Jewamongyou

Our "golden years"

Posted on November 3, 2011 by jewamongyou

With both Asian and Hispanic populations rapidly increasing in the U.S., the elderly can look forward to a rosy future. After all, according to practically everyone, both groups (and blacks, whose portion of the population is also steadily increasing) honor old people. For example, Ohio State University’s website tells us:

Hispanic families instill in their children the importance of honor, good manners, and respect for authority and the elderly. Preserving the Spanish language within the family is a common practice in most Hispanic homes.

And the Pearson educational support site gives us the following breakdown of ethnic groups and their attitudes toward the elderly:

CHINESE
■ Traditional Chinese values place the family and society over the
individual. Many American-born Chinese may not be as traditional but still hold values of respect for elders and authority.
■ The oldest son has obligations toward the family and is expected
to respect and care for parents.
■ The tradition of “filial piety” is the value of total respect for the
family, especially the elders. This respect for elders was advocated by Confucius, the famous Chinese philosopher and many
Chinese and Chinese-American families choose to follow these
ancient principles.
NATIVE AMERICAN
■ Traditionally, elders are respected for their wisdom, experience,
and knowledge.
■ Elders, regardless of tribe, assume significant roles as teachers
and caretakers of the young.
VIETNAMESE
■ Elders are given high respect in Vietnamese society. They are
considered the carriers of tradition, knowledge, and wisdom.
Age is considered an asset, not a liability.
■ Elderly grandparents and parents stay with the family for support
and care.
■ Elders may prepare meals and care for grandchildren if both the
husband and wife work.
■ In Vietnam, elders are the leaders and decision-makers in the
family and often sought for advice. When these elders move to
the U.S., they can become socially and culturally isolated for
many reasons (e.g., lack of English, age, lack of training for
work). In contrast, the younger family members become more
Americanized and may behave in ways their elders do not approve. This can create tension in families where elders feel ignored and not respected.
BLACK/AFRICAN AMERICAN
■ Elders are respected, obeyed and considered a source of wisdom.
■ To survive to old age is often considered an accomplishment reflecting personal strength, resourcefulness, and faith.
HISPANIC/LATINO
■ Elders are held in high esteem.
■ Old age is viewed as a positive time in the life of the elder.
■ Care for elders is provided by the extended family. It is expected
that children will care for their elderly parents.

And so it appears that all major immigrant groups feature respect for the elderly. No wonder immigration is considered so important for our aging country! Not only will young immigrants work and sustain the social security system, but they will also respect the aging white population.
Unfortunately, there is reason to doubt such an optimistic outlook. Firstly, a largely Hispanic America is not likely to be as wealthy as a white America since “Per capita income of Hispanics is one half that of non-Hispanic whites, and household net worth is less than one tenth.” With less wealth, there can be little doubt that the elderly will suffer. Our current economic downturn has already illustrated this. A recent Oregonian article spoke of the crisis many elderly Oregon homeowners now find themselves in now that there have been changes to the property tax deferral program. The reason for the changes, according to the article, is lack of money in state coffers.
It wasn’t that long ago that Obama had seniors trembling with fear and “mad as hell”, when he threatened that social security checks might not arrive on time unless Congress “does the right thing”. AARP will allow no concessions when it comes to established government programs for seniors:

AARP is adamant that Social Security and Medicare benefits must not be cut in any way as part of any deal to pay the nation’s bills and will continue our efforts to raise the voices of older Americans who rely on these programs for their health and financial security.” she added.

