You can’t. You can simply avoid the problem. All that happens in mixed race cultures, is that castes replace races. I can’t find anywhere any attempt has worked and hasn’t resulted in the total collapse of the civilization. When you increase the size of the polity you get classes. Sorry. That’s how it is for the simple reason that some people are more genetically desirable in every way than other peoples, and that’s what social class means: reproductive, associative, cooperative, economically cooperative, politically cooperative, militarily cooperative desirability. Each of us has a social market value and that social market value is what we call our class. We have higher sexual and social market value within group than across group except at the extremes. The desirability of different subraces is well documented, and is determined by ratio-proportionality and degree of neoteny. The only way to avoid the problem is to** segregate within states, or separate into separate states.** The science behind this reality is quite simple: 1 – Races and Subraces have different sized underclasses and **different distributions** around the mean in the personality traits that are genetically determined and largely immutable: a) intelligence, b) industriousness, and in rates of sexual development and depths of sexual development, and the retention of those features that illustrate retention of childhood features. (we have been domesticated just like other animals. We are no different. Some groups are more domesticated (lower testosterone, lower impulsivity, lower and slower sexual development, and therefore greater agency (self discipline of our emotions and impulses). 2 – Because of these differences **we need to produce VERY different commons** (manners, ethics, morals, norms, traditions, laws, institutions, education and training in the intuitionistic [what we call religion], in physical training, and in skills training, and in occupational training.) The median (average) (66% majority) determines the demand for formal and informal institutions (listed below). 3 – **Proximity Creates Animosity **because of the different status signals in and across groups, and the different rates of development both genetically, informatively, and culturally. Groups that are happy with their condition separately become hostile in proximity, and more hostile in cohabitation, and more hostile in political competition. This is true everywhere on earth. 4 – Because of these differences we need **very different political orders** – from the very liberal northern European high trust, to the very disciplined as we see in religious regions, to the nearly military needed in others. I could go on but the end is the end: Trying to eliminate races always and everywhere produces a **race to the bottom**. Creating many small nation states that are little more than corporations that serve the needs of their kin group and that kin group’s distribution will produce a** race to the top**. There is a very good reason why Europe evolved faster than the rest of the world combined in both the ancient and modern worlds: small homogeneous states. **Monopolies are always bad**. They are even worse in federations and empires. China is the interesting exception since the Han slowly conquer and integrate near neighbors, and are currently in the process of doing so to the remaining border nations. The Han are the largest ethnic group in the world. And they conquer and ‘make disappear’ every group possible. The Indians, who were (at least in what is today’s Pakistan) one of the oldest civilizations, were not able to progress – we don’t understand why yet but probably demographics. The Chinese stagnated despite good demographics. The Arabs destroyed every great civilization of the ancient world (North African, Egyptian, Levantine, Mesopotamian, Persian, Byzantine, (and as a consequence Roman by raids and slave taking) and ended by 1200, with the remains of their empire was only preserved by the new population of Turks who were forced out of china’s territories – but even the Turks declined rather quickly, and the middle east is still in the 7th century in most ways. South Americans are falling behind again. East Africa was on the cusp of development when the Europeans arrived and pitted the emerging civilizations against each other. **Races** are a good thing. **Subraces** are a good thing. **Tribes** are a good thing. **Clans** are a good thing. **Families** are a good thing. You can choose between kingroup-states, or Corporate States. You can choose between small very different states, or large homogeneous states. You can choose between collapse under political monopoly, or rapid progress under political diversity. Because in the spectrum from dictatorship to anglo rule of law you must possess an increasingly optimum demographic as you move from dictatorship to liberty. **The only value of scale is military conquest**. The value of homogeneity is psychological, not real. The effect of diversity in a polity that has access to political power is always the same: collapse. The best countries to live in have **small homogeneous populations** with very **small underclasses**, high median **intelligence**, and well developed **neoteny**, without hostile **competitors** on their borders.
