Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

  • What Race Were The First Humans?

    1. Today we can determine at least three or four major races today , and about 30-some-odd minor or sub-races, and a few hundred major tribes, and a larger number of clans.
    2. It is very hard to rewind the clock, but it’s clear that waves have emerged out of africa and the levant, that the earliest wave followed the water. Aside from that wave and the round vs almond eyes, the others are harder to judge. Although we see very clear clusters. (which we see in haplogroups.
    3. It is not clear that the additional waves spread from africa or the levant. It is increasingly suspicious that the black sea , caspian sea, persian gulf, and mediterranean, and Nile provided a trade network between the major continents – although sub-saharan africa was largely fed through trade via today’s yemen – and that trade friction east and west across the african interior is extremely challenging. You can see the genetic vector thru africa is through ethiopia, and the arab vector is through the narrows of ethiopia-yemen. So while early migrations followed the obvious water routes, it is more likely that subsequent migrations. And in particular the caucasian( European – Iranian(semitic,north african) – Indian) expansion was as successful as the earlier peoples we call today the southeast asians.
    4. It is not clear how west-eurasians, and in particular whites, developed -although it appears that they developed along the edge of the ice age around 20k years ago.
    5. But by the time of the invention of metalworking, the different regions had begun to speciate, (adapt to local conditions), and that the rapid increase in population, prosperity, and trade made possible by metalworking, husbandry, and early agrarianism began to interfere with speciation.
    6. All races developed using very utilitarian selection more so than mutation, by selecting for pedomorphic traits that are more useful in cooperation. However, some groups were more able than others. In particular east asians were most successful at isolating themselves from steppe and desert people. And europeans were less but largely successful. And so were africans.
    7. The largest differences between races and subraces are the degree of pedomorphic evolution, and the bias for female or male traits. And this is most evident by the relative SIZE OF EACH GROUP’S CLASSES when distributed by the two dominant personality traits of IQ and Conscientiousness. And more so by the bias between female and mail behavioral traits.
    8. All peoples demonstrate kin selection at all scales which is why people vote almost entirely by race when under race competition, subrace when under subrace competition, religion, when under religious competition, class when under class competition. And this is necessary for the simple reason that elites either carry or do not carry kin, for the simple reason that the pareto equilibrium is inescapable in organizing humans in voluntary organizations of production, and the nash equilibrium is inescapable in friendship, mating, and exchange.
    9. Abrahamic religion was the first successful mass movement of fictionalism that was able to rally the underclasses(pastoralists) against the aristocracy (metalworkers and agrarians). And it culminated in the Abrahamic Dark Age that cost something on the order of 500M lives.
    10. Abrahamic rationalism was developed first by Augustine, but modernized by kant. then Abrahamic pseudoscience was developed by Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, the Frankfurt school. But it was demonstrated to be false by the 1960’s when The french invented Postmodernism by simply denying all scientific truths in order to create a new abrahamic fictionalism (falsehood) we call political correctness. However, they are all just outright fabrications, just as the original abrahamic religions were all just outright fabrications.
    11. So today we try to prevent the second abrahamic dark age, and restore science instead of pseudoscience, truth instead of political correctness and postmodernism, rule of law instead of socialist rule by discretion, and cooperative tripartism instead of the lie of equality.

    This map of world haplogroups shows that between africa and east asia, how close or distant we are from one another.

    The indo-iranian-european expansion was … extremely successful and led to civilizations. The Iranian most successful of all. The arab-african counter-enlightenment (Abrahamic Dark Age) destroyed the great empires and by 1200 had set in course the impoverishment of the ancient world’s breadbasket.

    In europe almost all of us existing are very near kin, because we literally killed off most of our underclasses between 700 and 1200.

    https://www.quora.com/What-race-were-the-first-humans

  • Frederick the Great is at least as worthy of study as are Alexander, Caesar, Aur

    Frederick the Great is at least as worthy of study as are Alexander, Caesar, Aurelius, Charlemagne, Bismarck and Hitler. Napoleon is only interesting for his generalship. As a frenchman he was as always, a cancer for europe. Hitler and his Generals Bismarck Frederick the Great Henry the Eighth Charlemagne Aurelius Caesar (I am not sure, I think he’s a napoleon who harmed europe forever by destroying the ancient civilization of the celts. And the genocide of carthage … as bad as the muslims) Alexander. The Spartans The Trojan War. The Indo European Expansion. And The Abrahamic Dark Age as a revolt against aristocracy and reason.
  • Frederick the Great is at least as worthy of study as are Alexander, Caesar, Aur

