on a long time. Whatever it is, it ain’t good. Again, this is not to say that there aren’t many good white folk in these areas, it’s just to say that on a regional basis places like New England are a real problem for us.

    So yes, there is a bit of schadenfreude going on. They’ve earned it. But, as you suggest, there is some cold but hopeful logic as well. Our best chance of ultimately holding and/or retaking these areas may require a little, shall we say, extra motivation. Most of the lily white areas of the Great White Hinterland aren’t a problem, but a few definitely are. Anything that inspires an attitude adjustment in the problem areas is worth considering.

  10. With friends like these, who take pleasure in the ruining of the lives and homes of nice, decent, white people, who needs enemies?

    Nailed it. It’s not hyperbolic at all to say that this shameful and disgusting behavior.

    One thing that you left out is the anti-northern sentiment that undoubtedly plays a role when posters here express satisfication at the prospect of Vermont or Maine being flooded with negros. At what point will we realize how fucking stupid and petty this sort of base regionalism is in light of the existential threat we ALL face?

    Like ATBOTL said, whites in small towns in Vermont, Maine, Iowa, and so on are not responsible for any of America’s problems.

    As I’ve said here before, a funny thing about indiscriminate Yankee-bashing like this is that the average small town resident in a place like Maine is far more “redneck” than “SWPL”. Southerners who attempt to paint New Englanders with a broad brush are just as bad as the Yankees who attempt to impugn the entire south.

  11. But there’s logic there, too. Whites spared the pain are a big part of the problem.

    It’s questionable logic at best. How much influence does Lewiston have on the rest of the country? Hell, how much influence does Lewiston have even on the rest of the state or region?

    How much influence does any city not named New York, Washington, or LA have on the rest of the country?

    I’m like the Russian who dreamed of cutting a deal with the Mongols for safe passage for the hordes, through to parts west; so the rest of Europe can see what they’ve been getting for free while they insult me and mine.

    This is regionalism at its knuckle-dragging worst.

  12. “One thing that you left out is the anti-northern sentiment that undoubtedly plays a role when posters here express satisfication at the prospect of Vermont or Maine being flooded with negros.”

    We’re trying to accomplish something different than this, in a sense the exact opposite. A lot of Southern whites do have a broad anti-Northern sentiment, believing that Northern whites are all liberal multicultists. Their belief that Northern whites are against them encourages defeatism. This is reinforced by the media line that the Republican Party has become a regional Southern party, and that everybody else is pretty much blue. The media pushes this line for a reason. Think about it.

    If one looks at the red/blue map by state, the media propaganda line can appear to be more or less true. But when you look at it by county, a very different picture emerges. Then we see that the vast white hinterland of the North does not vote against the South, but in fact votes the same way.

    Now, of course voting isn’t everything, especially in our ridiculous and corrupt political system where neither party deserves a vote at all. But it is a proxy for certain things, and the county map shows that the media propaganda line is untrue.

    Point is, when I’ve run into this anti-Northern attitude from racially conscious whites, I’ve found it very effective to say, in effect, “No, most Northern whites aren’t like that at all. Look at the county map. It’s actually just a few pockets that are the problem, they are the real pieces of shit.”

    If I lied and claimed that there was no problem at all, of course they wouldn’t believe me. They know perfectly well that a region that elects the likes of Frank and Kennedy is very different than their own. That’s just the reality of the situation. Why pretend otherwise?

    There IS a problem with certain areas of the country, and New England is damn sure one of those problem areas. I wish that were not the case, but it is. Why try to ignore reality, when doing so has only ended up tarring the broad Northern white population unfairly? Better to not deny reality, and instead try to unite flyover whites – nothern, southern, western – against the problem areas, and work from there. Unite them against places like BosWash, San Francisco, etc. They are already inclined to dislike such places. Work with that.

    Whether you agree with this strategy or not, it amazes me that so many people don’t even seem to understand it. It’s pretty damn simple, and I’ve found it effective with regular people.

