February 28, 2010

Destabilization through illegal immigration in Greece

Greece over the past decade has become a source country concerning the entrance of an unspecified amount of illegal immigrants, mostly from Asian and African states, that enter mainly through the Greek-Turkish borders and with the complicity or indifference of the authorities of the neighboring country, despite the bilateral and international agreements that have been sealed for this matter.

Illegal immigration is actually an asymmetrical threat aimed at destabilizing the Greek state and it is of critical interest to view it under the prism of Ankara’s stance concerning Greece’s role in the region. In simple terms Turkey uses the masses of desperate people being gathered in its territory in order to inflict great losses in the Greek economy and alter its ethnic and social profile. The latest information that have verified the above writings are videos and images depicting the Turkish Coast Guard deploring immigrants in the Greek Islands; that were shown in Greek national TV without any denial from the other side.

* Turkey as a Eurasian Crossing

The Turkish authorities have announced from time to time that they expel some 100,000 illegal immigrants from their territory each year, whilst between 1995 and 2005 they managed to expel over 575,000 and arrest 6,100 smugglers. Even though the flow of people from the East to the West seems unstoppable, and an 8 billion USD illegal industry has been created, cantered on the main metropolitan Turkish centers.

The same criminal groups that are apt into securing great earnings from the modern slave trade, are also involved in the narcotics and arms trade, thus presenting the real magnitude of the threat involved which is the multiplication of organized crime activities and the existence of a multifunctional parallel crime syndicated state in Turkey that is also a threat to Greek and European stability.

The prices for a “crossing” between the Turkish shore and the Aegean Islands – a few miles apart- costs from 2,000 to 5,000 US dollars and for an illegal route from Turkey to Northern Europe the smugglers demand up to 15,000 USD. The immigrants from the African countries travel to Izmir, Istanbul and Mersin through vessels crossing the Mediterranean Sea, whilst Arabs come mostly through the Syrian-Turkish borders.

The Asians (Pakistani, Kurds, and Afghani) pass through the Iranian-Turkish borders and it has to be noted that both countries do not have a visa regime.

Therefore the flow of people from Turkey is in fact unconstrained and there has not been pressure to Ankara to alter this state of affairs with its neighbor.

At this point it has to be noted that between Middle East, Iran and Greece there is only one country apart and that is Turkey. That is one of the main reasons USA does not lift the visa between Greece and the States because there is a real threat of terrorists, criminals and other traveling through the Atlantic once reaching Greek territory. As it was mentioned before that is much easier that originally though, judging by the fact that from Central Asia to the Aegean the border controls are either lax or non existent.

Once reaching Turkish territory the immigrants are literally stashed in old warehouses or decaying apartments and wait for their transfer. In the meantime -a period up to 2 years- they work as underpaid manual workers in the local tourist and industry businesses, thus minimizing labour costs in Turkey.

Which is why some European companies want Turkey in the EU... to exploit that cheap slave labor. Of course that would be another way to drag European workers into poverty, right?

Currently it can be safely estimated that there are 1 million illegal immigrants “in transit” from Turkey to Europe and many of them will end up in Greece and allocate themselves in the newly founded ghettos in the center of Athens, in the port of Patras or in various locations in the countryside, thus adding up to the 2.5 million illegal aliens already present in Greece.

Greece and Turkey had signed a bilateral agreement concerning organized crime and illegal immigration (17/12/2005), although it has not been practically put into action and most importantly Athens already accuses the other side that it does not conform at all in the obligations written in the official documents, such as re-acceptance of expelled people from Greece that had left previously the Turkish coastline.

* The Stakes Involved

Greece is on the front line of the European periphery, meaning its actions have wider ramifications for the overall security architecture of the Continent.

There are three parameters by which the issue can be viewed upon.Firstly there seems to be a trial by the Turkish state to exhaust the Greek security, police and military forces that apart from their conventional duties have to deal with the increasing problem of persons crossing daily and in great numbers the borders in land and in the sea. Additionally to that the creation of large Muslim communities will play a destabilizing role concerning the societal balances of Greece as recent experience in France, UK, Italy and the Netherlands has shown.

