Killing Europe

Mark Hunter's picture
Submitted by Mark Hunter on Fri, 2018-01-05 21:15

New on ARI Watch:  Killing Europe

“The economic Marxists softened Europe up, the cultural Marxists are executing the coup de grâce. The cultural Marxists are the ultimate killers of Europe, and – as we see with Yaron Brook – very self-righteous killers.”

Yaron Snubbed by Antifa

edpowell's picture

The most amusing aspect of this Antifa attack at King's College London was that THEY WERE NOT PROTESTING BROOK AT ALL. They were protesting Sargon, because even though he's a rather mild mannered man in his criticisms of feminism, Islam, cultural Marxism, unlimited immigration, and the Left, he does in fact criticize them. You know, unlike Brook. While there were some indications that Antifa didn't't like Brook FOR HIS ADVOCACY OF ISRAEL, there is no indication they hate him for any of his other stances, which, after all, in the culture wars, are identical to their own.

Now if Brook ever gets attacked somewhere for HIS ADVOCACY OF THE UNITED STATES--ha! Fat chance!--then I'd be impressed.

Faux Foes

Lindsay Perigo's picture

So richly illustrative of who's really on whose side. Antifa = pro-open borders, Islam is a mosquito bite, sub-humans from Third World shit-holes self-select for virtue so bring 'em in, Donald Trump is the villain of our time, white Christian males suck, blah, blah, blah; Yawon = all of the above also. Unlike Antifa, however, he doesn't disrupt debate; he merely demands in advance that one doesn't make "broad criticisms" of him.

I hope he reflects on this, and that his being closed down by Antifa is a chickens' homecoming for his having virtue-signalled them and their ilk for so long. The fruits of Obleftivism.

Yaron, please seize this opportunity to have an epiphany, and knock it off. Obleftivism. It's a betrayal. It's anti-American. It's anti-freedom. It's a grotesque misapplication of Objectivism.

London College Fascists

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Yaron Brook at King's College in London on March 5, 2018. The fun begins at 13:13.

The Guardian isn't happy either

Lindsay Perigo's picture

The Italians must be doing something right:

Is this ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... a physical encounter somewhere or some kind of Faecesbook event? If the former, is Yawon afwaid there'll be mosquitoes pwesent?

Did Yawon wequire of Sargon that no sweeping cwiticism be made of him?

Yaron Shrugged; Sargon Struts...

Jmaurone's picture

Could you imagine Yaron exhibiting such swagger?

Yawon's confusion

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I expect if Yawon doesn't know the difference between "you're" and "your" he is unlikely to know the difference between "Obleftivist" and "Objectivleftist" (I'd never have conceived so inelegant a term as 'Objectivleftist' even for such tweasonists) or the difference between either of them and Objectivism. Still, good to know we Mogans are getting under Yawon's Obleftivist skin.


Yaron Brook is confused

Bruno's picture

Yaron Brook, I think you meant to say Obleftivist?

From his Facebook page:

Here is the Facebook event page for the demonstration against my event with Sargon tomorrow.
We plan to hold the event as scheduled. Join us and support free-speech.
Lets hope whatever it is it stays peaceful...

(It seems I can't please anyone: the alt-right call me a Leftist commie (or obectivleftist, if your an alt-right "objectivist"), and the Left calls me a racist fascist. I guess this is the fate of a real individualist.)

"George Soros is not happy!"

Jmaurone's picture

That makes me happy.

George Soros is not happy!

Bruno's picture

Full analysis of the elections coming soon..

Let me just say two quick things. One on the national elections and one on our favorite North Italian region.

1) The de facto George Soros Party, called "More Europe" (+Europa) has been utterly vanquished and has gained exactly ZERO seats of the Italian parliament in Rome. Among other abominations they pushed for "birth right citizenship" laws. They ran inside the left wing establishment (Euro boot lickers) coalition, in which the Dems (Partito Democratico) were shook by receiving an embarassing 19% or so of the vote. A Merkel favorite, Matteo Renzi has stepped down from party leadership.