Source: Original Site Post
-
—-”How Do We Fight Racism?”—-
You can’t. You can simply avoid the problem. All that happens in mixed race cultures, is that castes replace races. I can’t find anywhere any attempt has worked and hasn’t resulted in the total collapse of the civilization. When you increase the size of the polity you get classes. Sorry. That’s how it is for the simple reason that some people are more genetically desirable in every way than other peoples, and that’s what social class means: reproductive, associative, cooperative, economically cooperative, politically cooperative, militarily cooperative desirability. Each of us has a social market value and that social market value is what we call our class. We have higher sexual and social market value within group than across group except at the extremes. The desirability of different subraces is well documented, and is determined by ratio-proportionality and degree of neoteny. The only way to avoid the problem is to** segregate within states, or separate into separate states.** The science behind this reality is quite simple: 1 – Races and Subraces have different sized underclasses and **different distributions** around the mean in the personality traits that are genetically determined and largely immutable: a) intelligence, b) industriousness, and in rates of sexual development and depths of sexual development, and the retention of those features that illustrate retention of childhood features. (we have been domesticated just like other animals. We are no different. Some groups are more domesticated (lower testosterone, lower impulsivity, lower and slower sexual development, and therefore greater agency (self discipline of our emotions and impulses). 2 – Because of these differences **we need to produce VERY different commons** (manners, ethics, morals, norms, traditions, laws, institutions, education and training in the intuitionistic [what we call religion], in physical training, and in skills training, and in occupational training.) The median (average) (66% majority) determines the demand for formal and informal institutions (listed below). 3 – **Proximity Creates Animosity **because of the different status signals in and across groups, and the different rates of development both genetically, informatively, and culturally. Groups that are happy with their condition separately become hostile in proximity, and more hostile in cohabitation, and more hostile in political competition. This is true everywhere on earth. 4 – Because of these differences we need **very different political orders** – from the very liberal northern European high trust, to the very disciplined as we see in religious regions, to the nearly military needed in others. I could go on but the end is the end: Trying to eliminate races always and everywhere produces a **race to the bottom**. Creating many small nation states that are little more than corporations that serve the needs of their kin group and that kin group’s distribution will produce a** race to the top**. There is a very good reason why Europe evolved faster than the rest of the world combined in both the ancient and modern worlds: small homogeneous states. **Monopolies are always bad**. They are even worse in federations and empires. China is the interesting exception since the Han slowly conquer and integrate near neighbors, and are currently in the process of doing so to the remaining border nations. The Han are the largest ethnic group in the world. And they conquer and ‘make disappear’ every group possible. The Indians, who were (at least in what is today’s Pakistan) one of the oldest civilizations, were not able to progress – we don’t understand why yet but probably demographics. The Chinese stagnated despite good demographics. The Arabs destroyed every great civilization of the ancient world (North African, Egyptian, Levantine, Mesopotamian, Persian, Byzantine, (and as a consequence Roman by raids and slave taking) and ended by 1200, with the remains of their empire was only preserved by the new population of Turks who were forced out of china’s territories – but even the Turks declined rather quickly, and the middle east is still in the 7th century in most ways. South Americans are falling behind again. East Africa was on the cusp of development when the Europeans arrived and pitted the emerging civilizations against each other. **Races** are a good thing. **Subraces** are a good thing. **Tribes** are a good thing. **Clans** are a good thing. **Families** are a good thing. You can choose between kingroup-states, or Corporate States. You can choose between small very different states, or large homogeneous states. You can choose between collapse under political monopoly, or rapid progress under political diversity. Because in the spectrum from dictatorship to anglo rule of law you must possess an increasingly optimum demographic as you move from dictatorship to liberty. **The only value of scale is military conquest**. The value of homogeneity is psychological, not real. The effect of diversity in a polity that has access to political power is always the same: collapse. The best countries to live in have **small homogeneous populations** with very **small underclasses**, high median **intelligence**, and well developed **neoteny**, without hostile **competitors** on their borders.
-
Jewish (Female) Coercion vs European (Male) Coercion – Completing the Method
by James Santagata (More on Santagta’s Analysis) While we are talking about: FEMININE) – Abrahamic (Jewish > Abrahamic > Semitic) Critique (reputation destruction), Pilpul (Excuse making), and Bilbul (retreat to confusion) argument under threat of ostracization which constitute the feminine method of coercion; – as a counter to – MASCULINE) – European Logic, Science, History, and Reciprocity(law) under threat of violence, which constitute the male method of coercion; We must recognize that we have OUR OWN TRAITORS against reciprocity as well: DEFECTORS) – Abrahamic theology > Socratic Criticism (Critique) > Platonic Justification (Pilpul) > German continental philosophy et al > French enlightenment Philosophy > French Postmodern Philosophy > Anglo female Defectors. So while we have Feminine antagonists, we also have our own beta-defector/traitors, as competing with our Masculine practitioners of truth, duty, reciprocity, and markets (meritocracy). This means that we are outnumbered, and that to preserve western excellence and our own genes we must rule out of self defense, if not out of profitable offense. SANTAGATA’S COMPLETION OF THE JEWISH METHOD By James Santagata —“3 Phases Attack / Debate Strategy by Jewish Left* (You’ll notice Jewish right engages using fact, logic, etc. as a default, the left not) Phase 1: Pilpul – (Hebrew for pepper) tiring contortions to exhaust opponent while trying to mock and create the illusion of superior intellect (and morals). Phase 2: Bilbul – (Hebrew for confusion). If the opponent calls out and crushes the Pilpul, it moves to Bilbul which is to confuse and create habit. Phase 3 – Bulbul – (Hebrew for “penis” or “dick”, child taunt / usage among Israelis), if one makes it past Pilpul and Bilbul the phase moves to Bulbul, name calling and pure ad hominems. Phase 1-3 are predictive and simple patterns and techniques to quickly deflect, side step or crush Pilpul, Bilbul and finally Bulbul. There is a fourth phase but I am still searching for Hebrew or even Yiddish word that would convey that while satisfying the rhyming / semi-alliterative pattern of Pilpul, Bilbul & Bulbul.”— I’ll correct (or extend) james’ rather brilliant insight here by saying that the jewish RIGHT does not abandon appeal to reasonableness and complete the adoption of western reciprocity of costs as decidability. James’ other insight is that the Jews are also pursuing the feminine strategy of sh-t testing. In other words, they are creating demand for dominance and we are failing both them and our women. This last insight of James’, I think, completes the description of jewish behavior as cognitively feminine. It also completes the analysis that they are engaged in conspiracy rather than simply demonstrating the female reproductive instinct that is the product of female evolutionary cognitive bias. It also explains why jews maintained maternal households, and only adopted monogamy in the late middle ages, prior to practicing polygenic reproduction.