Moreover the undocumented aliens are responsible for the introduction of hygiene issues into the Greek territory and diseases such as tuberculosis that were almost extinct, have gain in strength recently. Further the Greek state budget is pressured due to the increased health, education, security, humanitarian and transport needs of a large number of people that don’t pay taxes nor do they bring capital into the country but instead they transfer abroad the largest amount of the wages they gain in Greece.

Lastly illegal immigration is a suitable terrain for the infiltration of European space by terrorists, criminals, espionage agents and any other category of the population wishing to avoid control and detention. Thus the future of Europe and Greece is being compromised due the lack of the basic principles of security in the international system, which is the verification of the identity of the passengers, a key factor for the existence of a stable and peaceful environment in the present day globalized era.

* Estimations

Athens should realize that the time has passed where the issue could have been resolved though the use of intellectual debates and non-practical dialogue between oblivious politicians.Actually the climax is near judging by the fact that the overpopulation in the East and the global economic crisis will arrive shortly, thus creating further strain in the borderlines.

* Therefore some practical steps are needed:

The domestic intelligence network of Greek informants and collaborators that cooperate with their Turkish counterparts should be neutralized and disbanded before any sustainable gain could be made.

The role of Turkey as discussed above and the regime relating to border crossings in the Middle East, should be made vocally known by the Greek Foreign Ministry to the global forums, conferences and the international organizations. The pampering of states and regimes that degrade the security of other societies should be brought to a halt and the full consequences of their actions should be publicly known.

For the moment the Greek diplomatic authorities are extravagantly at ease with the current distressful situation and completely out of tune in relation with the above proposed action.

Moreover the Greek patrol guards and teams should be able to make sensible use of their light firearm arsenal, since illegal crossing is in direct violation of a country’s independence and the numbers are so great that they constitute a sort of an invasion.

Furthermore that does not mean the killing of innocent civilians, but rather the use of hard power composed by the new technology “non lethal weapons”, the targeting of the smugglers-criminals involved, even the use of psychological warfare techniques into the territory of the neighboring country before even the preparation of the crossings begins.

The Greek state could also make use of its bilateral relations with countries such as Pakistan, Iran, Syria and others in order to persuade and pressure the foreign governments to take responsibility for their citizens ending up in Greece, many times without documents and passports. The creation of online data-bases with the latest techniques of facial recognition that verify for the identity of every immigrant can assist to that. It has to be noted that any initiative by Athens to those states will only have a minimal effect since the governments in there are mostly interested in dealing with their social issues by allowing the immigration of large numbers of unemployed and unskilled citizens and there are also indications concerning the initiatives by Islamic groups to form strong communities in Europe by exploiting the religious faith of the newly comers.

The stance of Greece should be in overall terms, that of a state that considers it s territory a “non suitable illegal immigration route” and make it know in an international level. Although the Greek governmental officials seem rather hesitant into implementing the above recommendations, the historical necessity and the international obligations of the country might activate them rather soon than latter.

1. Turkey is actively involved in the immigrants invasion of Europe
2. Turkey 's intentions are hostile
3. The US push Turkey on the EU but protect themselves with a special passport regime for Greece, as they know Greece is swamped with illegal immigrants from Turkey
4. Obviously the US aim at destabilizing Europe

Destabilization through illegal immigration in greece

Jews and immigration policy — Again

Kevin MacDonald: A friend sent along Steve Sailer’s review of historian Otis L. Graham’s Immigration Reform and America’s Unchosen Future. Misleading title. American immigration policy was chosen. It just wasn’t chosen by the vast majority of the American people, and this is Graham’s point. As I have tried to show, it was chosen by the organized Jewish community and put into action as a result of Jewish political pressure and financial wherewithal. Graham notes that the successful immigration restriction of 1924 was seen by historians as one of the reforms of the Progressive Era’s campaign against the excesses of capitalism, since immigration lowered wages.

It’s fair to say, however, that Jews never saw it that way and there’s at least a fair amount of truth in the idea that the 1924 law was enacted to achieve an ethnic status quo that Jews saw as unfair to them. (Jewish immigrants were correctly seen by restrictionists as disproportionately involved in political radicalism, and it was generally a period of ethnic defense of White America.)

