Immigrants, Simple Economics, Social Unrest

NB: This applies to places other than the United States, I just used that particular place and the group of Latin American immigrants because I am familiar with this particular situation. Additionally, this group of immigrants can be substituted with another as circumstances permit or demand. Same goes for the place.


 

They come for riches and an easy life. They think they can support a family with several children while many normal people struggle greatly to support two or three. It might almost be funny if it weren’t so sad. (No one knows what that line was a reference to, and I’m okay with that. To make it more difficult to find, parts of the line have been changed or added.) Of course I am speaking of a certain type of immigrant that we see commonly here in the States. I am aware that plenty of them come from places with terribly unequal distribution of wealth, but to go from there to the place with the most debt in the recorded history of mankind – and in an attempt to make a substantial profit for little work – is madness if not stupidity. They are so deluded that they end up crammed into a living space too small to comfortably fit their entire family while they scrape by on bills and buy McDonald’s every day because they can’t afford decent, human living conditions with what they make from their jobs cleaning up after others. And yes, some immigrants start cooking food for a living. Fresh-off-the-boat immigrants can’t expect a job much better than that since they usually don’t have college degrees or job experience in anything that doesn’t involve cleaning or cooking. Their bilingual children have slightly brighter futures, but still don’t have the straight shot at easy cash that their parents wanted. In short: all their effort is for nothing. They continue working low-wage jobs without getting much in return. All that has changed for them is that they are now in a foreign environment with terribly unhealthy foodstuffs, surrounded by people who either barely understand their language or don’t speak it at all. These immigrants often don’t get much benefit from making the effort to leave their homeland and can suffer regret and homesickness as a result. Naturally, the immigrants are not the only ones to suffer from their decisions. The host economy, already burdened with debt, strains to support the flood of new mouths to feed and families to house and employ. The amount of money in public circulation must then be spread ever more thinly across the population – leaving progressively less for everyone. Less money in the host economy means less foreign aid can go to their homelands. If a host economy cannot aid these places, it then becomes more likely that people from those places will emigrate and end up in a place that they have erroneously been led to believe can make them rich… by them scrubbing toilets… Anyway, this sets in motion a cycle which results in an astounding number of people moving to a place, aiding in the economy’s collapse, and causing the host nation to become as undesirable as the place they came from. Parts of the host nation will even look like their homelands simply from lack of population control. Stepping into these neighborhoods and cities is like entering a foreign land to the native of the host nation. It is rather uncomfortable for the native and can induce feelings of one’s homeland having been invaded and overtaken by foreigners. Of course this leads to varying degrees of social unrest ranging from whispered comments and rude looks to protests or even violence. Under permitting circumstances, these feelings and actions can intensify and these places can spread. There are a couple of ways to look at this sort of situation. One is despair that the homeland the natives have worked so hard at to build and maintain is being broken down by these foreign invaders. The other is to be pleased with the social unrest as it could mean an increased probability of a wide-scale revolt of the people against the parties that can be held responsible, which of course includes the “merchants” in the government as well as the immigrants. Indecision is of course not an option. Anyone who refuses to care enough to pick a side and viewpoint runs a risk of being labeled as an enabler, dog, sheep, puppet or any other number of degrading things you can think of. To remove this risk, it is necessary to choose. Rest assured any mercy will virtually exclusively be shown to genetic Europeans living outside of Europe who have a preference to focus more on the problems in Europe than the ones they face where they live because, after all, Europe is their home and they have no business living elsewhere. It then makes sense for them to care more about their genetic homeland than wherever they currently live. (It can generally be assumed that other genetic groups immigrated to that place recently enough that they could move back home much more easily than a genetic European could, and therefore deserve less mercy.)

Advertisements

I apologize, but a personal issue came up that will prevent me from further posting this week. This will never be explained. I should be able to post two articles next week and pretend that will make up for it.

Again, I’m sorry.

