Mark,

I am almost sure that you have read Bremmer's J Curve but if you haven't you might find it interesting.

I think there is another curve, almost as interesting. Since I don't know how to post graphics here, permit me to explain it to you. Picture in your mind a graph with time on the vertical axis, with a long time ago at the top and the not too distant future at the bottom of the axis. Then picture Numbers of "productive" and "unproductive" people on the horizontal axis. Then, draw a more or less exponential curve sweeping upward over time (unproductive), and a more or less linear curve sweeping downward over time (productive). The linear curve starts higher than the exponential ascending curve but eventually they intersect. The shapes of the two curves essentially reflect fertility rates.

When the two curves intersect, society will be unable to draw sufficient resources from those producing them to support those who are not. At, or soon after, that point of intersection is reached, something will have to give. One group or the other may well revolt based on its perception of unfairness.

You may be reaching that point in England or you may not. I don't think the point has yet been reached in the U.S., but we may be not far behind.

Dan

Mark, you'd have a stronger point if it weren't for your rather startling u-turn since you wrote this article a few weeks ago.

Why has your contempt for the undeserving sweatpanted underclass suddenly turned to sympathy?

Dan,

What's the name of the second curve (productivity vs fertility) you mention in #1?

Brave post, Mark. Kudos.

You're definitely correct about both the "green space" issue and the jobs issue. I encourage you to check out this video.

Clav,

There are two curves. One shows the exponential growth in the "unproductive" population, and the other shows the basically linear decline in the "productive" population. Both curves are largely based on fertility but also on other factors.

Neither curve is labeled "fertility," although both curves are to a great extent based on fertility. One is labeled "Productive," the other "Unproductive." It is my thesis (as far as I am aware, I invented the previously unpublished "Miller Curve") that as society is blessed with more unproductive members, and fewer productive members, the fit will hit the shan.

The U.S. is a very rich country, and this may take a while. However, her resources are not infinite, and some day it is likely to happen -- unless my church takes over.

Dan

Dan:

I believe you're talking about dysgenics, or negative selection, here. It's not a new idea, but definitely a "controversial" one in the sense that some people are liable to get offended at certain inconvenient scientific facts, even ones they barely understand.

500,000,000 or bust...it's a start anyway

brought to you by the Acme Shovel Co

Damn, that's a creepy site, troll!

Mark,

What exactly is your point? You seem to be trying to pin something on "Liberals" but it wasn't quite clear.

Are you saying that they have abandoned Whites? If that is the case, is supporting Whites a goal of Liberals?

Also, did I miss something? Did Obama say that White people cling to guns and religion....?

Another point of confusion, you being an immigrant in Britain, what makes you think that its fine for your to hold a job there but not none Whites?

Lastly, are you serious?

"Brave post, Mark. Kudos."
- RJ Elliott

Now why doesn't it surprise me that the same guy who cheerleads the invasion/occupation from sidelines, also thinks that typing rhetorical words on a keyboard is "brave"...?

troll,

That was oooooweeeeoooo (Scary movie sound forget the instrument. Starts with a "z" I think).

The links on the homepage of that site say it all for me...

"Who? What?? Where??? When????"

Funny old internet you have under that bridge of yours, troll...

Dr Dreadful in #2: "Why has your contempt for the undeserving sweatpanted underclass suddenly turned to sympathy?"

Dr D., I wouldn't necessarily say I'm pouring with sympathy, but I do understand that the hits that the white underclass have taken were originally not of their own making. Their communities used to be strong, but now they're an apathetic, antisocial mess.

I still think they should have some measure of pride of themselves instead of spearheading the "Why Bother?" generation as they are doing. And you'll see that I am very much consistent in that I once again attack the benefit culture which consumes so many of these sweatpanted underclass. I wouldn't call them "undeserving," though. They're deserving of work and the respect (self and otherwise) that comes with it.

In short, having had the opportunity to think about the subject again due to Mr. Obama's elitist language, I found it legitimate to ask, what's happened to the working-class white community and why?

REMF in #10: "Now why doesn't it surprise me that the same guy who cheerleads the invasion/occupation from sidelines, also thinks that typing rhetorical words on a keyboard is 'brave...?'"

Because, REMF, as RJ said in comment #6, "some people are liable to get offended at certain inconvenient facts." It is a pretty courageous thing for anyone to opine so openly on matters concerning immigration (mostly illegal immigration, which is breaking the law, hence the term "illegal") and the effect it has on the mostly white native population. It's all too common for someone with a knee-jerk complex to shout "RACIST!" without even bothering to understand the point being made. You just might be one of those very people.

