The Graph That Explains the Migrant Crises of 2016-2100

The Graph That Explains the Migrant Crises of 2016-2100, by Steve Sailer, who put togther this graph based on the U.N.’s 2015 revised population estimates:

Population 1950-2010 Africa, ME, Europe


That’s probably not going to happen due to some combination of (A) intelligent self-restraint, (B) mass migration, and (C) Malthusian Nightmares (war, famine, disease, etc. etc.) ….

Keep in mind that there’s not a one to one relationship between population growth and emigration. In general, people try to assess whether the future at home looks brighter than the present. But people in Africa and the Middle East can see their countries’ futures will be more crowded and constrained.

[A]t present, white people don’t seem to be making much of an effort to facilitate and encourage reasonable family planning in Africa. Because that would be, you know, racist. Which is the worst thing in the world, much worse than the U.N.’s population forecast.

So, who’s in favor of open borders and paying benefits to refugees that are 10 times the average income in sub-Saharan Africa? Who thinks European culture is, to use their favorite word, sustainable?

Political correctness gone mad on campus

Political correctness gone mad on campus, by Clarissa Bye. The Institute of Public Affairs says PC is stifling free speech on Australian university campuses and student’s hurt feelings are being prioritized over academic debate. Matthew Lesh said:

Students are being persecuted over their political views, while growing policy guidelines on “acceptable” speech are curtailing academic freedoms

We have policies that now forbid sarcasm and making people feel “uncomfortable. We need to have a public debate about this.

Universities depend on free and open intellectual debate. It is impossible to develop and discuss ideas in an atmosphere where certain concepts are restricted.

[A]n attempt to set up a men’s shed group at Sydney University was blocked as “too masculine” — but allowed to go ahead after they appointed a Queer Officer, a Women’s Officer and an Ethno Culture Officer. … There was a women’s space and a queer space … men have a high suicide rates and there’s not necessarily anywhere on campus where we can access resources informally.


Keven Donnelly at the Daily Telegraph opines:

Any curriculum that defends Western political and legal systems and way of life is attacked on the [University of Sydney’s Religion State and ­Society Research] Network’s website for replicating and reinforcing what is described as “the socially constructed concept of whiteness”. …

Ah, our civilizational rivals want us to just commit suicide already:

The network, in part ­funded by the Australian and Malaysia Institute and Council of Australian Arab Relations and associated with Muslim-majority states and the Muslim diaspora, calls on Australian universities “to dismantle the white curriculum” and to “criticise the ­reproduction of whiteness”.

What, so we can be like Saudi Arabia? Muslim clerics would soon make a few changes to the lifestyles of the PC.

The re-emergence of the political correctness movement on university and college campuses in Australia, America and Britain provides further examples of the cultural left’s antipathy to Western culture and its tendency to rewrite history.

See the earlier furore over university guidelines around indigenous history.

Europe at the Edge of the Abyss

Europe at the Edge of the Abyss, by Victor Davis Hanson. Normal nations would close their borders after attacks:

After suffering serial terrorist attacks from foreign nationals and immigrants, a normal nation-state would be expected to make extraordinary efforts to close its borders and redefine its foreign policy in order to protect its national interests. But a France or a Belgium is not quite a sovereign nation any more, and thus does not have complete control over its national destiny or foreign relations.

The new German problem is ideological:

As part of the European Union, France and Belgium have, for all practical purposes, placed their own security in the hands of an obdurate Angela Merkel’s Germany, which is hellbent on allowing without audit millions of disenchanted young Middle Eastern males into its territory, with subsequent rights of passage into any other member of the European Union that they wish. The 21st-century “German problem” is apparently not that of an economic powerhouse and military brute warring on its neighbors, but that of an economic powerhouse that uses its wealth and arrogant sense of social superiority to bully its neighbors into accepting its bankrupt immigration policies and green ideology.

The European immigration disaster is more than Islam:

Europe’s immigration policy is a disaster — and for reasons that transcend the idiocy of allowing the free influx of young male Muslims from a premodern, war-torn Middle East into a postmodern, pacifist, and post-Christian Europe. Europe has not been a continent of immigrants since the Middle Ages. It lacks the ingredients necessary to assimilate, integrate, and intermarry large numbers of newcomers each year: There is no dynamic and fluid economy, no confidence in its own values, no belief that class and race are incidental, not essential, to one’s persona, no courage to assume that an immigrant made a choice to leave a worse place for a better one. And all this is in the context of a class-bound hierarchy masked and excused by boutique leftism.

