IDEOLOGY AND ETHICS SURVEY
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:
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:
are born, not made
||Mixes easily, affable, likes to be the center
||Respect tradition and authority, follows the rules
||Easily distressed and frustrated, feels vulnerable and sensitive
||Tendency to become lost in thought and abstraction
||Keeps to oneself, feels exploited, thinks "world is
out to get me"
||Confident, cheerful, upbeat
||Avoids risks and dangers, takes safe route even if more
||Tends to be physically violent, has a taste for revenge
||Works hard at setting and achieving goals, a perfectionist
||Plans carefully, tries to make rational decisions
||Prefers emotional closeness
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
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
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
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"
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
||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
||little seasonal change, immediate gratification
|in resource scarce, male-provisioned, hunting society,
||in female provisioned gathering society, polygamy
|male provisioned society, less sexual and physical
||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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
How genetic distance influences the degree
of altruistic and parasitic behavior
One 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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"
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
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