Life after Google

Here’s the George Gilder book, Life After Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy, discussed in Dr Turley’s video.

Here is George Gilder’s Amazon page.

I am a fan of Gilder, especially his ideas about how wrong and damaging current feminism is – particularly for women. We talk frequently about what will happen when some beleaguered Europeans begin to come to life. Fems ought to worry about their fate when Western men awaken.

Men without women are “mad, bad, and dangerous to know” and those ignorant Fems are clueless. They have no idea.

Home Schooling in Russia

Homeschooling is a sacrifice. It requires that the parents come up with the financial planning to make this undertaking possible. Two parents working full-time obviously can’t do it. Thus, families may have to be creative.

Homeschooling is also a reward. Most days it takes little more than two or three hours for academic work, leaving lots of time for other endeavors – time outside playing or running a track, plus time inside playing musical instruments or reading or playing fiercely-contested boardgames. No electronics save the computer for learning the keyboard as soon as possible.

Homeschooled children are noticeable. They don’t have the pressure of “socialization” at school so they’re freer to be themselves.On one occasion, the owner of a small bookstore where I’d taken the future Baron asked me if I homeschooled. Taken aback, I admitted as much and asked how she knew. “Without exception”, she said, “the homeschooled kids I see are calm and poised.” Since then, I’ve learned to pay attention to kids in public…I think she’s right, though I don’t ever ask.

As public education continues to swirl the drain, I feel great sympathy for those who don’t have the choice to educate their children en famille. It was a joy I’d not have missed for anything.

Dr Turley reports on Russia’s growing homeschooled population:

Orban and Salvini’s Concerted Push-Back

Look out, Merkel and Macron. The water must be above your ankles by now. Keep bailing!

Dr. Turley again, talking about the eventual Fail of the globalist EU and its replacement by an updated version. One with border security and cultural pride.

When you open the video, move the bar over to 1:00 minute to skip the annoying commercial. YooTube said it would begin at 1:00 minute, but it lied. Too bad Turley’s doing that. It detracts considerably from his message.

I believe Vlad Tepes is working on a subtitled video of the Orban/Salvini meeting. That should be entertaining; Salvini missed his calling as an actor who proclaims with gusto.

It’s good to know the important things that the MSM doesn’t bother reporting.

The Predictable End Begins Again

Three opinions on the hot mess of #WaitForMe South Africa, which is anxious to go Zimbabwe one better:

The main problems facing national entities in the African continent are corruption, corruption, corruption. Without a rule of law and robust property rights, no country can flourish.

All too soon South Africa will have begging bowls in the U.N. Or rather, a list of demands that “former colonials” had better meet. But those wicked colonials will be embroiled in their own troubles, many of them brought about by their imported African populations.

Not to worry. China – already buying up mineral rights throughout the continent – is waiting in the wings to pick up the pieces. Who needs to ‘own’ countries when one can simply strip them to the last yuan?

The end of this sad tale will be blood, death, and famine. However, the present instigators will get away, their pockets bulging.

Blacks are Fleeing

Can you say gob-smacking news??

Back in the 1960s, the Dems sold their souls to snag the black voting bloc. They also significantly increased the size of our government with entitlement benefits for poor families. The family units were “entitled” as long as the father wasn’t in the home, a rule which served to break up black families. It was, and remains, a disaster of karmic proportions, one they were warned about repeatedly.

America’s urban poor, mostly black, are enslaved to local Dem governments; those enclaves are drugged-out concentrations of wretchedness. Will Teflon Donald Trump be able to make some changes in that ugly picture?

As Trump rolls back the evils of the 1960s, race relations in the U.S. are undergoing a paradigm shift. As Turley says, the leftist definition of racism, i.e., power+prejudice=racism, is rotting out. In its place is a nascent realization that this definition is a lie; blacks want immigration to end so that citizens’ jobs are safe.

In other words, the Democrat Party will have to choose: will they be the voice of unlimited immigration – i.e, job-stealing immigrants flowing in through Mexico, or will they choose their faithful black voting bloc? They can’t have both.

We’ll have to watch the votes in November to see how this plays out in various Congressional Districts.

