The Evolution of Multicultural Iconography

The title makes this sound like a research paper, doesn’t it? Well, in a way it is — but you won’t see any footnotes or scholarly annotations in it, because I don’t know where I picked up any of these images.

When I search for relevant graphics for a post, I often encounter a lot of interesting and/or appalling unrelated images. Whenever that happens, I save some of the choice tidbits in a folder for possible later use. Over the years I’ve collected several dozen of them.

Sometimes, during a search using particular keywords — examples include “multicultural”, “diversity”, “tolerance”, “inclusive”, “enrich”, and “ethnic” in various combinations — I uncover a vast lode of visual goodthink, a purulent sump of politically correct imagery going on for page after page of search results. At first my mind recoils from so much cloying mendacity, but eventually a sort of sick fascination sets in, and I keep on paging through the saccharine rainbow of Multicultural iconography, just to see what pops up.

Hence this collection. These pictures represent only a tiny sample of what’s out there, just waiting for you to gaze upon them so they can zap your degenerate bourgeois mind into a state of right-thinking rectitude. Try your own image searches using relevant keywords and see what turns up. But be sure to pack a supply of anti-emetics — you’re going to need ’em.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Standard Multicultural imagery functions as a visual shibboleth. Businesses, charities, educational institutions, and all levels of government must display the correct icons of diversity or expect to be cast into cultural outer darkness. The ideological guidelines are fairly rigid at any given moment, but they shift over time. Imagery that was acceptable and even laudable to display in 1960 has become doubleplus ungood, and hence unthinkable here in the second decade of the 21st century.

The first signs of what is now known as Multiculturalism began to appear in the late 1950s and the early 1960s, during the “Think Ethnic” craze that came flooding into the culture under the leadership of beat writers, abstract artists, folk musicians, and other KGB fronts. I remember seeing the earliest versions of those “small world” graphics of ethnic children that have become ubiquitous in the fifty years since. They featured a map or a globe with kids of various ethnicities standing on a representative piece of real estate. The Mexican boy wore a serape and the Japanese girl sported a kimono. The Eskimo kid was standing in front of his igloo holding a harpoon. Alpine types could be identified by their dirndls and lederhosen. In those days — late Eisenhower to early Kennedy — the spear-carrying African with a loincloth and a bone in his nose had already been ruled off the turf. But even so, the images that were commonly used back then would get today’s editors fired or expelled from school if they were so foolish as to publish them.

A more recent version of the costumed “small world” graphic is below:

“Small world”, with costumes

This image is ideologically suspect by the standards of 2014. Notice, for example, the Hawaiian babe person with her lei, her grass skirt, and her little strapless top. If that isn’t the objectification of womyn, I don’t know what is!

To resolve this sort of dilemma, the most recent “small world” pictures tend to drop the costumes entirely, since any given representation could at any moment become verboten as “ethnic stereotyping”. The preferred solution is to dress all the kids in the same shorts-and-tee-shirt kindergarten outfits and indicate their ethnicity by skin and hair color:

“Small world”, no costumes

And here’s a paper-doll version of the same meme. In their holy diversity, they’re all made out of ticky-tacky, and they all look just the same:

Multicultural paper dolls

Now let’s move on to the field of carefully staged photographs. These are widely represented in university publications, government handbooks, and corporate brochures. Every time I walk into our bank, I note the carefully-calibrated Multicultural posters for loans, mortgages, and savings accounts, each coded to appeal to the perceived demographics of the bank’s customers whilst toeing the Multicultural party line.

Here’s a collection of gospoda of all ages, gathered together to celebrate their unity-in-diversity with a reassuringly cheery bonhomie:

Multicultural citizens of all ages

And here’s a slightly different group, clearly a workplace assortment with a demographic center of gravity somewhere in the Millennial generation:

Multicultural group of office workers, mostly young

In all of the above examples, one aspect of diversity is noticeably absent: the hijab. Whenever the Arab ethnicity appears, it is represented by a burnoose and a jalabiya on a male representative of the culture. Other varieties of Muslim dress may include the dashiki, the turban, the fez, etc. — but only males are depicted.

That’s a non-inclusive situation, and is quite sexist when you think about it. But it’s now beginning to change. Although the idealized workplace groups are still without the veil, as far as I can tell, the school groups are another matter.

The particular genre of Multicultural iconography represented below is an arrangement I’ve dubbed the “head wheel”. It typically includes groups of grade school, high school, or college students lying on the ground like spokes of a wheel with their heads at the center:

Multicultural head wheel, no hijabs

Notice the more recent evolution of the head wheel as represented in this photo:

Multicultural head wheel, with hijabs

It used to be that staged “diversity” shots of high school students showed everyone in standard Western outfits:

Multicultural high school kids

But hijabbed girls are being more and more frequently included in carefully arranged Multicultural school shots:

Multicultural school group, with hijab

And is that a hijab on the little brown girl on the right side of this Montessori version of the “small world”?

Montessori diversity

These recent images of veiled females, including very young girls, are a sign and signal of the mainstreaming of the hijab in Western societies. Muslims have worked diligently over the past decade or two to rebrand the veil as an expression of “women’s rights”, so that any school or play group that forbids them becomes de facto “discriminatory”. And if there is one thing that any public administrator will go to any length to avoid, it is the taint of “discrimination”.

So the hijabs are creeping into the icons of PC/MC propaganda on all fronts. Watch for them to appear next in the idealized workplace shots.

For those who wish to create their own UN-approved Multicultural art, these crayons are an absolute must:

Multicultural crayons

But be careful to choose your colors correctly! If your Sri Lankan kid looks a little too beige around the ears, it’s off to Diversity Training Camp for you, tovarisch!

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The natural response to Multicultural iconography is an instinctive feeling of loathing and aversion. When I see these pictures, I just want to get away from them, to return to a world that is sane and normal.