As Sailer’s review shows, Jews have not ceased seeing the 1924 law as exclusion of Jews. Graham points out that Jews live in the past when it comes to thinking about immigration: “the “filiopietistic” urge (“of or relating to an often excessive veneration of ancestors …”) is particularly strong among Jewish media figures. Italian-Americans, in contrast, tend to approach the immigration policy question by thinking about the future rather than by obsessing over the past. This anti-rational emotional reflex about immigration contributes to the kitschy quality of MSM discourse on the topic.”

In other words, Jews see the 1924 immigration law as part of their lachrymose history among Europeans, It’s just another example of irrational anti-Semitism — an example that warrants the evil nature of the people and culture who created it. Since, as Sailer notes, Jews constitute half of the most influential media figures, and since the other half are rigorously vetted to exclude anyone who opposes what amounts to the Jewish consensus on immigration, there really isn’t much real debate in the above-ground media.

Of course, there is a lot of self-censorship. Graham recounts the example of Theodore White, then the most influential journalist in America (and a Jew), refusing to publish his views on immigration. “‘My New York friends would never forgive me. No, you guys are right [on immigration], but I can’t go public on this.’ ” Sailer quotes Graham:

Hearing White’s agitated response, I had my first glimpse of the especially intense emotional Jewish version of that taboo [against immigration skepticism]. His whole heritage, and his standing with all his Jewish friends, was imperiled (he was certain) if he went public with his worries about the state of immigration. …

I did not suspect it then, but this would become an important subtheme of our experience as immigration reformers. American Jews were exceptionally irrational about immigration for well-known reasons. They were also formidable opponents, or allies, in any issue of public policy in America.

In a nutshell, that’s the problem with Jews: They get what they want and what they want is not necessarily what others want (leading to conflicts of interest) or what is good for the country as a whole. It really wouldn’t matter if the only group that wanted open borders was African Americans. But it matters greatly that Jews do.

Incidentally, Otis Graham’s brother Hugh Davis Graham, agrees with me on the forces behind the 1965 law. He wrote in his 2002 book Collision Course (pp. 56-57):

Most important for the content of immigration reform [i.e., loosening], the driving force at the core of the movement, reaching back to the 1920s, were Jewish organizations long active in opposing racial and ethnic quotas. These included the American Jewish Congress, the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, and the American Federation of Jews from Eastern Europe. Jewish members of the Congress, particularly representatives from New York and Chicago, had maintained steady but largely ineffective pressure against the national origins quotas since the 1920s…. Following the shock of the Holocaust, Jewish leaders had been especially active in Washington in furthering immigration reform. To the public, the most visible evidence of the immigration reform drive was played by Jewish legislative leaders, such as Representative Celler and Senator Jacob Javits of New York. Less visible, but equally important, were the efforts of key advisers on presidential and agency staffs. These included senior policy advisers such as Julius Edelson and Harry Rosenfield in the Truman administration, Maxwell Rabb in the Eisenhower White House, and presidential aide Myer Feldman, assistant secretary of state Abba Schwartz, and deputy attorney general Norbert Schlei in the Kennedy-Johnson administration.

Survival of the Fattest

Posted by James Jackson on January 22, 2010

Enter a London coffee house or restaurant, check into a hotel, or wander by a building-site, and you will find the workforce almost exclusively foreign. Yet British unemployment continues to surge towards 2.5 million. Something is rotten in the heart of modern Britain, for that heart is the underclass and its malady is caused by welfare.

A process of reverse evolution is in train. It is no longer the fittest or the brightest, the fastest or the best, who survive and thrive in our contemporary jungle. It is the moronic and the bovine, the fattest and the least productive, who are cosseted and subsidized and excused their behavior. Because of it, they breed. After all, sex is free and the State will ever pick up the pieces. Collect £200 and Get out of Jail for free. While the benighted and exploited middle-classes pay their tax, marry late, and have fewer children, the underclass procreates with abandon. They have every reason, and no reason not to.