    Frederick the Great is at least as worthy of study as are Alexander, Caesar, Aurelius, Charlemagne, Bismarck and Hitler. Napoleon is only interesting for his generalship. As a frenchman he was as always, a cancer for europe. Hitler and his Generals Bismarck Frederick the Great Henry the Eighth Charlemagne Aurelius Caesar (I am not sure, I think he’s a napoleon who harmed europe forever by destroying the ancient civilization of the celts. And the genocide of carthage … as bad as the muslims) Alexander. The Spartans The Trojan War. The Indo European Expansion. And The Abrahamic Dark Age as a revolt against aristocracy and reason.
  • Frederick the Great is at least as worthy of study as are Alexander, Caesar, Aur

    Frederick the Great is at least as worthy of study as are Alexander, Caesar, Aurelius, Charlemagne, Bismarck and Hitler.

    Napoleon is only interesting for his generalship. As a frenchman he was as always, a cancer for europe.

    Hitler and his Generals

    Bismarck

    Frederick the Great

    Henry the Eighth

    Charlemagne

    Aurelius

    Caesar (I am not sure, I think he’s a napoleon who harmed europe forever by destroying the ancient civilization of the celts. And the genocide of carthage … as bad as the muslims)

    Alexander.

    The Spartans

    The Trojan War.

    The Indo European Expansion.

    And The Abrahamic Dark Age as a revolt against aristocracy and reason.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-01 22:59:00 UTC

  • Our Kin Are Only As Old As The Enlightenment

    Please think about this very seriously and try to understand what it means to be ‘european’. We are so closely related it’s actually ‘odd’ that we don’t look even more alike. Everything that comes out only serves to confirm that europe has undergone a series of genetic miracles because of our upwardly redistributive social order. –“The most recent common ancestor of every European today (except for recent immigrants to the Continent) was someone who lived in Europe in the surprisingly recent past—only about 600 years ago. In other words, all Europeans alive today have among their ancestors the same man or woman who lived around 1400. Before that date, according to Chang’s model, the number of ancestors common to all Europeans today increased, until, about a thousand years ago, a peculiar situation prevailed: 20 percent of the adult Europeans alive in 1000 would turn out to be the ancestors of no one living today (that is, they had no children or all their descendants eventually died childless); each of the remaining 80 percent would turn out to be a direct ancestor of every European living today.”– THE GREAT PURGE WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL
  • OUR KIN ARE ONLY AS OLD AS THE ENLIGHTENMENT Please think about this very seriou

    OUR KIN ARE ONLY AS OLD AS THE ENLIGHTENMENT

    Please think about this very seriously and try to understand what it means to be ‘european’. We are so closely related it’s actually ‘odd’ that we don’t look even more alike. Everything that comes out only serves to confirm that europe has undergone a series of genetic miracles because of our upwardly redistributive social order.

    –“The most recent common ancestor of every European today (except for recent immigrants to the Continent) was someone who lived in Europe in the surprisingly recent past—only about 600 years ago. In other words, all Europeans alive today have among their ancestors the same man or woman who lived around 1400. Before that date, according to Chang’s model, the number of ancestors common to all Europeans today increased, until, about a thousand years ago, a peculiar situation prevailed: 20 percent of the adult Europeans alive in 1000 would turn out to be the ancestors of no one living today (that is, they had no children or all their descendants eventually died childless); each of the remaining 80 percent would turn out to be a direct ancestor of every European living today.”–

    THE GREAT PURGE WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL


    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-01 22:21:00 UTC

  • Our Kin Are Only As Old As The Enlightenment

    Please think about this very seriously and try to understand what it means to be ‘european’. We are so closely related it’s actually ‘odd’ that we don’t look even more alike. Everything that comes out only serves to confirm that europe has undergone a series of genetic miracles because of our upwardly redistributive social order. –“The most recent common ancestor of every European today (except for recent immigrants to the Continent) was someone who lived in Europe in the surprisingly recent past—only about 600 years ago. In other words, all Europeans alive today have among their ancestors the same man or woman who lived around 1400. Before that date, according to Chang’s model, the number of ancestors common to all Europeans today increased, until, about a thousand years ago, a peculiar situation prevailed: 20 percent of the adult Europeans alive in 1000 would turn out to be the ancestors of no one living today (that is, they had no children or all their descendants eventually died childless); each of the remaining 80 percent would turn out to be a direct ancestor of every European living today.”– THE GREAT PURGE WAS VERY SUCCESSFUL
  • Why Do White Americans Appropriate European Culture?

    Um. (a) Why do europeans (overwhelmingly) appropriate American culture? (b) Americans pay very little attention to europe other than the UK. And (c) Because while europeans are better cultured, and often better educated, and certainly better disciplined – europeans are also ‘provincial’ from our perspective, and the data bears that out.