My detestation of these images is driven by a deep anger at the essential untruth of them. They’re bogus. They’re codswallop. They have nothing to do with reality.

To underline the mendaciousness of these pictures, take another look at those hijabbed teenagers in the “head wheel” shot. No seriously Muslim family — one that requires its teenage girls to wear the veil — would allow those girls to lie on the ground so close to males who are not their relatives, especially infidel males. It simply wouldn’t be permitted. Their fathers, uncles, and brothers would punish them if they did, and might even kill them. We’ve seen too many depressing demonstrations of this tendency in various tragic news stories coming out of the USA, the UK, Canada, Australia, Denmark, Germany, and most other Western countries.

In summary: these images are pernicious, dangerous lies.

Nobody, not even the people who manufacture these visual travesties, could possibly believe that they reflect the world we live in. Real humans — even PC Progressives — tend to clump together with their own kind. When forced by circumstances to keep company with “diversity”, they don’t chum around with differently-colored folks in exaggerated grinning good fellowship. They’re polite but reserved, and most likely guarded. They keep a certain distance.

Real camaraderie can only come — if it ever does — after months or years of close acquaintance, when full trust has been established. There’s no other way to bridge the instinctive aversions that everyone feels for fellow humans with a widely different genotype.

So what is the purpose of all this inclusive Multicultural flapdoodle?

Multicultural iconography presents us with what Konrad Lorenz termed “supernormal sign stimuli”. That is, they are a visual representation of a condition which doesn’t actually exist, but to which we are programmed to respond even more strongly than we do to reality. The manufactured Multicultural group shot is intended to fill us with an artificial feeling of warm affection and good fellowship. We’re supposed to feel it more intensely than we do within our own families and communities.

The big difference between supernormal sign stimuli in the animal kingdom and those churned out by the PC/MC propaganda brigades is that the former are instinctive and genetically based, while the latter are manufactured and imposed from the outside. They represent an attempt to override our instinctive programming that tells us we are happiest and safest among people with whom we share the largest possible section of our genome. It seeks to make us into something that we are not.

How well is it all working? Your guess is as good as mine.

The best way to find out would be to ask the Millennials. They’ve been absorbing this subversive iconography since their mommies first plonked them down in day care when they were in diapers.

And the Muslim Brotherhood has taken advantage of all this poisonous Progressive nonsense for the past thirty years or so, taking every opportunity to insinuate their Islamic memes into all those “diversity” viruses boring their way into the brainpans of impressionable young Westerners. That’s why the hijab is showing up now — their patient Islamic efforts are finally bearing fruit.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

A couple of final notes about Multicultural imagery:

1. Try searching Google images for “diversity business”. I spent an hour or so last night doing exactly that, and the results were fascinating, albeit frightening. Diversity really is a huge business. Someone is shelling out billions and billions of dollars to all those consultants, think tanks, seminars, and focus groups.

Just check out the hundreds of photos of these diversity bozos giving each other awards. When that absorbs so much of their energy, you know they’re really raking in the green, big time.

2. Twenty or thirty years ago the Multicultural meme was accompanied by “rainbow” iconography. The trend may have originated with Jesse Jackson and his Rainbow PUSH Coalition back in the 1970s. The putative idea was that all different colors of people would come together and be like a rainbow.

Yet the rainbow rarely appears in these multiculti icons now. The reason? My guess is that it was successfully co-opted by the LGBT groups and the “Pride” movement. Everyone has seen the Pride parades where rainbow banners accompany the leather freaks and transgenders and g-stringed boy-toys. That’s not the sort of thing we want people to associate with our cute little Multicultural kindergarten kids.

So the rainbow had to go.

50 thoughts on “The Evolution of Multicultural Iconography

  1. The head wheel is reminiscent of Big Star’s number 3 album “Sister Lovers” except that the album cover was more believable. Multikulti iconography is one of a multitude of varities of mendacity with which we are force fed. How much more do we take before….?

  2. This is the first time in history that has happened: that invaders are invited to colonize one’s native nation out of “pity” for the invaders because they are poor, mistreated by their own rulers or any invented lie that perverted minds of western politicians can dream up.
    The first time that politicians = liars = traitors are called honorable instead of turning them into “birds” .

  3. Speaking of multicultural indoctrination, have you ever watched children’s television? It’s quietly horrifying. A British show called “Mr Maker” has as a regular feature five children who help make a craft object with the help of Mr Maker, the host. One episode featured five children only one of whom could be suspected of being an indigenous Briton. One of them was a little girl in a head scarf. I wondered if that little British boy, if indeed he was British, will ever know how much he has been robbed.

  4. Excellent piece of analysis, Baron. My own experience of the millennials is that they are pretty well indoctrinated, as you say, apart from the intelligent ones, who are pretty cynical. I know one group who took part in an Enterprise competition for schools, here in the UK. They did some really professional-looking photo shoots, and took care to include a black and a brown kid. They knew exactly what they were doing.

  5. “It’s a small [conquerable] world ‘ by doctrine remains intact, perhaps due to it’s doctrinal rejection of such iconography. For a largely illiterate culture, illustrations prove invaluable. Heavens forbid actual imagery reveal the Arab supremacist nature of the Islamic doctrine.

    Perhaps that is why human collateral damage of Muhammedan v. Muhammedan carnage has continued unabated throughout Islamic history. . .Islamic Iconography

  6. And is that a hijab on the little brown girl on the right side of this Montessori version of the “small world”?

    Why, yes it is, and it appears that she resides in France!

    • Quelle surprise, Babs.

      The self-induced guilt of the colonial nations’ leaders has caused them to indulge in self-destructive behavior.