-
Jewish (Female) Coercion vs European (Male) Coercion – Completing the Method
by James Santagata (More on Santagta’s Analysis) While we are talking about: FEMININE) – Abrahamic (Jewish > Abrahamic > Semitic) Critique (reputation destruction), Pilpul (Excuse making), and Bilbul (retreat to confusion) argument under threat of ostracization which constitute the feminine method of coercion; – as a counter to – MASCULINE) – European Logic, Science, History, and Reciprocity(law) under threat of violence, which constitute the male method of coercion; We must recognize that we have OUR OWN TRAITORS against reciprocity as well: DEFECTORS) – Abrahamic theology > Socratic Criticism (Critique) > Platonic Justification (Pilpul) > German continental philosophy et al > French enlightenment Philosophy > French Postmodern Philosophy > Anglo female Defectors. So while we have Feminine antagonists, we also have our own beta-defector/traitors, as competing with our Masculine practitioners of truth, duty, reciprocity, and markets (meritocracy). This means that we are outnumbered, and that to preserve western excellence and our own genes we must rule out of self defense, if not out of profitable offense. SANTAGATA’S COMPLETION OF THE JEWISH METHOD By James Santagata —“3 Phases Attack / Debate Strategy by Jewish Left* (You’ll notice Jewish right engages using fact, logic, etc. as a default, the left not) Phase 1: Pilpul – (Hebrew for pepper) tiring contortions to exhaust opponent while trying to mock and create the illusion of superior intellect (and morals). Phase 2: Bilbul – (Hebrew for confusion). If the opponent calls out and crushes the Pilpul, it moves to Bilbul which is to confuse and create habit. Phase 3 – Bulbul – (Hebrew for “penis” or “dick”, child taunt / usage among Israelis), if one makes it past Pilpul and Bilbul the phase moves to Bulbul, name calling and pure ad hominems. Phase 1-3 are predictive and simple patterns and techniques to quickly deflect, side step or crush Pilpul, Bilbul and finally Bulbul. There is a fourth phase but I am still searching for Hebrew or even Yiddish word that would convey that while satisfying the rhyming / semi-alliterative pattern of Pilpul, Bilbul & Bulbul.”— I’ll correct (or extend) james’ rather brilliant insight here by saying that the jewish RIGHT does not abandon appeal to reasonableness and complete the adoption of western reciprocity of costs as decidability. James’ other insight is that the Jews are also pursuing the feminine strategy of sh-t testing. In other words, they are creating demand for dominance and we are failing both them and our women. This last insight of James’, I think, completes the description of jewish behavior as cognitively feminine. It also completes the analysis that they are engaged in conspiracy rather than simply demonstrating the female reproductive instinct that is the product of female evolutionary cognitive bias. It also explains why jews maintained maternal households, and only adopted monogamy in the late middle ages, prior to practicing polygenic reproduction.
-
—“Q: What Do You Define as Commons?”—
—“@curtdoolittle Sir, do you have a resource that you could direct me towards in which you describe your understanding of the commons? Thank you in advance.”—Prussian Blue Persuasion Every single thing you pay for by either action, inaction,or forgone opportunity for discount or gain: obeying manners, ethics, morals, laws, norms, traditions, paying taxes, common property in all its forms (territory, resources, infrastructure, buildings, monuments), maintaining your, your neighbor’s, and local and national common property in all its forms, acts of charity (by your own hand and own money), acts of voluntary and military service. Anything that isn’t privately owned, by individual partnership, or corporation, but creates an asset for the members of the polity.