Eventually both the money and the will to provide government benefits will run out. Even if we accept, at face value, the above claims that immigrant cultures honor the elderly, we should ask, “Whose elderly?”. We would expect them to respect their own elderly – but this does not mean that the elderly of other groups and races enjoy the same respect. It would be interesting to see the results of a study (where family involvement, and other variables, are controlled) showing levels of elder abuse at nursing homes by race.
Due to the fact that older people are much more active politically, the inevitable collapse of government social services for them will be delayed for some time. But older people have a habit of dying. There will come a time when they will simply be outvoted by a younger, nonwhite and hostile electorate. Little by little, region by region, old white people will become politically irrelevant. For those old white people who supported “diversity”, and naively believed that they could import foreigners to work for them in their old age, there will be poetic justice. I do not feel much pity for them; they will reap what they sowed. I do feel sorry for those who fought for the truth, worked hard to defend their nation but will still be left out in the cold. There are a lot of elderly white people who raised children themselves but, through no fault of their own, have no grandchildren.
It will be up to the younger generation of whites to take care of those older whites, even if they are not related to them directly. We cannot depend on government benefits much longer.

Posted in immigration/ Hispanics, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 7 Comments

When Chinese cruelty meets African laziness

Posted on November 1, 2011 by jewamongyou

Actually, I have no evidence that the Africans were lazy; I just thought it would be an eye-catching headline. In any event, it seems that some Chinese men have been accused of abusing native workers in Mozambique:

Maputo – Mozambique has revoked the visas of three Chinese men accused of beating construction workers with a hammer and scalding them with boiling oil, private newspaper O Pais reported on Friday.
“These Chinese are accused of inhumane acts against local employees of Nantong construction company,” the Ministry of Labour said in a statement, cited by the paper.
One of the accused, Lin Cheng, allegedly “flung boiling cooking oil on Mozambican workers,” it said.
Another, Cai Bingjun, “attacked his associates in several ways, using a hammer, a wooden plank and other work tools,” the ministry said.
The third, Wei Hongfeng, is accused of “having fired a Mozambican for discussing mistakes on his paycheque”.

If those same crimes had been committed in China, most likely the men would have gotten away with it. But it appears that the mixing of cultures (diversity) didn’t work out very well in these cases. Hopefully, back in China, those men will not be in a position to commit similar crimes (assuming they are actually guilty).
Incidentally, while in Madagascar, I met a woman who had been to Mozambique. She told me that she had caught a man, red-handed, trying to pickpocket her. This was in a crowded street and when the locals saw what had happened, they beat the living daylights out of that pickpocket.

