"I favor Western Civilization not because it is white, but because it is liberal"
As do I. However, it seems clear to me that liberalism works best in largely white nations.
High-IQ Asian nations like Japan and S. Korea are not as free as lower-IQ white countries like Great
Britain (for now anyway). Godless Capitalist has insinuated that liberty-squelching gun control
legislation is primarily due to the disproportionate gun crimes committed by blacks.* In Europe, the
disproportionate sex crimes committed by Arab men will surely curtail the freedoms of white
Europeans in some fashion. I agree with you that racialism tends to be illiberal. But aren't the
concessions of freedom that whites must make in multi-cultural societies to keep crime-prone minorities
from running wild just as illiberal?
* That British blacks are disproportionately violent, particularly with guns, is common knowledge. I don't
have the dates, but I suspect that the application of draconian gun control measures in the U.K. coincided
with increased black immigration from Africa and the Carribrean. Does anyone have dates or stats on
this?
well, much of southern europe was illiberal until the 1990s-and there is still some debate about whether
france & germany for instance are truly liberal-though compared to the rest of the world.....
True, but Germany, France, and Southern Europe are doing a much better job of liberalism than most
Muslim nations. Maybe there exists a certain "cultural aptitude" for freedom that is present in varying
degrees most world cultures, but completely absent in some. And, it must be remembered, the
aforementioned nations seem more or less able to HANDLE these new freedoms, as most black African
nations struggle with them.
Why do you think South Korea is illiberal? It used to be but it and Taiwan are evolving into fairly
vigorous democracies. Generalisations are a bad thing but having known many East Asians (or rather
members of the Chinese diaspora to be specific) they are instinctively what would in US parlance be called
irreligious moderate Republicans.
"But aren't the concessions of freedom that whites must make in multi-cultural societies to keep crime-
prone minorities from running wild just as illiberal?" -- duende
Duende, what is the crime-prone minority in South Africa that causes whites there to have to make
illiberal concessions of freedom?
At this point, with North Korea and China so unstable, I worry about those fledgeling democracies.
Basically, I'm saying that I am skeptical that mass immigration from Oriental countries (e.g. what G.C.
has promoted) will be an unmixed blessing as far as American democracy goes. Democracy will
obviously develop in a different direction in these nations, in ways that might not be compatible with
traditional American democracy. Orientals clearly function better in a democracy than Hispanics, but at
this point I remain a tad skeptical, though open to persuasion.
The word is "Asians." That's the word you're looking for.
Posted by: Justin Slotman at January 6, 2003 02:25 PMOh, you used "Asian" in the main post. I'm being an ass. Never mind.
Posted by: Justin Slotman at January 6, 2003 02:29 PMJason: "East Asians (or rather members of the Chinese diaspora to be specific) they are instinctively what
would in US parlance be called irreligious moderate Republicans."
Yeah, but unfortunately their university-educated kids end up either:
A) Complaining that white culture is evil, while at the same time protesting and raising all hell any time a
mainstream media outlet implies through their portrayal of an Asian person that that Asian-Americans
are any different than whites, or
B) politically apathetic, with rare moments of political action orchestrated by their peers in category (A)
Posted by: Eric Lien at January 6, 2003 04:57 PMEric
I dunno but the impression I get from looking at Asian American websites is that for some strange reason
the later generation Asian-Americans are more alienated from US culture than Asian-Australians are
from Australia.
And as for politics, etc no more politically apathetic than the Australian population but if anything
probably more well informed. I would also characterise the Asians of my generation (i.e. university
educated, 1 st gen) as politically moderate conservative/libertarian - I'd say 90% of my Asian friends vote
conservative - if anything the older generation is more likely to vote Left but only because they think the
Right are racist.
Jason Soon: for some strange reason the later generation Asian-Americans are more alienated from US
culture than Asian-Australians are from Australia.
I would say that this is partly because Australia is a younger country than America, with a less defined
culture and national traditions and symbols, and is more secular, all of which make it easier for Asians to
fit into the nation and society.
Justin,
The U.K. has solved the terminological problem of having large South Asian and East Asian
populations by dubbing the former "Asians" and the latter "Orientals". I think this is far more pithy than
saying "East Asians" and "South Asians". As a writer I like efficiency in words, and as a conservative I
get annoyed with wasting brain cells to rememorize the ever-changing names of different ethnic groups.
No offense meant, but if you take my use of "Oriental" that way, get over it.
British gun control began around 1920 in reaction to Communism. I have the impression that Black
immigration there is mostly postwar.
Duende, North Korea is not unstable. In fact, it is so stable that its government has been able to remain in
power in spite of a famine and widespread poverty.
There is a tendency among Westerners to label dangerous governments as "unstable" and dangerous
leaders as "crazy". But revolutions rarely happen and people can be evil and highly dangerous without
being crazy. Hitler was not crazy. Neither were Stalin, Pol Pot or Mao. Well, Kim Jog-il is not crazy
either. He's isolated and he and the people around him are paranoid. But they are not crazy and they are in
firm control.