Sincerely,

frozenotter

Gnats

“In a short time he begins to twist things around to make it look as if all the injustice in the world had always been done to him and not the other way around”

-quote from Mein Kampf

Well, the Romans killed plenty of other Europeans in battle in the course of Rome becoming the Roman Empire. The English later started taking advantage of Ireland, and eventually Irish slaves started being shipped to America. The Dutch shipped plenty of African slaves (including ones captured, enslaved and sold by other Africans) to America. Turks have been trying to slaughter Europeans for ages. Sometimes this would be followed by them raping the European women. Still other European women were burned alive, drowned, pressed to death or otherwise forced to undergo torturous execution “trials” after being accused of witchcraft in both Europe and North America. The Holodomor resulted in a massive death toll. Many people died during the reign of Ivan the Terrible in Russia – much like many Cambodians died as a result of Pol Pot obtaining power. The American government dropped two nuclear bombs on Japan. Virtually everyone knows that the people of North Korea are, for the overwhelmingly large part, being treated horribly. Back in America, almost all the “Indians” are dead. On a more global scale, a sickening number of people are being held in debt slavery by – who else? – the Jews. I’d say we have enough problems without this last one being added. Then they have the nerve to inflate any number of deaths of their own people and blame it on Europeans whenever they can – even if some of those deaths were caused by naturally-occurring illness or some other unavoidable thing like old age (because if a 96 year-old woman dies suddenly, she must have had a heart attack thinking about Nazis. It couldn’t be something like old age. That would just be silly *eye roll*). These parasites continue on to ask for money to make themselves feel better after all their well-earned “hardships” they’ve undergone after their host lands have tried to expel them as a result of said host lands realizing what damage they’ve caused. A rather obvious result of this is the bandit state called Israel. Its existence is largely funded by donations from various other nations (you didn’t expect them to actually work, did you?). Now that all this has been said, it should be obvious that not all injustice and certainly not all hardship has been always inflicted on the Jew and, furthermore, that far too many people have been treating the Jew – this creature creating ever more problems for the rest of us – with undeserved kindness.  After repeated and aggressive attempts to stop Europeans from having good, genetically European children and with their debt-enslaving, money-worshiping ways, it could additionally be suggested that the Jew deserves not kindness but outright harshness. Indeed, one does not ever respond with any degree of kindness to the discovery of one’s own life force being drained away by a gnat.

A Short Case for Drinkable Seawater

Making seawater drinkable would benefit us in that the world’s ever-increasing population demands more resources – including drinkable water – to stay alive (esp. in places like California where they have terrible droughts, yet are unable to make use of the ocean water on their western coast), and making more water available for this purpose would (on a large scale) postpone the “impending water wars” people hear about occasionally or (on a small scale) increase one’s ability to survive natural disasters or harsh weather in bad times or at least provide a backyard water source for people trying to cut down on bills. Furthermore, for the time being, drinking seawater could help cut down on the consumption of the rat poison sodium fluoride. I’m not so sure “Big Brother” would jump at the opportunity to poison the breeding grounds of sea creatures that can be caught, sold, and taxed to the government’s benefit (even if dumping waste product into the ocean is a cheap way of getting rid of it), so I’d assume this action would not be first on their list of things they’d want to do. Of course litter, oil and other forms of pollution can also be a problem. Because of this, one may automatically rule out certain areas for potential water sources. The easiest way is to compare the coast to a dump and the water thereby to a drainage ditch and, if there is any similarity between what is seen and what the visual field is being compared to, simply find another area (having or at least borrowing a boat would be useful if one has the opportunity to take advantage of it). Use your best judgement. If you don’t feel comfortable drinking this water, then don’t drink it. You may have a more convenient freshwater source available anyway (personally, since I live in a place with a lot of lakes, streams, and the beginning of the Mississippi River a-ways North of me, I have plenty of options of water sources to clean and use in place of seawater – which I have no access to). I do not recommend drinking the water tainted with sodium fluoride as a backup option. That would be a horrible idea.

Hypothetically Speaking… (About Identical Twins)

Regarding tissue and organ transplants between identical twins (called isografts according to Wikipedia): they are not supposed to trigger an immune response because the recipient is genetically identical to the donor. (I found a back-up source for this that isn’t Wikipedia for once. It is from some sort of Medical Encyclopedia which heavily implies the same thing saying, “The more similar the antigens are between the donor and recipient, the less likely that the organ will be rejected” … “No two people, except identical twins, have identical tissue antigens.” I’ve cited this site below.)

Since having an identical twin gives one another person to lean on in the event of an unfortunate medical event, would it not be more convenient, at least from a medical standpoint, if endangered species would produce more twins?

Of course it would.

Even from the standpoint of nature it would make more sense to increase the number of offspring born to a mother to increase the likelihood of survival and aid in the reproduction and distribution of genes later in life. In humans this also aids in things like the survival of surnames, passing down knowledge and culture, and helping to shape the world for even more upcoming generations with the creation of more humans to do the shaping.

