Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

by Simon Ström —“I need to comment on the differential distribution of traits between races, because although I agree with it otherwise, I don’t think Curt’s model is complete. Genetic traits are not merely more or less frequent among different groups; they are often also entirely fixed (everybody in group X has it) or completely weeded out (nobody in group X has it), especially if a trait consistently proves to have an evolutionary advantage (or disadvantage). Skin color is a very trivial but powerful example: you will never find a black-skinned European except in rare cases of de novo mutations (diseases) and subsequent familial heredity. There are millions of SNPs that are fixed among all humans as a species, and even among all mammals, etc, because they are crucial for fetal development, for properly working coagulation systems, neuronal communication, oxygen transport, etc.”— Correct. Although, again, I always prefix my statement with “meaningful” or “substantial” differences. And I mean this ONLY in the context of everyone’s ability to suppress their underclasses and produce higher trust polities by doing so. So by ‘meaningful’ I mean only that any existential human group that produces a distribution above 100 (or 105, more likely), under rule of law by the common natural law of reciprocity, should be able to construct a sovereign (libertarian) high trust polity. That ashkenazi will always be better with language, east asians better at math, and aryans (europeans) better at invention(creativity), and africans better at socialization, is just what the data tells us. I can’t levy judgment on the hindus because what ‘keeps them down’ (at least appears) to be cultural. There exist two great races that I know of: the Japanese and the Germanic. One that has potential (the russian). And I am certain the japanese have chosen survival. India will get there with time. I think China will get there with time. The rest of the world depends entirely on demographic shifts, and how successful the market is at reallocating reproduction upward.

by Simon Ström —“I need to comment on the differential distribution of traits between races, because although I agree with it otherwise, I don’t think Curt’s model is complete. Genetic traits are not merely more or less frequent among different groups; they are often also entirely fixed (everybody in group X has it) or completely weeded out (nobody in group X has it), especially if a trait consistently proves to have an evolutionary advantage (or disadvantage). Skin color is a very trivial but powerful example: you will never find a black-skinned European except in rare cases of de novo mutations (diseases) and subsequent familial heredity. There are millions of SNPs that are fixed among all humans as a species, and even among all mammals, etc, because they are crucial for fetal development, for properly working coagulation systems, neuronal communication, oxygen transport, etc.”— Correct. Although, again, I always prefix my statement with “meaningful” or “substantial” differences. And I mean this ONLY in the context of everyone’s ability to suppress their underclasses and produce higher trust polities by doing so. So by ‘meaningful’ I mean only that any existential human group that produces a distribution above 100 (or 105, more likely), under rule of law by the common natural law of reciprocity, should be able to construct a sovereign (libertarian) high trust polity. That ashkenazi will always be better with language, east asians better at math, and aryans (europeans) better at invention(creativity), and africans better at socialization, is just what the data tells us. I can’t levy judgment on the hindus because what ‘keeps them down’ (at least appears) to be cultural. There exist two great races that I know of: the Japanese and the Germanic. One that has potential (the russian). And I am certain the japanese have chosen survival. India will get there with time. I think China will get there with time. The rest of the world depends entirely on demographic shifts, and how successful the market is at reallocating reproduction upward.