As Africa has systematically swallowed a trillion dollars in aid with precious little to show for it, so welfare at home has rendered a burgeoning social subgroup unable or unwilling to pull its (now grotesquely bloated) weight. The middle class pays dearly—housing these people, schooling them, nursing them for their myriad addictions and self-induced complaints, and then being mugged by them as they trudge home from their highly-taxed jobs.

Rather than imbue an ethic of hard work, discipline, and responsibility, through a process of handouts and hand-wringing we have promoted instead a culture in which it pays to be a dropout and where a man need not lift a finger (let alone a pick, shovel, mallet, chisel, or spanner) in order to earn a wage. Crack, smack, and street-robbery are so much more rewarding. Whoever imagined nothing is for free was profoundly wrong. The underclass not only rejects the notion there is nobility in work, it cannot actually see the point.

“I long to hear a politician ask the question: If you have so little money, what on earth persuaded you to have five children? We have stripped the underclass of pride, motivation, and personal responsibility and instead award it rights and benefits.”

Every decade that passes, the habits become engrained (some would say, enshrined) and the mindset reinforced. The underclass grows, and not merely because teenage girls fail to discover contraception and believe the swiftest route to a council house is via their own birth-canals. Enabling and sustaining it, feeding it with ceaseless waves of new recruits, is a liberal-left education establishment that has conspired to beach successive generations on the shoals of illiteracy and phonetic spelling and the sandbars of underachievement. Init, well wicked, knowhaddamean? Of course you do. Education used to point the way out of the ghetto. Today it simply consigns our young to a lifetime of delivering pizza.

Without the resources to renationalize industry, left-leaning governments have directed their energies towards taking the public back into state ownership. Create an underclass, make it dependent on your largesse, and you will garner its vote. That is the premise. Or maybe there is no logic; perhaps it is just the old knee-jerk and patronizing instincts of the left. They know best. And it has done irreparable harm. In place of parenting, there are social workers; instead of common sense, there is health and safety and the criminal records bureau; substituting for normal community interaction is diversity training; standing in for work there is always welfare. At every level the state intrudes and society suffers.

I am not advocating we eat the poor—far be it for me to promote a fatty diet—and nor do I suggest we abandon all financial safety-nets. I simply propose we ditch the tired vocabulary of victim-hood that categorizes the handout-consuming and habitually unemployed as the ‘most vulnerable in society’. It is the wealth-creators who are the most vulnerable.

Look closer and you will find that poverty is more often than not a matter of prioritization for those apparently caught in its maw. I long to hear a politician ask the question: If you have so little money, what on earth persuaded you to have five children? Why at Christmas do you purchase the latest consumer durables, computer-games and plasma-screen televisions and yet baulk at spending on private health insurance? How come you are so fat when fruit and vegetables are cheaply available? It will not happen. For we have infantilized the populace, stripping the underclass of pride, motivation, and personal responsibility and instead awarding it rights and benefits.

In the liberal-left world of the welfare state, everything is a condition, an illness, a fault of someone else. Even obesity is to be blamed on rogue genes, thyroid-malfunction or the antics of food manufacturers rather than on the sloth and greed of individuals. People forget the mouth is generally larger than the anus and thus cram it with more food. They have been allowed to forget.

The origin of yet another subspecies is revealed. But that’s okay. For the state will provide gastric bands and liposuction and will end up owning a few more souls.

Soft tyranny of liberalism

By Alexander Dugin

After the Gulf War, almost all mass media outlets in Russia, as well as in the West, injected into the common speak the formula «New World Order», coined by George Bush, and then used by other politicians including Gorbachev and Yeltsin. The New World Order, based on the establishment of a One World Government, as has been candidly admitted by odeologists of the Trilateral Commission and Bildenburg, is not simply a question of politico-economic domination of a certain «occult» ruling clique of international bankers.

This «Order» bases itself on the victory on a global scale of a certain special ideology, and so the concept concerns not only instruments of power, but also «ideological revolution», a «coup d’etat» consciousness, «new thinking». Vagueness of formulations, constant secretiveness and cautiousness, deliberate mysteriousness of the mondialists do not allow, until the last moment, to clearly discern the contour of this new ideology, which they decided to impose on the peoples of the world. And only after Iraq, as if following somebody’s orders, certain bans were take off and multiple publications appeared, which began to call things by their own names.