Mate, I don't reckon there really is a white underclass, or at least not in the way most people picture it.

It's a fallacy. There are, of course, poor-working-class whites: those labelled chavs in the UK, white trash in the US, and bogans in Australia. However, they are hardly sitting around being disgruntled.

That so-called white underclass Mark is looking at still runs everything in a wider sense because it's the barometer of middle-class, majority public opinion, and it makes a lot of the unwritten rules in regard to how we supposed to behave in relation to this stuff, even in Britain.

I'd assume that'd be the same in the US.

What I do agree with Mark on here in relation to Britain is that too much pandering is being done in the expectation that Britons will bend for the new arrivals, rather than have them adapt to the British way of life they've chosen over their old ones, when it's not always necessary and not enough thought is being given into the problems this might create. A lot of new migrants would prefer to be treated normally anyway, and most understand that doesn't mean they have to lose their cultural identities.

There are some pretty whacko lefties though in the UK (along with some pretty whacko righties), who'd like to ban everything from Santa to the term "blackboard" in case it offends anyone.

That kind of politically correct nonsense just underwhelms me, as does the extreme right's answer: if you don't like it, piss off or we'll make you piss off. Somewhere between that, there's a happy medium, and you'll see it in towns and cities all over Britain, America and Australia every day.

Luckily, most people agree that these things are whacko and the vast majority of Poms still believe they have a voice in government, and are content to use it one way or the other, even if it's through the newspapers rather than in direct approaches to politicians and bureaucrats.

I like the word multiculti...did you make that up?

Sweat pants all day...ahhhhh, that's the life! Who could be bitter at a day like that???

Gotta love some of the comments too...the silly question of whether obama was talking about white people...of course he wasn't...he was talking about EVERYBODY else in rural PA...you know...he was talking to all those minority hunters I see in the woods during hunting season, clinging to their guns...people that ask questions like that must really believe everyone's been sipping the same kool-aid!

I like the word multiculti...did you make that up?

No, he didn't.

guess I've been using the wrong dictionary all these years!!!

Actually, Andy (and how the hell are you, by the way?), to answer Zedd's question: Of course Obama was referring to white people. He was clearly having a go at "hicksville" -- and "hicksville" is comprised of working class white folks. He certainly isn't accusing blacks or any other non-whites of displaying antipathy toward anyone else not like them, because blacks and other non-whites just don't do that sort of thing. Whites are the only ones who need to learn about peace, tolerance and love for thy non-white neighbor!

Stan, please check out the link to The White Season. Read about the episodes and watch the video clips. If the whites in the communities they analyzed aren't disgruntled, then what exactly would you call them?

Of course, as per the current generation of "working" whites, the teens and early 20-somethings, you just might be right. They're so apathetic that they can't be disgruntled about anything for very long. As long as they can get their skunk cannabis and fried chicken, they're happy as pigs in shit.

Chelsey seems somewhat unseasoned for the vice presidential running mate with Hillary. Obama seems like the logical other minority victory candidate on a Hillary/Barrack ticket. A Hillary/Bill campaign ticket wouldn't satisfy the civil rights stuggle equation spanning the past 3 decades, but maybe a Hillary/Mom ticket might. Who ever it is that got the United States presidency in the pickle it is now in, I hope the voters don't sell out a failed notice of protest by putting back seat drivers in a place they ought not to be.

STM, Doc, Clav, Dan Miller,


I am surprised that you didn't call this author on his premise. He is suggesting that the purpose of government is to sustain the economic viability of Whites. The fact that all of you simply glossed over that is startling to me. The fact that in Britain, a White country, that there are poor Whites (where else should poor Whites be) AND that there are non Whites who work (meaning get up out of bed in the morning and labor) should be an issue, is astonishing. This man is not a Brit yet he is working there. In his mind THAT is acceptable because he is White. Neither of you thought that that was irrational. Why, pray tell?


Dan - you addressed the J curve.

STM - the myth of the disgruntle White underclass

Clav - you kissed up as usual (chuckles)

Doc - Well you are always forgiven.

Zedd,

I thought that I had at least pointed up Mark's inconsistency. See my comment #2, then click on the link to his other article that I cited. See if your jaw doesn't drop just a teensy bit after reading it as a companion piece to this one.

Life is good MEM...how 'bout you?

As far as the rest of your comment in #20...that's what I was thinking...but WTF do I know???

[Entire comment deleted due to:
a) Complete irrelevance to the topic under discussion;
b) Shilling.

