Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

Additional Commentary and References


Have different geographic evolutionary environments influenced the capacity of different races to develop civilizations?
  A strong environmental.viewpoint:  

A strong genetic.viewpoint:
Different climates may influence life-  
Harsh winters sculpture races towards
styles and cultures, but not genetics    
innate technological adaptiveness
Urban environments congregate ex-  
Man vs. man competition in urbanized
pertise and mostly build civilizations  
environments can help evolve criminality
Civilization is about strenuously over-  
Migrations to easier climates freed sur-
  coming differences in urban areas    
plus capacities to help create civilization

Sample argument: The success of civilizations is all about culture and learning, and never about race or any form of evolutionary genetics. Disciplines such as sociobiology and physical anthropology are inapplicable on this question. The concept of "race" itself is a highly artificial and misleading construct. It has been promoted by white supremacists in order to justify class differences and exploitation. Hence, the idea that different geographic environments can shape different temperamental characteristics and influence civilizations is dangerously irresponsible. The real progress of civilizations has come from the way civilizations around the world have borrowed from each other. For example, Westerners got their knowledge about how to make paper from the Chinese and algebra from Arabs. Urban environments have overwhelmingly been the focal point of real, sustained advancements in civilization because this is where peoples of many different backgrounds have been able to meet and share ideas and build enduring institutions. Urban environments necessarily require people to consciously learn more tolerance in order to deal with greater population density and the impersonality of so many people of different backgrounds being brought together. When people discuss racial differences in public, this damages the esteem of people with a history of being disadvantaged and oppressed. Therefore, it is necessary to rewrite our history books to enhance discussion of the achievements of oppressed peoples so that we can correct this psychological damage. For decades, Jewish-owned national media have enlightened the American public about how evolutionary racial theories are all "discredited" and somehow linked to "Nazism" and "white supremacy." During the early 20th century, the Jewish anthropologist Franz Boas of Columbia University promoted a school in anthropology that promoted egalitarianism on racial issues. He was heavily supported by national media, which also helped Americans better understand the Soviet experiment in Russia. The Boas school of anthropology succeed very well in correcting other views, particularly in our government-funded schools. Unfortunately, noble efforts to educate Americans and Soviets on egalitarian theories have been unraveling in recent decades. This is particularly true since the advent of the Internet and the ability of scientists to decode DNA and analyze ancient samples. Therefore, we have an urgent need to find more ways to safeguard the Internet against incorrect views that might promote white racism. We must also pass more hate crime laws that contain ingeniously crafted language that can snare the statements of racially conscious whites as well as everyone else who is out of line with social sensitivities. By concocting legal theories that link "ideas" that people express to forms of illegal violence, we can drag white racists through the court system to intimidate them, bankrupt them, and otherwise shut them up. We need more Third World immigration into America to further condition whites towards sharing their living space, culture, and destiny with other peoples. We need to spend more money on education and devote more resources to help different groups apply and develop their different intellectual capabilities. The world will not be saved until we make Sweden look more like Nigeria and Minneapolis look more like now majority nonwhite areas of New York City, Los Angeles, and Detroit.
. . .

Sample argument: Generally speaking, civilizations got jump started in ancient times when various groups ranging from Nordic and Celtic peoples in northwestern Asia to Mongols, Turks and Hun in northeastern Asia migrated southward and westward to easier climates and found that they had a surplus of vigor and intelligence. This became invested in that sum of material and cultural improvements which we call civilization. In cold areas, humans generally lived under highly dispersed conditions as hunters and gatherers or in small villages, therefore Darwinian selective factors fell more heavily on individual shoulders. Individuals who could not think technologically to prepare winter survival gear or delay gratification to lay up provisions during the warm seasons tended to die off at higher rates. These sculpturing factors applied to whoever happened to live in frost zones, to include mongoloids as well as caucasoids. Therefore, greater technological adaptiveness is not specific only to whites. However, between caucasoids and mongoloids there are likely temperamental differences involving chivalrous and individualistic behavior related to such factors as the amount of time spent in frost zones, mutations, and other factors. In contrast to all of this, tropical zones tend to select more for "reactive" behaviors. Here, hunting and gathering opportunities are more consistent throughout the year. Impulsive behavior has higher survival value relative to such traits as a capacity for delayed gratification and technological thinking. Racial differences run much deeper than skin color between the "peoples of the north" and jungle people. For example, whites have about twice the cerebral folding density in their brains, and a much higher ratio of frontal lobe to anterior lobe than blacks. These physiological differences correlate with greater abstract intelligence in neural anatomy. Sometimes Darwinian selection themes have had more of a man vs. man theme than a man vs. nature theme. This alternative theme is particularly pronounced among Jews, who lived for over 1,700 years as a dynamic minority in Babylonia as well as in small racially exclusive colonies in other urban areas of the ancient world. Their modus operandi focused on various forms of man vs. man trade and brokerage in urban environments that involved manipulating confidence as opposed to physical labor involved in creating things of real value from natural resources. Since urban environments often permit the unfit and crooked to out-reproduce the fit and noble, their sustained contribution to the advancement of civilization has been highly cyclical at best. While it is true that other racial groups have made impressive achievements besides whites, even here there are many interesting wrinkles when we look at details. For example, many Visigoths (a Nordic people) settled in North Africa in the Middle Ages and produced descendants who later became blue-eyed Muslim scholars. "Iran" comes from the word "Aryan" even though Iranians today are Muslim like most Arabs. The Turks who ran the longstanding Ottoman Empire are not Arabs either, although they are also mostly Muslim. The earliest founders of Sumer and Egypt were caucasian. Ancient caucasoid remains have been found in eastern China, far eastern Asia, Egypt, and in North and South America. Often it was necessary for conquering groups from the north to segregate themselves to avoid being absorbed by temperate zone masses.


The following extract from my "environmental vs. genetic" article helps to clarify most of the issues raised by this question.

Scientific support for genetic differences

Thanks to the Internet, and the fact that more Americans tend to become open to new ideas as the country falls apart, accumulated scientific research on the role of genetics is making a bigger impact. In fact, even some national media are now following along kicking and screaming.

As one example Dan Seligman’s May 12, 2003 Forbes article: “Professor Rothman Strikes Again,” states, “In The IQ Controversy: The Media and Public Policy (1988), Rothman and Mark Snyderman collected data showing that the press overwhelmingly attributed IQ differences in the population to various cultural artifacts. The authors also surveyed 661 experts academic psychologists, cognitive scientists, test specialists who decisively rejected these cultural explanations and collectively stated that some 60% of IQ variance reflected the different genes of the high and low scorers.”

Other experts weigh in higher. Dr. Arthur Jensen in Bias In Mental Testing reports, "Estimates of h² (ie., "broad heritability," which includes all of the genetic variance) for various standardized tests of intelligence vary from about .50 to .90 in different samples and populations, with a central tendency close to .75." (p. 244). In Intelligence and National Achievement, Dr. Raymond Cattell reported, "The accumulating evidence that 60-80% of intelligence should end... [a reluctance by most people to believe that intelligence is substantially inherited]. It is about as heritable as stature. By shifting from a generation with poor nutrition to one very well fed we can get a shift of average stature from about 5 ft. 7 ins. to 5 ft. 9 ins., but you cannot go on doing this."