Language: A servant turned master

Posted on October 31, 2011 by jewamongyou

I have been reading the debate, about the existence of the Taino, on Dienekes’ blog. The debate pretty much revolves around semantics. They argue over the definitions of “ethnic group”, “extinction”, “religion” and “language”. It seems to me that the debate could be solved by simply agreeing to disagree about the definitions. There was a discontinuity of the original Taino tribe; in other words, they became extinct. The people who call themselves “Taino” today have every right to call themselves whatever they want. If they wish to found their own ethno-state and call it “Tainoland”, let them do so.
Are they the same Taino tribe that inhabited the Caribbean in the 15th century? Of course not. The Greeks of today are not exactly the same Greek people that existed in the 15th century either. Both the Taino and the Greeks have changed. It’s only a matter of degree. As far as I know, there is no scientific litmus test, or threshold, that can determine who is a “real Greek” or a “real Taino”. Each of us is free to draw the line wherever we choose. This is not to say that Dienekes’ point is not a valid one; the Greeks have remained a living ethnic group continuously for a very long time. Today’s “Taino” have been an “ethnic group” for only the last few years and any link between today’s Taino and 15th century Taino is tenuous at best.
Like so many other things in our world, an ethnic group has no clear borders, and it is always changing.
It is not only races and ethnic groups that change. Individuals change too. Most of the cells in our bodies replace themselves every few years. George Wright was on the lamb for 41 years, long enough for most of his body to have been replaced. It could be argued that the guilty George Wright no longer exists, since it was mostly a different body (and certainly a different mind) that did the crime so many years ago. Of course, by this token no criminal could ever be punished for his crimes. Wives would be right when they say, “You’re not the same man I married” and no divorce would be necessary. Parents wouldn’t have to pay child-support and children wouldn’t have to honor their parents. Contracts would have no meaning and elections would not be valid.
We get around the above complications by recognizing continuity* as a valid reason to apply old labels. Thus, there is still a Jewish people even though it would be unrecognizable to the Jews of 2,000 years ago. But this consistency of labeling is merely a human trick; it helps us cope with an ever-changing reality but does not change that reality one bit. The pace of change, and its agents, help us distinguish between what we consider the natural course of nature and crime. For example, we are all slowly dying, but when a person accelerates this natural process in another, we call it “murder”. Similarly, all races and ethnic groups are slowly dying, but when people accelerate this natural process, we call it “genocide”.
In order for us to make sense of reality, and for any sort of civilization to exist, humans were forced to distinguish between various stages of existence. Language was an essential tool for this end. We had to have a name for “lion” and “cub” in order to express varying degrees of danger and harmlessness. But over time, this tool transitioned from a system of labeling external realities to acquiring the power to determine reality in the mind of its users. While magic incantations, prayer and curses are good examples of this, sophisticated/educated people never truly abandoned this frame of mind. We easily become confused between the words we use to express ideas and the ideas themselves. Our habit of using language to neatly label various stages of change has made us lose sight of the fact that we live in a fluid reality. The words we use to describe any given state of being can only be approximations.
It seems to me that the longer a culture has been literate, the more it tends to lose sight of the distinction between reality and the words we use to express it. Many of the debates in the Talmud focus on the meanings of words. Even then it was assumed that words must have precise meanings, and that this was necessary in order to understand Jewish law. Later, the Kabbalists claimed that Hebrew words actually capture the essence of the things they describe (the ultimate precision). The ancient Greek sophists exploited this confusion for their own profit. In our own time, we are also becoming subservient to the vagaries of language – when our courts use the word “manslaughter” for “murder” and let criminals off with a slap on the wrist. Or when President Clinton was creative with his definition of the word “sex” or “is”.
Language is a very special tool; Without it, we would not be fully human. But, if we take it too seriously, it limits our minds and oppresses us. Here’s an interesting post from science chat forum:

Even Pavlov agreed animals are versatile, adapt their behavior to novel and unpredictable situations, and seem to anticipate and plan for the future. Their versatility is evidence of calculating minds. For example, wolves cruising about their immense territories are believed to navigate by learning mental maps of the land. This explains how wolves are able successfully to take short cuts through regions of their territories they have not previously explored.
A major difference between animals and humans is language. Our use of language enables us to label ideas and think about them. The view is that animals have no language and therefore cannot think. But thoughts need not be based on human language. After all, how do people think who are completely deaf and blind from birth and have never heard a word spoken?
How many kinds of thought are there? We are so used to human-style thought that we may not realize our language-based thinking is not the only mode of thought. If animals do not have language and yet think, then they must think without words. They think in a kind of non-linguistic, non-verbal thought.
Get a measure of what non-verbal thought is like. Simply suppress your urge to think in words. Suppress the stream of words constantly running through your head by repeating over and over to yourself a short rhythm, like “one, two”. Buddhist will know a lot about non-verbal thinking.
Whereas language excels at abstract thought, you may find your non-verbal thoughts Think non-verbally of a problem and solve it by non-verbal reasoning or by insight.
An understanding of animal way of thinking is important for a complete understanding of ourselves.
In so many ways the possession of language stops us in understanding many things.!!!