      Oh wait…not self-destructive. The elites are well buffered against their decision to repair the damage by letting into their native land all those who hate them, all the variously-hued immigrants carrying large grudges. Those elites well knew those immigrants could get theirs back by attacking average citizens who had the nerve to NOT to be born in the hellholes these folks came from. Since they can’t get at the leaders, or even the upper classes who often “served” in the immigrants’ homelands, well then…average folk will just have to bear the brunt of resentment in absentia. Thus, in a truly Faustian bargain, the elites pass legislation that makes it extremely dangerous if indigenous citizens dare to complain about being beaten, robbed, shoved to the back of the queue, etc. Once upon a time, Brits learned very young the rules about queuing. But the newcomers break the rules with impunity. With loud, boorish impunity.

      When the leftists start passing “hate speech laws” you can tell they hate the victims who are complaining about what has been done, is being done, to them. The well-connected left creates fortresses of “justice and fairness” and they fiercely guard the portals against those they fear – which is anyone not marching in lock-step with their gospel.

      Tommy Robinson’s fate for complaining out loud, for saying “England for the English”, is meant to serve as a warning to the others. Thus it’s crucial to rubbish and smear his character as a warning to anyone who might have considered speaking up.

      • . The elites are well buffered against their decision to repair the damage by letting into their native land all those who hate them, all the variously-hued immigrants carrying large grudges.

        Well buffered for now, you mean. But when their end comes, it will come with a rapidity that will totally astonish them. They are building their houses on sand…

  7. There are some nuances of distinction between “Multi-cultural,” “Multi-racial” and “Multi-ethnic” — and the three do not necessarily overlap. What matters above all, and we have to look at it unflinchingly, is that the West is being inundated by imported non-White races, and in Western countries where non-Whites are indigenous, e.g. the United States, the majority white race is being forced by its elite to prostrate itself before the others.

    Of course, with race comes culture, but no always. Nor is it dangerous, Islam excepted, when imported cultural elements divfersify the indigenous culture — as long as such a culture is reified by the autochthons. In extreme cases, even Islam is not harmful as long as modified by white racial-cultural imprint. Captain Sir Richard Burton, for instance, was an admirer of Sufi Islam, had spent years among Mohammedans asone of them, and even made the Hajj. Yet he remained throughout it all a paragon of Britishness, eccentrism and all, indeed enriching (greatly) his native culture rather than tearing it down. In France, the philosopher -prolific writer Rene Guenon (1886 –1951) converted to Islam without tearing the fabric of his society, whose culture he subsequently enriched considerably. But that was when there still was such a fabric.

    Same goes even more for other “multi” influences affecting our own. Thomas Merton was one of the most influential figures in American Catholicism not merely because he was a monk approaching holiness but also a Zen practitioner with deep insight into the essence of Zen. My own years of immersion in Japanese culture produced insights that I believe add something to my white Christian people, as do another rebel writer’s, John Derbyshire’s, immersion in the Chinese culture. Yoga could also be listed as an enriching element, were it not often used by its instructors as a self-hating Trojan Horse.

    The trouble ensues when non-White alien colonizers bring their own cultures that they are constitutionally unable to take apart and synthesize what’s appropriate in the host culture. In other words, a rich cultural layer cake is possible and may be highly beneficial, as long as the cake builders come from one people, with shared chords of history, language, custom etc. But this principle holds true: the more color, the more dolor. And that is the dolor that our rulers are committed to inflict upon us unto total decomposition.

  8. Fascinating piece of observation, Baron, and I’m with you on the broad picture.

    However, passing over “…beat writers, abstract artists, folk singers and other KGB fronts”, which I suspect you put in just to wind up people like me, I take issue with your reference to “the instinctive aversion that everyone feels for fellow human beings with a widely different genotype”.

    Around 1970, I dated a black girl from Grenada (unusual in those days), and was startled at the negative reaction of some friends and colleagues. This doesn’t make me a saint, it’s just that I was programmed differently. As the Jesuits said, give me the education of the child and I will answer for the opinions of the man. In this country, mixed black/white couples are now very common and most people take it in their stride.

    I have a possible alternative explanation for the disappearance of the rainbow imagery. Here’s a quote from the 1969 UK hit by mixed-race group Blue Mink, “Melting Pot”:

    What we need is a great big melting pot,
    Big enough to take the world and all it’s got,
    And keep it stirring for a hundred years or more,
    And turn out coffee-coloured people by the score.

    Wikipedia says the song has- shock horror- “assimilationist undertones “. Bloody great steaming overtones, I’d say; and a naive idealism- if we were all magically put in an ethnic blender, we’d surely find something else to fall out over, such as religion, or which end of a boiled egg to cut off before eating, because we’re tribal. That tribalism need not be expressed racially, imho: as the song says (in “South Pacific”), “You have to be carefully taught”. I saw the film aged around ten, and my mother had to explain the racism to me.

    Wikipedia disapproves of “Melting Pot” because since 1969, multiculturalism, of the kind which champions “separate development” (I use the apartheid-era term deliberately) has become the PC norm, which I think may be why your rainbow disappeared. Now, as the problems resulting from some people, especially you-know-who, not integrating, grow worse, we’re starting to see some back-pedalling from politicians and journalists, though it may be too little, too late.

    • Mark —

      I don’t have enough time at the moment to answer you in depth. But I’ll hit the high points:

      1. My mention of the “beat writers, abstract artists, folk singers and other KGB fronts” was a reference to (among others) Pete Seeger, who was in the vanguard of the folk movement, which helped pioneer the ideological corpus that eventually became Multiculturalism. Other folkies climbed on that bandwagon — the Kingston Trio, Joan Baez, Bob Dylan, the Smothers Brothers (“Think Ethnic”), etc., etc.

      Pete Seeger was most assuredly a Communist. He was a member of the Party. It’s in the historical record; look it up. And, like the rest of the American Communist Party, he was funded by Moscow. Once again: look it up.