Some of the best evidence to remove "environmental noise" comes from studies of identical twins who have been separated at birth and raised in different environments. The April 13, 1987 U.S. News & World Report article "The Gene Factor" provided the following examples where the Minnesota Center for Twin and Adoption Research compared hundreds of identical twins against the general population and analyzed statistical variation. The percentages below show how much the traits are determined by heredity:

Extroverts are born, not made

Extroversion Mixes easily, affable, likes to be the center of attention 61%
Conformity Respect tradition and authority, follows the rules 60%
Worry Easily distressed and frustrated, feels vulnerable and sensitive 55%
Creativity Tendency to become lost in thought and abstraction 55%
Paranoia Keeps to oneself, feels exploited, thinks "world is out to get me" 55%
Optimism Confident, cheerful, upbeat 54%
Cautiousness Avoids risks and dangers, takes safe route even if more difficult 51%
Aggressiveness Tends to be physically violent, has a taste for revenge 48%
Ambitiousness Works hard at setting and achieving goals, a perfectionist 46%
Orderliness Plans carefully, tries to make rational decisions 43%
Intimacy Prefers emotional closeness 33%

Another interesting percentage worth considering is contained in the 1991 study, by J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard, which found a .52 genetic contribution to male homosexuality.

Dr. William M. Fox reports in his book American Values Decline (offered by America First Books) evidence for a strong genetic basis behind criminal behavior as well:

...[A] Swedish study involved 1,775 adopted men and women who were born between 1930 and 1949. Of the men who had been born to law-abiding parents and reared in good adoptive homes, only 3 percent had been convicted of a crime. Of those born to law-abiding parents and reared in unfavorable adoptive homes, 7 percent had been convicted. However, of those who had been born to a convicted parent and reared in good adoptive homes, 12 percent had been convicted, and of those born to a convicted parent and reared, in unfavorable adoptive homes, the rate soared to 40 percent!" [from Jerry E. Bishop, "Probing the Cell: Researchers Close in On Some Genetic Bases of Antisocial behavior," The Wall Street Journal, February 12, 1986, page 19.]

What makes discussion of racial issues tricky for many people is the fact that genetic traits in populations tend to manifest themselves as bell-shaped statistical curves. This makes sense, since genetic traits originate with DNA molecules, which in turn are continually replicating. Most DNA will perfectly replicate most of the time, but we can inevitably expect slight errors from mutation and other causes on each side of the norm. These errors decline in frequency the more they deviate from the norm, creating a bell-shaped distribution.

Hence, when we compare groups on a genetic level, we have to compare statistical bell-shaped curves for one group against averages for another. People who try to confuse a genetic issue often use the technique of favorably comparing someone on the right hand side of a bell-shaped curve that characterizes one population group with people in the left hand side of a different bell-shaped population. This can disguise the fact that the first population taken as a whole may be decidedly inferior to the second population group.

The 22 Jan 2006 National Vanguard article "Muliracialists Are Crazy Part 3 carried overlapping IQ graphs that illustrate the differences between blacks and whites. These data are taken from the National Longitudinal Study of Youth, Version 1. According to The Bell Curve, by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray, these kinds of overall population differences have persisted despite massive resources expended by environmentalists to eradicate them.

The differences between white and black populations involve far more than skin color and IQ test results. There are also significant differences in brain structure. For example, frontal lobe development is correlated with abstract intelligence, and whites have a higher ratio of frontal lobe to anterior lobe area compared to blacks. They also have a larger average brain size, a higher density of cerebral folding, and other anatomical features that correlate with greater intelligence, as noted by such researchers as Dr. Carleton S. Coon, Dr. F. W. Vint, and Dr. C. J. Connoly.

In his book The External Morphology of the Primate Brain, that involved a study of 60 brains of whites and negroes, Dr. Connoly observed:

"Comparing the two large groups of Whites and Negroes, while the variability is large and there is much overlapping, the mean values reveal significant differences. The dimensions correlate well with what we might expect from a knowledge of the cranium in the two races. The Negro brain is on the average relatively longer, narrower, and flatter than the brain of the Whites. The frontal region, as measured by the projectional distance to midpoint of central sulcus, is, relative to the total length of the brain, larger in male Whites than in Negroes, while the parietal is larger in Negroes than in Whites . . . . It can be said that the pattern of the frontal lobes in the White brains of our series is more regular, more uniform than in the Negro brain . . . . The White series is perhaps slightly more fissurated and there is more anastomosing of the sulci . . . . It is a matter of frequencies."

Obviously one can find examples of blacks on the extreme right end of the bell curve who are smarter than most whites. But one needs to compare both curves together to really grasp the significant population differences. The graph shows a vastly greater number of people with IQ's over 120 who are whites who are able to provide intelligent leadership to society. In contrast, the black population is weighed down with a vastly larger number of border-line mentally retarded people.

The graph also explains why intermarrying black and white populations of equal size results in a disaster for any society that wants to remain a technologically advanced First World country. If total population size is kept constant, the number of people with IQ's over 120 drops by 90%.

We can use the bell curve concept to not only compare two different populations, but also get a sense regarding how a particular characteristic might be graduated along a spectrum within a population group. As an example, in his diffusion of innovations theory, Everett M. Rogers suggested that the bell curve (presumably for white people) might be divided as follows: innovators (2.5%), early adopters (13.5%), early majority (34%), late majority (34%) and laggards (16%). Obviously an advanced technological society capable of sustainable innovation, scientific analysis, and rational political institutions needs to maintain relatively higher percentages of the first few categories on an innate genetic level than various stagnant Third World countries.

It is probably accurate to say that certain human populations tend to be unusually rich or skewed in regard to certain traits relative to others. It is also accurate to say that one can usually find exceptions at one end of the bell curve that help prove the "rule" shown by bulges on anther end of the curve. Take for example America's imprisoned criminal population. Let us assume that the overwhelming majority of inmates deserve to be locked away. That curve would probably be heavily skewed towards a much higher percentage of innately criminal individuals than the general population, just as the bell-shaped curve of whites is offset from the black bell-shaped curve in traits favoring intelligence.

Later in my "mutualism vs. parasitism" section I profile the Thugs of India as a criminal population. We might expect such a "criminal rich" population to show gradations of the criminal trait within its own bell curve, much like the diffusion of innovation example. At one end of the curve, we would probably find highly intelligent but incorrigibly criminal people who are totally proud of their evil nature and their ability to maliciously undermine society and fool most of the people most of the time. Moving towards the center of the bell shape, we would find people who are marginally criminal. These people may have criminal tendencies, but they would tend to be more subconscious than conscious. They can lead fairly honest lives if bolstered by the presence of honest people. Lastly, at the far other end of the bell curve, we could expect to find people who are not particularly criminal at all.