-
—“Q: What Do You Define as Commons?”—
—“@curtdoolittle Sir, do you have a resource that you could direct me towards in which you describe your understanding of the commons? Thank you in advance.”—Prussian Blue Persuasion Every single thing you pay for by either action, inaction,or forgone opportunity for discount or gain: obeying manners, ethics, morals, laws, norms, traditions, paying taxes, common property in all its forms (territory, resources, infrastructure, buildings, monuments), maintaining your, your neighbor’s, and local and national common property in all its forms, acts of charity (by your own hand and own money), acts of voluntary and military service. Anything that isn’t privately owned, by individual partnership, or corporation, but creates an asset for the members of the polity.
-
University of Identitarianism in France
—“Les Identitaires contains a number of strains of political thought including varieties of socialism, Catholic social teaching, direct democracy, regionalist decentralisation, and Yann Fouere’s concept of a Europe of 100 flags. The group additionally advocates an anti-Islamic foreign policy, calling Islam the major threat to Europe. It was founded in 2003 by some former members of Unité Radicale and several other anti-Zionist and National Bolshevik sympathisers. It included Fabrice Robert, former Unité Radicale member, former elected representative of the National Front (FN) and also former member of the National Republican Movement (MNR), and Guillaume Luyt, former member of the monarchist Action française, former Unité Radicale member, former director of the youth organisation of the FN, National Front Youth (FNJ). Luyt claims inspiration by Guillaume Faye’s works in the Nouvelle Droite movement.”— http://vidmax.com/video/178969-Fed-up-Europeans-Now-Have-a-University-Trained-to-Fight-Back-against-Leftist-and-Illegals
-
University of Identitarianism in France
—“Les Identitaires contains a number of strains of political thought including varieties of socialism, Catholic social teaching, direct democracy, regionalist decentralisation, and Yann Fouere’s concept of a Europe of 100 flags. The group additionally advocates an anti-Islamic foreign policy, calling Islam the major threat to Europe. It was founded in 2003 by some former members of Unité Radicale and several other anti-Zionist and National Bolshevik sympathisers. It included Fabrice Robert, former Unité Radicale member, former elected representative of the National Front (FN) and also former member of the National Republican Movement (MNR), and Guillaume Luyt, former member of the monarchist Action française, former Unité Radicale member, former director of the youth organisation of the FN, National Front Youth (FNJ). Luyt claims inspiration by Guillaume Faye’s works in the Nouvelle Droite movement.”— http://vidmax.com/video/178969-Fed-up-Europeans-Now-Have-a-University-Trained-to-Fight-Back-against-Leftist-and-Illegals
-
The Four Phases of The Leftist “Debate”
by James Santagata (Mixture of truth and humor) 4 Phases Attack / Debate Strategy by Jewish Left* (You’ll notice Jewish right engages using fact, logic, etc. as a default, the left not) Phase 1: Pilpul – (Hebrew for pepper) tiring contortions to exhaust opponent while trying to mock and create the illusion of superior intellect (and morals). Phase 2: Bilbul – (Hebrew for confusion). If the opponent calls out and crushes the Pilpul, it moves to Bilbul which is to confuse and create havoc. Phase 3 – Bulbul – (Hebrew for “penis” or “dick”, child taunt / usage among Israelis), if one makes it past Pilpul and Bilbul the phase moves to Bulbul, name calling and pure ad hominems. Phase 4: BooBul: A faux-Hebrewization of English “booboo” ala “I done fucked up debating that guy!!!” + Hebrew “Bul” to create the neology and stay within and satisfy the rhyming / semi-alliterative patterns above. Phases 1-4 are predictive and simple patterns and techniques to quickly deflect, side step or crush Pilpul, Bilbul, Bulbul, and finally Boobul.
-
The Four Phases of The Leftist “Debate”
by James Santagata (Mixture of truth and humor) 4 Phases Attack / Debate Strategy by Jewish Left* (You’ll notice Jewish right engages using fact, logic, etc. as a default, the left not) Phase 1: Pilpul – (Hebrew for pepper) tiring contortions to exhaust opponent while trying to mock and create the illusion of superior intellect (and morals). Phase 2: Bilbul – (Hebrew for confusion). If the opponent calls out and crushes the Pilpul, it moves to Bilbul which is to confuse and create havoc. Phase 3 – Bulbul – (Hebrew for “penis” or “dick”, child taunt / usage among Israelis), if one makes it past Pilpul and Bilbul the phase moves to Bulbul, name calling and pure ad hominems. Phase 4: BooBul: A faux-Hebrewization of English “booboo” ala “I done fucked up debating that guy!!!” + Hebrew “Bul” to create the neology and stay within and satisfy the rhyming / semi-alliterative patterns above. Phases 1-4 are predictive and simple patterns and techniques to quickly deflect, side step or crush Pilpul, Bilbul, Bulbul, and finally Boobul.