UPDATED: Bono Gives Go-Ahead to ‘Kill The Boer’ Chant

Crime, IMMIGRATION, Justice, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Racism, South-Africa

I know that few in the developed world care about the undeclared, ad hoc, genocidal, ethnic-cleansing of rural Afrikaners in South Africa, my old homeland (a least so the major, cowardly conservative publishers assure me). But (from their positions of relative safety), my American countrymen do care about Bono, the great benefactor of mankind, and are surely interested in what he has to say about the incitement to kill the Boers. (Fore more about these killings see “‘Kill The Fucking Whites’ On Facebook”)

Anyhoo, Bono is a chap who fronts a three-chord band of unimpressive droners. His ignorance about the teachings of the late Lord P. T. Bauer, the foremost authority on foreign aid, has catapulted him to a position of great prominence on matters concerning the undeveloped world. This is, after all, the Age of the Idiot.

On tour in South Africa, and amid the ongoing assault against the beleaguered Boers, Bono told the BBC that the ditty “Shoot the Boer,” “which was sung during the fight against apartheid” [and at practically every political rally since] had folkloric pride of place in South Africa, “like music supporting the Irish Republican Army.”

G-d must be otherwise indisposed. (I’m not a believer, but I know many of my readers are. “Respek.”) The God of the Jews was vengeful, when it came to meting out justice. If he were fully “engaged” (and I’m being as delicate as I can), he would surely have struck the bonehead Bono down for giving the killing of a vulnerable people the go-ahead.

Given the mesmerizing, often murderous, power of the chant—any chant—in African life, this is in fact what Bono has done. Does anyone remember the “‘Kill them before they kill you” slogan that helped excite Hutus to massacre half a million of their Tutsi neighbors? Apparently not.

Of course, banning an incitement to murder will do nothing to excise a dark reality embedded deep in the human heart. It is this reality that must be discussed openly vis-a-vis South Africa. I do this in
my book, Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons From South Africa from Post-Apartheid South Africa. It will be published on May 10, 2011.

UPDATE (Feb. 15): No matter how many times I write or reply to the question of, “Why don’t South Africans up and leave,” I get the same insular, derisive responses, or repeat questions. Again and again. The penny never seems to drop. So, I will excerpt again from “The Immigration Scene,” where it was explained that highly-skilled and educated South Africans can petition destination countries to emigrate. The rest haven’t a hope in hell of getting into the USA. However, even highly-skilled immigrants are weeded out indirectly in the American immigration system, which,

“selects for low moral character by rewarding unacceptable risk-taking and law-breaking … An example should clarify what I mean by ‘select for low moral character’: Most of our South-African friends, all highly qualified, upstanding family men and women, have opted to go to Australia or the UK. Why? Well, legal immigrants to the U.S. don’t ‘wait their turn,’ as the uninformed pointy-heads keep chanting. It is usually their qualifications that, indirectly, get them admitted into the country. The H-1B visa, for one, is a temporary work permit—and also a route to acquiring legal permanent resident status. However, if one loses the job with the sponsoring company, the visa holder must leave the U.S. within ten days. What responsible, caring, family man would subject his dependents to such insecurity and upheaval? As I say, most of the people we know would never contemplate breaking the law by remaining in the US illegally. And not because they’re dull or unimaginative (an ‘argument’ I’ve heard made by Darwinian libertarians, who praise immigration scofflaws for their entrepreneurial risk-taking, no less). But because they have the wherewithal—intellectual and moral—to weigh opportunity costs and plan for the future, rather than say ‘mañana’ to tomorrow and live for today. Unhip perhaps, but certainly the kind of people America could do with.”

The H-1B visa or the O-1 ‘Extraordinary Ability’ Visa are the most popular in gaining entry into the USA. They are predicted on a job offer and are not easily attained (as you will see, if you bother to read the above-linked article).

Other work visas are easily obtained if you’re a law breaker, speak Spanish, are uneducated, and are not Caucasian—there are very few rational ways of getting into the US. The US simply selects for low moral character and a lack of professional accomplishment in its immigration-policy proclivities and sympathies.

As for the family reunification system, in the case that a candidate has family in the US (see “Please, Can My Sister Become An Illegal Immigrant?”), old parents can come right away. The younger, productive siblings of a permanent resident, such as my sister, are last on the legal waiting list. With backlogs running to 4 million cases, she may have to wait well over a decade, if not two, to come to the US legally.