2) Our guy Attilio Fontana, to whom I've dedicated an entire video a while back, has devastated his opponents and has claimed the Presidency of the great region of Lombardy. He is pushing for more regional autonomy, less bureacracy and taxes, kicking out illegals, and boosting local birth rates.

Italy Awakes!

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Looks as though the Italians have rejected both the Lefties and the "moderate" Right in voting for Italy as an Islam-Free Zone. I hope Bruno will soon report from the scene!


Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Very thoughtful long comment, Ed. I enjoyed reading it. You may recall that I printed out your 60-page or so monograph on Third World immigration to the West and read every word carefully.

Despite my somewhat loose wording above, I don't favor "good" people in immigration but "superior" people, as you perhaps do yourself. I want those who improve or uplift the nation -- possibly rejecting those who are merely "good", but still inferior to the popular norm.

Possibly unlike you, I personally don't want to live in "America" but rather "Super-America" or at least someplace superior. Nor do I seek to preserve America, Germany, Italy, etc. as is. These nations have changed thruout their history and always will and should. Of course, I don't want the post-modernist destroyers of Western liberalism to force these impressive nations to take in hordes of Third World savages.

That said, I like true cultural diversity and dislike the homogenized, bland world that has been strongly emerging for at least half a century. Everyone today worldwide is pretty much like everyone else, the world is becoming "flat" in Thomas Friedman's term, there's no place wild, crazy, and exotic left to go, etc. I personally don't want Tahiti and Timbuktu to become like Kansas City.

I think the citizens in some sense "own" their country, and thus have a right to keep out foreigners, even for irrational or "racist" reasons.

Wanting to date Italian girls over Germans, or Orientals over French, or blacks over Hispanics, etc. doesn't make one racist or ethnically bigoted. It's like favoring certain personality types, or education levels, or body shapes, or hair colors, etc.

I want to live in a good neighborhood, not a white one. I like hot girls, not white ones. Etc. I personally also sometimes find white people too bland and uninteresting for my taste.

That's most of my reactions to your thoughtful comments, at least...


Meanwhile, here's a quietly shocking video (to me, at least) which shows the almost-overwhelming power of immigration to alter nations and change human history.

Keep the Good and Kick the Bad Out

edpowell's picture

I have to disagree with Ky on this one. There are far more "good" people in the world, if good is defined loosely as non-criminal, non-terrorist, productive people, than the US can or should attempt to bring in. There are probably 300 or 400 million "good" Chinese people in just that one country, and allowing them all to immigrate would basically destroy the US as it exists today for cultural and political reasons, as I discuss in my essay, even given that these Chinese would not (by definition in this thought experiment) be criminals, terrorists, or welfare moochers.

Why can't the United States REMAIN AMERICAN? What makes it so that the US cannot retain its current culture and demographics? There's already a China, why does the US need to morph into another one? There are plenty of productive Indians as well, Japanese, Koreans, Taiwanese, Englishmen, Germans, Poles, etc. Why is it our duty to turn large sections of the United States into foreign enclaves by allowing everyone "good" in?

We--you and I, Ky, and people of our generation--grew up in a time unprecedented in US history, where due to certain unique historical circumstances, not likely to be repeated any time soon, where the US immigrant population (except blacks) had more-or-less homogenized into a single assimilated whole. We've been taught from birth in government propaganda mills that "diversity" and "assimilation", despite their mutual exclusivity, are what comes natural with large-scale immigration, and that IS NOT TRUE. Assimilation is not "natural" if there are large numbers of immigrants from one country. Balkanization is "natural". People assimilated in the US for three primary reasons, none of which are valid today: 1) the lack of a welfare state, 2) the cutoff of immigration in 1924 so ethnic enclaves could not be continually replenished and strengthened, and 3) the forced assimilation that the Second World War caused by mobilizing and forcibly and thoroughly mixing 16 million men in their 20s and 30s.

if you want assimilation today, without the benefit of another World War, there has to be an absolute limit on both the number of immigrants per year from any one country, the number of immigrants total from any one country, and the number of immigrants from all countries as a whole. Mark and I may disagree on what that number is (I think he's in favor of zero, while I am not), but for me at least, it's a lot lower than the current number today. A LOT lower. This type of policy would exclude "deserving" people right and left by its very nature, since there are more "deserving" people in the world than the US can accommodate and still be the US. We don't need to "recruit" good people, we need to turn everyone but the best of the best away.