Social Justice: An Analysis (Part 2)

Below is the second part of a four-part guest essay by Richard Cocks about Social Justice. Previously: Part 1

Social Justice: An Analysis

Part 2
by Richard Cocks

Tough love vs. mother love

It would be a strange world in which absolute equality reigned. There would be no one to admire. To develop and get better in any regard; financially, musically, or athletically, would be impossible. Everyone would be exactly the same. It would be the least diverse world possible; a static, boring hellhole.

Thomas Sowell points out that even the same person is not equal to himself at different stages in his life.[1] An older child will be bigger, stronger, smarter and more capable than the younger version of himself. This is natural and inevitable. Workers are likely to be more productive and become more capable over time. Teenagers frequently start out at the minimum wage while most millionaires are over sixty. Very few people start on minimum wage and remain there as older adults. As more experience and seniority are accumulated there is the likelihood of promotions spanning decades. For this reason the same individual is likely to occupy multiple economic groups over a lifetime. And when people retire their income is likely to decrease.

Age differences between individuals, or the median age of ethnic groups, would alone be enough to generate economic inequalities.[2] The median age of American Jews is 52 while the median age of Hispanics is 40 and partly for that reason, Jews are on average better off than Hispanics as groups.[3]

In America, most millionaires and billionaires have not inherited their wealth but have earned it. The titans of the tech industry, for instance, are nearly all self-made men.

This obsession with leveling differences between people can be linked to the love a mother has for all her children — an unconditional love looking out for the lost lamb. Agape is the Greek name for compassionate love, and it is focused on acceptance and non-differentiation.

Eros is a more masculine-style tough-love aimed at looking out for the welfare of people by encouraging them to develop and get better; to promote hard work, discipline and sacrificing present pleasure for future gain. In principle anyone at all, no matter his talents and starting position, can get better. To truly care about someone is to wish him to improve.

In metaphysical or religious terms, in the realm of the Absolute there are no distinctions, all is one. Everything is equally divine and good: Agape. In the realm of the Relative, distinctions exist and the possibility of things being better or worse relative to other things or relative to themselves at different points in time comes into being: Eros.

Ken Wilber in A Brief History of Everything argues that real non-pathological love is a combination of Eros and Agape. The push to grow and develop combined with an acceptance of someone just as he is. Unfortunately, there is a tendency in popular culture at the moment to regard masculinity, and thus masculine virtues, as “toxic.” Thus, Eros-derived achievement and success is looked upon as suspicious and a reason for others to feel resentful.

“Social justice” is the pathological promotion of Agape with no Eros attached.[4] Superiority, and thus development, is then regarded as a sin.

Kindness and Charity

The idea of social justice is not a harmless mistake. The claim that all people who are less successful in a given economic system are the victims of discrimination and injustice divides the world into victims and victimizers; the oppressed and the oppressors. It is imagined that if it were not for these evil people, all people and groups would be at the same economic and social level. This kind of thinking has its modern roots in Marxism which divided the world into two groups; the bourgeoisie (capitalists) and the proletariat (workers). The exploiters were to be murdered and the exploited freed.

Marxism posits a cause for the proletariat’s suffering: they are being actively suppressed and kept down. This imagines the proletariat have all the ingredients for tremendous happiness and success but their fantastic potential is prevented from being actualized by nefarious others. In this way of thinking, it is not prosperity that needs to be explained, which is imagined to be the default and natural situation of man, but penury. Any failure to achieve economic wellbeing then must not be the fault of the individual but that of some external force, in exactly the same way the National Socialists claimed the Jews diabolically pulled the strings of international commerce.

Sowell argues that relative poverty and a hardscrabble existence have characterized humanity for most of its history. Prosperity is the anomaly, not the default condition. It is that which needs explaining. Japan studied the success of the Scots and English when they realized they were falling behind technologically, while the Scots copied the English to lift their own performance.

Failure is always easier than hard work and changing cultural attitudes. The majority of countries simply resent their higher performing minorities and seek to suppress them; for example, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia with regard to their ethnic Chinese minorities and Fiji against its ethnic Indians.

Economics is also not a zero-sum game. The standard of living of rich countries is high for everyone relative to poor countries. If wealth were attained by stealing it from the poor, the more wealth a country had, the poorer the masses would be. This is not the case.