The New World Order represents in itself an eschatological, messianic project, much exceeding in scope other historical forms of planetary utopias - such as the early protestant movement in Europe, the Arab Khalifate, or communist plans for a World Revolution. Perhaps, these utopian projects served as preludes to the final form of mondialism, trials which tested integrational mechanisms, effectiveness of command structures, ideological priorities, methods in tactics, etc.

Taking this aside, contemporary mondialism, absorbing the experience of protestantism, eschatological heresies, communist revolutions, and geopolitical cataclysms of distant centuries, has sharpened its final formulations, finally determining what was pragmatic and incidental in previous forms, and what really composed the base tendency of history on the road to New World Order. After an entire sequence of vacillations, ambiguities, pragmatic steps and tactical black-outs, contemporary mondialism has finally formulated its fundamental principles regarding the pressing situation. These principles can be assigned to four levels:

1. Economical: the ideology of the New World Order presupposes a complete and mandatory establishment of the liberal capitalist market system all over the planet, with no regard to cultural and ethnic regions. All socio-economic systems carrying elements of «socialism», «social or national justice», «social protection» must be completely destroyed and turned into societies of «absolutely free market». All past flirtations of mondialism with «socialist» models are coming to a complete halt, and market liberalism is becoming the single economic dominant on the planet, ruled by the World Government.

2. Geopolitical: the ideology of the New World Order gives unconditional preference to countries comprising geographical and historical West in contrast to countries of the East. Even in the case of a relatively Western location of one country or another, it will always be favored in comparison with its neighbor to the east. The previously implemented scheme of geopolitical alliance of the West with the East against the Center (for example, capitalist West together with communist Russia against national- socialist Germany) is no longer in use by contemporary mondialism. Geopolitical priority of Western orientation is becoming absolute.

3. Ethnic: the ideology of the New World Order insists on utmost racial, national, ethnic, and cultural intermixing of peoples, giving preference to cosmopolitism of large cities. National and mini-national movements, used earlier by the mondialists in their fight against «greater nationalism» of the imperial type, will be decisively suppressed, as there will be no place left for them in this Order. On all levels, national politics of the World Government will be oriented towards intermixing, cosmopolitism, melting pot, and so forth.

4. Religious: the ideology of the New World Order is preparing the coming into the world of a certain mystical figure, the appearance of which, is supposed to sharply change the religious-ideological scene on the planet. Ideologists of mondialism are themselves convinced that what is meant by this is the coming into the world of Moshiah, the Messiah who will unveil laws of a new religion to humanity and will perform many miracles. The era of pragmatic use of atheist, rationalist, and materialist doctrines by mondialists is over. Now, they are proclaiming the coming of an epoch of «new religiosity».

This is exactly the picture emerging from an analysis of latest revelations by ideologists of the Tripartite Commission, Bildenburg Club, the American Council on Foreign Relations, and other authors, intellectually servicing international mondialism on very different levels - beginning with «neo-spiritualism» and ending with concrete economical and structural designs of pragmatic technocrats.

It is important to note that this ideology cannot be qualified as being either «right» or «left». More than that, within it exists an essential and conscious superposition of two layers, relating to polar political realities. The New World Order is radically and rigidly «rightist» on the economic level, as it assumes absolute primacy of private property, completely free markets, and triumph of individualistic appetites in the economic sphere. Simultaneously, the New World Order is radically and rigidly «leftist» on the cultural-political front, since the ideology of cosmopolitism, intermixing, ethical liberalism traditionally belongs in the category of «leftist» political priorities.

This combination of the economic «right» with the ideological «left» serves as the conceptual axis of contemporary mondialist strategy, a basis for the design of the coming civilization. This ambiguity is manifested even in the very term «liberalism», which, on the economical level stands for «absolutely free markets», but on the ideological level calls for a «mild ideology of permissiveness». Today, we can justifiably assert that the World Government will base its dictatorship not on some typical model of «totalitarian tyranny», but on principles of «liberalism». Revealingly, it is in this very case that the terrible eschatological parody called New World Order, will be perfected and completed.