  13. Point is, when I’ve run into this anti-Northern attitude from racially conscious whites, I’ve found it very effective to say, in effect, “No, most Northern whites aren’t like that at all. Look at the county map. It’s actually just a few pockets that are the problem, they are the real pieces of shit.” …

    There IS a problem with certain areas of the country, and New England is damn sure one of those problem areas.

    Things are not quite as simple as a binary red/blue county map would make it seem.

    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2008/countymappurpler1024.png

    This is a map of the 2008 election in which counties are shaded on a continuum from red to purple to blue based on their vote percentages.

    Is there really that drastic a difference between two predominantly white counties, one of which voted 40% for McCain and the other 60% for McCain? Are the whites in the former “pieces of shit”?

    For an example, first take Lewiston, Maine. Lewiston is located in Androscoggin County. Androscoggin County was about 95% white in the 2000 Census. In 2008 the vote in Androscoggin County was Obama 57%, McCain 41%, so it would be colored blue on a binary red/blue county map.

    Now look at Alleghany County, Virginia. It is in the western part of the state and was about 95% white in the 2000 census. In the 2008 election, the vote in Alleghany County was Obama 48%, McCain 51%, so it would be colored red on a binary red/blue binary county map.

    So are whites in Androscoggin County “real pieces of shit” but whites in Alleghany County good just because 10% fewer whites in Androscoggin County voted for John McCain? Are whites in Androscoggin County deserving of the hatred by people on this blog who gleefully delight in the prospect of the destruction of their lives, simply because 10% fewer of them voted for McCain than did whites in Alleghany County and their county is “blue” rather than “red”?

    To quote ATBOTL again, you would think people who read this blog would know better than to judge people by whether they voted for Bush and McCain.

  14. There are many Southerners on Stormfront who express schadenfreude when white people outside of the South are raped or killed by blacks. In these comments they usually also say something to the effect that things like that can’t happen where they live, because there are so many gun totin’ rednecks who wouldn’t allow it to happen, despite the fact that Stormfront is full of identical news articles about whites being raped and murdered by blacks in the Deep South. It’s like a kind of cognitive blindness with these people.

    One clown responded to an article about the Central American MS-13 gang in Maryland or somewhere by stating that Mexicans wouldn’t dare make gangs in the South, because Southerners would never tolerate it, despite the fact there are tons of Mexican gangs in his home state of Georgia and many other parts of the South too, and numerous articles on Stormfront about Mexican gangs in the South.

    Another fool claimed that Northerners don’t know about blacks because there aren’t many blacks in the North. Apparently, she had never heard of Newark, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Buffalo, Pittsburgh or any of the other numerous smaller Northern cities that were destroyed by the mass migration of Black from the South.

    A lot of white people in industrial Midwestern cities, especially poorer people, are descended from Southerners who migrated North at the same time the blacks did. Detroit, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Ohio and Chicago have a lot of these people. Many of these people voted for Obama because they are in dire straits economically and felt that they couldn’t survive another Republican administration. Immigration is at very low levels in most of these rust belt areas, so it’s not a big issue. They know gays are not responsible for them losing their jobs so that doesn’t play well in those areas either. At least some elected official in the Democratic party are willing to criticize “free trade” and outsourcing. The poor white shift to the Democrats in Ohio, Virgina and Pennsylvania was a major factor in the 2008 election. Obama almost won Indiana.

  15. “Is there really that drastic a difference between two predominantly white counties, one of which voted 40% for McCain and the other 60% for McCain? Are the whites in the former “pieces of shit”?”

    There is a significant difference between two such areas. A twenty point difference is massive, and clearly qualifies one area as far more liberal than the other. Of course, there are many other factors to consider, but a twenty point differential is nothing to sneeze at.

    “So are whites in Androscoggin County “real pieces of shit” but whites in Alleghany County good just because 10% fewer whites in Androscoggin County voted for John McCain?”