I agree. It would be nice if we could benefit from language in our relations with the outside world, but prevent it from taking over our minds completely. One of the pitfalls of verbal thought is that we expect reality to conform to our words. We should visit a sandy beach.
Let us ask ourselves where the ocean begins and dry land ends. Though it may seem clearly marked on a map, the reality is that it varies with the tides. Each wave brings a new reality and each grain of sand would have its own say as to whether it belongs to the ocean or dry land. The boundaries are fuzzy – and yet we will drown if we venture too far out into the water; at that point, there is no doubt. Further inland, we know we are safe. Thus we fully recognize the validity of “dry land” and “ocean” even though there is no clear demarcation between the two. Perhaps this is one reason the beach is so popular. In a sense, it takes us back to our pre-verbal existence.
*What if George Wright had suffered, at some point during his 41 years on the run, total amnesia. A brick fell on his head, he lost consciousness and woke up with a totally different personality. When the law caught up with him, should he still be punished for the crimes of George Wright #1?

Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

Asserting my right to be charitable

Posted on October 30, 2011 by jewamongyou

I recently found myself in a moral dilemma. An old friend of mine, who is rather mentally unstable, found himself in a minor financial crunch of his own making. Though it was not my fault or responsibility by any stretch of the imagination, it did involve me and I could easily alleviate this person’s suffering. To step in and help him would make me feel good about myself (since the person had not asked me to do so and since there has been no pattern of ongoing dependency) but, on the other hand, it would have been much better for that person if he would take responsibility for his own life and solve his own problems.
The trouble is that the individual in question exists within the no man’s land of free-will and fate. He was born to a mother with drug, and alcohol, problems. He suffered an abusive childhood and he is at odds with the society he finds himself in. He is not a criminal and he is pleasant to be around – almost in a childlike way, though he is of normal intelligence.
In the end, I chose to do what made me feel good and I helped him. I told him it was not for him, but for me. A small effort, on my part, had made this unfortunate individual very happy. It was not possible for me to know the limits of his capabilities, if he could have taken this small step on his own and grown up that much more; it is just as likely that he will never grow up. In any event, his physical maladies will kill him before he gets very old.
But the above decision was my own to make. It would have upset me if somebody else had stepped in, taken my money by force and given it to the above individual. This is what government does. The fact that the individual, described above, does not benefit from any government hand-outs made it much easier to help him out of my own free will. It allowed me the satisfaction of having helped somebody less fortunate, so that I could take all the self-righteous glory for myself. Filling out a 1040 tax form just doesn’t hold the same magic for me.

Posted in libertarian thought | 3 Comments

Would I ever vote for a black man for president?

Posted on October 28, 2011 by jewamongyou

Steve Sailer just wrote what many of us have already been thinking:

The NYT has a column quoting various pundits puzzling until their puzzlers are sore over the mystery of Herman Cain’s rise to the top of the GOP presidential polls. How can some random corporate executive emerge from nowhere?

It’s almost as mysterious as how some random state legislator / part time law school lecturer can rise to the White House in a few years. Maybe Cain and Obama have something in common? It’s crazy to think that, I know, but there’s something about the two of them that seems similar. But what could it be?

Some commenters have pointed out that Obama and Cain are quite different. Certainly they are – about as different (in what they claim as their ideologies) as one can hope any two mainstream presidential candidates might be. But given the simplistic thinking of the “stupid party”, it should come as no surprise if the republicans simply do whatever the democrats do and hope for the best. In this case, nominate a black candidate.

I don’t remember if I wrote about it on this blog but I had predicted, several months ago, that the Republican Party would end up nominating a black man – because whatever the Democrats do, the Republicans soon copy. Of course it remains to be seen if I was right.
I have already written about the problems with black government officials. But would I ever support a black man for president? You know what they say, “Never say never”. Under some conditions I might consider it.

The black candidate would have to, of course, share many of my values (just like any other candidate). But he would also have to stress, over and over again, that he owes (as a public official) no special loyalty to blacks*. He would have to publicly state: “If you intend to vote for me because I am black, then I do not want your vote!” He would have to have a solid record on the protection of white civil rights**. He would have to be married to a black woman (or single) – because that’s the example a leader should set. Of course it would take an awful lot to motivate me to go out and vote in a presidential election (I don’t think I’ve ever voted for a president – of any race). I find it difficult to believe anything any presidential candidate says; they’ll generally say whatever their advisers tell them to say in order to get elected.