Significantly, if an entire prison population group in criminal traits were deported to form an independent, self-sufficient community somewhere, there would probably be relatively fewer honest people in the population compared to malefactors. It would be less likely that there would be enough of a critical mass of honest people to prevent the malefactors from rising to the top. Put another way, it would be more likely, but not guaranteed, that the criminals would seize control of the strategic bases of the society. It would also be more likely that criminals would marginalize honest people, rather than the other way around. All of this, despite the fact that a significant portion of this population might still have some honest people.

Similarly, we can say that a population group rich with people in low intelligence will tend to comprise a fairly inefficient and dysfunctional society, even though one would still be able to find some examples of very bright people in that group. Unfortunately the smart people would find it hard to accomplish very much, because they have to spend too much time babysitting the stupid people who vastly outnumber them. Such a society has a high "genetic load" or drag factor. It will unlikely be very competitive with other societies.

We have repeatedly seen vivid examples of this drag factor everywhere that white rule has vanished in black African countries such as Kenya, the Congo, former Rhodesia, and now South Africa. These countries always deteriorate into brutal, corrupt dictatorships with basket case economies.

One of the effects of affirmative action in America, as well as special privileges for special interests such as he Israel Lobby (caught once again spying on America in the Larry Franklin case), has been to dramatically increase America's load factors of lazy, stupid, and crooked people. They not only drag down economic performance, as reflected in the horrifying trend charts depicted in my Critical Issues section, but worse yet, they have become powerful enough to marginalize and drive out honest and productive people.

A basic model for understanding the evolution of genetic differences

For starters it is critical to understand how different geographic environments (or "environmental stresses") sculpture the distributions of traits in human gene pools in different ways, and how these gene pools can degrade over time. Here I am using "environment" to mean a physical environment such as an Ice Age glacier or a sub-saharan jungle. These physical environments tend to select people in different ways. This use of the word "environment" to mean a geological environment that selects for human genes in a certain way is different from the use of the word "environmental" used at the beginning of this article to mean "learned" or "nurtured" behavior.

In his landmark work Why Civilizations Self-Destruct, Dr. Elmer Pendell explained that human gene pools are subject to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, just like other animals. This law states that chemical reactions in the universe tend towards greater randomness. This applies to chemical reactions that sustain life processes inside the human cell and replicate DNA. In other words, in the absence of natural selection, animals that reproduce at a zero population growth rate accumulate dysfunctional mutations and other forms of genetic load over time and suffer gradual and continual degradation in their abilities. Because of this deteriorative pressure, Dr. Pendell believed that animal species only achieve bare survival equilibrium with their geological environment. The Second Law of Thermodynamics prevents populations from developing capabilities in excess of the selective pressures of their physical environment.

Dr. Pendell believed that Ice Age environments imposed vastly more severe demands on human problem solving skills than tropical environments. Humans who lacked the ability to create winter survival technology and who also lacked the ability to delay gratification to prepare in the summer for the winters tended to get killed off at a faster rate. This skewed the innate traits of frost zone gene pools towards technological adapativeness.

In contrast, human groups that remained in temperate zones failed to develop this greater technological adapativeness. The Second Law of Thermodynamics kept them in bare equilibrium survival with the lower requirements of their physical environment.

One might see an analogy with the case of the dodo bird. A group of dodos once flew into a particular tropical-zone island where there no ground predators. As dodos established their home on this island, the ones which remained capable of flight had no particular survival advantage over birds incapable of flight. Over time, mutations which inhibited flight spread through the dodo bird population. By the time European sailors discovered the island, no dodos could fly anymore. Non-flight "genetic load" had saturated the dodo population. Sailors could grab dodos off the ground at will, and they quickly became extinct.

In his landmark book My Awakening, Dr. David Duke provides an excellent summary of the selective differences between frost zone and sub-Saharan African conditions (p. 93):

Prehistoric European-Asian Conditions

Prehistoric Sub-Saharan Africa
complex-sturdy shelter-critical minimal shelter needed for survival
winter extremely harsh climate no winter comfortable climate
warm, well-made clothing critical no clothing required for survival
ability to make/control fire critical fire not required for survival
long periods of resource deprivation resources more abundant
periods of little vegetation, few small animals or birds hunting necessary food gathering less problematic in tropical climes gathering favored
foresight, planning and delayed gratification necessary for survival little seasonal change, immediate gratification favored
in resource scarce, male-provisioned, hunting society, monogamy favored in female provisioned gathering society, polygamy favored
male provisioned society, less sexual and physical aggression favored female provisioned society favors male aggression and sexual drive
promiscuous behavior resulting in fights often leads to death of mate and children death in fights from sexual competition not critical for survival of mates and children

Evolutionary sculpturing of territorial needs and chivalrous instincts:

Dr. Duke provides some extended discussion to explain the evolutionary impact of frost zones that is well worth reading. He notes on page 92:

During most of the last 80,000 years, Europe endured temperatures much colder than today. Modern Europeans emerged about 35,000 years ago and met the crucible of the Wurm glaciation (24,000-10,000 B.C.). Temperatures in Europe and Asia probably averaged around 18 degrees (F) colder than the present.

We see significant technological adaptiveness and comparatively higher IQs among all races or racial subgroups that have had a significant frost zone sculpturing tenure, including eskimos, Japanese, and Mongols. Conversely, we see a relative lack of technological adapativeness among tropical peoples. Another example besides Negroes are the Piraha Tribe of the Amazon, which has proven completely incapable of learning how to add 1 + 1 despite months of instruction by anthropologists.

Professor J. Philippe Rushton has put together the IQ map provided below that illustrate his article: "Winters Are Good For Your Genes: Lynn Book Finds World Average IQ 90, Declining From North To South."

I would like to interject my personal view that the frost zone evolutionary environment likely sculptured temperamental traits in many other areas besides an aptitude for technological problem solving.

It appears that whites in general, and the Nordic branch of Caucasoids in particular, have lived for a longer evolutionary period than other races under extremely dispersed conditions near Ice Age glaciers in relatively small family or tribal units. The key selective factors involved man vs. nature technological innovation themes. Man vs. man guile or artful sociability was probably not a particularly significant factor. In fact, in some ways it probably helped to err on the side of having a high sense of individual territoriality to prevent competitors from stealing ones food in cold winters.

A vivid anecdotal example of this behavior is described at the beginning of a book called Sissu about the Finnish Winter War against the Soviets. According to a folk tale, which was perhaps apocryphal, a Finn heard that someone wanted to build a cabin several miles away. He pulled out his puukku knife to go kill him because he felt the stranger was invading his territory.