Members of modern democracies tend to be fairly good at recognizing scapegoating when the targets are at the lower end of the success spectrum, such as the poor and the handicapped. However they tend to fail dismally to perceive scapegoating when the victim belongs to the higher-ups. Scapegoating the king or the chief is historically very common. The powerful person is already singled out by his office, and since he occupies a position of authority, he can be blamed when things have gone wrong. The individual can never succeed against the mob, so this person is as vulnerable as anyone else. When SJWs target the 1% this is classic scapegoating — the 99% against the 1%.

Continue reading

Andrej Babiš: Czech Companies Don’t Want to Hire People Coming From Black Africa

In the following video Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš talks to an interviewer about his immigration policy — which is to import the type of workers the Czech economy needs, rather than the sort that multiculturalism (i.e. the EU) is trying to foist on him. The interviewer obviously thinks she has caught him out as a WAYCIST because he rejects the idea of bringing in migrants from black Africa.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Viktor Orbán: The Soros Plan Will Be Stopped by the Next European Parliamentary Election

Below is the full speech given by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán at last weekend’s Bálványos Summer Open University and Student Camp in Tusnádfürdő in the ethnic Hungarian region of western Romania.

The speech is long — 43 minutes — and parts of it, especially the first half, might seem like “inside baseball” to anyone who does not live in Central Europe. However, I think you’ll find the whole speech well worth your attention. Throughout his talk Mr. Orbán intersperses the policy discussion with philosophical asides and cultural analysis. And in the foreign-policy section of the speech — the second half — his explanation of international political currents, especially where they concern Russia, are lucid and shrewd. This is a man who has studied international relations carefully and applied what he has learned.

I recommend listening to (or reading) the whole thing. You’ll come away with a better understanding of the political situation in Central Europe.

Many thanks to CrossWare for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Oz and Russia to Welcome Besieged South Africans

Good news! The white population in South Africa has been under the gun (and the machete) for far too long; a murderous heritage from Nelson Mandela to his people. But that legacy is about to turn.

That Russia is smart enough to offer experienced white farmers land to put into production shows how shrewd is the Bear. Heaven knows it needs people who are willing to be fruitful and multiply.

Meanwhile, Australia will have some balance for its leftist leanings, and some ballast for its ship of state that will eventually have to turn toward China.

Social Justice: An Analysis (Part 1)

Below is the first part of a four-part guest essay by Richard Cocks about Social Justice (and also, of course, Social Justice Warriors).

Social Justice: An Analysis

by Richard Cocks

Part 1

Cosmic justice: infantile and nihilistic

Social class, home environment, genetics and other factors all contribute to differences between individuals. People differ in looks, height, income, social status, morality, various kinds of intelligence and athleticism, musical ability, industriousness, discipline, and every other human characteristic. Differences in culture, history, and geography generate differences between groups. Being born into a culture that emphasizes hard work, education, conscientiousness, and thrift is a tremendous advantage.

“Social justice” advocates describe the resulting disparate achievements as “inequalities” with the suggestion that these represent some kind of injustice. Unequal achievement is treated as though it must be the result of discrimination, “privilege” or some other unfairness, while it is in fact the inevitable consequence of differences between individuals and groups. These differences will exist no matter how a society is organized, barring a race to the bottom where the laziest, least talented individual set the bar and every achievement that surpasses that pitiful measure gets confiscated and distributed — removing any incentive to do anything much at all.

Very young children and even some animals[1] have a sense of justice or fairness. In humans this starts out with an intuitive perception, later gets modified by reflection and culture, which in turn influences what gets perceived as just or unjust. Iain McGilchrist describes this as right hemisphere perception, left hemisphere mid-level processing, returning once more to the right hemisphere.[2]

An egocentric child, without prompting, can perceive that receiving a small ice cream while his brother gets a large one is unfair and unjust.[3] However, he is also likely to think that the fact that his older brother has fewer restrictions on what he can do than he does is unfair. Both cases generate resentment. However, only one is justified.

In the second case, being older and thus a little wiser, the older brother does not need as much supervision. He is more capable, self-sufficient and responsible, and therefore has more privileges. These privileges might seem unfair and unjust in some “cosmic” sense, but they are in fact perfectly reasonable.[4] His parents are not being unjust at all. It is merely that age and experience are on the side of the older brother. To harbor resentment at the parents is unreasonable, unfair and unjust. They are blameless. To resent the brother is also ridiculous. There will always be an older sibling as long as siblings exist. The protest is misguided.