Secondly, the West, standing at the head of geopolitical theories of the New World Order as the hemisphere where the Sun, Sun of History, sets, takes on the role of both a strategic and a cultural model. In the course of the last stage of realization of mondialist projects, natural symbolism must completely concur with geopolitical symbolism, and the complexity of preceding geopolitical bloc construction, maneuvers, and political alliances, which mondialists used earlier to reach their goals, now gives way to a crystal clear geopolitical logic, which even a simpleton is able to comprehend.

Thirdly, Moshiah, whose coming the far-flung mondialist institutions are supposed to facilitate, is, from the point of view of such diverse religious tendencies as Orthodox Christianity and Islam, clearly and without any doubt associated with the sinister figure of Antichrist. As follows from the very logic of apocalyptic drama, in the course of the last struggle, the clash will occur not between the Sacred and the profane, nor between Religion and atheism, but between Religion and pseudo-religion.

That is why Moshiah of the World Government is not simply a «cultural project», new «social myth», or «grotesque utopia», but is something much more serious, real, terrible. It is completely obvious that opponents of mondialism and enemies of the New World Order must take on a radically negative position in respect to this ideology. This means that it is necessary to counter the World Government and its plans with an alternative ideology, formulated by negating the doctrine of the New World Order.

The ideology radically opposed to mondialism can also be described on four levels.

1. Economical: priority of social justice, social protection, and «communal», national factor in the system of production and distribution.

2. Geopolitical: a clear orientation towards the East and solidarity with the easternmost geopolitical sectors in considering territorial conflicts, and so forth.

3. Ethnic: allegiance to national, ethnic, and racial traditions and traits of peoples and states, with a special preference for «greater nationalism» of the imperial type in contrast to mini-nationalisms with separatist tendencies.

4. Religious: devotion to original and traditional religious forms - most importantly, Orthodox Christianity and Islam, which clearly identify «new religiosity», New World Order, and Moshiah with the most sinister player in the eschatological drama, the Antichrist (Dadjal in Arabic).

Antimondialist ideological warfare front must also combine in itself elements of «leftist» and «rightist» ideologies, but we must be «rightist» in political terms (in other words, «nationalists», «traditionalists», etc.) and «leftist» in the economical sphere (in other words, supporters of social justice, «socialism», etc.) In fact, this very combination is not just a conventional and arbitrary political program, but a necessary condition in this stage of the struggle. Geopolitical priority of the East makes it incumbent upon us to completely renounce different «antiasian» biases, at times held by the Russian Right under the influence of a bad and completely untimely example of the European Right. «Antiasianism» plays only into the hands of the New World Order.

And, finally, allegiance to the Church, the teachings of Holy Fathers, Orthodox Christianity is a necessary and most important element of anti- mondialist struggle, since the substance and meaning of this struggle is in choosing True God, the «right side», the «blessed part». And no one will be able to save us from false charm, sin, temptation, death on this terrible journey, except for the Son of God. We must become His host, His army, His servants, and His missionaries. World Government is the last rebellion of the nether world against the Divine. Short will be the instant of their triumph. Eternal will be the joy of those who will join the ranks of «last fighters for Truth and Freedom in God».

The True Judge will «come unexpectedly».

Anarchistan in Athens

Posted by Aya Burweila on January 22, 2010

Flanked by the presidential guards known as the Evzones, one would imagine that the soldier entombed in front of the Greek parliament witnessed the last of violence when he fell fighting in the battlefield.

Alas, not so.

On January 9, at 7:59 pm, a bomb exploded in a trash bin next to The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. In a proclamation titled ‘Democracy Will Not Win’ and posted on a website hosted by state university servers, The Conspiracy of the Cells of Fire and the Terrorist Guerrilla Group claimed responsibility and promised to continue with its violent campaign. In response to this act of terror, Citizens’ Protection Minister Michalis Chrysochoidis made the following declaration:

“Some people want panic and fear but we are not afraid nor will we panic…This is an unguarded area and it will remain this way. We will not transform Athens into a militarized city. Athens is a safe and free city.”