In his essay "The History of Freedom in Antiquity," the eminent British 19th century historian Lord Acton commented on how a strong need for personal freedom is very ancient among white people:

According to a famous saying of the most famous authoress of the continent, Liberty is ancient; and it is Despotism that is new. It has been the pride of recent historians to vindicate the truth of that maxim. The heroic age of Greece confirms it, and it is still more conspicuously true of Teutonic Europe. Wherever we can trace the earlier life of the Aryan nations we discover germs which favouring circumstances and assiduous culture might have developed into free societies. They exhibit some sense of common interest in common concerns, little reverence for external authority, and an imperfect sense of the function and supremacy of the state. Where the division of property and of labour is incomplete, there is little division of classes and of power...

In his book Body Language, Julius Fast talks about how people from Northern Europe stand much further apart from each other in their conversations. Interpersonal interactions among Nordic peoples often strike others as being a bit stuffy and distant. As a rule of thumb, as one heads further south in Europe, people stand increasingly closer to each other in conversation, and have more informal protocols. It is not uncommon for Mediterranean fathers to hug and kiss their own sons and kiss other men, which is unheard of in northern countries. Going further south, Julius Fast points out how Arabs stand very close to each other. To deny an Arab your breath is to insult him.

This very different sense of personal territoriality among population groups has political implications. "Human rights" is probably related to an instinctive requirement to preserve significant personal territory before government.

The origin of the cultural and behavioral trait of chivalry is also an important issue. In "The Passing of the Great Race" Madison Grant wrote (page 168).

The Nordics are, all over the world, a race of soldiers, sailors, adventurers and explorers, but above all, of rulers, organizers, and aristocrats in sharp contrast to the essentially peasant and democratic character of the Alpines. The Nordic race is domineering, individualistic, self reliant, and jealous of their personal freedom both in political and religious systems and as a result they are usually Protestants.

Chivalry and knighthood and their still surviving but greatly impaired counterparts are peculiarly Nordic traits and feudalism, class distinctions and race pride among Europeans are mainly traceable for the most part to the north." (p. 228).

The social status of woman varies largely with race, but here religion plays a part. In the Roman Republic and in Ancient Germany women were held in high esteem. In the Nordic Countries of today, women's rights have received much more recognition than among the southern nations with their tradition of Latin culture." (p. 228).

Chivalrous competition is very common among frost zone mammals such as wolves, reindeer, foxes, bears, and bears. One of the greatest threats to chivalry is parasitism. While parasitism is very common in tropical environments, where animals are close enough for parasites to easily hop from host to host, the high degree of animal dispersion in Arctic environments works in the opposite direction.

In chivalrous competition, males will spar to compete for females. They compete just enough to show dominance, but refrain from destroying the loser by drawing blood. This enables the more fit males to disproportionately reproduce, thereby maintaining the strength of the herd. However, by not killing off the weaker males, the herd retains the greater safety of numbers to ward off packs of predators.

Chivalrous government is an anomaly among most human societies. Most human societies around the planet become very pyramidal is they become very large. The people at the top typically become increasingly vicious to fend off any real or perceived competitors.

We can see how chivalrous instincts must be spread among the general population in order for Western Civilization to become viable. Parliamentary debate depends on the ability of individuals to voice their dissent without getting assassinated. The right to face ones accusers in a trial by jury depends upon not being up against vicious mafia groups who ruthlessly kill off all witnesses. Scientific debate requires the ability to advance a new theory that contradicts leading scientists without losing ones job.

In order for competitive free markets and for free enterprise capitalism to remain viable, both the government and the largest corporations must refrain from using their power to viciously squeeze out competitors and rig the markets.

One reason why America is breaking down, incidentally, is the increase in vicious, anti-chivalrous behavior throughout society. We see this in the case of people who lose their jobs for voicing not politically correct opinions. In contrast, back in the early 19th century chivalrous values once made America once of the most admired countries on earth.

Today America has become despised around the world. The High Priests of War by Michael Collins Piper documents how America's foreign policy has been high-jacked by Jewish neo-cons who viciously smear all domestic critics of their influence. Torture, which is very commonly used by Israelis against Palestinians, is now widely used overseas by Americans.

An interesting indicator of America's depravity involves the sad case of Jewish spokesman and national media darling Dr. Alan Dershowitz. He hardly ennobles either the Harvard University faculty or America's Jewish community. He has artfully tried to reduce public repugnance towards the use of torture and has viciously attacked his colleague Dr. Stephen Walt, former Dean of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, for the report co-authored with Dr. John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago that criticizes the Jewish Lobby's role in American foreign policy.

Critics of Jews have historically viewed them as an an alien racial group instinctively incapable of acting like chivalrous gentlemen. For over two thousand years their evolutionary history has been focused on man vs. man competition where they have been outsiders in highly urbanized environments forced to live by their wits. Critics such as Henry Ford in his International Jew series claim that Jews as a group are more likely to produce a disproportionate number of people who are prone to engage in covert, deceitful, vicious, criminal, Mafia-like behavior. In business they have a greater tendency to act as vicious monopolists. In their view, Jews tend to be incompatible with chivalrous republican government and principled free enterprise competition.

This has some similarities to Ralph Townsend's analysis in Ways That Are Dark about the Chinese (offered by America First Books). To him, it is no accident that the Chinese are often referred to as "The Jews of the East." For well over two thousand years the Chinese have endured conditions of extreme deprivation and overcrowding, in which Darwinian survival depended heavily on artful man vs. man diplomacy, to put it politely. In addition to their considerable business acumen, Townsend claims that the Chinese have an amazing capacity to ingratiate themselves with Americans. They can quote high-minded platitudes of Confucius one moment and then just as easily break their word with Westerners the next. According to Townsend, writing in 1933, the Chinese language has no real equivalent of the word "lie" that carries with it any sense of the moral repugnance that accompanies its usage in the West.

Townsend noted that the Japanese, who have absorbed some Caucasoid genes from the Ainu, have a very different cultural personality that is much closer to Western concepts of personal honor. Townsend observed an interesting paradox that begins with the fact that initially Americans tend to like the Chinese more than the Japanese. The Chinese seem much more affable and gregarious, whereas the Japanese appear more reserved. However, Townsend claimed that after Americans have had enough dealings with both the Chinese and Japanese to begin to understand each group, most Americans start to prefer the Japanese. They discover that they have more in common with the Japanese on the honor issue, and that is more important to them in the long run.

In regard to the comparing the Chinese with Jews, if one compares Ways That Are Dark with Jewish Supremacism by Dr. David Duke, one can see that the Chinese are qualitatively very different from Jewish supremacists in many important ways. Among other things, the Chinese have had their own land base and self-contained civilization for thousands of years. Their religious institutions make it possible for them to find contentment within their own borders without defining themselves relative to other peoples or making it a divine mission to perpetually infiltrate and exert control over other societies under false pretenses.

The origins of advanced civilizations

According to Dr. Elmer Pendell in Why Civilizations Self-Destruct, advanced civilizations began when peoples of the north headed southwards to warmer lands where survival was much easier. Dr. Pendell defined civilization as the sum total of problem-solving improvements made by people over time. Hence, the peoples of the north had excess genetic capacity in terms of intelligence and robustness that could now be invested towards the continuous problem solving processes required to create advanced civilizations.