Part of the maturation process is learning to distinguish between events that are due to favoritism, attempts to solicit elicit sexual favors, or some other inequity and occurrences that are the result of relevant differences between people. To feel resentful towards someone merely because he is better in some way, such as in looks, status, wealth, or popularity, is in some sense natural. It is also puerile and undeserved. It is a sin in the literal sense of missing the mark. Certainly the envied person is not at fault simply for being superior. The defect is in the heart of the malicious resentful one.

It is true that even a relatively happy, mature person will almost inevitably suffer occasionally from this kind of inappropriate resentment, but he recognizes that the fault lies in his own breast, not in the other person.

By failing to distinguish between deserved resentment and inappropriate hatred towards someone or some group simply for being superior in some way, “social justice” returns people to an infantile inability to differentiate between resentment based on actual unjust treatment, and resentment that is generated simply by the desire to have or be what someone else has or is.

If the universe itself can be considered unjust in some way, due to the unequal distribution of admirable characteristics, it is not the fault or responsibility of man and it is not in man’s power to fix. It is certainly not the fault of “society,” which the phrase “social justice” implies. Justice and fairness appropriately considered enter the picture only with regard to human institutions and rules.

To reject inequalities is to rebel against reality itself. All people bar two are superior to some and inferior to others in any conceivable characteristic. To reject that fact is to renounce the character of existing at all.

One response to existence and Being is to reject it; to decide that it is better never to have lived and then, having lived, to end it as soon as possible. Mass shooters act out the intention not just to end their own lives, but to kill as many as they can in a rejection of Life itself.[5] Social justice warriors are engaged in a similar kind of nihilism. Scapegoating and killing the “kulaks”[6] in the manner of Stalin has no logical end. Since differences of achievement are unavoidable, the logic of social justice is the complete destruction of the human race. By encouraging undeserved resentment against individuals and whole sectors of society, “social justice” activists ramp up intergroup hatreds that promote internecine conflict and, if unchecked, will lead to more horrible violence than simply one individual picking up a gun. Once the scapegoated group is murdered, differing levels of success within the persecuting group remain, and the process will continue.

To reward merit or productivity?

In thinking about economic success, Thomas Sowell recommends simply jettisoning the notion of merit. He argues that “the concept of merit brings an insult to misfortune and arrogance to achievement.”[7] It is impossible to separate how much achievement is the result of talent, for which a person can take no credit, and how much is the result of industriousness. On the face of it, hard work seems meritorious. However, even industriousness tends to be highly affected by familial and cultural influences; an unearned advantage. This means that it is not possible to assess merit. What can be rewarded — what is known how to reward — is productivity.

Rewarding productivity creates an incentive to be productive, and all tend to benefit. They benefit because rewarding productivity encourages using the latest technology and most effective methods, raising the quality of products while reducing their cost. Simply rewarding effort would not be optimal for that reason.

Continue reading

Angela Merkel: Europe’s Basic Message is “Humaneness”. Viktor Orbán: Close the Borders.

Earlier this month Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin. Hungary and Germany are polar opposites on the migration issue, so it’s no surprise that the two leaders could agree on only blandest of generalities concerning immigration into Europe.

The following video shows the press conference held by Mrs. Merkel and Mr. Orbán after their discussions. If you can dig your way through the Mutti-speak used by Angela Merkel, you’ll notice the essential difference between the two leaders: Chancellor Merkel’s most important concern is “humaneness” towards the migrants, while Prime Minister Orbán focuses on national sovereignty, border security, and the protection of the Hungarian nation.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for translating the German, to CrossWare for translating the Hungarian, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

Continue reading

Welfare Chauvinism in Europe?

Another descriptive lecture from Dr. Turley:

He mentions “welfare chauvinism” coming of age in the paradigmatic shift occurring among center-left parties in Europe. Whoo-whee, Bubba, I thought only us knuckle-dragging EverTrumpers believed in that concept.

Sometimes I feel like a motherless child…other times, I feel like the world is in a barrel, twisting and twirling over Niagra Falls.

Leftists Untie!