      I can’t say how many others were likewise tools of the KGB. But a vanguard was all that was required. The leaders, who were on the Soviet payroll, made sure that Moscow’s agenda became hip, cool, with-it, and something that thousands of others wanted to climb on board with.

      That’s how we got free love, dope, no-fault divorce, affirmative action, gay rights, and Multiculturalism.

      Look it up. The pedigree for all of it goes back at least to the Frankfurt School in the 1920s. Seeger and Guthrie were just the hip 1950s American avatars of the same strategy.

      2. “[T]he instinctive aversion that everyone feels for fellow human beings with a widely different genotype” is something that is reified statistically. Anecdotal counter-examples do not disprove it.

      In any bell-curve distribution there are outliers, and there most certainly are outliers who feel an attraction to or an affinity for other ethnic groups.

      But the broad statistical middle acts exactly as I stated, and that behavior is genetically based. The clinical evidence — including the DNA analysis that wasn’t even a distant dream when I was a wee bairn — is extensive, and backs me up.

      It’s out there in the research results. Nicholas Wade — who is a liberal, not a reactionary like me — just wrote a controversial book on the topic.

      Once again: Look it up.

      • I have to amplify that with what was happening in movies and plays, which by the 1940s-50s were being written largely by commies.

        The unhinged left having largely won the culture wars, it is largely forgotten now that Joe McCarthy was right and his critics were wrong, and that the Hollywood Ten were really the most prominent of the Hollywood 100, and that eternal thanks should be given by real Americans and other Westerners to those in Hollywood (e.g. Ronald Reagan, Elia Kazan) who opposed the red scourge, and not to the protesting commies who had been using their privileged positions to implant KGB – Leninist – Frankfurt School memes in the minds of hundreds of millions Americans and foreign Hollywood film fans.

      • It is universally accepted, though little discussed, that every human being inexorably suffers from “race anxiety” – a term coined by liberal anthropologists to contradistinguish it and separate it from “racism”.

        Race anxiety: plonk any ethnic European or African child in the middle of a Chinese city and he/she will unavoidably experience anxiety because nobody else looks like him and everybody else looks similar to each other, ie you are different and alone. Chinese kid in a European or African city same deal. These reactions are beyond morality or ideology because they are simply hard-wired into our (my, Hu Flung Deng’s and Ndebele M’Kono’s) DNA. They are the evolutionary product of survival discretion: feel comfortable with the physically same, feel uncomfortable with the physically different.

        It is indeed possible in the Bell Curve of human responses for eg, a Japanese woman to choose to mate with a Brazilian of African ancestry, but it is an “outlier” scenario. I chose this pairing because I know of one such marriage and it does not seem, and I stress seem, to have been driven/underlain by Multiculti/PC ideology (“Look at how cool/tolerant/virtuous and superior I am: I’m white and my girlfriend/boyfriend is black/Chinese!) or economic/passport opportunism.

        • J. O’M. —

          I agree with you entirely, but I think our instinctive responses are based on a far wider sensory array than simply the visual one.

          I think we are programmed by our genes to detect (below the level of consciousness) the sounds, smells, colors, body shapes, kinetic behavior, body language, collective behaviors, and methods of group interaction that are part of the genetic heritage of our own group. Our instincts tell us to congregate with such people, trust them, rely on them, protect them, and defend them.

          Like any other instinctive behavioral responses, these can be overridden by training. In fact, given the level at which different ethnic groups have interacted since the 18th century, such overrides are an absolute necessity. We can’t have ethnic strangers going into automatic “fight or flight” mode every time they encounter each other.

          But there are limits to how much these responses can be reprogrammed. I would assume that most people still feel the same basic uneasiness in a multi-ethnic environment when their own group is in the minority.

          But we are generally unaware of our own feelings in this regard, because such apprehensions are widely understood to be sinful, the sort of deadly sin that can only exist in a secular post-God self-righteous culture.

          We feel those basic disquiets, but we must suppress our awareness of them; otherwise we would know how BAD we are.

          This constellation of instincts/overrides/shame/suppression forms the basis for the near-universal Western affliction I have termed the Screaming Nazi Heeber-Jeebers.

    • Mark–

      You rely on anecdote to make your questionable assertions. You also assign motives to others based on how things make you feel. That is the kind of liberal discourse which has so degraded public dialogue.

      It’s probably too late to go back to school, but I recommend reading some – A LOT – of the available historical analysis of the times in order to catch up on what you know. Here’s a very readable fellow:

      Paul Johnson is a Brit. He’s written 40 0r more books, including several excellent expositions on American history which are on their way to becoming classics. His work is accessible and easy.

      Here: I even retrieved the Amazon UK page on Johnson for you:

      I’m sure your library must have his books and they’re certainly available used somewhere.

      You are on the wrong track – a dead end cul de sac – when you state that the Baron writes to “wind up” people like you. He writes for his own enjoyment and the entertainment of our readers. He writes from a deep well of knowledge about history, some of which was acquired in his high school years in Yorkshire as he did the assiduous studying that was required to pass one’s A levels back then.

      It is not his responsibility to cure your lack of understanding of history.

      The name of our blog arose from that same course of study – after 9/11 few Americans knew anything at all about the significance of the date for Islam, or that Islam had ever gotten so close to changing the course of history in 1683. The Baron’s long slog in attempting to educate people about how we’ve been flim-flammed by the Marxists since very early on has been an uphill struggle. As it is for anyone else who attempts such an undertaking.

      Wind you up indeed. So who was Diana West having on with her years of careful research and eventual publication of her book?

      American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character

      A lot of Marxists and ex-Marxists and fellow travelers and opportunists were scared enough by her revelations about thecharacter of certain Americans and Brits to mount a crazed attack against a book many of them didn’t read. She exposed the underbelly they don’t want us to see.