Immigration as a leftist tool for big government:

The rapid influx of vast numbers of unassimilated, uneducated, poor, and often illegal newcomers may violate every rule of successful immigration policy. Yet the onrush does serve the purposes of the statist, who demagogues for an instantaneous equality of result. Bloc voters, constituents of bigger government, needy recipients of state largesse, and perennial whiners about inequality are all fodder for European multicultural leftists …

Big government hobbles Europe demographically:

Europeans are not having children for lots of reasons. A static and fossilized economy without much growth gives little hope to a 20-something European that he or she can get a good job, buy a home, have three children, and provide for those offspring lives with unlimited choices. Instead, the young European bides his time, satisfying his appetites, as a perpetual adolescent who lives in his parents’ flat, seeks to milk the system, and waits for someone to die at the tribal government bureau. …

Socialism also insidiously takes responsibility away from the individual and transfers it to the anonymous, but well-funded, state. The ancient Greek idea that one changes one’s children’s diapers so that one day they can change his is considered Neanderthal or just crudely utilitarian. Why seek children and the honor of raising and protecting them when the state can provide all without the bother and direct expense?

The author’s recommendation:

As a general rule, whatever Europe is now doing, we [the US] should do the opposite — for our very survival in an increasingly scary world.

Libya threatens to open migrant floodgates into Europe

Libya threatens to open migrant floodgates into Europe. The EU recently agreed to generously dole out money to Turkey to keep its refugees at home. Incentive, anyone?

Libya will “open the floodgates” and let thousands pour into Europe if the West does not help combat illegal immigration, officials have warned.

More blame?

Is this the Libyan government’s fault for misdiverting funds, the West’s fault for not following through, or just an omnishambles? Nobody’s saying—and the media doesn’t seem particularly curious to find out, or to put the pieces together. Of course, if Obama were a Republican there would be non-stop, wall-to-wall coverage of this continuing disaster, and if Hillary Clinton were a Republican the press would never let anybody forget for a minute that this is the policy she once hoped would be the star in her crown.

The Battle for the Bathrooms

The Battle for the Bathroom, by Matthew Hennessey. US states are passing “bathroom bills” — boys must use the little boy’s room, girls must use the little girl’s room.

Not so fast, Bigoty McBigotface.

To the radicals behind the push to let transgender individuals use any bathrooms they like, the issue has become the latest in a long-string of valiant last stands against the intolerance and hatred of the traditionally minded. Like same-sex marriage — always less a core conviction than an effective cudgel to use against conservatives — this business of having the tiny minority of gender-confused people dictate to the rest of us how we should order society is likely to become the Civil Rights Issue of Our Time™.

Section 18C may render all speech “inoffensive”

Section 18C may render all speech “inoffensive”, by Augusto Zimmermann, Joshua Forrester and Lorraine Finlay, argue in a new book that section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act may be unconstitutional, and in any case its use to silence debate is undemocratic and has dire consequences for freedom of speech in Australia.

Consider the recent case of Cindy Prior at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT). Ms Prior ejected three students from an Indigenous-only computer lab in 2013 because they weren’t Indigenous. The students soon posted on Facebook: “Just got kicked out of the unsigned Indigenous computer room. QUT stopping segregation with segregation,” and “I wonder where the white supremacist computer lab is.” Dr Sharon Hayes, a QUT lecturer

…stated at the time that “it seems a bit silly” to evict students from a computer lab for not being Indigenous when there are computers not being used. She apparently suggested that Ms Prior might have been in breach of QUT anti-discrimination policy by asking students who visited the Oodgeroo Unit whether they were Indigenous.

Ms Prior said she felt “sick, furious and distraught” after the comments of Dr Hayes.

According to Ms Prior, all these comments have caused her to suffer “offence, embarrassment, humiliation and psychiatric injury”. She says she didn’t feel safe and was worried about being verbally or physically assaulted. She claims she went home on that day feeling sick and stressed, as she did not feel safe and was worried about verbal or physical attack.

Ms Prior is suing the students and Dr Hayes for $247,570 under 18C. The Australian Human Rights Commission determined in August last year that there was “no reasonable prospect of the matter being settled by conciliation”, so Ms Prior filed her claim in the Federal Circuit Court.

Naturally, the very fact that a claim can be made on the basis of these facts in the first place highlights the problems with the low harm threshold established by section 18C. In many respects, “the process is the punishment”, particularly in a context where an allegation of racism inevitably carries with it special opprobrium in the community.

Who discriminated against whom, on the basis of race? What a “chilling effect” this has.

Imagine If Conservatives in Academia Could Safely ‘Come Out’

Imagine If Conservatives in Academia Could Safely ‘Come Out’, by Virginia Postrel, who review a new book “Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University,” by Shields and Dunn.

The modern academy pays lip service to diversity. Yet as a “stigmatized minority,” the authors note, right-of-center professors feel pressure to hide their identities, in many cases consciously emulating gays in similarly hostile environments. “I am the equivalent of someone who was gay in Mississippi in 1950,” a prominent full professor told Shields and Dunn. He’s still hiding because he hopes for honors that depend on maintaining his colleagues’ good will. “If I came out, that would finish me,” he said.