The Poor Are Always With Us…

Our Israeli correspondent MC sends these thoughts on the cultural (and moral) foundations of wealth-creation.

The poor are always with us…

…But it is the arrogant who are the real enemy

by MC

Most Islamic countries are poor. They are poor because their religion is a religion of poverty, based as it is on a system where every nuance of a person’s life is dictated by somebody else, thus imprisoning a person’s free will. Even Saudi Arabia with all its wealth in the cities has a real problem with poverty outside the cities.

Most communist countries are riddled with poverty, too. Communism does not encourage wealth-creation except as graft and exploitation amongst its elites. Communism, too, imprisons free will.

Innovation is a prime product of free will, and it is the ability to innovate that generates wealth and civilization. Countries can create their own essences of civilization and export them, others can be gross importers of civilization if, and only if, they have the ability to buy into civilization, otherwise they too are poor and backwards.

Gaza, for example, buys into limited civilization by exporting and exploiting a victimhood culture which plays on the heartstrings of the West to such an extent that the West then exports the bounty of its own civilization to expiate a ‘guilt’ that it perceives when duped by the illusions of abject poverty and victimhood portrayed by the media’s white-guilt propaganda.

But guilt money does not relieve the cause of any of the poverty, especially when the cause of that poverty is Islam or socialism.

The Gulf states have oil. So do the USA and Russia, but the Gulf stuff is cheap and plentiful. So Islam has a rich uncle who can buy influence. Saudi Arabia is like a spider sitting at the centre of a web of intrigue: Islamic intrigue, the intrigue of the wealthy barbarian.

If the West has a vulnerability, it is its denial of its own culture; its denial that the Judeo-Christian basis of the West is superior because it allows the individual the free will to innovate. When one denies the cultural basis of the West’s success, one becomes vulnerable to having one’s behaviour coerced, and in the case in question, coerced by bribery. Saudi Arabia has found that it can use its oil revenue to buy a place in the West’s cultural sunshine. Not only that, it can use its wealth to have the civilization upon which it depends slaughtered as unbelievers — as Islam demands.

Western cultural nuances are ubiquitous across the world, and many have adopted the products of Western culture: phones, bicycles, televisions, tee-shirts, shoes, cars, buses; the list is endless. This is amazing flattery if, we would just be humble enough to stop and think about it. No other culture has contributed anything close to it.

But Marxism has effectively destroyed Christianity. When one can see a Pope actively working a communist manifesto, then one must assume that Christianity is in its death throes. Whether or not the revolutionary theology that the current Pope has brought with him from South America is KGB-inspired is difficult to determine, and the truth may only come out when it is ancient history.

Continue reading

From Szczecin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, a Razor-Wire Curtain Has Descended…

Immigration-related events are moving rapidly this in Europe summer. The situation is in such flux that now would be a good time to step back and try to get an overview of the process.

Three years ago the dead baby hysteria, followed by Chancellor Merkel’s invitation to the world (“Y’all come in and set a spell, bitte!”), launched the Great European Migration Crisis. Since then I’ve read hundreds of news articles and analyses about the flow of “refugees” and the reactions to their violent and fragrant arrival in Western Europe.

After digesting all that information I created the following map, which presents my subjective evaluation of the different approaches to migration by various European countries. I’ve rated the policies of 28 different countries (the EU 27 minus Croatia, plus Switzerland) on a scale from 0 to 100, from zero (red) for the open-borders attitude of the “Welcoming Culture” to 100 (blue) for the absolute refusal of mass migration by the Visegrád Four (Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic). Data from the last six months weighs more heavily in the score assigned to each country — for example, Spain and Italy recently changed governments, which has strongly affected each country’s migration policy.

Immigration policies in Europe, Summer 2018 (Click to enlarge)

The grouping of countries based on their stance on migration bears a striking resemblance to the division of Europe into East and West by the Iron Curtain. This is especially true if we roll the clock back three months — back then Italy and Bavaria would have been quite red. And the analogy becomes even more apt if we remember that Austria was occupied by Soviet troops until 1955, which gives it one foot in the Eastern camp.