Most likely, whoever wins the election, the rest of us will lose.

* I don’t think this would make him a traitor to his people; his job would be president of the United States, not president of the blacks of the United States. In his private life, he could have any loyalties he wanted.

** No recent white candidates would fill this qualification either.

Posted in Uncategorized | 14 Comments

A grudging nod to HBD from mainstream media

Posted on October 27, 2011 by jewamongyou

I live in the Portland area – which is a very dangerous place to live. For example, we have not only the famous Powell “City of Books”, which is the largest bookstore in the world, but we actually have two Powells. One of them is fairly close to my house. They are dangerous because every time I walk into one of them, I leave with less money than I had going in. On my last visit, I left with a paperback called “What is Your Dangerous Idea?” It is easy to see why I couldn’t resist.
“What is Your Dangerous Idea?” is a collection of about 120 short essays on ideas that might be considered “dangerous” to one extent or another written by many famous scientists and thinkers. Some of those ideas are established scientific fact, others are flights of fancy. I did not expect to find anything substantial on HBD because it was, after all, sitting on a table in plain view in a major bookstore. HBD is a truly “dangerous idea”; it is well-supported and it threatens the very foundations of modern leftist faith. Therefore, it should not be included in such a book, nor should it be found in such a prominent location in a major bookstore.
It so happens, however, that there is a chapter called “Groups of People May Differ Genetically in Their Average Talents and Temperaments” by Steven Pinker, who is also the writer of the introduction to the book (where he mentions the possibility that blacks have higher testosterone levels and Ashkenazi Jews have been selected for higher intelligence).
Pinker is very careful in how he words this (short) chapter. Here is a portion of that chapter:

In March, developmental biologist Armand Leroi published an op-ed piece in the New York Times rebutting the conventional wisdom that race does not exist. (The conventional wisdom is coming to be known as Lewontin’s fallacy: that because most genes may be found in all human groups, the groups don’t differ at all. But patterns of correlation among genes do differ between groups, and different clusters of correlated genes correspond well to the major races labeled by common sense.)
In June, the Times reported a forthcoming study by physicist Gregory Cochran, anthropologist Jason Hardy, and population geneticist Henry Harpending proposing that Ashkenazi Jews have been biologically selected for high intelligence and that their well-documented genetic diseases are a by-product of this evolutionary history.
In September, political scientist Charles Murray published an article in Commentary reiterating his arguments from The Bell Curve that average racial differences in intelligence are intractable and partly genetic.
Whether or not these hypotheses hold up (the evidence for gender differences is reasonably good, for ethnic and racial differences much less so), they are widely perceived to be dangerous…. Large swaths of the intellectual landscape have been reengineered to try to rule these hypotheses out a priori (race does not exist, intelligence does not exist, the mind is a blank slate inscribed by parents). The underlying fear that reports of group differences will fuel bigotry is not, of course, groundless.

Readers of this blog should have already noticed the above deception, the implication that there is little evidence of racial differences. Most likely, this deception is merely a way for Pinker to protect himself against charges of racism. Nevertheless, it is far more honest than what we are used to seeing in the wider media. The book was published in 2007. I believe that it is a tool we can use to help break the taboo against HBD with our friends and family. It can be gotten from Amazon for $4.00 including shipping (used). It cost me a bit more; I paid for the ambiance of Powells. The chapter on race is strategically located about 4 (short) chapters into the book. Close enough to the beginning that even those who don’t finish reading books will probably get to it – but it is not the first chapter, so people won’t get the idea that this is just a sneaky way to get them to accept HBD.
As I read more of the book, I’ll probably share some of the more interesting ideas therein with the rest of y’all.