      Sadly the character of English life was changed irrevocably when Churchill was booted out of office after the War. Do you have any idea how close Churchill came to making the US comprehend what was being done to the West by Russia?? He almost succeeded, but the American and British marxists prevailed. The Iron Curtain clanged down, as he said in that speech in America’s midwest:

      It is hard to read that without weeping as with hindsight we know now the slaughter that was to come. Churchill was cursed with the foresight to know ahead of time.

      When Churchill failed to be re-elected Britain’s long downward trajectory accelerated. The Empire began sinking into a grey socialist sea.
      Obama meant it when he removed the bust of Churchill from the Oval Office as soon as he arrived.
      Do you *really* think that the Baron’s essays are about you?? Seriously?
      Get a clue. Get a library card.

      • I already advised Mark to stock up his intellectual larder in another area: psychometrics, racial genome-based differences (in the mind, the physical differences being excepted from the lefties’ omerta). I gave him some 12 names of serious, academic authors doing primary research in those areas, plus names of popular blogger-writers who digest all that knowledge for the benfit of lay readers.

        Mark’s answer was that he did not want to go thnere; too much work. It’s so much more comforting to cling to one’s sugary illusions. Mark is at least well-mannered and not obnoxiously hysterical like most multiculti leftists are. But the common denominator to all is that when facts contradict ideology, ideology must prevail, as do feelings over thinking.

      • Baron & Dymphna- Thanks for your replies. No, I don’t really imagine the Baron’s essays are about me! But I don’t assume either that because Pete Seeger and some others had a particular agenda, they were in the pay of the KGB. Some certainly were, in some cases probably unawares- I’ve read all the discussions about Diana West’s book here at GoV; others would have been idealists, some disillusioned with capitalism after 1929, some disgusted with the democracies’ appeasement of fascism, and some useful idiots.

        I’ve skimmed several reviews of Nicholas Wade’s new book (and wondered whether they were all writing about the same one!). None of them refers to an aversion towards genetically dissimilar humans, though it may be in there, and my anecdotal evidence that many white Brits and Afro-Caribbeans have got over their former antipathy would certainly be borne out by the statistics. I’ve already been persuaded, by Takuan and others, that there are genetic differences in intelligence, but that’s a different issue.

        I’ll have to pass on Paul Johnson, whom I read many years ago when he was a socialist; not because he’s shifted, but his outrageous assertion that the human rights abuses of the Pinochet regime were Soviet propaganda makes it impossible to trust him on any other issue.

        I hate falling out with you over Churchill, Dymphna; he was Britain’s greatest statesman of the last century, at least. However the postwar Labour government did found the Welfare State when we were in even more debt, proportionately, than now, and Britain’s postwar economic decline had much to do with the loss of the Empire, from which we bought raw materials cheap, and to which we sold (into a protected market) finished goods not so cheap. Before this, in the 1930s, the standard of living of those in work actually rose.

        • Pete Seeger was a member of the Communist Party. This is simple historical fact. He did not just have a “particular agenda”.

          And he, like all members of CPUSA, was in the pay of the KGB. For decades the liberals in this country maintained that American communists were somehow “independent” of Moscow, and their repetitions of this Big Lie for all those decades had its effect — most people seem to believe it.

          However, the funding of the Party by the USSR was confirmed by — of all things! — the opening of the Soviet archives after the collapse of the USSR in 1991.

          As Takuan pointed out, the same can be said of lots of other leaders of popular culture in those days. You may prefer to believe the old lies; that’s your choice. But my use of “KGB fronts” as a descriptive is solidly based in fact. M. Stanton Evans, Diana West, and others have labored long and thanklessly in the archives of primary sources to chronicle what was done to American popular culture by the Communists.

          That you choose to ignore the patient work of dedicated historians and prefer to believe the Pretty Lie instead may say something about your own character or emotional needs, but it does not change the facts themselves, which are stubborn things.

          • Sorry Baron, but the reason I made my flippant comment about winding up people like myself, was because I took exception to your bracketing together as KGB stooges, a bunch of people with different motives. To take a parallel example, the young non-Spanish volunteers who fought on the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War were not automatically sympathisers with the Soviets whose Air Force fought on the same side, any more than Churchill admired Stalin; is it unreasonable to point out that people on the Left in mid-c20th America were not all part of a plot to bring down the US?

        • others would have been idealists

          Yes: with monstrous, misanthropic, deadly ideals. You want to excuse them for their atrocities and support of the same?

      • If Muslims won at Poitiers, but lost at Ayn Jalut, Muslim Vienna would be besieged by an army of Shamanistic Turks.

    • You were “programmed” differently? You mean someone managed to build an override to a normal human response to “Other”? Watch ANY child of one race meet an adult of another race: the fear is obvious and natural. So they performed quite a feat in your case. Obviously you didn’t dwell in a neighborhood with a lot of immigrants. We have mixed race kin on both sides of our families, Mark. They have actually come here and sat among the white folk, but their side are obviously uncomfortable, which seems the normal reaction. Why aren’t they enlightened like you, I wonder? Why would I be likely to feel the same way if I visited with them at their home? Must be my latent racism.

      Of course your mother had to explain the trite sentiment in that song to you. Race was one of the great unmentionables that nice people didn’t talk about. But the song writers were wrong. There is nothing to be taught; initial fearfulness of the stranger is a natural and entirely comprehensible response. And if your family had lived in a large majority black enclave you’d have learned easily enough and young enough that the work-around program would’ve been a FAIL – especially as they’d ganged up on you for fun. You might try walking the streets of E. Saint Louis singing that song. Wear body armor.

