Earlier by Patrick J. Buchanan: Is China the Country of the Future?

I still have China on my mind following last month's jaunt there. My conclusion: they’re going to eat our lunch—unless we have a “Sputnik Moment.” And even then, unlike in 1957, it’s not clear the U.S. can respond.

Look at the flap involving the NBA, the National Basketball Association. Daryl Morey, the general manager of a basketball team called the Houston Rockets, tweeted his support for people in Hong Kong protesting the ChiCom government. Basketball is big in China; the NBA pulls in millions of dollars from Chinese fans. Following the manager's tweet, the ChiComs have cut all ties with the Rockets, and the state-run media have canceled coverage of games.

Daryl Morey has issued grovelling apologies, but they don't seem to have improved the situation. The NBA is looking at major revenue losses.

I hate this politicization of everything. We used to be able to enjoy sports and show business without having to hear the political opinions of players, actors, and pop singers.

But what makes it double annoying is that it's always the same message, in sports or showbiz: a message of virtuous compliance with progressive orthodoxy.

Example: in 2016 the NBA pulled its All-Star game from North Carolina because that state's legislature had passed a bill that ticked off transgender lobbies. The following year the NBA championship winners turned down an invitation to the White House because their players didn't like Trump.

The message from pro basketball: elected legislators in North Carolina and an elected President in the White House are beyond the pale, but an unelected dictatorship in Peking is hunky-dory.

The hypocrisy is hard to miss.

But that knee in the groin that the ChiComs delivered to the NBA is a reminder that China is a big player now, politically and commercially.

Earlier, by Patrick J. Buchanan: In Syria, Is Trump At Last Ending Our 'Endless Wars'?

President Donald Trump could have been more deft and diplomatic in how he engineered that immediate pullout from northeastern Syria.

Yet that withdrawal was as inevitable as were its consequences.

Earlier In Waterville, Maine, Mayor Nick Isgro Proclaims Columbus Day, Not "Indigenous People's Day"

Unless you’re in Canada (in which case Happy Thanksgiving!) it’s a month early for the War On Thanksgiving, and two months early for the War On Christmas, but it’s Columbus Day, and War On Columbus Day has become part of the War On White America.

Also, of course, the War on Christianity in general—Columbus was a Christian, his ships are frequently represented with crosses on the sails, and the pre-Columbian societies in North America and the Caribbean were pagan or heathen, which means that they had human slavery, cannibalism, and tribal warfare with stone knives and clubs. English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, writing more than a hundred years after Columbus discovered the New World, described society in a “state of nature” as being "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" [Leviathan, Chapters XIII–XIV].

That’s what Columbus found when he arrived. In Waterville, Maine, where, as I mentioned recently, the heroic Mayor Nick Isgro prefers to celebrate Columbus Day (the Federal holiday) rather than “Indigenous People’s Day” (the holiday proclaimed by antiwhite haters in the Maine State Legislature) some University of Maine College Republicans spoke out in a Facebook post [Archive link] which controversially criticized human sacrifice and cannibalism.

• College Republicans stand by statement on ‘brutal societies’ in pre-Columbus America, by Daniel Payne, College Fix, October 10, 2019
• Maine group faces backlash amidst 'Indigenous People's Day' controversy, by Chloe Teboe, NewsCenterMaine, October 9, 2019

Of course, the University of Maine’s “Vice President for Student Life and Dean of Students”(I.E. Cultural Marxist Commissar ) Robert Dana [Email him] attacked the College Republicans in an email to everyone with a UMaine email address. If you’re a student at UMaine, you can protect your email address from spammers, but if the Commissar in charge of “Student Life” wants to send you an email, he can (the email was also signed by college president Joan Ferrini-Mundy [Email her]):

See, earlier, by Linda Thom: Unrest In Urumqi—A Californian Draws A Dark Lesson For Her Own State

There’s an old stereotype that “all Chinese people look the same.” However, what people really mean is that Han Chinese people, who make up 91% of the population of the People’s Republic of China, look the same. There are also 55 officially-recognized ethnic minorities in China. And then there are ethnic minorities whom the Chinese government refuses to recognize. This is usually because they are Turkic peoples who are genetically very different from the Han and don’t like being ruled by them. One of these unrecognized ethnic minorities: 11.3 million-strong Muslim “Uyghur.” They have effectively been in rebellion against Han occupation for centuries. And, genetically, they are, to a great extent, white.