Posted in book/movie/video reviews and links | 10 Comments

South Africa Sucks blog is back

Posted on October 26, 2011 by jewamongyou

The new URL:
http://uhuruguru.blogspot.com/

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Left's pygmy problem

Posted on October 25, 2011 by jewamongyou

Many of us have assumed that the relative media silence over the ongoing genocide of pygmies in Africa is due to a desire to avoid, whenever possible, depicting black Africans in a negative light. While there is definitely some truth to this, there might be another, more sinister, motivation behind this neglect.
The leftist establishment assumes, as a matter of faith, that race is not a meaningful biological concept. That racial differences are superficial. Mathilda writes (in a comment):

And other world renowned geneticists and physical anthropoligists are behind race as a valid descriptive term. It’s about a 50-50 split. Look up Niell Risch.
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:8YUaBabaYWIJ:genomebiology.com/2002/3/7/comment/2007+neil+risch+race+skin+deep&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=uk
The pro-race ones aren’t as noisy though, as people like you automatically have a hissy if someone observes one of the many racial non-cosmetic differences between human poopulations. Such as…
Pregnancy duration.
http://www.newscientist.com/blog/shortsharpscience/2007/03/black-and-asian-babies-at-increased.html
Age of menopause
Height
Lung capacity
Life span
Muscle and bone density
To name but a few. If you don’t believe me, have a root through this blog. Pygmies hit the menopause at 24, I’d hardly call that ‘no difference’. They are geriatric in their fifties. They seem to age nearly twice as fast as average humans.
http://www.physorg.com/news117456722.html
We are 99% the same as each other (revised by Venter recently). Not the 99.9% the same you see touted about so often.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-09-03-dna-differences_N.htm
This is a fair amount of differences, as we are 98.4% the same as a chimp, so a small amount of DNA can make a lot of difference. Contrary to what is commonly reported in thn Media, we are not ‘unusually closely related’ to each other compared to other mammals. We are fairly average.
BTW, the 4% variation in human only DNA that defines us as races… in other species the same amount can easily define a new species, let alone a sub species. Read up on Chichlid fishes.

National Geographic also has an article about the unusually early onset of menopause among the pygmies. There has been some debate as to whether this is due to genetics or environment. The fact that other African groups suffer equally from malnutrition and disease, but maintain more or less normal stature and menopause, argues in favor of a genetic explanation.
If the early onset of menopause among the pygmies is genetic, then this presents a serious problem for the “race is a social construct” crowd. When we consider past conduct of the racial-egalitarian left, it is not hard to imagine them condoning the slaughter of the pygmies – since they represent an inconvenience to its dogma. I wouldn’t be surprised if it turned out that leftist elites were actually paying black Africans to liquidate pygmy populations within their borders. Josef Stalin would have been proud, and called it “a statistic” rather than “a tragedy”.
On a positive note, there is an organization dedicated to the survival of the pygmy: The Pygmy Survival Alliance (based in Seattle, Washington). One wonders how rare a given race must become before such an organization arises to help ensure its survival. It is also worth bearing in mind that if whites ever reach the risk of extinction of the pygmies, neither Africans nor Asians will form organizations to assure its survival.

Posted in pan-nationalism and multi-culturalism, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 14 Comments

A kinder, more tolerant, Islam?

Posted on October 24, 2011 by jewamongyou

MSNBC has a story called “Battling for gay rights, in Allah’s name” where we read about a new form of Islam – I would call it “Reform Islam” – that renounces violence, strives for equality of the sexes and accepts homosexuality. The co-founder of the movement, Ani Zonneveld, has taken a lot of heat from other Muslims for her liberal views. In describing the roots of her activism, Zonneveld says:

… her activism grew out of frustration with other American Muslims for being either too willing to accept the word of conservative imams or unwilling to speak out.
“If there is a homophobic sermon at Friday prayer … nobody would stand up and say, ‘I’m sorry that’s an appalling sermon,’” said Zonneveld. “But I can’t sit with a community where it is acceptable to be homophobic …. How can you just let it slide?”
Muslims for Progressive Values is intended to provide a space to worship and a voice to Muslims who don’t necessarily agree with American Muslim leaders often seen as speaking for the entire flock.
Zonneveld, a lifelong Muslim, spent part of her childhood in Germany and Egypt, then attended college in Illinois. She became a professional singer and songwriter and now works with well-known artists, including include blues singer Keb’Mo and Melissa Manchester. Her husband is from Holland and their 13-year-old daughter goes to a public school.