      We live in a majority black “neighborhood” and I know the rules and follow them. One of our neighbors is going to cost us a lot of money because we have to go to court to prove our right to traverse our driveway in peace. We shouldn’t have to prove our right to use the driveway – we’ve been doing so for thirty years until he decided to make life difficult. So we’ve been advised to seek a definitive judgment from a court of law rather than rely on the common usage which has been the custom for at least fifty years or more on that path. But our neighbor is from the big city and he’s got city manners. It’s not a racial thing: he has been equally boorish to all races and creeds. So we have to pay for HIS ugly programming. Not fair, but there you go. The trick is not to take his behavior personally.

      The US will indeed have cafe au lait colored folk, just as they have among the Creoles in New Orleans and other parts of Cajun country in Louisiana. But there will continue to be white enclaves and black enclaves, again as there are in New Orleans.

      And there will also be outliers like Louisiana’s governor, a first generation American whose parents are from India. They were none too happy when he converted to Catholicism, and when he studied public policy rather than medicine or law, they were really upset. Jindal probably has a genius IQ. He’s a Republican who won in a largely Democrat state, voted in by all those bigoted Cajuns and creoles. But even with that genius IQ, he believes in silly things that no liberal would touch. They’re much too intelligent, you see.

      • A main reason for the legal profession and especially the courts serving as a battering ram of nondiscriminative immigration, multiculturalism and suppression of the white majority’s cultural and religious identity is that in a such a weird postmodern stew all tacit and highly efficient mechanisms that hold a monoracial, monocultural society together cease to operate. Good manners, mutual consideration, unspoken commonly held assumptions, customs, giev and take, norms and common law become inoperative. What remains is laws and more laws, suing and being sued, and essentially placing the individual and society in a steel trap entirely owned by legislators, lawyers, prosecutors, judges etc. Not much difference from serfdom and vassalage under the feudal system.

      • I was raised mainly in small towns in the North of England, with a spell in Winnipeg, Canada (1953-6). Apart from the latter city which had a Jewish community, mainly in one area, I came across few people whose background differed greatly from my own until I moved to London in 1969, aged 21.

        Yet when I did arrive in the Big City as a callow youth, I took its multi-ethnic makeup in my stride- because I was brought up that way, and anyway everyone was a stranger (apart from the gay friend-of-a-friend whose flat I shared; going to some of the pubs & clubs he liked was an education in itself, but that’s another story).

        Dymphna, if some of your family feel awkward around one another, I respectfully suggest that this is due to attitudes absorbed, albeit perhaps unconsciously, in childhood. Maybe “You have to be carefully Taught” is trite; doesn’t mean it’s not true. Certainly it’s well documented that racist attitudes are more common in the UK among those who have little contact with people who are different.

        • Mark, Anecdotal evidence is irrelevant. What is relevant is how the majority of people ACT in the real world – when it appears that no one is watching.

          The FIRST thing that immigrants do in the West is try to import more of THEIR people with THEIR culture to the West.

          If people were naturally comfortable with other races, then the real world would exhibit that tendency whereas the real world shows us that people – en masse – actively try to live with and build up their own racial group to be the majority.

          Three things are happening in the West:

          1. Various non-European subgroups are working together with other non-European subgroups to achieve power over the white European majority via its rapid dilution through immigration and reproduction.

          2. White Europeans mistakenly believe that there are as many white Europeans as non-European subgroups in the world whereas the various modern world wars and family planning including abortion have decimated the numbers of white Europeans in the world.

          3. Non-European subgroups attempt to procreate with white Europeans in order to raise their social status – and sometimes the IQ of their progeny – in the currently white European West. According to one leading dating site, white women are the pickiest of all people when choosing a mate. It may be that low status white women who live side by side with non-European subgroups understand best that white Europeans will soon by a minority in the West and decide to procreate with non-European subgroups so that their children will be part of the majority group in a racially changing world.

          • Thanks Egghead, but think your second para conflates race with culture. They often are the same, but by no means always.

            Re your point 1: Sounds to me like a conspiracy theory; I seriously doubt whether, say, UK Ghanaians and Bangladeshis even talk to one another much, let alone plot our downfall!

            Point 2: We’re not likely to agree about abortion, but unless/until Dymphna’s projected demographic implosion happens, it’s not good for the planet for humans to keep expanding their numbers- especially the relatively wealthy, who consume more finite resources.

            Point 3: As with point 1, you imply a degree of deliberate planning which seems unlikely; basic attraction is a more likely explanation.

          • Hi Mark,

            1. At an instinctual level, immigrant groups know better than to interfere with unlimited immigration lest they limit immigrants from their own groups – with each group hoping to become a majority in a specific industry, no-go zone, town, county, region, and/or country. Which immigrant groups in the West are actively seeking to criticize, diminish, or stop unlimited immigration? Immigrant groups work together to lobby for and facilitate immigration for their own reasons – all of which work against the interest of indigenous peoples who are outnumbered by the limitless would-be immigrants throughout the world.

            2. It disturbs me greatly to hear you making the argument that white Europeans should cease procreating. I guess THAT propaganda worked…. Do you even care that white Europeans will be a VERY small minority in the world in the NEAR future? Do you even contemplate what that reality will mean 1) for the continuation of civilization in general, and 2) for white Europeans in specific to be ‘ruled’ by minorities who have been fed a mind diet that white Europeans are evil – where even white Europeans casually ‘agree’ with that evil assessment.

            3. Women choose mates who can provide material benefits to their children – with those material benefits varying from situation to situation. In other words, what MAKES the mate attractive IS his ability to provide material benefits, and having your child be a member of the majority group IS a material benefit that matters more than others on an instinctual level. It will be better for low status white European mothers to have a mixed race child when non-European subgroups start abusing and murdering ‘white’ children – which low status white European females know and understand due to their living in close quarters with non-European subgroups.

            P.S. At least one recent study showed that women have an instinctual sense to avoid mating with men whose genes would combine with theirs to cause genetic abnormalities in offspring. Of course, this ONLY applies when women are free to choose their own mates. What you term to be ‘basic attraction’ is a VERY complex topic….