The biggest change in the past three months has been the formation of a new anti-immigration government in Italy. The “xenophobia” of the East Bloc has now broken through the razor-wire curtain and gained a foothold in Western Europe. No wonder EU politics is in such turmoil! After failing to contain the “anti-European” attitudes of Poland and Hungary, Brussels now has to contend with Matteo Salvini. Italy is one of the “big four” pillars of the European Union, so its defection to the anti-migration side carries enormous significance for continental politics.

The situation is metamorphosing rapidly, but before we analyze the process of change — the “delta”, as they say in the military-industrial complex — let’s go over the snapshot of current European migration policies.

The Visegrád Four

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán was the first major European political leader to (1) understand the larger significance of the refugee crisis of 2015, and (2) act rapidly to counteract the nexus of globalist actions that threatened the stability of the Hungarian state. In doing so he made himself an obstacle to the no-borders coalition, especially the “American philanthropist” George Soros. The reaction to Mr. Orbán’s building of the fence helped clarify the East-West divide, and strengthened the solidarity of the Visegrád Four. Each country now supports the others’ positions, and each vows to veto any action by the EU (the European Commission requires consensus to implement a sanctions regime) that would harm the other members. Taken individually, each V4 country is no match for Germany or France, but when they act in concert the four countries become a formidable thorn in the flesh of the Brussels oligarchy.

The movement of Italy and Austria (and even Bavaria) towards the Visegrád Four position allows Hungary to — as Barack Obama has so frequently said — punch above its weight.


The most recent Austrian election resulted in a coalition government headed by Sebastian “Boy” Kurz (ÖVP) as chancellor and Heinz-Christian Strache (FPÖ) as vice chancellor. Mr. Kurz may well be a cynical opportunist who has simply trimmed his sails to the wind, all the while remaining loyal to his mentors in the Davos crowd. However, to maintain his position he has to give at least the appearance of acting decisively to deal with the migration issue — hence the recent law targeting “radicalization” in Austrian mosques (see Christian Zeitz’ analysis). Part of that appearance will of necessity include the reduction of violence and disorder brought to Austria by Muslim immigrants. Any failure to achieve discernible results will endanger his chancellorship. For that reason one may expect him to stay the course, at least for the time being.

Mr. Kurz’ alignment with Italy, Hungary, and Bavaria bodes ill for Chancellor Angela Merkel and the mandarins in Brussels. A counterweight to their power is forming on their southeastern flank, and the resulting political crisis looks to be the most turbulent since the fall of the Iron Curtain and the reunification of Germany.


The new coalition government in Italy is shaking the very foundations of Barad-dûr in Brussels. The Five-Star Movement is more or less a traditional populist party, but the Lega Nord is full-on anti-immigration. Interior Minister Matteo Salvini has hit his stride early, turning back the refugee ferries and threatening to impound any NGO “rescue” vessels that make port in Italy. Unlike Chancellor Kurz, Mr. Salvini has never changed his tune — almost ten years ago, when I first started paying attention to him, he was the same anti-migrant firebrand that he is today. He shows no sign of being cowed by threats from Brussels; it’s no wonder that emergency summits are being hastily convened in reaction to him.

Since the new government was formed, the Lega has shot ahead of the Five-Star Movement to become the most popular party in Italy. If another election were to be held, Matteo Salvini would most likely end up as prime minister.

Eastern Europe

When I use the term “Eastern Europe”, I refer to the Baltic republics, Romania, and Bulgaria. (The Visegrád Four plus Austria comprise Central Europe. Strictly speaking, Moldova, Ukraine, and Belarus could also be considered Eastern Europe, but their political affairs are more closely associated with Russia, whether for or against, so I’m leaving them out of this analysis.)

Eastern Europe has the good fortune not to be attractive as a final destination for migrants — their welfare benefits are much less generous than those further west, and they are less reticent about dealing harshly with the criminal proclivities of foreigners. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have the added advantage of being largely off the route for most of the migration flowing into Western Europe.

Bulgaria and Romania have their share of migrant camps, full of angry, resentful Third-World “refugees” who are impatient to get out of those Black Sea backwaters and into the promised land of Germany or Sweden. The crime and disease the migrants bring with them spills out of the camps and into the adjacent towns. News outlets in those countries are blessedly un-PC, so the word gets out, and members of the general public who may once have been indifferent are now becoming anti-immigrant.

Continue reading