And while race and nationality are not important if small numbers are immigrating, because they will be drowned out in the general population, the more people the US allows in, the more race and nationality become factors that need to be taken into account for a number of cultural reasons that lead to poisonous cultural, economic, and political repercussions in second and third generations, which are well documented in my essay, but also intelligence and other biologically-related personality traits, which were not discussed in my essay, but are discussed elsewhere on this board. Again, small numbers make these irrelevant, but large numbers (even of "good" people) make both the cultural/political and (for some populations) biological issues poisonous to the country as a whole. This is admittedly not an "individualist" approach to immigration, because the effects I am discussing are "emergent properties" of large numbers and in subsequent generations. But the effects are real, well documented in many of the references I cite in my essay, and not something one can wave away with charges of "racism".

I don't support ethno-states as a universal principle as some white nationalists do, but I don't condemn them if they exist either. I like the fact that Poland is Polish, Germany is German, France French, Italy Italian, Britain British (mostly), Sweden is (unfortunately decreasingly) Swedish. I wish those countries had the sense to remain primarily ethno-states, because that cultural variety is what makes Europe interesting. I don't want a homogenized UberEurope where every country is the same, and I don't think most Europeans want that either. But it is being forced on them almost as fast as they are being forced to Islamicize.

As far as wanting to live in white neighborhoods, that was the entire point of white flight in the 1970s which created the exurbs in the US. When it comes to having a black or Asian or Indian neighbor or two, nobody really cared. But when school bussing was being forced on whites, so that their children were forced to go to schools with large numbers of inner city blacks, most white folks up and moved as far away as they needed to be to escape the tyranny of the federal judges. I live in a "multicultural" neighborhood with exactly zero social trust, and I can't wait to accumulate enough money to move further out into the exurbs where the neighborhoods are more homogenous and where social trust exists again. As Mark says, there is a natural preference to live among one's own kind, and while he and I may disagree about how much "one's own kind" is defined by culture versus biology (for me it's at least 90% culture), I'm not sure race or ethnicity isn't a perfectly good statistical proxy for culture when you get right down to it. Most people are neither philosophers nor statisticians, so don't condemn them for wanting something (a nice neighborhood) and making a perfectly valid generalization ("nice" = "predominantly white"). This preference continues in marriage, where fully 98% of whites marry other whites and 89% of blacks marry other blacks. Either you agree with the Left and think this is clearly an example of the white supremacist and structurally racist nature of the United States, or you think, like I do, "well, that seems perfectly natural, given that this sort of preference is literally built into the mammalian brain." And sure, just because this sort of preference is in fact built into our brains does not mean we are biologically determined, as the 2% of whites who marry outside the race demonstrate. But it does indicate that the biological predisposition has a substantial statistical effect on the population as a whole. This effect is not racism, and given its biological origin it's not even in the realm of morality. If a white guy says "I prefer to date white girls," the proper response is not "RACIST!" it's "Well, obviously."


Brant Gaede's picture

Kept out the Muslims.

the rest for the best


Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

I think Mark Hunter is an alt-rightist. He opposes the destruction of the West thru the immigration of Third World savages -- which is good -- but he evidently doesn't much advocate immigration of people of high quality and merit. Rather, he seems to openly champion racism. Mark evidently supports "ethno-states", "white nationalism", and "people who want to live in white neighborhoods." He even thinks Pakistanis, Bengalis, and other non-whites have "different standards of human physical beauty and by white standards they are grotesque."

In my view, the correct answer on immigration -- which will save Europe, and America too -- is this: Keep and kick the bad people out, while allowing and recruiting the good people in. Their race, sub-race, nationality, and tribe is irrelevant. This approach and policy, based on justice and merit, is also consonant with individualism and Objectivism.