However, once in the warmer lands, the peoples of the north were no longer subjected to savage sculpturing factors. Their offspring tended to decline over time in average fitness much like the dodo bird. In addition, the civilizations they created developed niches that allowed people of low ability to reproduce at a faster rate than people of higher ability.

Paradoxically, as the material improvements and monuments of civilizations accumulated over time, giving the external appearance of an increasingly advanced civilization, the underlying genetic quality was steadily deteriorating. Eventually, the ratio of nonproducers to producers increased to the point that bygone civilizations began to stagnate. At this tipping point, they began to lose traction in their ability to anticipate and solve problems. Eventually they became so overwhelmed by their accumulating problems that they went into decline.

At this point let me interject that while I agree with Pendell that dysgenic decay is an important long term underlying factor, I see evidence that many civilizations seem to fall apart well before their underlying gene pools are totally depleted due to the accumulation of genetic load.

I think that there are two extremely important addition reasons to help explain the accelerated decline of various civilizations. One reason is that over time civilizations tend to become more centralized and tyrannical, which degrades their ability to engage in rational innovation and problem-solving on a grass roots level. In cover this process in some depth in my centralization vs. decentralization discussion. Please note my libertarian analysis regarding how centralized government tends to turn into ponzi government, which in turn tends to turn into evil government.

In addition, as societies become more centralized and individuals become less self-sufficient, people with increasingly criminal traits, parasitic modus operandi, and other mental health problems tend to rise to the top and set the tone of society. This also severely degrades the ability of a society to engage in rational grass roots problem solving and innovation. I discuss the "criminal personality" and parasitism in depth in my mutualism vs. parasitism discussion.

There is definitely an unvirtuous circle involved here in which all of these factors viciously feed on each other. Dysgenic decay encourages increasing centralization, because a declining level of overall competence in the overall population makes its more likely that "the masses" will become increasingly less self-sufficient as individual adults and instead assume an increasingly child-like level of dependency on their rulers. They will simultaneously become less capable of heading off various forms of tyranny. Similarly, as a population becomes weaker in terms of its innate character and intelligence, it becomes less capable of resisting criminal exploitation.

Dr. Edward Wilson and Sir Arthur Keith add to Dr. Pendell's basic model

In his book Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, Dr. Edward Wilson explains how the selection of certain genetic traits can only be explained in terms of natural selection applied on a group level as opposed to an individual level.

One example includes selection for altruism. This is a trait that motivates an individual to risk his own life or to diminish his own resources for the greater good of his group.

We might imagine the following as an example of altruistic sacrifice. A woman has several children who are in danger of getting mauled by a bear. The mother starts fighting the bear to give her children time to flee, and gets mauled to death. From an evolutionary viewpoint, although her genes are now lost, there is still a net gain of the survival of her children.

As another example, imagine a group of young men who fight to the death to defend their tribe against invaders who might genocide or enslave their people. Their sacrifice is cost effective if it prevents the destruction of the remainder of their gene pool.

In contrast, imagine a group where parents tend to feel no inclination to risk themselves to save their children, or where young men feel no inclination to fight to defend their tribe against attack, enslavement, and possibly even extermination. In this case, this group without any altruistic instincts is more likely to become extinct than one that has altruistic traits. In a world where tribes compete for living space, the group without altruism cannot effectively band together to defend its genetic interests.

Since altruism has a genetic basis, it is vitally important that a people with strong altruistic tendencies focus this behavior first and foremost towards the reproduction of their own genetic type. In this way the altruistic genes survive.

If on the other hand a group carrying a high degree of innate altruism can be tricked into adopting and nurturing alien children, or pursuing economic policies that benefit alien interests before their own kind, then the altruistic group is in fact now suffering from parasitism. An alien group is now enhancing its own genetic fitness at the expense of the altruistic group, in essence "using up" the first group's altruism to promote the survival of alien genes. If this parasitic relationship continues for too long, the altruistic group will become extinct, and altruistic behaviors will die with them.

Sir Arthur Keith's Evolutionary Breeding Unit concept

The late British anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith argued that tribal separation in what he called "Evolutionary Breeding Units" has been very important in the human evolutionary process. Tribal separation allowed beneficial mutations to take hold. Furthermore, tribal separation enabled groups with superior genes to expand at the expense of failed groups. Among other things, it enabled a tribe with altruistic traits to avoid being parasitically used up by a group that lacks these traits. It also rewarded successful groups on a genetic level, analogous to the way successful entrepreneurs must be able to retain earnings in their companies to grow in a competitive free enterprise capitalist system.

Sir Arthur Keith described how competition takes place not only between tribes, but also to promote eugenic as opposed to dysgenic mating on an individualized basis within a tribe. When applied to mating, "eugenic" means mating that promotes offspring who are more fit. "Dysgenic" means mating that produces less fit offspring. As mentioned earlier, humans tend to naturally engage in eugenic practices when they try to find a marital partner who is their equal or better.

One cannot help but wonder if a combination of tribal competition, combined with internal eugenic mating selection inside competing evolutionary breeding units, accounted for the "cranial explosion" that occurred among human ancestors in last three million years. Dr. Edward Wilson's classic work Sociobiology: the New Synthesis provides a vivid example with a graph that plots brain volume (y-axis) against millions of years before present on the x-axis. (Figure 27-1, redrawn from Pilbeam, 1972).

The graph starts with Ramaphithecus punjabicus who had an estimated 310 cc brain volume roughly 14 million years ago. A hypothetical curve showing the brain volume of our ancestors shows a steady gradual rise of less than 20 degrees for the next eleven million years until we get to Australopithecus africanus, with about a 460 cc capacity roughly 3 million years before present. From here the cranial capacity curve sharply accelerates. We see Australopithecus habilis at 600 cc about 2 million years ago, Homo erectus at 1,000 cc about 1 million years ago, and Homo sapiens at around 1,400 cc at present. The curve reaching Homo sapiens is at about a 70 degree upward climb.

After Homo Sapiens depicted on the graph around our present time, we see the line on the chart fall off from a 70 degree climb to a 45 degree climb. Considering the way America and other Western countries are being dumbed down as a consequence of out of control Third World immigration and the habit of the most fit white women having the least children, I think that it would be more accurate to show a negative angle. This would be consistent with Dr. Pendell's observation that civilization tends to create niches that support the reproduction of the less fit at the expense of more productive people, and hence tends to reverse evolution.

The positive evolutionary function of tribalism and racism

In the article "Zoological Subspecies in Man" by Dr. Norman Hall in the October 1960 issue of Mankind Quarterly, Dr. Hall observed that "racism" prevails among all mammalian subspecies in nature. (The term "subspecies" is synonymous in zoological jargon with the term "race").

