Category: Civilization, History, and Anthropology

THE CASE AGAINST GENETIC ADMIXTURE
(Don’t shoot the messenger)
The importance of racial homogeneity increases with evolutionary neoteny and it’s advantages. In other words it benefits less neotenic peoples but harms more neotenic peoples.
Races are not equal in genetic expression. Lower neoteny expresses more so than higher neoteny. IQ mirrors racial admixture for the same reason. As such it’s much harder to express ‘white’ than it is south eurasian, southeast asian, african or the various hybrids. So the one-drop rule might be excessive, but not very.
There are four primary races from four speciation events. In neotenic order from least to most they are: african(East Africa), south eurasian (Dry Persian Gulf), european (European Ice Age), and east asian (probably tibetan stepp combined with old north coastal migration). Everyone else is a hybridization of those four. And prior to the agrarian revolution each was as different as africans europeans and east asians. Additionally, the first ‘out of africa’ generation along the coastal route from yemen to india to se asia, to pacifica to australia was more akin to old africans (San) than to new africans (Bantu), but there are no surviving isolates that I know of remaining. Even aboriginal australians are an admixture.
If you don’t care about phenotypic expression you should care a LOT about IQ distributions. Because average IQ decline in a population is the absolute worst long term consequence a people can experience, and decline in intelligence is non linear.
Europeans are the product of three groups: Native Europeans (European Hunter Gatherers), Anatolian Farmers, and European-Caucasian Steppe Herders.
This distribution is still evident in the IQs of populations in the cline from south to north of europe: Anatolian Farmers: Turkey (86), Greece (92), Sicily (90) Sardina (92); Atlantics: france(94-96), Spain(98); and Germanics (100-101), then the north slavic and poland (96). Then the finnics in Estonia and Finland (100-101).
At present (a) the Flynn effect is reversing (dysgenic reproduction) (b) the best people have the fewest if any children (asymmetric reproduction), (c) immigration is lowering average IQ, (d) the quality of education due to ‘equality in the classroom’ combined with women teachers is declining accordingly – the result a less capable poplation offset by import of high performing university students, technologists, researchers, and even businesspeople – effecting the economy but not the social and political order.
So the outcome is rather obvious in the data: you cannot have a high trust western european country, with participatory democracy, technological innovation and the wealth that results from a population with an IQ much under 100. The lower the IQ the greater the demand for authoritarianism.
And in fact, a population needs, as England did before the industrial revolution, and ashkenazi did until they outbred, an IQ over 105 and preferably over 110 to maintain intellectual, political, and economic competitive advantage and the resulting quality of life of the population.
Because your quality of life is more dependent upon the country’s average IQ than it is your own.

Cheers

Reply addressees: @IsseKwok

HOW LONG HAS FRANCE BEEN THE ENEMY OF EUROPE? (Forever basically)

–“CURT: You’ve mentioned that France is the enemy of Europe. When did that start?”–

Great Question
0 – Paleolithic agrarian age Atlantics (monolith builders) vs the steppe herder expansion that conquered them.
1 – Ancestral Venus cults of the Gaulish territory vs the masculine Germanic pagan cults.
2 – Successful Roman conquest of Gaul but not Germania.
3 – Latinization of Gaul during the roman administration
4 – The division of the Carolingian Empire (843) – largely laid the groundwork for future French-German divisions, including the emergence of the Holy Roman Empire of the Germanic Peoples.
5 – The investiture Conflict (11th-12th Centuries). A conflict between popes and Holy Roman Emperors over the right to appoint church officials and invest them with spiritual authority. Although not a direct France vs. Germania conflict, it involved significant players from both territories and highlighted the growing ideological and political divisions within Christendom, often aligning German emperors and French kings on opposing sides.
6 – The french slaughter of the Templars (1307) by King Philip IV of France, so that the monarchy could escape his debt – as a result, handing over European banking to the Jews.
7 – The 14th century French attempt to move the papacy, papal court, and the seat of the church to Avignon in France – including succeeding with seven successive popes. Followed by the return to italy and the Western Schism (1378-1417), a period of division within the Catholic Church where rival claimants to the Papacy in Rome and Avignon (and later Pisa) led to a split among Europe’s Christian states.
8 – The French attack on the Rise of the Habsburgs (15th Century Onwards) that united the HRE with Spain and her territories, out of envy and little else. (After the conflicts between France and the HRE during the franco english 100 years war).
9. The french-catholic vs germanic-protestant divide and the wars of religion.
10. Rousseau’s ‘catholic’ rebellion against the english empirical revolution and the ango invention of tht modern rule of law state setting the chain of evnts in progress that would lead to communism.
11. The napoleonic destruction of the holy roman empire and the monarchies of europe setting the stage for the necessity of the formation of the german state, th german attempt to recover losses to france, and the first world war.
12: The french abuse of the WW1 treaty punishing germany despite germania being in the right throughout history – especially in it’s domestication and integration of eastern and baltic europe into the european economy and political order.
13. The french support for jewish postmodernism as a central objective of the french academy.
14. The french postwar undermining of the american project to prevent another world war through global trade at every opportunity.
15. The French attempt to ‘rule europe’ especially Germany by the European union.
16. The French attempt to unify with russia postwar only ending as putin betrayed france in 2022.
17. The french sponsorship for multiculturalism not only in france but a demand for it across europe.

By the late Middle Ages and into the early modern period, these factors had firmly established a complex and often antagonistic relationship between French and German territories, even if the notion of “national enemies” in a modern sense was still taking shape.

France has a chip on its shoulder, like a spoiled child who keeps losing the game.

Anyway, I could make this list five times as long with little effort. This is just off the top of my head.

Reply addressees: @DwightExMachina @radiofreenw