    Of course not, this is a massive oversimplification. Nobody is denying that there are many good people in the “bad” areas, and many bad people in the “good” areas. It’s just that some areas are more favorable to us, and others are more hostile. It amazes me that some people are hellbent on denying this most obvious of facts. I don’t know how anybody expects to win this struggle if they can’t recognize that some areas are more hostile than others. Putting one’s head in the sand doesn’t help. Hell, if memory serves, even Hitler used to refer to “Red Berlin.”

    Further, context is king. It’s not just that the whites in New England voted for Obama at significantly higher rates than other whites. There is more to it than that. New England has a long history of anti-white sentiment, going back to its role as cradle of abolitionism. Further, it sends people like Frank and Kennedy to Washington. There are Democrats, and then there are Democrats.

    The Obama vote in Alleghany County is disturbingly large, I don’t deny that. But the overall behavior of the whites in that area is not nearly as hostile to us as what comes out of New England. It’s like comparing apples and oranges. One thing is for sure: the 10 percent vote differential doesn’t begin to cover the enormity of difference. I live in Virginia, and have had conversations with tons of people from the white mountain counties. I can bring up race with little problem. Favorable responses are the norm, unfavorable are rare. But New Englanders? On average, they have a much less favorable reaction. I wish that were not true, but it is what it is. Notice I said “on average.” Of course, there are many good white folk in New England. But, on a regional basis, it is definitely an outlier from the white norm. Do you seriously deny this?

    Alleghany County doesn’t send people like Frank and Kennedy to Washington. Anti-white crusades and political movements don’t tend to emerge from places like Alleghany County. So it’s not just that the Obama voters of New England are more numerous, it’s that they tend to be of a different sort. Different enough, anyway, to send people like Frank and Kennedy to Washington, something that just wouldn’t happen in most areas of the country – even those with a disturbingly high Obama vote.

    “To quote ATBOTL again, you would think people who read this blog would know better than to judge people by whether they voted for Bush and McCain.”

    Again, this is an oversimplification. Voting can be a useful proxy, but the broader context must be considered as well. The bottom line is that some areas are, relatively speaking, more favorable to us and some more hostile. That is reality, and we do not profit from denying this.

  16. “A lot of white people in industrial Midwestern cities, especially poorer people, are descended from Southerners who migrated North at the same time the blacks did. Detroit, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Ohio and Chicago have a lot of these people. Many of these people voted for Obama because they are in dire straits economically and felt that they couldn’t survive another Republican administration. Immigration is at very low levels in most of these rust belt areas, so it’s not a big issue. They know gays are not responsible for them losing their jobs so that doesn’t play well in those areas either. At least some elected official in the Democratic party are willing to criticize “free trade” and outsourcing. The poor white shift to the Democrats in Ohio, Virgina and Pennsylvania was a major factor in the 2008 election. Obama almost won Indiana.”

    Obama DID win Indiana, though not with a majority of the white vote. But, on the whole, I agree with what you are saying here. My position is not that any white who voted for Obama is forever lost to us. Not at all. With the Republicans so godawful bad, I was slightly tempted to vote for Obama myself. Of course, I couldn’t bring myself to actually do it, but I certainly understand the great anger and disenchantment with the Republicans.

    There are many factors to consider when determining whether a particular region is more or less hostile to us than the norm. Any honest reading of my posts on this subject would make this clear.

    Voting is just one factor to consider, but if you look at the election map by county it does tend to track quite well with other factors. Not perfectly, but reasonably well. It is useful as a proxy, but obviously there are other things to consider. When we consider not only the vote for Obama, but other factors as well, it is clear that there are some regional outliers, and New England is one of them.

  17. Junghans: Fred Reed “libtard?” Most people reckon him conservative, enough so that his website has been banned from military installation on account of its non-PC content.

  18. Fred’s a Race Traitor, dominated by his Mexican “possibly a Jew” (in his own words) wife. He loves his little Pet Darkies far more than he ever loved his own Race. I hope he gets everything he deserves. I do not wish him well.

  19. Reeds a suck-up to Mexicans, and all around general libtard who now and then says something politically incorrect. He had a good writing style, although now his mental capacity is dulled. Little thing called gettin’ old.

Comments are closed.