...Consider, if you will, the results of competition between closely allied subspecies of wild mammals when one penetrates into or is introduced into the range of another. Whether they be mice, moles, or monkeys, one and only one subspecies survives in a given area, because after a few thousand years, ordinarily in a much shorter time, crossbreeding may result in amalgamation, a sort of extinction by dilution. but the more common results are either that they fight and one kills the other, or that as a result of less direct combat, the individuals of one subspecies more often usurp the best food, places best suited for rearing young, and shelters for affording maximum protection from enemies. Therefore the one subspecies thrives, whereas the other subspecies because of lower birth rate and decreased longevity that result from inferior food, inferior nurseries and insufficient shelter, decreases and disappears. The introduced black rat (Rattus rattus rattus) has disappeared from the large areas in North America where competition was furnished by another introduced subspecies, Rattus rattus alexandrinus. So it goes in almost every instance where kinds of mammals so closely related as subspecies of the same species are suddenly thrown into competition over a large area. Indeed, study of the thousands of subspecies of native wild mammals has led to the formulation of the biological law concerning them that: Two subspecies of the same species do not occur in the same geographic area. Of the half dozen or fewer exceptions reported to date, reinvestigation has shown that the two kinds instead were in every instance full species, or two subspecies that lived each in a habitat apart from the other. Thus the rule remains almost or quite without exception and it should give pause to anyone about to advocate the long continued residence together of subspecies of man.

The implication here is very clear. Racism is instinctive in man, just as it is in all other mammals. "Racism" survives as a genetic trait because Evolutionary Breeding Units that have this trait are more likely to dominate, acquire the best territory, and pass on their genes than those that lack racist traits.

According to Dr. Hall, tribalism and racism work so well in nature that they do not even have to be a consciously defined process among mammalian subspecies. Through evolution they become instinctive or "default" behaviors among animals species incapable of consciously viewing the world in ideological terms.

Hence, we do not necessarily require ideology to explain why humans instinctively maintain armies and national borders. They sense a strong need to prevent alien peoples from either conquering or infiltrating their territory and driving their own indigenous population out of existence. Hence, "nationalism" and "national borders" are not some kind of "Grand Illusion," as extreme leftists and certain anarcho-libertarians would have it, but rather a territorial imperative deeply rooted in our genes.

In his book Civil War II: The Coming Breakup of America, Thomas Chittum provides another form of evidence that tribalism and racism are instinctive in humans. He lists 37 European countries, starting with the countries that have the most homogeneous populations. As we go down the list, starting with countries in which 98% of the population consists of one ethnic group, we see that when we reach countries where the most dominant group is no more than 75% of the total population the incidence of instability and civil war increases dramatically. He concludes (p.131), "The lesson is clear: The more mono-ethnic a European nation is, the more likely it is to be peaceful and stable. The more multiethnic a European nation is, the more likely it is to experience tribal civil wars. There is simply no real arguing this brutal fact."

A third argument that tribalism and racism are instinctive is provided by Dr. Lothrop Stoddard in his books such as The Rising Tide of Color and The French Revolution in Santo Domingo. According to Dr. Stoddard, when two dissimilar races interbreed, quite often rather than getting rid of racism, they create a new group that begins to function like a third race. Now instead of one racial conflict between two groups, one has three racial conflicts between three groups. This can create an even bigger social mess.

As one example, when Spaniards first came to the New World, they rarely brought wives from Spain, but instead mated with Indian women and created Mestizos. As Mestizos grew in size and influence over three centuries, it tended to swing back and forth politically between Indian and white interests. The "wars of liberation" that broke out in Latin America against Spanish rule in the early 1800's were essentially race wars in which the Mestizos allied themselves with Indians to oust what was left of the white ruling class. Simon Bolivar, an aristocratic renegade who served as a major leader in the revolts, eventually came to view the Mestizos and Indians as incapable of forming a stable government along classical liberal lines. He proclaimed himself a dictator a couple of years before making plans to retire in Europe.

In The French Revolution in Santo Domingo, Dr. Stoddard tells a sadder story with a similar theme. Santo Domingo, known today as Haiti, was once the most prosperous French plantation society in the New World. The whites imported so many blacks to work their plantations that they became only about10% of Haiti's population. These Frenchmen also managed to sneak in enough dalliances to create a sizeable class of mulattoes over time. Not surprisingly, the mulattoes tended to swing back and forth politically between black and white interests.

The French Revolution created a wave of liberalism that led to the emancipation of the slaves. However, various power struggles led to tragedy. This included the willingness of the British as part of the Napoleonic Wars to supply arms to the blacks to make trouble for the French. The situation deteriorated into an all-out race war where the mulattoes and blacks joined together to kill all the white people. This included savagely killing off totally defenseless white women and children. Then the pure blacks turned on the mulattoes and killed most of them as part of an internal racial purification move.

All of this seemed to take place "naturally" in the early 1800's. Zionist-dominated, liberal national media did not exist yet in America.

Although Haiti was once France's most prosperous colony, today it is the most backward country in the western hemisphere. Where Black Rules White: A Journey Across and About Hayti by Hesketh Prichard, first published in 1900, is a fascinating study of a society that has returned to its genetic baseline. The very primitive way that most blacks function in Haiti is almost surrealistic by Western standards. Consistent with genetic theory, we saw some of this same surrealism resurface among blacks in New Orleans during the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

How genetic distance influences the degree of altruistic and parasitic behavior

ne important implication of the instinctive component of racism is that the more similar people are racially, the more likely it is that that they will have an altruistic, mutualistic, or symbiotic relationship. Conversely, the more dissimilar they are, the more likely it is over the long run that the relationship can devolve into something predatory or parasitic.

Of course we are speaking here about statistical probabilities, not certainties. No doubt on an individualized basis, people can meet certain individuals of other races for whom they have tremendous respect and admiration. No doubt there are mixed communities that can learn to get along under certain social conditions.

Despite all of this, there is still a broader social problem that never goes away. It is deeply rooted in our genes. The rule of thumb is that all other things being equal, the greater the genetic distance between peoples who make up a community, the more the community requires massive infusions of liberal propaganda and political "hand-holding" to keep things together, and the more likely it is that severe economic and political stress will break things apart. In other words, highly race-mixed societies tend to be highly "leveraged" societies. As previously mentioned, all it took was the flooding related to Hurricane Katrina in August 2005 for racial chaos to break out in New Orleans and make the city look like Mogadishu. In contrast, racially homogeneous Japanese cities have experienced vastly more devastating earthquakes, and yet have remain relatively free of plundering and other forms of social strife.

America in the late 20th century has become a major historic anomaly by the way its leaders encourage its majority white population to elevate aliens and promulgate their own dispossession. In my section covering "genetic bottom up" interpretations of history, I describe how the Anglo-Saxon Puritans who settled New England and provided a major foundation for the American Revolution were very homogeneous on a racial, ethnic, cultural, political, and religious level. Up until the 1840's, America was overwhelming white and Protestant. Fast forward to today, and we see across America a multi-racial, multi-cultural population held together principally by leftist ideology. America seems to be on some kind of winding down cruise control from remnants of cultural habits and institutions established in the 19th century by a totally different society, while groups like the neo-cons described in High Priests of War or the Jewish elite described in The Dispossessed Majority squeeze every last little drop of viability out of us before the whole bankrupt system implodes.