Assistant Comments Editor]

Um, Zedd #23,

Which of these comments is a "kiss up?" (and why?):

#3

#8

#17

And how could I have "glossed over," anything when I didn't even address the article itself at all?

Still a few bricks shy, I see...

Clav,


My charge is that you didn't address the blatantly racist tone of this article. If the destructive consequences of perpetuating racist ideas isn't of concern to you, the ridiculously irrational and more-so illogical nature of this "argument" should cause you to bristle. As a regular BC commenter and participant, shouldn't sustaining your reputation as a lucid thinker and renaissance man be motivation enough to nudge you into disavowing vulgarly exposed expressions of inanity such as this.

It is one thing to look a man in the eye and tell him he is an idiot but to be afraid to challenge stupidity across the ocean in a virtual world is confusing at best.

Manning is a nit wit and he needs to know it. It will help him to sober up and perhaps nudge him into becoming the man that he was born to be instead of the boisterous clown that he is at present. Human beings have evolved passed his nuisance. He and the slew of rationally and emotionally left behind restrain humanities progress. For some reason his experiences have caused a diversion from the progress that has been made in our evolution and he is stuck in idiot mode and trying to drag as many people as he can with him (a la Hitler, Mugabe, Saddam, he just doesn't have enough at his disposal to do much damage). Why are you cool with that?

On the kissing up comment, I cant help it, I have to say something smarty pants to you. You should know that. Why did you even address that comment?

Doc,

What Mark is saying is that its wrong for non-Whites to work in Europe because they may be taking jobs from Whites (from there or whatever part of the world apparently) who MAY want to work there some day. Amazing...

I don't mind the racist stuff that much (eye rolling). What I cant get over is the fact that he is consistently dense and he thinks that he is brilliant. I am amazed that he is given the time of day by any publication. I keep thinking that he may have had a low point on the previous article (from the way you guys act as if all is well) and that THIS ONE will be lucid.... sigh!

I think the George W syndrome is spreading like wildfire. We just let the airheads run rough shot.

Shod

Andy,

Were you referring to my comment (#9)?

Never heard of multiculti huh?

Guess I lead a sheltered life Zedd...

Zedd - I have to ask this...you don't really believe that Obamas comments weren't pointed toward rural white folks do you? He knows damned well how city folk feel about him and he knows damned well how rural folk feel about him and he also knows what the racial mix is in rural PA. Do you?

The exact quote was..."You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them, and it's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

He wasn't talking about Philly or Pittsburgh...he was talking about rural PA...

Ever been to a small town in PA??? I have.

Andy,

Yes I've been to a small town in Pennsylvania.

You missed the point COMPLETELY. His comment wasn't about Whiteness. It was about a block, a segment of the population that (like all other people) assembles in some huddle for comfort. In this case, they assemble around these "institutions" or ideas (religion, guns, etc.) The point was about WHY they are seeking comfort.

Are you saying that Obama's African heritage precludes him from mentioning any hardship that any people may be having other than Africans?

He was talking about people in rural Pennsylvania. He wants to be President of America (including rural Pennsylvania). He is campaigning in rural Pennsylvania, why shouldn't he talk about what ales them? Why should he focus on their level of melanin in order to have THAT discussion?

Obama is just as White as he is Black. Actually, culturally, he is White. He was raised by Whites in a White world. He is more White than he is Black. The poor guy had to learn what being Black is. I am sure he still struggles with that.

Now what is your point?

Another thing, the African American community is used to assessing why certain of it's segments react to things in certain ways. We are also used to being analysed. I think its funny that Whites are so sensitive to the possibility of being "understood" (or condescended upon). I think its because many assume that what they do is the standard or "norm".

So there there now Andy, I understand why you are angry. Hug??? Kumbaya anyone?? Oh I forgot, you are bitter. Well I'll have you know that I watched The Sound of Music at least five times and I liked Kenny Roger's The Gambler!

Zedd you get me all wrong...I'm not angry...I've been happily married for 25 years to a little italian hottie...I have two beautiful daughters going to the local CC...two crazy dogs...I travel all over the world...I'm already retired once and working towards my second retirement...I make a good living...spend most weekends fishing on my boat(paid for)...all my vehicles are paid for...I have a nice little four bedroom house that's not in foreclosure...life is good for me!

Personally, I can remember when I was kid singing along to those sound of music songs...do a deer... and all that...Kenny Rogers never impressed me...either the singer/actor/chicken fryer or the baseball player!