    The french are effeminate and have been our enemies since the second world war. The Germans are culturally compatible with us, but … cowardly by comparison. And the Brits have all gone soft and mad. And frankly other than italy, which we share love of food and beauty with, there isn’t much reason to think about europe at all. (Really).

    If the Germans ever regain their self respect and return to military leadership of europe, so that we don’t have to carry their moral self indulgence any longer, that would be something worth talking about. 😉

    I mean, the people we are most interested in are the japanese and the russians.

    At least they have some SPINE.

    Europe is a conquered continent, and really needs to recover.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-white-Americans-appropriate-European-culture

  • Why Do White Americans Appropriate European Culture?

    Um. (a) Why do europeans (overwhelmingly) appropriate American culture? (b) Americans pay very little attention to europe other than the UK. And (c) Because while europeans are better cultured, and often better educated, and certainly better disciplined – europeans are also ‘provincial’ from our perspective, and the data bears that out.

    The french are effeminate and have been our enemies since the second world war. The Germans are culturally compatible with us, but … cowardly by comparison. And the Brits have all gone soft and mad. And frankly other than italy, which we share love of food and beauty with, there isn’t much reason to think about europe at all. (Really).

    If the Germans ever regain their self respect and return to military leadership of europe, so that we don’t have to carry their moral self indulgence any longer, that would be something worth talking about. 😉

    I mean, the people we are most interested in are the japanese and the russians.

    At least they have some SPINE.

    Europe is a conquered continent, and really needs to recover.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-white-Americans-appropriate-European-culture

  • by @MartialSociety The Great Intellectual division of The West—Aristotle vs Plat

    by @MartialSociety The Great Intellectual division of The West—Aristotle vs Platonism, Empiricism vs Rationalism, Naturalism vs Idealism—finds its origins in the acquisitional (worldly) conflict between those who posses agency, and consequently produce order & the transcendence of Man from beast… …to gods through the incremental mastery over self, ignorance & nature against those who lack agency, submit to chaos, produce a dysgenic dominance hierarchy & surrender to a hostile & unknowble nature. Less poetically, this conflict has always been familial (genetic) in nature, and that by the time of the Axial age, that warfare became of those who can compete in the market for rule & sovereignty against those who could not compete nor provide sufficient incentive to… …cooperate by market through strict observance to the natural laws of sovereign men & to the norms that produce (increase) & maintain agency. More scientifically, Inter-group (familial, tribal, ethnic, racial) competition in the acquisition of (a) resources (free-energy & raw materials, which we employ in the production of consumption goods, capital & (warfare) technologies at increasing rates of entropy dissipation).. … (b) females (temporal persistence: genetic survival across time) & (c) territorial assets (strategic holdings of superior land, ports, trade routes & natural defense) selects for groups with marginally, yet incrementally, superior/optimal management of human capital by norm.. …law & institutions via incremental elimination/suppression (negativa) of groups with suboptimal, marginally inferior institutions, norms, genetic capital, territorial (resource) holdings. Let us return from our detour, though it is worthy to note that I found the reduction necessary so as to avoid any charges that I hold to convictions contrary to the facts produced by the sciences, but I also wanted to preface a more abstract discussion on language and grammars.. …with parallel (commensurable) arguments, written with increasing informational completeness covarying with specificity in terminology, and varying inversely with the degree of assumed context (shared frames of reference). As outlined above, incompletely admittedly, the origin of philosophical (metaphysical, epistemic & methodological) disagreement stems from genetic conflict. And we know that from the cognitive sciences that the latter determines the former, though the particular-manifestations… …will vary according to the relevant decision-ecologies; which can be modeled as Nash equilibriums, as acquisitional games between competing agents & clusters (familial, tribal, class, ethnic & racial) with three means of acquisition: (a) remuneration, (b) violence… (c) manipulation of social accnting (gossip, fraud & deceit). The agents will be bounded by these constraints & and produce a Pareto-optimal distribution as they inter-act (make choices in a social ecology) w/ other agents in forming & joining clusters (defect<->cooperate axes). & when competing with other agents and clusters (suppression/defense<->parasitism/predation axes). I maintain that competitively-inferior kin-groups and their individual members, have the incentive to form larger coalitions inasmuch as they *must* do so in order to survive… …(resist domestication), &that in order to maintain the cohesiveness (sufficient degree of non-conflict) of coalitions between non-kin requires the production of abstract (non-worldly) symbols and memes, and consequently the norms & signals required for… …the functioning of the dominance hierarchy.