I must emphasize that in America's power centers, we have not eliminated racism and tribalism. To the contrary, in many ways these things are more virulent today than they have ever been before in American history. I can say from personal experience having lived in New York City for ten years, I saw far more extreme racism among its vast Jewish population despite the fact that publicly so many Jews pretend to be liberals than I ever observed growing up in the South and being exposed to Southern white rednecks or serving in the Marine Corps and being exposed to professional militants.

All we have done is merely shifted the "who" and the "how" behind it all. Instead of supporting white racism to acquire living space in North America from Indians, now America's elites focus on helping Zionists accumulate Jewish living space in the Middle East. Americans also provide blank check support to hobble any real or perceived enemies of Israel, to include Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and the next possible target Iran.

American leaders provide unswerving rhetorical support for the strictly segregated, anti-Palestinian apartheid state of Israel. The oppression of Palestinians is cruel and ghastly beyond belief. Palestinian activists and suspects are routinely rounded up and tortured by Israelis. Their leaders are often targets of assassinations. Helpless civilians are often targets of genocidal bombings and machine-gunnings. Many Palestinians are forced to live in tightly controlled, "locked down" communities where their means of making a living has been stolen from them and they can only survive from charitable assistance provided from the outside. The list of abuse goes on, but the point is that in terms of systematic cruelty, the Israelis make Simon Legree in Uncle Toms Cabin look almost mild and amateurish by comparison. By giving blank-check support to Israeli oppression, combined with its commission of such war crimes as spreading aerosolized depleted uranium among hundreds of thousands of helpless Iraqi and Afghanistan civilians, the U.S. Government surrenders whatever moral authority it claimed for waging its war of conquest against Southern states in the 1860's to ostensibly free slaves, although its real objective, of course, was to impose high tariffs.

This is almost like a textbook physics problem where matter and energy are conserved on both sides of a reaction equation. Here, total "racism" has been conserved. It has gone from a diffuse form of racism held by America's white majority in the 19th century to a very concentrated and virulent form of racism held by America's Jewish elite and their liberal minority coalition allies. When we net out the "anti-racism" taught to whites to prevent them from rebelling against Jewish media and financial overlords, and add in racism taught to American troops to kill helpless Arabs, and then combine all this with Jewish and other liberal minority coalition racism, it appears that "total racism" has been "conserved" within our "social system" since the 19th century. Like matter and energy in a physics equation, it has not been destroyed, it has merely been shifted and transformed. This is almost mathematical in nature, not to mention completely Orwellian.

In the long run it would be much healthier for white Americans to deal with their instinctive racism in an open, honest, and decentralized level. We would be better off trying to honestly express our racism within the framework of classical liberal principles rather than continue to deny our instinctive nature as part of the current modern liberal charade.

The Orwellian tactics used by America's Jewish media elite to deal with our instinctive racism simply cannot go on forever. The situation will probably reverse sometime after the coming economic collapse.

How "anti-racist" campaigns create an unsustainable and unstable paradigm

Once one accepts the premise that racism and tribalism have an instinctive basis, this creates an entirely new perspective regarding government-mandated "anti-racist" and "anti-discrimination" campaigns. In fact, anti-racist campaigns remind me of ecological models that show how various trends sew the seeds of their own demise and must inevitably reverse themselves.

As an example, imagine a population of wolves that feeds on a population of reindeer. As the wolves become more successful, their population grows and they begin to experience more competition among themselves. Conversely, the weakest and slowest reindeer get killed off, making it harder to catch the more fit remainder of the herd. Meanwhile, with fewer reindeer around, more grass becomes available for survivors, increasing their chances of survival. As the surviving reindeer get faster, and have more grass to eat, and conversely as the wolves multiply and become increasingly less successful at hunting, we can see how eventually the wolves will reach a point of diminishing returns and the equilibrium balance between wolf and reindeer populations will eventually reverse against the wolves.

Similarly, when a society suffers from massive anti-racist propaganda, the groups that quietly retain their racism have a huge survival advantage and grow at the expense of anti-racist idealists. This is because people who can function as a group generally have an advantage over atomized individuals. In addition, since the dominant groups' defenses against alien infiltration have been anesthetized, more aliens can now flood into the country. This will ultimately cause increasing racial strife and racial consciousness as well.

At some point the growing power and abrasiveness of the covert groups and alien infiltrators will become so great that atomized, anti-racist white Americans will finally figure out that they have been duped. The cynical elites that originally promoted the anti-racist campaigns hope that by the time white Americans finally wake up, they will have been reduced to an impotent minority, and will then feel forced to accept their dispossessed status with passive resignation.

We saw how decades of ethnic suppression under communism in the former Yugoslavia helped produce a genocidal reaction after communist collapse. Therefore, because anti-racist campaigns tend to produce in the long run the exact opposite of their stated purpose, there is always have a whiff of politically expedient snake oil to them. Wilmot Robertson underscores this point in The Dispossessed Majority when he observes that the biggest self-styled anti-racists in American society, namely the Jewish elite that controls the liberal minority coalition, are in fact the biggest racists of all.

This why I believe that in the long run it is healthier for individuals and society to deal with their own instinctive racism out in the open. It may not be particularly pleasant to certain people, but handled in this way people are more likely to function on an even keel and figure out ways to productively coexist rather than go to extremes.

The "genetic interests" concept

Genetic distance between peoples can be quantified scientifically. The article "Ethnic Genetic Interests" by Michael Rienzi in the Feb 2003 issue of American Renaissance reviews Dr. Frank Salter's landmark work "Estimating Ethnic Genetic Interests: Is it Adaptive to Resist Replacement Migration?" This article is well worth reading in its entirety. In the name of brevity, I will provide some of the particularly important excerpts.

Mr. Rienzi starts by commenting that so-called "mainstream" discussions about increased crime and other impacts of Third World immigration miss the ultimate consequences, namely the impact on the genetic continuity of America's declining white population:

From an evolutionary standpoint "fitness" means "reproductive fitness," or the propagation of distinctive genes from one generation to the next. Living organisms can be seen as the vehicles by which this propagation occurs. Thus, as Dr. Salter explains, adaptive behavior "maintains or increases the frequency of one's distinctive genes in the population." Family or kin share many of the same distinctive genes, so as a person's fitness is increased by the survival and reproduction of his kin.

Increasing shared "genetic interests" within ones own population increases the chances that people will work together beneficially on a political and economic level. Decreasing ones genetic interests for any reason has the opposite effect, that is, this path increases the risks of alien strife and usurpation described by Dr. Norman Hall in Zoological Subspecies in Man, by Wilmot Robertson in The Dispossessed Majority, or by Thomas Chittum in Civil War II.