Conservatives nowadays nearly always hide their views until they’re safely tenured, a deception that is more than a temporary hardship:

But the dishonesty corrodes the mission of the university. For instance, a political scientist at a research university told the authors that he wouldn’t assign works by Friedrich Hayek in his political economy class before he was tenured. His fears of political ostracism thereby deprived students of exposure to an influential 20th-century thinker.

Complete dominance of the academy in the arts leads many progressives to assume conservatives are dopey:

The paucity of conservative professors also gives liberal scholars a misleading picture of the American right, reinforcing the idea that conservatism is incompatible with intellectual rigor. Liberal academics picture Rush Limbaugh rather than an intellectual peer.

Give it five minutes

Give it five minutes, by Jason Fried. Insights from someone who admits that he used to be a hothead: “whenever anyone said anything, I’d think of a way to disagree.” His life changed when someone responded:

Man, give it five minutes. It’s fine to disagree, it’s fine to push back, it’s great to have strong opinions and beliefs, but give my ideas some time to set in before you’re sure you want to argue against them.

Fried writes:

“Five minutes” represented “think”, not react. … Learning to think first rather than react quick is a life long pursuit. It’s tough. I still get hot sometimes when I shouldn’t. …

There’s also a difference between asking questions and pushing back. Pushing back means you already think you know. Asking questions means you want to know. Ask more questions. …

There are two things in this world that take no skill: 1. Spending other people’s money and 2. Dismissing an idea.

Dismissing an idea is so easy because it doesn’t involve any work. You can scoff at it. You can ignore it. You can puff some smoke at it. That’s easy. The hard thing to do is protect it, think about it, let it marinate, explore it, riff on it, and try it. The right idea could start out life as the wrong idea.

Political correctness is characterized by a learned canon (though it changes over time, often in contradictory ways). Ever notice how quick PC people are to shoot if someone dares to say something non-PC? Notice too how PC people are attracted to big government, which is all about spending other people’s money? And the organizations in Australia that do the most to teach the PC canon are creatures of big government — the ABC and the universities? No skill required…

hat-tip Matthew

Why Are Millennial Men Such ‘Wimps’?

Why Are Millennial Men Such ‘Wimps’? Tomi Lahren lets loose with some political incorrectness:

Some choice quotes:

Is it just me, or have men gotten really soft these days? …

This has nothing to do with sexuality. It has to do with the helplessness of today’s young men. It seems few can change a light bulb let alone fix a flat tire or change oil, and that makes for pretty slim pickings for the females out there looking for a match.

Chivalry is all but dead, and so is manliness. And by the way, wearing a flannel shirt and having a beard doesn’t make you a man if you still can’t change a tire and are scared of the dark. It seems like millennial men either don’t have jobs or are still using their parents’ credit cards to buy us drinks at the bar…

So whose fault is it? Is it our fault, ladies? Are we getting too strong? Nah, I don’t buy that. See, a real man knows how to handle a strong woman, so this isn’t our problem. Maybe it’s the way boys are raised these days: fatherless homes and no male role models. It’s hard to learn how to be a man with no man around. …

Please teach your sons to be men, because the women of the world are tired of the boys.

Helen Smith points to “the misandric legal and political culture and how it affects young men these days — that is the real problem.” Commmenter bggatdl notes:

“Boys being boys” no longer exists. Now, when a boy acts like a boy, he is really ADHD or some other made-up diagnosis and needs to be medicated to almost a state of stupor. Boys are taught from a young age that showing interest in a girl is not natural, but a violation of her safe space, sexual harassment, and even a potential sexual assault.

Boys and men are crapped all over in every TV commercial. …

I feel bad for today’s young guys. I’m happily married for years in a mutually respectful relationship where my wife and I can have a disagreement or argument and she won’t run to the nearest divorce lawyer because she isn’t like the younger women today that are applauded for leaving their men and being “independent.” I have a Facebook friend who was in her mid-30’s, left her husband of 12 years and now sees her two kids half the time … because she “found a new hot guy and feels alive again!” All of her friends are like “you go girl!,” “you gotta live for you” and comments like that. No one seems to notice she destroyed a marriage to a good man and wrecked her kids’ lives in pursuit of a new relationship. Her husband, a real good, hard-working guy, is insulted by her for “working too much” (as if the money for the 5-bedroom house falls out of the sky), for not being as much fun, and not going to the gym as much. And her friends are like “his loss, girl!”

Bottom line: Men are crapped all over, and society encourages it, almost demands it, And many are checking out. I don’t blame them. … Men today are told they’d better put up with it, or they are the dirtbags and the problem.