Six days later, on January 15, a little after noon, a gang of masked attackers broke into the central office of the Deputy Justice Minister Apostolos Katsifaras. Finding Katsifaras missing, the thugs used their batons and hammers to brutally vent their anger on two of the minister’s employees, sending them both to the hospital. True to style, they trashed his office and scattered leaflets of anarchist propaganda before they left.

The minister was right about one thing though: Greeks are not scared and they are certainly not panicking. On the contrary, Greeks are tired, peeved, and angry at the increasingly emboldened terrorist groups and the swamp of anarchist subculture in which they swim.

If anything, these recent acts of desecration and violence reminded the nation of the time when mobs held Athens under siege in December 2008. Over a period of two weeks, anarcho-student mobs burned, looted, and gutted the Greek capital and cities across Greece. Schools and university departments became launching pads for roaming gangs of street thugs who eventually caused an estimated 1.5 billion euros in damages.

A far cry from being ‘militarized,’ Greeks stood aghast as a paralyzed government, instead of containing the rioters, ordered anti-riot squads to refrain from arresting the students or using any appreciable force. This short-sighted move not only prolonged the rioting and plundering, but almost succeeded in toppling the paralyzed government itself. Moreover, it brought to the forefront the consequences of government policies on higher education that over decades, enabled the radicalization and anomie of its youths. (Incidentally, no criminal investigation into the 2008 riots has been launched.)

”When the government tried to pass educational reforms, no less than ten thousand students did what they do best in the sabotage of higher education: Molotov cocktails and organized tantrums.”

The restoration of democracy in 1974 heralded a new and different era of violence in Greece that emanated from within rather than from without: regular terror and violence from leftist groups and mobs of anarchists who have entrenched themselves in the social and educational fabric of Greek society. According to the recent whining of one 44-year old anarchist, rioting is the only rational response to an administration that just ‘doesn’t understand their frustration at class division, the poor economy, a broken education system, and a corrupt government.’

Petulant self-pity aside, the anarchists and members of terror groups, who like to imagine themselves ‘re-enacting some sort of 19th century social revolution against the bourgeois,’ are neither poverty-stricken nor alienated. A good number of them enjoy access to higher education for which they pay no tuition and no fees. Many so-called students are fanatically committed to pathological demonstrations and compulsive vandalism as ‘a fun social activity’ and an emotional catharsis that combines wanton destruction with the extension of ’legitimate demands’ for all to hear.

Gallingly enough, students majoring in anarchy have made great use of a neoclassical enclave where they can congregate, commiserate, conspire, stash weapons, and hang out: the Athens National Technical University, better known as the Polytechnic. Like all universities across Greece, the Polytechnic is out of bounds for the police. An ’academic asylum law,’ passed shortly after the fall of the junta prohibits law enforcement from entering university grounds to pursue trouble makers and bring them to justice. In fact, when the government tried to pass educational reforms in the summer of 2006 that included limiting the infamous ‘asylum’ law, no less than ten thousand students rioted, occupied universities across the country, firebombed the police, and generally did what they do best in the sabotage of higher education: Molotov cocktails and organized tantrums.

At the end of the day, The Greek dream has always been to graduate from a university you can’t get expelled from to getting a job in the civil service that you can’t get fired from. Nonetheless, most would agree that state malfunction is no excuse for state destruction. And under no circumstances is anarchy and terror the solution or catalyst for the change Greece so urgently demands. With the country at the brink of financial ruin and mired in other serious socio-economic problems, this generation of anarchy are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
However, amidst the violence and vicious cycles, there is an enduring and rare inspiration in those charged with protecting The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Dressed in the traditional kilt worn by the men who fought the rugged and relentless resistance against Ottoman rule, the Evzones stand completely still at their posts, impervious to all threats and provocations—including cowardly terrorist attacks. Remarkably, even when they were warned of an imminent explosion, three Evzones guards refused to abandon their posts, an action for which they were given presidential recognition.

It would be fitting if both members of parliament and the media begin showing the same sincerity in protecting public interest as the Evzones show in protecting the unknown soldier who died not to destroy his country, but to honor it. As for the terrorists and anarchists, its high time they got a haircut, went back to school, and gave up the Marilyn Manson lyrics for Pericles’s ’Funeral Oration.’