Scientists can take the genetic data from works such as Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza's 1994 book The History and Geography of Human Genes and calculate the extent of damage alien immigration does to the genetic interests of the indigenous population. The amount of genetic change can be calculated as the equivalent number of children not born to an indigenous person.

According to Dr. Salter, because Danes are similar to Englishmen, an influx of 10,000 Danes would have an impact on changing an indigenous English population by "not having" 167 children. In contrast, genetically distant people create vastly more damage. The arrival of 10,000 Bantus is the equivalent of 10,854 lost children.

Mr Rienzi observes that, "While plunging birthrates may be genetically damaging for European-derived peoples, their replacement by genetically alien immigrants is much worse. A falling birthrate reduces the population but does not transform it genetically, and a future increase in birthrates can always make up for the loss. Once immigrants have established themselves in a native territory their genes are a permanent addition. From the standpoint of genetic ethnic interests, the idea that `immigration makes up for low native birthrates' is pathological."

The following chart, taken from the aforementioned History and Geography of Human Genes, helps to show on a pictorial level the genetic distances that scientists have determined on a quantitative level. Kevin Strom notes in his article "Multiracialists Must Be Crazy" that:

"The picture painted is not one of panmixia, but of races evolving away from each other, away from the average or center, becoming more diverse in the true sense of the word, more different. This, too, is in accord with both common-sense observation and the laws of evolution, which posit racial divergence and separation as one of the very engines of Life itself."

The moral basis of "in-kind behavior"

One of the many lies fed to white Americans by their controlled national media is the notion that once they accept concepts involving genetic distance and kindred loyalty, that all of a sudden they will be at grave risk of turning into evil, totalitarian Nazi demons who want to go around slaughtering, enslaving, or oppressing alien peoples. Therefore, ideological leftism is the only way to go.

Actually one can argue that almost the exact opposite is true, namely that being an anti-racist leftist can be far more deadly in the long run for humanity than acting as an open pro-white racial nationalist who is respectful of other peoples. In fact, one might even argue that a white person must become a pro-white racial nationalist in order make humanitarianism sustainable into the future.

For starters, I already mentioned in the introduction to this series that the body count under "genetic bottom up" classical liberal (or libertarian racial nationalist) leaders such as Thomas Jefferson and William Gladstone are utterly miniscule compared to card-carrying leftist "environmental top down" leaders such as Mao Tse Tung, Lenin, and Pol Pot. Libertarian racial nationalists who appreciate the uniqueness of race, heritage, and culture for their own kind are more likely to respect these characteristics in others, compared to leftists who view all of mankind as infinitely re-programmable, interchangeable, and ultimately highly expendable masses.

We see evidence that societies following classical liberal principles can be amazingly peaceful and benign. This is reflected in the old crack that the Scandinavian countries have been blessed with "boring histories" in the last few centuries. Once the classical liberal focus on science, technology, and industry starts to pay off with rising living standards, people start cutting back on having large families and creating population pressures that encourage territorial conflicts. In addition, their desire to trade goods created by their growing industry creates another incentive to be nice towards other countries. In fact, these societies give more per capita in humanitarian aid than any other societies on this planet.

Conversely, Third World countries that can least afford to have large families are the ones who are always producing children at a faster rate than their growth in wealth. They are also the most likely to embrace and suffer from de facto forms of authoritarian Marxist Socialism. Given the vastly superior historical track record demonstrated by racially conscious, all-white First World countries who have embraced classical liberal principles, one might wonder what kind of perverse mentality would have the chutzpah to attack them for their "racism."

Secondly, when anti-racists attack racial nationalist societies, they fail to solve the altruistic reinvestment problem. After all, we know that altruism has a genetic basis, and that different races have different aptitudes for technological innovativeness, individual initiative, decentralized institutions, and humanitarianism.

People who are innately charitable, talented, and productive have to be able to perpetuate their own genetic characteristics biologically so that people of their own kind will still still be around generations into the future to be able to help other peoples. In other words, people who want to be unselfish and help other peoples in this world still have to practice a minimum amount of selfishness in order to perpetuate their own biological makeup. Otherwise, not only their own being, but also the altruistic traits that come from their being, will become extinct. The golden goose that lays the golden eggs will be dead. Put another way, one often has to be able to pull himself out of a pit before he is able to reach down and help others out.

One can hence see how misdirected kindness might in fact be the greatest cruelty in the long run. Imagine for example a father with five children who are all very bright and capable. Imagine also that an illegal alien family with a long history of mental retardation and criminal activity moves next door. The father is so anxious to appear to be a "do gooder" and "anti-racist" that he invites the kids of the neighbor to come over to his house to eat any food that his wife prepares first. He forces his own children to stand by and watch, often while they are starving, as the neighbor's kids always help themselves to every meal first. The "do gooder" father even pays for the education of the neighbor's kids. To top it off, he even tries to set them up with the right connections in business and offers to capitalize their business endeavors. Long before this, he boots his own children out of the house on to the street. In fact, he completely disinherits them before they become teenagers as part of a "tough love" approach.

Imagine that the net result of all this misdirected "do gooderism" is that two of the father's children get beaten and stabbed to death in the streets, and the other three wind up in dead-end jobs working for malicious supervisors who envy their talents as "privileged white people" and prevent them from getting ahead. Consequently, they have problems making ends meet in order to have children. In contrast, the neighbor's children manage to get degrees from professors who look the other way to avoid appearing "racist." However, once in the business world, they continually make incompetent decisions that waste resources. Nevertheless, as "minorities" they are able to fall back on government jobs with juicy salaries that allow them to have big families.

I think that the average person would recoil at such a scenario, and view this "do gooder" father as a very cruel, perverse, and misguided man. On a genetic level, his misguided sense of altruism has helped to genocide his own family line while propagating a dysfunctional alien line. The net result to society has been an increase in nonproductive and alien people over productive individuals.

Yet why would this be so very different from the affirmative action programs which deny jobs to qualified whites whose ancestors created America's institutions in the 19th century, and instead award jobs to aliens? Why is this less cruel than the CEO's of major U.S. firms, who have enjoyed all the benefits of growing up on white taxpayer money in an all-white society in the 1950's and 1960's, who were educated at white-built and white-run institutions, but who now have an investment preference for building factories in Asia and could care less if American manufacturing infrastructure collapses and fellow whites in America go unemployed?

Jared Taylor, the editor of American Renaissance, summarized the current situation very succinctly in his Feb 2003 edition:

We are the only race with governments that officially and deliberately ignore the call of racial kinship. No other race welcomes strangers into its homelands and then grants them preferences over the children of natives. No other race subsidizes alien underclasses and then blames itself for the fecklessness, incompetence and violence of these underclasses. No other face measures virtue by how many advantages it can offer to people as biologically unlike itself as possible, or by how loudly and persistently it can heap scorn on its own history, traditions, and ancestors. Members of no other race routinely adopt children of other races.


Return to question 19

Proceed to commentary for question 20


Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.