Why are the Uyghurs in the news so much? Why is our government trying to pressure the Chinese to stop abusing Uyghur “human rights”? [Top US diplomat keeps up pressure on China over Muslim Uighurs, Aljazeera, October 10, 2019, ]. How did the Uyghur become such an irritant to the Beijing regime?

The Uyghur, known until the 1930s simply as the Turki, have repeatedly risen up against their East Asian Han overlords, inevitable because they are genetically and culturally very different from the Han. It has been demonstrated that the more genetically different two ethnic groups are, the more likely they are fight against each other [see Ethnic Conflicts, by Tatu Vanhanen]. Essentially, there has been continuous unrest in the Northwest province of Xinjiang, where the China’s Uyghur mainly live, since 1931. This province, once overwhelmingly Uyghur, is now only 45% Uyghur—and 40% Han. Its capital city, Urumqi, is now 75% Han and only 12.8% Uyghur.

These massive demographic changes reflect a deliberate Han government policy of overwhelming Xinjiang, and especially its capital, with Han immigrants so that the Uyghur will completely lose control of their territory, be absorbed into Han culture, and stop being a quasi-white thorn in the Han regime’s side.  

In contrast, intense restrictions are not imposed on the Muslim “Hui,” as the Hui are not in rebellion and are genetically closely related to the Han [Genetic substructure and forensic characteristics of Chinese Hui populations using 157 Y-SNPs and 27 Y-STRs, By Mingkung Xie et al., FSI Genetics, 2019]) so the Han are prepared to tolerate them.

But, unlike the Hui, Uyghur cannot set up schools to educate their children in Islam. If they work for the state, they are not given facilities to fast during Ramadan. Uyghur must live in gated communities with police check points. QR codes (computer-readable barcodes) must be attached to the doors of their dwellings so that the police can easily check who is authorised to be there [The race card, The Economist, September 3, 2016].

Immigration patriots know that Donald Trump hasn’t been the border cop they voted for in 2016. Ann Coulter invited Trump’s ire when she wrote as much in February: “Trump has spent 25 months not building the wall.” But then Trump did divert military appropriations to begin construction, and more recently, his stricter new rules seem finally to be reducing the inflow, which followed his massive reduction in refugee admissions. Despite the best efforts of the GOP and Javanka, Trump has still not made a Bush I-Read My Lips-type U-turn. Trump’s real problem: the sheer power of the entrenched Treason Lobby. But the fact remains: he’s the only Trump we’ve got.

Let’s go to some bright spots.

One of the best things Trump has done is change immigration regulations. For example, all immigrants must now purchase health insurance within 30 days of arrival or prove they can cover healthcare expenses. “Immigrants who enter this country should not further saddle our healthcare system, and subsequently American taxpayers, with higher costs,” the White House said [Presidential Proclamation on the Suspension of Entry of Immigrants Who Will Financially Burden the United States Healthcare System, WhiteHouse.gov, October 4, 2019]. The Migration Policy Institute claims the new rule could block 65 percent of new arrivals; 4 percent of recent immigrants lack health insurance and another 31 percent depend on taxpayer-provided healthcare.

If true, that’s a good thing. And that change riffs off Trump’s effort to block immigrants who scrounge off welfare.

Disappointingly, the Kushner immigration plan announced in May does not lower the number of green cards awarded every year. On the upside, though, it mandates that wannabe immigrants be fluent in English, pass a civics test, and prove they can financially support themselves. That’s not as good as the RAISE Act, which would halve immigration, but it might well reduce the numbers.

And the White House recently announced it would lower the annual intake to 18,000 for 2020, the lowest number ever and a 79 percent cut to Barack Obama’s high of 85,000 and well below his planned 115,000 for fiscal 2017. So there’s a campaign promise Trump kept, much to the chagrin not only of the Open Borders Lobby,  but also the Establishment Republicans we call the Lankford Nine.