See also:

Who's Behind the Anarchists in Greece?

Legalized Pornography and Demographic Genocide

Reginald Thompson

“A primary cause of low fertility in the Greco-Roman world was a male culture that held marriage in low esteem.”
-Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity

A problem with legalized pornography is that if you allow pornography to become too widely consumed, its degraded vision of women will eat away at the capacity of men to fall in love with members of the opposite sex. This reduced capacity for romantic love will make the men of a society less interested in the joys and challenges of stable pair bond based reproduction. Pornography encourages recreational sex rather than marriage and children.

Also, pornography will discourage men from participating in stable pair bonds by tricking their Limbic Systems into thinking they’re getting so much sex that there’s no need to settle down.

Given that stable pair bond based sex is by far the most valuable from the standpoint of increasing the birth rate, I decided to do some research on whether legalized pornography correlates with a country having reduced fertility.

From Wikipedia I found a list of 45 Countries where it was possible to assign their pornography laws to one of three categories: Pornography Banned, Semi-Legalized Pornography, or fully Legalized Pornography.

Then I looked at the 2000 TFR Rates for these countries as provided by the CIA World Factbook:

N Total Fertility Rate

Pornography Banned 19 2.73

Pornography Semi-Legal 5 1.69

Pornography Fully Legal 21 1.67

As can be seen, there’s a stunningly large gap in fertility between countries where pornography is banned and countries where it is wholly or partially legal. In fact, the gap is great enough that even with a sample size of only 45 countries, the Mann-Whitney test of the difference between two means gives a P Value of only .000005.

Could this discrepancy be driven by White countries almost all having legal pornography while having low Fertility for other reasons?

No it couldn’t, as the discrepancy is almost exactly the same even after we throw the White countries out of the equation!

N Total Fertility Rate

Pornogrpahy Banned 17 2.85

Pornography Semi-Legal 1 3.11

Pornography Legal 6 1.79

But what about the possibility that Muslims countries almost all have illegal pornography while at the same time having higher Birth Rates for other reasons?

That can’t be what’s driving the result either, as the correlation remains nearly as strong even after throwing out all the Muslim countries:

N Total Fertility Rate

Pornography Banned 19 2.35

Pornography Semi-Legal 5 1.69

Pornography Legal 10 1.63

At the same time there might be more subtle differences between countries where pornography is banned and countries where it is not that could be partially driving this result.

The real question from a practical standpoint is whether legalizing pornography in a country will drive down fertility. If that is the case, we can rightfully conclude that reversing the legalization of pornography in a country would be of great benefit to its Birth Rate.

From the CDC I found tables showing the Total Fertility Rate for America in the years 1940 to 2000.

Then I decided to look up the Total Fertility Rate for the 5 years before and 5 years after two key Supreme Court rulings that made it essentially impossible to arrest an American for distributing or possessing obscene materials, and which opened never before seen floodgates of pornography.

Jacobellis v. Ohio Stanley v. Georgia

TFR For 5 Years Before 3.53 2.62

TFR For 5 Years After 2.77 2.04

As can be seen, America’s Total Fertility Rate suffered a profound decline in response to the Supreme Court’s two most important rulings in favor of the pornography industry.

Also, when I put whether a year came before or after Jacobellis v. Ohio and Stanley v. Georgia as Dummy Variables in a Multiple Regression, together they explained a staggering 77% of the variation in American fertility from 1940 to 2000!

I think the implications of these findings to White Advocates should be loud and clear: The use of pornography by Whites should be fought tooth and nail, and the banning of pornography in White majority countries and states should be set as a central long-term goal.

Notes: Jacobellis v. Ohio was a 1964 ruling by the Supreme Court that the exhibitor of a film judged obscene by the state of Ohio could not be prosecuted. This had the effect of making it nearly impossible for States to punish people for disseminating pornography.

Stanley v. Georgia was a 1969 ruling by the Supreme Court that invalidated all state laws forbidding the private possession of materials judged obscene. This effectively gave everyone in the country the legal right to buy and hold as much pornography as they could their hands on, thus creating a state of affairs never before seen in American history.

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.