Mark Hunter's picture

Froggy asked me to tell people that he has nothing to do with Pepe, a.k.a. Kek. Kek was supposedly an Egyptian deity, a sort of man with a frog shaped head. (I had to look it up.) Froggy is an ordinary frog except that he is very intelligent. I mean for a frog.

Believe it or not there are some Brook talks even worse than the “blame Europeans” ones mentioned in “Killing Europe.” I’ll let people know when an article appears about it.

Yes, what I call “preference racism” is natural and what is natural cannot be evil per se.

In the article I mentioned particularly only Europe, Scandinavia and the U.K. but immigration is also a problem in Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

Froggy we miss you

Bruno's picture

Mark, where has Froggy gone? I miss the original version of Pepe.

Ariwatch had chats with the God KEK before it was cool.

Surely Froggy must have stayed at home because he couldn't have handled your increasing "wacism"?

In all seriousness, good job with the essay. Ariwatch is invaluable. You picked up on two of the most obscene podcasts by Mosquito Bite Brook.

I haven't listened to that English lecture you referenced though. I'll have to look it up and see what noises he makes while saying that Europe should stop mass immigration.

Notice the quotes you gave on Iswael vs those on Euwope. Both are "very ethnocentric", but one is justified by partaking in the category "special", while Euwope is collectivist and twibalist.

Extremely bizzare (for those not taking proper notice) that he would "rather die" than fight for Christianity (vs Islam and Kant). Bizzare for a European that is, but his Jewish background is clearly taking the best of him (so much for being an "American" -> who lives in Puewto Wico now nonetheless).

Good point on the standards of physical beauty, something which I believe is important. "Preference racism" as you call it is well documented. It exists even among very small infants. It's hardwired.

Something hardwired cannot be immoral by definition, lest one accept "original sin" (completely at odds with Objectivism). Hence it cannot be racism to have "race preference" if racism holds a negative moral connotation, which it does.

As for the history of the United States as essentially a white nationalist country, Obleftivists and mainstream Conservatives would "rather die" than address actual historical fact.

America is an outpost of Europe, just like the rest of the now independent European colonies. Ayn Rand was proud and approved of American colonization. Obleftivists and Cuckservatives on the other hand are essentially in "defense mode" against the attacks of the Cultural Marxists against "our racist past" and "history of colonialism".

As for the gas chambers and other obscenities of the like, that was consequence of marxism and other postmodern german garbage that passes for philosophy. Historically Europeans either segregated or kicked out both the Jews and especially Muslims. In many other cases they were left basically alone and lived side by side with Europeans, the Jews that is. Muslims were all eventually kicked out.

Something as simple as a complete shutdown of muslim immigration and some friendly (i.e. perfectly legal) nudging the "un-integrated" (i.e. un-assimilated) to leave would be perfectly sufficient to reclaim Europe. As for those that remain violent or criminals, just ship them back.

America was "wacist" without ever resorting to any sort of extermination program. This obsession with "their going to kill us all" is hysterical.

Japan is "wacist", they just mind their business and ask to be left alone. They do not allow mass immigration. End of story.

Refraining from action is not aggression. Refraining from opening the door to the entire world is not aggression. It is common sense and healthy nationalism.

As for America, it must completely shut down all forms of immigration period. Some small numbers should be able to come in, but they should all be subject to proper selection. Nothing else will do. Birth right citizenship is the first thing that must go, as well building the wall and deport every single illegal. Every single one. Nudge all the rest of the undesirable immigrants out in a peaceful manner, firstly and most easily by deporting, or demanding compensation and then banning its use, all welfare recipients. Deport without hesitation any criminals.


Make America Great Again. Make Europe Great Again. Make Objectivism Great Again.

PS. Make New Zealand and Australia and Canada Great Again too.

PPS. Lastly, help South Africans survive the black marxist thugs in power over there. Give right of return and asylum to all of them (the Europeans that is) if they prefer to move away.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.