I honestly believe from his and his wife's comments that the Obamas are the bitter ones...he seems to have a lot of issues beginning with his grandma and ending somewhere near the doors of his church! I'm sure, if he wasn't running for president, I might even like old Barry Obama!

About the only things that make me bitter are MCH and people that can't drive!

But I do like hugs!

Zedd: "I am amazed that he is given the time of day by any publication."

Ah yes, the ol' "if they don't agree with me, they should not be published" routine -- something which you pinkos excel at, Zedd. If the high and mighty Zedd -- who does no writing of his own -- doesn't concur, then it's "amazing" that any article pass the mainstream liberal censorship machine.

It's no wonder you named yourself after the last letter of the alphabet. It's of relatively low value in the English language, just as your attempt to paint me as a jack-booted racist is of little substance.

Did you perchance read where I referred to the British National Party as "scary far-Right whackos"? Why, pray tell, would I have written such words if I sympathized with what their racist sentiment? I think I have made it pretty clear that I consider such people below worms on the evolutionary scale.

Nice try, homeslice.

Dr. D: "See if your jaw doesn't drop just a teensy bit after reading it as a companion piece to this one."

D., I continue to wonder just why this article is so astonishing and jaw-dropping in relation to the other recent piece of mine which you refer to.

I argued in the previous piece about why the government allows so many people to while their days away on incapacity benefit when the only thing they're incapacitated by is the level of drugs and drink they consume. And it is a fact that the working class white community forms a large percentage of all those who are cheating the system.

In this article, I simply asked the question why, which I did not do in the last article. Why has the working-class white community been hit so hard? And when I thought about it, yes, I guess maybe I was able to see where the situation they find themselves in sprang from.

Just because I asked the question doesn't mean these chavvy so-and-sos are going to be my best friends. I still find them absolutely repulsive.

But there's a reason why some of these "working class" white communities are so awful, and that's what I tried to say in this piece.

If all this still rubs off as astonishing, then could you please tell me why?

Mark,

Let me clarify that I am happy that you are able to earn a living. If it is writing that allows you provisions then so be it.

However, you have demonstrated that you cling to ideas that have no rational bases because they are badly supported and you consistently articulate them loudly, using examples which don't fit the "argument". Your articles seem to reflect a laziness or daftness on your part. Its as if you think that if you state something no matter what it is, that in itself is enough.

How do you defend complaining about immigrants taking jobs in Britain when you are a non Brit who is holding down a job.

"Scary movie sound forget the instrument."

At the risk of violating this site's rules and providing actual information, it's called a theremin.

Oh mighty Zulu warrior princess,

This topic, the topic of perceived disenfranchisement of whites in their own country, was approached in an article dealing with a "scholarship" for white students by John Bambenek in Nov. 2006.

There, you called all the supporters of the author childish. I wrote a comment which I'll reproduce here with a slight modifications.

I'm curious, Zedd. The way I see it, if blacks, Mexicans, women and others can get free passes into American schools based on a history of discrimination against them, or because they can scare the living shit out of a college administration with the threat of violence, why not Jews? I remember wondering about this when all this shit got introduced in the late 60's - when I was still in university. It was the bullying blacks (burn baby! burn!), bullying (bra-burning) women, bullying (Young Lord) Puerto Ricans and others threatening riots who got the free passes.

Jews didn't threaten riots, so they didn't merit a free pass, eh? So, it's just like Kahane said. If you didn't bust a goy's head, you'd get shit. Again, Kahane was right! And today in England, Jews get crapped on all over by Moslem gangs. Boy, was Kahane right!!

Put simply, if you give someone a pass to get in because the society discriminates against him, ALL those who suffer societal discrimination deserve a pass also. THAT IS CALLED EQUAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW, A CONCEPT EMBEDDED IN THE CONSTITUTION OF 1787, A CONCEPT TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM ENGLISH COMMON LAW. The quotas and other forms of "affirmative action" in the United States simply have not worked. All they have done is make a mockery of EQUAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW, much the same way the Volstead Amendment (Prohibition) made a mockery of law enforcement in the 1920's. It appears, from the words of the author of this article on bitterness of working whites in America and Britain, penned by Mark Manning, that "positive discrimination" has been the same kind of success that "affirmative action" was in the States.

What is fairer to me, is a merit system. He who gets the best grades gets in and all the other bullshit gets eliminated. The same thing with hiring. Civil service should be color-blind (or colour-blind) in her majesty's dominions), as should employment.