Since I am not an expert on Islam, I can only wonder if her views can legitimately be called “Islam” or if they might better be described as some other religion. I also wonder if she truly believes Islamic scripture or if she is simply using religion as a vehicle for a social movement. Of course, even she may not know the real answer to that question. Is this movement a natural development that goes hand in hand with the Christian Reformation and Reform Judaism – or is it being supported through our tax dollars by a government that is eager to mitigate the dangers of militant Islam? Is it a positive development that can declaw a dangerous ideology, or will this kinder and gentler Islam lure more people into a faith that is the nemesis of Western civilization? If this Reform Islam ends up being anything like Protestantism or Reform Judaism, it will simply give people more options in life while still being able to call themselves “Muslim”. For the time being, it appears to be a fringe movement with only a few followers.
Frankly, I would think that Mrs. Zonneveld is in danger of having a fatwa declared on her. She seems to be a brave woman.

Posted in Muslims | 13 Comments

Ethiopian beauty

Posted on October 23, 2011 by jewamongyou

The severe shortage of women in China has prompted many Chinese men to seek love elsewhere. China already gets oil, copper and other natural resources from the Dark Continent – why not women as well? There is, of course, a natural barrier to Chinese men marrying black African women: The Attraction Gap. East Asian men are among the least sought after males in the world and black African women among the least sought after females in the world – but not in the sense that they would tend to attract each other. It would normally take extraordinary circumstances to bring them together. But there is a solution: Ethiopians. Ethiopians are heavily Caucasian/Semitic in origin. This makes them more palatable to Chinese men. A post on the blog Evo and proud reports:

In this, China is in the worst situation. On the one hand, it has the most unbalanced sex ratio in East Asia. On the other, its bachelors are poorly positioned in the international marriage market, since they earn much less money than do bachelors in South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. Where can they go to find wives?
The most likely place seems to be sub-Saharan Africa, with Ethiopia being especially likely. With their relatively light skin and fine features, Ethiopian women seem to be the most attractive candidates. Chinese entrepreneurs are also well established in that country. This topic came up on an online thread about Chinese-Ethiopian marriages. One Chinese commenter wrote:

In China the Ethiopian women is revered as a Holy God. Every day we say prayer that God will send us an Ethiopian woman for marriage so that our children are smart, beautiful, and clever like Ethiopia.

Indeed, the Caucasian element within Ethiopians gives some of their women a specific type of beauty that is entirely Ethiopian (but reminiscent of Indians in my opinion).

Ethiopians seem to be well aware of this element in their ancestry. It is also reflected in their traditional art, for example:

Unfortunately, their 40% Eurasian ancestry doesn’t do much to bring up their average I.Q.; the higher I.Q.’s of Caucasians apparently evolved much later than the back-migration into Africa. How would a racially conscious Chinese man deal with this fact?
Bojing: I think I’m falling for you Makeda; you are the most beautiful woman I have ever met!
Makeda: I am so lucky to have met you Bojing. You are so handsome! Kiss me Bojing!!
Bojing: Here. I brought you some flowers.
Makeda: That is so sweet! Bojing, please marry me and take me back with you to China!
Bojing: There is this little matter of regression to the mean…
Realistically, he would be thinking of her other assets at that point – such as her cooking abilities.
Note: Having just visited Ethiopia myself, I made some changes to this post. I did not see any Chinese men with Ethiopian women while there. But I did shoot some photos of lovely Ethiopian women. Be sure to check out that post, and the others related to Ethiopia!