January 19, 2007

APPLIED DARWINISM IS A PACKAGE DEAL (via Tom Morin):

Tancredo's Dubious Allies (The Prowler, 1/16/2007, The Spectator)

According to campaign finance reports, one of Tancredo's biggest financial backers has been the family of Dr. John Tanton, the founder of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). Wall Street Journal editorial-page features writer Jason Riley wrote a devastating piece about the organization back in 2004, in which the group's pro-abortion and pro-eugenics roots were revealed.

Tanton is also one of the most prominent conservative financiers of Planned Parenthood in the United States, having helped found in the mid-1960s the first Planned Parenthood chapter in northern Michigan.

Tancredo appears to have embraced FAIR's extreme and repugnant policy positions, having accepted more than $20,000 from the FAIR PAC and personal donations from Tanton between 1996 and 2006.


There can't really be people dense enough not to realize that nativism, nationalism, racism, abortion, and eugenics all go hand in hand, can there?

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 19, 2007 10:16 AM
Comments

I think that there are rather a lot of people who think they don't all "go hand-in-hand."

Posted by: Brandon at January 19, 2007 10:28 AM

Appalling commentary Mr. Judd.

Posted by: iRi at January 19, 2007 10:41 AM

Yes, it's an appalling ideology.

Posted by: oj at January 19, 2007 12:29 PM

Brandon:

No, there are a lot who try to keep the other hand hidden.

Posted by: oj at January 19, 2007 12:37 PM

OJ,

If it is true that this conjunction is so obvious, how come so many people who are nativist and nationalist are anti-abortion?

Posted by: Brandon at January 19, 2007 1:27 PM

They aren't. Why do you think they want to Norplant women on welfare?

Posted by: oj at January 19, 2007 1:50 PM

I don't know, OJ. Ever watch Lou Dobbs for about, oh, 7 seconds? Some people definitely know what they're about.

Posted by: Dreadnought at January 19, 2007 2:18 PM

Yes, the leaders of the movement seem to have no doubt that it's about racial hygiene.

Posted by: oj at January 19, 2007 3:18 PM

What does Norplant have to do with abortion? Or are you saying that contraception is now the same as abortion?

Posted by: Brandon at January 19, 2007 3:42 PM

Man, this must be "everybody pile on OJ" day!

It's true enough that there's not a perfect 1.000 correlation between support for abortion* and support for socialism, or closed borders, etc., but OJ is right in a very important respect. Once you've decided that some category of people (e.g., Jews, Mexicans, welfare recipients, infants and toddlers, people in nursing homes--pick any category you like) is of inferior dignity to whatever category you happen to belong to, it becomes incrementally easier to kill them or at least treat them badly. See, e.g., Peter Singer's argument that infants and Terri Schiavo are not "persons"; Margaret Sanger's lifelong campaign to introduce birth control to the black population. One of the more eye-opening experiences I've had was a conversation about fifteen years ago with a co-worker--a good, progressive, compassionate, liberal with a couple or three graduate degrees who supports racial equality and gay rights and feeding Ethiopia--who said some rather classist things about some cigarette-smoking "baby mamas" at the nearby bus stop and finished with "that's why we need to keep abortion legal, because people like that shouldn't be having kids."


(*-There is a non-trivial subset of male abortion supporters who do so not out of ideology, but because it allows them to impregnate random doxies at will without being tagged for 18 years of child support. They are most properly referred to as "selfish pigs."

Posted by: Mike Morley at January 19, 2007 3:55 PM

Every day is "everybody pile on OJ" day!

Posted by: Brandon at January 19, 2007 3:58 PM

Why do you think they support forced contraception?

Posted by: oj at January 19, 2007 4:02 PM

Racism, but that isn't the point. You act like this is a such a seamlessly, coherent philosophy that only a fool would fail to see it. But most people fail to see it. Most abortion supporters are anti-nativist and anti-racist. Most nationalists are conservative and anti-abortion.

Posted by: Brandon at January 19, 2007 4:52 PM

There's a difference between patriotism and nationalism and nativism. Tom Tancredo and Pat Buchanan (and, to a lesser extent, guys like Sherrod Brown) are blood-and-soil nationalists, a philosophy which is not all that compatible with being an American patriot.

Posted by: Mike Morley at January 19, 2007 5:15 PM

Nationalism and nativism are the same thing.

Posted by: oj at January 19, 2007 5:34 PM

No, most abortion supporters are racist and support it because they think it will control the wog population. Nationalists share the goal.

Posted by: oj at January 19, 2007 5:36 PM

Please explain why you delete h-man's comments that use the racial slur "wetback" but don't delete your own comments that use the racial slur "wog."

Posted by: Bryan at January 20, 2007 10:28 AM

Please explain why you delete h-man's comments that use the racial slur "wetback" but don't delete your own comments that use the racial slur "wog."

Posted by: Bryan at January 20, 2007 10:31 AM

OJ,

I must have missed that part of the planned parenthood presentation. But that's a neat way to support an argument. Just impute motives to people that they don't actually express. Because that's what they "really" think.

Posted by: Brandon at January 20, 2007 10:42 AM

What do you think Planned Parenthood is but a eugenic front?

www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html

Posted by: oj at January 20, 2007 1:45 PM

Because I'm sarcastic. H is a racist.

Posted by: oj at January 20, 2007 1:46 PM

One feels contempt and loathing for indiscipline, barbarity and social pathology. For whatever reason, these things are present, of at leat perceived to be present more among members of one race than among others.

Tell us, is it "racist" to disdain to these things? Must we approve them to prove that we are not that way?

Of course, the opposite is true. The non-racist position is to recognize that culture is learned and chosen. A person of any color may attain high culture, just at one of any color may degrade himself with barbaric ways of thinking and acting.

Remember that it was the Nineteenth Century racist theorists, such as d'Gobineau, who taught that culture was racial, and that different groups of humanity were either "culture-creating," "culture-bearing," or "culture-destroying."

We would laugh at such a view nowadays, call it childish inanity. But that is exactly the position taken by the mountebanks who accuse us of racism because we pass judgement against uncivilized behaviors.

Posted by: Lou Gots at January 22, 2007 7:32 AM

Judeo-Christians laugh at it, because it's obviously inane.

It's even funnier because those who believe it are more barbaric than the "races" they hate.

Posted by: oj at January 22, 2007 8:35 AM
« FIGGY COOKIES: | Main | NOTE WHO'S MISSING?: »