    • Stock up your larder then watch a Dead Teenager movie like Final Destination 5: this might give you an indication how propaganda designed by franchise committee works in popular culture – tripping all the wires of white guilt in relation to blacks, and reserving nasty racial/cultural stereotyping for the Jewish-positive character that would bring a warm glow to the spirit of Goebbels.

      How this film, sorry toxic hate fest, managed to get past the diversity compliance regulators is a mystery unless of course it came with a liberal coating of invisible paint.

  9. First, it just struck me today, that there is a considerable increase in white women wearing floor-length dresses. Granted they frequently are somewhat clingy so might be considered inciting, but it also made me wonder if this is one step on the way to the burqa.(sp?) In the name of fashion women are dhimmifying themselves already.

    Second, there is a difference between the interactions of individuals of different ethnicities and groups of individuals of different ethnicities. I have at one time or another found women of all ethnicities from coal-black to lily-white and all shades in between, to be attractive. At the same time, when I am a minority, I am uncomfortable, no matter how benign the environment or accepting the majority is.

    • Or, the economy is just THAT bad….

      “The Hemline Index is a theory presented by economist George Taylor in 1926.[1][2]

      “The theory suggests that hemlines on women’s dresses rise along with stock prices. In good economies, we get such results as miniskirts (as seen in the 1960s),[3] or in poor economic times, as shown by the 1929 Wall Street Crash, hems can drop almost overnight. Non-peer-reviewed research in 2010 confirmed the correlation, suggesting that ‘the economic cycle leads the hemline with about three years’.[4]”

      • Egghead- Re your post four (?) up from here: You might be surprised to hear that some black and South Asian Brits are far from happy about the influx of Eastern Europeans, mainly due to the added pressure on schools, housing etc.

        I certainly didn’t suggest that Europeans should stop procreating (!)- only that replacement levels would be sensible.

        The only non-European “subgroup” abusing children in significant numbers, so far as I know, is (mainly) South Asian Muslims. Few of these (or, to be fair, Hindus, Sikhs or East Asians) intermarry with whites here; it’s mainly Afro-Caribbeans and (in smaller numbers) West Africans.

        • Hi Mark,

          It seems to me that you are attributing intent to stated unhappiness of the blacks and South Asians about white Eastern European immigration. On what basis do YOU know why blacks and South Asians are unhappy about white Eastern European immigration? Would the blacks and South Asians really state their real reasons – or their politically correct reasons? Were blacks and South Asians at all concerned that blacks and South Asians are using up resources that indigenous white British people need?

          Being unhappy is a far cry from agitating to limit ALL immigration. Do you contend that the blacks and South Asians are agitating to limit ALL immigration – or only white Eastern European immigration?

          If you were to research population ‘replacement’ levels, you would see that white population ‘replacement’ levels are in dire straits. If you want to argue that people need to adhere to population ‘replacement’ levels, then whites around the world need to begin having very many more children just to keep parity with their parents – let alone the non-white groups which are reproducing at generally higher rates than whites.

          When you say, “The only non-European “subgroup” abusing children in significant numbers, so far as I know, is (mainly) South Asian Muslims,” all that I can think of is that is one group too many – with disastrous and far-reaching population ‘replacement’ consequences for the indigenous white European population where young white European girls are so physically, mentally, and spiritually traumatized that those girls may truly never be able to reproduce and raise healthy white European children – but then, that is the point of the rape jihad, isn’t it – to terrorize the indigenous population into submission to the Muslim population?!

          As Hesperado would say, Muslims are bullet-proof from criticism and prosecution in the West because whites sort Muslims as being immigrant minorities INSTEAD of being immigrant terrorists.

          You mentioned that you were bullied as a child. Please consider how the rape jihad is affecting the feelings and future of young white European girls….

    • I wouldn’t make too much of the floor-length dresses. Many years ago, fashion introduced something called a “maxi-skirt.” It was a dramatic change from the recently popular “mini-skirt.” (There was also a “midi-skirt.”) The clothing industry survives by regularly telling us that what was stylish a year or two ago is no longer so, and we must buy some new clothes. Not long ago, flowered pants were tacky. Now, every chic woman must have them.

      The return of the “maxi-dress” a couple of years ago should be seen in that light, though this incarnation tends to be less modest on top than the previous one, which usually had a folksy vibe. (Think Laura Ingalls on the prairie.)

      Does that put your mind at ease?

    • A vote of one for long dresses. They feel swishy and feminine. In addition, I rather like the shalwar khameez, which is unisex and unifit. I looked on a wiki once and the cut of the man’s pants were huge – meant to fit everyone, obviously.

      Can’t afford one, even at Indian prices since I buy @ Goodwill and they’re not having a run on them…yet. So maybe leggings, which I have and some kind of sundress and t-shirt match.

      The real ones are very colorful and not at all like those Arab black bags. I cannot understand why they would put women in those thick black things in the desert sun while the poobahs all wear flowy white linen over their beer bellies.

      I predict a rebound from the slut couture I see on news sites and am voting for Indian clothing.

  10. The Multicultural crayons caught my eye. I recalled from long ago one of the colors I liked, “Indian Red”.

    So I Googled and tried to find information from the Crayola site, but couldn’t. I fell back on Wikipedia, where I found this:

    “Colors have been renamed through the years. In 1958, Prussian Blue was renamed Midnight Blue due to the name’s associations with the Holocaust. The color known as Flesh was renamed Peach in 1962, partially in response to the U.S. Civil Rights Movement. Indian Red was renamed Chestnut in 1999 due to concern that some children thought the crayon color represented the skin color of Native Americans.”