I suppose admitting people to university or hiring them based on merit and demonstrated ability is childish, isn't it? What is more mature is to give in to bullies threatening riots and destruction, isn't it, oh mighty Zulu warrior princess?

Mark: It's your tone which is inconsistent. Your previous piece, while bemoaning the way the welfare system is run, laid the blame for the indolent underclass ultimately at their own feet. Now that you've turned your attention to immigration, suddenly these same folks are the victims in all this.

Liberal: Theremin - thank you! It was on the tip of my tongue, but I just couldn't summon the word therefrom.

"My charge is that you didn't address the blatantly racist tone of this article."

Isn't this from the same chick who thought Robert Mugabe was perfectly justified in hating Whites?

RJ

Is he not? Remember Rhodesia??? Is it me???

These are two very different things.

Are you alright???

Ruvy,


You obviously did not read the article and certainly not my response. Mark is talking about the U.K.

What are you on about???

Zedd,

1. I read this article three times and the other article twice over before sending this here.

2. I read the comment thread here and at the other article twice over before commenting here.

3. "Positive discrimination" in England, and "affirmative action" are both failures. I strongly suspect that a smart gal like you did not get where she is through handouts and free passes. When you get angry enough, you let the intelligence show. So for all the handouts to "women of color", I suspect that all you achieved, you achieved on your own.

4. Now go read my comment again, and pay attention this time....

Ruvy,


I am not sure what your post has to do with my comments other than that I am a Black person.

I don't know what that has to do with non-White immigrants in England WORKING (that means not getting a hand-out).

Ruvy, I do believe that Jews have had more reparations than any other group on the planet. Heck the 20billion a year that we've been doling out has got to count for something. And we had nothing to do with what happened in Germany. Give me a break. America is the land of African Americans. It is their home. They were screwed for hundreds of years and got a REALLY, really bad start (JUST 40 yrs ago). They are owed if not merely for the sake of the country benefiting from them catching up. Besides I know way too many idiotic Whites who hold positions of power for no good reason to be thinking about Blacks getting a free ride and taking over. I'm sure you do too.

By the way, African Americans as a whole are highly conservative when it comes to the issue of working hard for what you have. Ask a working class Black person about welfare and see the response. They'd make David Duke sound like a flower child. So please stop talking about BLACKS (including Africans, Caribbeans, Australoid et al) wanting welfare. Its off.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Now as to the anger of the sixties.... You have got to be kidding. After hundreds of years you really think that people wouldn't be smoking mad? Are you serious? You, the same hot head who boils over at any perceivable suggestion of Jew bashing. What do you think we are made out of? Think man.

Also, this dim wit (some may say) that wrote this article failed to ponder on just how many Brits are all over the globe living in splendor for generations in these people's countries of origin. Lets not mention Australia, New Zealand and the U.S. Would it be impolite to call him a dunderhead?

Zedd - I'm still waiting for you response to I'm not bitter...I guess you have none??? Nothing for a liberal to say to a true libertarian that loves his life?

come on ...at least a hug!!!

Andy, you sound so...

...lonely...

Ruvy re: Zedd: "Oh mighty Zulu warrior princess"

LOL. Ruvy, as always, you are spot on. However, the knee-jerks, like REMF and the Zulu warrior princess herself, would castrate you for that on the grounds of extreme, unforgiveable racism.

I believe the correct term for Zedd would be, "oh, African-American of the fairer sex ..."

"It's your tone which is inconsistent. Your previous piece, while bemoaning the way the welfare system is run, laid the blame for the indolent underclass ultimately at their own feet."

I am not being inconsistent, Dr. D., and I did no such thing. I blamed the government for allowing these people to exist the way they do. Read the previous piece again and tell me where I blame the white communities formerly known as "working class" for their own problems? I believe the point I made was that they're only too happy to take advantage of Government handouts, because they're defeatist. But, ultimately, who's responsible for their defeatism?
Not they themselves, and I never said so, neither then nor now, so will you please stop telling me what an incredible U-turn I performed? I believe I've been very consistent with my point in both articles.
And the point is, I think these "poor" whites could certainly be contributing a lot more to society, but I do not place the original blame for their situation with them. They did not do this to themselves.

"Also, this dim wit (some may say) that wrote this article failed to ponder on just how many Brits are all over the globe living in splendor for generations in these people's countries of origin. Lets not mention Australia, New Zealand and the U.S. Would it be impolite to call him a dunderhead?"

Would it be impolite to assume that the person who wrote this sincerely wishes that Caucasians had all died off during the Little Ice Age so that we would not be "living in splendour" in so many English-speaking countries?

