Asian Guy

Exactly, everyone around the world is ethnocentric. I personally know from experience about how many Asians view themselves as above other ethnic groups. Currently, the most open people are the Europeans, they have the most Liberal immigration policies.

I do know that Japan, China, and the Koreas have very strict immigration laws. Even with Mexico, it is about 1000 times more difficult for an American to move there than vice versa: October 27, 2004 Immigration And The Unmentionable Question Of Ethnic Interests By Kevin MacDonald Arguments over immigration are usually limited to cultural or economic factors. Political scientists like Samuel Huntington point out that the culture of the country will change dramatically if there is a continued influx of Spanish-speaking immigrants. And economists like George Borjas have demonstrated that large masses of newcomers depress wages and create enormous demands on the environment and on public services, especially health care and education. These lines of argument are, of course, legitimate. But there always seems to be an element of timidity present. No one wants to talk about the 800-lb. gorilla sitting over there in the corner—the issue of ethnic interests. [ . . . ] Complete article is at http://www.vdare.com/misc/macdonald_041027_immigration.htm

What Israel is doing simply reinforces my belief that "the only true (international) "right" is the right of force, and the only true (international) "law" the law of the jungle" (http://www.transtopia.org/quiz.html).

The support of selling advanced weapons to China would depend on whether one like's the U.S.A. or not. If one does like the U.S.A., then you would want America to remain the sole world power and this can only be done by starving China. On the other hand, if one does not like the U.S.A., then allowing China to develop militarily, economically, and scientifically would create a balance of power between the U.S.A. and the rest of the world, thus preventing America from acting unilaterally and with impunity against the rest of the world. So, it all depends on whether you like America or not.

Interesting article: http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Temp/Temp-TheUSIsNotNumber1ButItDoesDoNumber2.html I guess most humans have not learned as yet how to maintain an empire for the long term. One needs to consider history, human psychology, and resource maintenance and then plan accordingly if they want their empire to last.

I find it odd that anyone would relate selective breeding to Hitler, when in fact Germany was the last nation to try such things. Japan, several South American countries, China, India, the U.S.A., Israel, and most of Europe have in the past, or currently are, doing things to facilitate selective breeding. Even as far back as B.C., the ancient Spartans used to selectively breed for physical strength which made them very powerful. Too bad though they chose physical strength over intelligence: these morons chose ape-like features over cognitive abilities, and then wiped out Athens, a truly intellectual society. Oh well.

Of course not. I believe that all ethnic/racial groups should be concerned about their genetic health. We all share this planet, we might as well all evolve upwards together and at the same rate.

http://www.neoeugenics.com/ 1. Human intelligence is largely hereditary. 2. Civilization depends totally upon innate intelligence. Without innate intelligence, civilization would never have been created. When intelligence declines, so does civilization. 3. The higher the level of civilization, the better off the population. Civilization is not an either-or proposition. Rather, it's a matter of degree, and each degree, up or down, affects the well-being of every citizen. 4. At the present time, we are evolving to become less intelligent with each new generation. Why is this happening? Simple: the least-intelligent people are having the most children. 5. Unless we halt or reverse this trend, our civilization will invariably decline. Any decline in civilization produces a commensurate increase in the collective "misery quotient." Logic and scientific evidence stand behind each statement listed above. So, what are your thoughts?