    As happens so often with Wikipedia, when I click on the footnote they provide for the “Native American” sentence, I get this message:

    “Sorry, but we couldn’t find the page you were looking for.”

    Still, it sounds likely.

    And it’s logical why “Flesh” would have been changed to “Peach” — “You white Westerners can’t imply that “all flesh” is that racist pink-white hue…!”

    • The only race-based joke Bill Cosby told back in the early days was that he smoked “flesh-colored cigars”.

  11. All this stuff arose from postmodernism–Kant, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Hegel, Foucault, Derrida, Rorty. As Stephen Hicks writes “Postmodernism is the left’s strategy for responding to the crisis of the failure of socialism.”

    If one dilutes the pride of nationalism and it’s cultural cement by wild heterogenous immigration, you must weaken that autochthonous culture and make it more susceptible to takeover.

    No genius was needed to discover this strategy, but Gramsci helped.

  12. I want gun-colored crayons. Or weapon-colored. Gun metal grey. Black Glocks. Tan for rifles…what colors for AR-whatsis??

    I remember seeing a pink “Hello Kitty” semi automatic. I’d love one. Dream on. Medic Mauser sent me an image once. Bet they have a girl-type kick to them.

    • Girl-sized kick? Absolutely, since the .223/5.65 x 45 cartridge is very modest in power (too small to hunt deer in most if not all of the northern states), it’s a lot more manageable than rifles chambered in more “manly” calibers.

  13. Dymphna:

    At 7:38 PM you wrote, “Watch ANY child of one race meet an adult of another race: the fear is obvious and natural”. I know otherwise. This first happened about five years ago. I am seated in a restaurant eating. At the next table, a Negro boy of 2-3 is sitting with his mother. The boy gets up, walks over to me, smiles and says, “Daddy”. You got that right! The boy is apparently so starved for fatherly affection he hopes to get it from a “white boy” like me. This has happened to me about 15 times throughout the years. None of these boys showed any fear in approaching me.
    What do you think this means?

    • Interesting….I presume you are white or Asian or some other color than these boys who approach claiming your putative paternity?

      Do white boys ever do that?

      Do girls of *any* race come over to you saying “Daddy”?? Because if they haven’t been sexually abused, girls are hungry for affection also.

      In the course of my social work career I worked with many, many children from dysfunctional environments (and often in immediately post-crisis situations). I found it to be the case that many extremely emotionally needy children would approach any adult, almost begging for love. They would grab me by the leg and say “I love you” as soon as they saw me….and once latched on, it was often difficult to get them calm enough to let me go. So I would interview mom for a few minutes before asking her to take her child and then model behavior I would HOPE she’d copy.

      When the Baron spent some time at the shelter painting a mural in the downstairs common room, small boys in particular tended to herd around him, touching, talking, hungry for attention. One in particular made him uncomfortable.

      In the beginning it was hard not to want to “make everything better” for the children’s mothers so they could in turn attend to their little kids. I will never forget two tiny ones whose mother was deaf – and inattentive to them. Their eyes stared hungry holes into my face. I was afraid if I touched them they’d shatter. I would mutely signal to their mother to please hold them.
      I should have specified young children from stable kin networks who had both male and female adults in their lives on a dependable and daily basis. Those are the kids who will shy away from people who look different, though they may stare intently from behind mama, where it’s safe. Even extroverted young ones are careful.

      What very small kids of different races do with one another, though, is no different than the intense curiosity they exhibit for kids who look just like them. In that event, it is meeting “another like me” – in the sense that they are cohorts and therefore mutually interesting. Race is incidental in those situations, but you have to be in an environment to where you can see them and observe the intensity.

      • Not to contradict your wider (and I daresay emotionally draining) experience, Dymphna, but I recall maybe 30 years ago, a friend telling me of his five-year-old daughter starting school, in a primarily white area; she found nothing unusual about her black and south Asian peers, but ethnic Chinese kids disconcerted her as their narrower eyes made it harder to read their expressions.

        Certainly one of the delights of watching small children is their fascination with each other.

    • When I lived in southern Sudan, I was pointed to to exemplify the “boogey man” on more than one occasion.

  14. The local Wal Mart has something like nine large photos inside the door of people. Only two were white. Today I noticed a photo of a white woman with amixed-race child.

    Over the decades who can fail to see the cop shows with the OBPS (obligatory police supervisor) and no cop buddy picture can do without the white and black partners. The master hacker in heist and terrorist movies is always black. “Congo” is the movie to watch for jumbled sex and race rolls.

    Movies push relentlessly the female kung fu ass kicker or the female cop who slams the 200-lb. perp on the hood and locks his arms so she can cuff him. Happens all the time.

    “Luther” is a treat on Netflix, but he doesn’t have a white partner. He does have anger management issues though and he needs to develop some of that British reserve.

    “Wallender” is a terrific Swedish cop show but it was apparently made before any Muslims emmigrated there. Not a one in sight.

    The hard sell or the hard coverup. Take your pick.

  15. Dymphna:

    Yes, I am Caucasian. I wrote “Negro boy” because I have never had a girl of any race, nor a boy who not Negro approach me saying “Daddy”.
    I pity these kids but am not responsible for their plight. Their mothers are creating a hell on earth for the rest of us as perhaps 30-40% of these kids will become felons sooner or later.

  16. Great article Baron. I remember watching the opening ceremony of the 2012 London Olympics and shaking my head at the “typical British family” being represented as mixed-race.
    There are still parts of the country in Britain (usually in the country) where members of ethnic minorities are still minorities.
    I know of a mixed race couple from Leeds who didn’t move to York, because they didn’t feel as comfortable in that city. There are far fewer members of ethnic minorities in the latter and therefore far fewer mixed-race couples and families. They felt their family would stand out a lot more there. Though the English themselves are starting to be outnumbered by the Eastern Europeans there now!

Comments are closed.