Apart from increasing litter yield, twins are also rather useful for medical studies. Of course I will refrain from disclosing any discomforting details as we’ve all been made aware of some of the related things that society – or rather the mouth of it – has deemed to be… less than ethical. This is not the time to discuss whether it would be useful to society as a whole to put to use individuals scheduled for death in the first place, and this certainly isn’t the time to mention a certain message from October 20th, 1942 sent to SS-Obersturmbannführer Dr. Brandt which in part read, “In the Reichsführer SS’ letter of April 18, 1942 it is ordered in §3 that if prisoners in Dachau condemned to death live through experiments which have endangered their lives, they should be pardoned.” (The source for this is cited at the end.) Let’s ignore that for the time being and instead focus on why twins are so useful to society.

Back on the subject of medical studies, one need not inflict one twin with some horrible damage and watch the subject’s affliction progress. In this day and age, we have plenty of naturally-occurring afflictions which can be acquired purely through bad luck or poor decisions. Simply increasing the occurrence of twins in the population would increase the likelihood of one in a pair of twins acquiring or possibly being born with some affliction. Then one could study both the progression of the thing and the increasing differences between the healthy and afflicted twins. Invasive measures would be unnecessary in this situation.

Ah, but now we come to the problem of how to create more twins!

One might increase the likelihood of fraternal twins by encouraging women with the proven ability to hyper-ovulate to have more children (“proven” in this case meaning she has done so by already producing one or more pairs of twins), but this wouldn’t do much good as fraternal twins are no more genetically similar than you are from any non-identical sibling you may have. On the other hand, the production of more subjects would statistically make it more likely that some of them would produce identical twins. More people making more twins results in an overall increase in twins, so eventually this could have a bit of an effect.

Suppose, alternatively, that twins who reproduce with other twins are themselves more likely to have twins. This would be useful, but would take quite some time to have much of an effect. In this way it is similar to the first possibility, though they could have a stronger influence on the general population when used in combination.

Well then, if identical twins are brought about by the splitting of an already-fertilized egg, could it not be possible to affect the mother in some way as to make it more likely for this to happen? If it was found that, for example, a specific chemical reaction occurred to cause this process in identical twins occurring while being absent in the occurrences of non-twins, then the solution would be as simple as finding what the chemical reaction is and deliberately attempting to cause it. Perhaps it could be brought about with a concentration of one or more herbs or maybe the mother needs to be a certain temperature to make it more likely to happen. There may very well be a rather sizable list of potential causes, but a successful, affirmative finding would mean the possibility of a large increase in twins in the general population, and in only a single generation!

Another option for creating more identical twins (admittedly this idea is not my favorite) would be to use some sort of scientific help from something as boring as fertility drugs ranging into the illegal practice of human cloning. This would be rather lazy and, as the effects cannot be obtained naturally as they would with a healthy and fertile female, they are far less useful than the other options which in theory wouldn’t require much effort on the part of anyone involved.

Apart from that, scientific intervention in fertility may lead to more instances of birth defects as opposed to natural fertility and child-bearing. Even where fertility drugs are concerned there is danger since the mother does not realize when she is pregnant at the moment of conception, but rather some time later when she, for example, feels “morning sickness”. Between the conception and her realization of her impregnation, she will continue taking the fertility drugs and her offspring will consequently be negatively affected.

That is why it is so important that the identical twins occur through natural means. It does no good to have an increase in identical twins when they are both born defective with problems that do not need to be studied. One does not need to look at shriveled limb stumps to know how to make an artificial limb and it does no good to study the absence of a chromosome when there is nothing we can do to add the missing chromosome to the affected subjects! Precious time must not be wasted on things that are completely pointless!

In this day, as Europe is being overrun and deathly out-bred by imported Africans, Asians and so on, it is even more important than any time in the past to actively work toward the survival of genetic Europe – to not accept extinction or destruction but to implement solutions! If one such solution might be to purposely increase the number of children a woman is likely to bear at any one time, then it’s a damn good solution! And if it happens to increase our collective knowledge of how to keep genetic Europe healthy, then it’s an even better solution!

 

Sources:

-Wikipedia.org

-Medline Plus Medical Encyclopedia, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000815.htm

-message quote taken from a somewhat longer translation found on page 144 of a book called Concentration Camp Dachau 1933-1945 (ISBN 3-87490-528-4), which credits the original to “Bundesarchiv Koblenz”