Since Third-World immigrants have larger families, they will crowd out the smaller family units of the Afrikaner or Anglo- South African in vying for this category of visa. Thus, the US immigration policies also favors the Third World.

Please search my blog– and articles archives under Immigration and South Africa if you want to find out more about how near-impossible it is for some of the hardest working people in the world to come to the USA legally. You can purchase my book, out on May 10, and read up about the odd illegal white South African being sent packing back to South Africa by American justices.

But do wake up about America; it opens its arms only to a certain kind of oppressed refugee.

Barack’s Budget

Barack Obama, Debt, Economy, Media, Uncategorized

The man with the revere-Midas touch has submitted his $3.7 trillion budget, which he, age-appropriately, justified before a suburban Baltimore middle school, this morning. Barack Obama’s definition of fiscal conservatism is guarding the status quo. Obama’s budget is the same budget as last year’s. The tax proposals are the same. Entitlements (Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and Defense) remain untouched, an exemption that included the new healthcare monstrosity. Discretionary spending Obama has vowed to freeze for five years at a very high rate, but, as Doug Holtz-Eakin, former Director of the Congressional Budget Office, reminded the Obama adoring Norah O’Donell, the president has a (short and savage) history of ferociously fighting the enforcement of the very freezes he proposes.

Holtz-Eakin: This budget is “a political documented oriented to getting him reelected. The American worker needs jobs. There is no greater threat to the economy than the accumulation of deb this budget promises. This budget is good political positioning,” which guarantees the continued issuance of debt at a rate of $50,000 a minute (the median income of the average American), or $12,000 per family.

With a flick of his forked tongue, Obama once beguiled media groupies such as MSNBC’s Norah O’Donnell. No longer. She seems persuaded by the warnings of former CBOaf to big spender President George W. Bush.

UPDATED: ‘We Need To Do A Lot Less & A Lot Sooner Around The World’

Constitution, Foreign Aid, Foreign Policy, Ron Paul, War, Welfare

Rep. Ron Paul: “There is no authority in the Constitution for the welfare state, the warfare state, and the police state. … If you learn about, fight for and promote free-market economics, I can guarantee that you will sleep better at night; you will enjoy your life, and you will feel like you are doing something worth while. Defend liberty.” This innocent, impish, almost awkward man can make those tears well in your eyes.

UPDATE (Feb. 13): Patrick Cleburne of VDARE.COM has captured the mood at FoxNews as “Ron Paul Wins Presidential Straw Poll at CPAC – Again Feb 12, 2001”: bad-tempered.

Read on as to why Ron Paul is serious about sovereignty issues too; always has been.

It Takes a Man… Or A Merkel

Democracy, Europe, Foreign Policy, Iran, Israel, libertarianism, Media, Middle East

Be it in Africa or Arabia, liberals labor under the romantic delusion that the effects of millennia of development-resistant, fatalistic, superstitious, and cruel cultures can be cured by Facebook, an infusion of foreign aid, or by the removal of the Mubaraks and Mugabes of the respective regions. I hope they are right about Egypt. My non-interventionist, libertarian inclinations jibe with a certain detachment about the events on both the Egyptian and Iranian street. (See “Let’s Fret About Our Own Tyrants.”) I’m nothing if not consistent. As I said (“Frankly, My Dear Egyptians, I Don’t Give a Damn”), “I wish the Egyptians better luck with their next ‘son of 60 dogs’ — that’s an Egyptian expression for political master.”

So far, I’m buoyed by the peacefulness of the protest; Egyptians clearly wish to get on with the business of building their lives. Maintaining the peace with Israel would be an organic extension of the admirable restraint exhibited by the demonstrating Egyptians. Besides, what’s wrong with peace? However, American media have not paused long enough from slobbering to express what German Chancellor Angela Merkel has enunciated (“Merkel: Egypt must keep peace with Israel”):

[Merkerl] welcomed Egyptian President Mubarak’s departure in the face of pro-democracy protests as “a historic change” and a “day of great joy.”
But, Merkel said, “We also expect the future Egyptians governments will uphold peace in the Middle East and respect the treaties concluded with Israel, and that Israel’s safety will be guaranteed.”
Israel’s greatest concern has been that its 1979 peace treaty with Egypt might not survive under a new government, especially if Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood – the largest and most organized opposition group – gains influence. The Brotherhood has opposed the treaty.

Trust a German woman to keep her wits about her. Merkle also has a good record of refusing to heed the hedonist B. Hussein Obama (an agitator from Chicago), who urged her to print and inflate her country’s currency to Weimar-Republic levels.