With people like you around MCH, how could anyone ever be lonely!

...ban intra-racial breeding

"Would it be impolite to assume that the person who wrote this sincerely wishes that Caucasians had all died off during the Little Ice Age so that we would not be "living in splendour" in so many English-speaking countries?"
- Mark Edward Manning

I don't know about impolite, but definitely ignorant, since I'm caucasian and I agree with her.

Mark: OK, if you say so. Wasn't what I got from the articles, but still.

It does seem like a bit of a strange lament coming from a 'personal responsibility' conservative, though.

LOL. I knew you'd catch hell (from the usual suspects) for this article, Mark.

Again, kudos. Don't let the bastards mau-mau you into self-censorship.

Oh mighty Zulu warrior princess,

I am not sure what your post has to do with my comments other than that I am a Black person. I don't know what that has to do with non-White immigrants in England WORKING (that means not getting a hand-out).

Your race helps determine your comments - both here and at John Bambenek's article, which both deal with a sense of disenfranchisement among white people. I realize that you are only over-flowing with sympathy for poor whites in Britain finding themselves pushed out of work by cheaper non-white labor (says something about the fine results of positive discrimination - or of the standard greed of the standard cookie cutter employer). But if you read Mr. Manning's article with a bit of care, you'll notice he talks about eastern European labor coming for cheap, too. I'm willing to bet that a lot of that eastern European labor consists of Jews from White Russia, the Ukraine, and the Russian Federation. Of course, I could be wrong, but knowing Russian Jews, and their willingness to work at any job, so long as they indeed get paid, I would not be surprised.

So, "white", in this article, really means native Brits. There are non-white Russian Jews - probably six or seven in the whole world....

By the way, African Americans as a whole are highly conservative when it comes to the issue of working hard for what you have. Ask a working class Black person about welfare and see the response. They'd make David Duke sound like a flower child.

Yup, black Americans are a proud lot, and much prefer working for a living over working 'the man's' system for doling out money in return for dignity. I know this from personal experience. I do not have to ask.

But that doesn't change the fact that black students threatened violence to get "black studies" programs on various campuses, and that underlying all black-white relations, particularly in the States, is a fear of blacks rioting.

Perhaps you would prefer that black rioters in America be met with machine gun fire and hand grenades in the streets? The guilty liberals of the 1960's couldn't stomach such an idea, but you never really know with the generation of Angry Americans that seems to be arising today.

Ruvy, I do believe that Jews have had more reparations than any other group on the planet.... And we had nothing to do with what happened in Germany.

Sorry, Zulu princess, speaking both as a Jew and as a native born American with considerable knowledge of history, you are wrong.

American businessmen invested in Hitler, just as they invested in the Wahhabi. American businesses, like Ford, IBM, the firms owned by the Rockefellers and a score of others, actively did business with Nazi Germany at the same time that American soldiers were fighting the Nazi evil. In addition, the American military refused to ever bomb a railway track leading to a Nazi concentration or death camp, even after the Normandy invasion. That allowed the Nazis to carry out a lot of murder. Standing by while someone is murdered in plain sight makes you as guilty as the murderer, Zedd. So is refusing a potential murder victim refuge. In short, the American establishment was quite happy to do nothing while the Nazis carried out their own eugenics policy.

Heck, the 20 billion a year that we've been doling out has got to count for something.

What 20 billion, Zedd? Show me the money. There are seven millions of us here. We are a family of four (not counting the cat). Where has been our twelve grand a year? According to you, we're owed $84,000 from the treasury of the U.S. of A.

How many times do nitwits like you need to have it explained to them that American "aid" consists of a credit chit for the Ministry of Security to spend IN THE UNITED STATES??! How many times do nitwits like you need to have it explained to you that what you call "aid" is an instrument of imperial control?

Are you really that slow, oh mighty Zulu warrior princess?

But that is a different subject altogether, and not germane to this article.

The bottom line is that guilty liberal types in Britain and America have been bamboozled by threats of violence and rioting - in short, the only real law in both countries is the law of the rioter. And that is enough to make anybody angry.

Mark - For what it's worth, I just read those two articles and I don't see any contradiction. As you address different aspects of a central issue, you change emphasis. That's normal. (I'm not going to comment about whether or not the articles are right, because every country's welfare net is different, and I'm not a Brit.)

I've found that a couple of recent comments of mine have been misunderstood, maybe because readers expect cartoonish arguments from one extreme or the other. Nuance is frowned upon.