Theme: Civilization

  • No More Lies on Race

    RACES EXIST, ARE MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT, AND IMPORTANTLY SO.The Immateriality of Race Is a Social Construction (lie) to Destroy Great Civilizations 1 – The Four Major Races: West Eurasian (European), South Eurasian (today’s islam and india), Mongoloid(East Asian), and Negroid (African). The rest are hybrids of these four. 2 – The South Eurasian Race: Includes the  peoples of north africa, the levant, and  mesopotamia, caucuses, iran, the central asian steppe, india,  and what we consider the turkic branch is a hybrid of iranic and mongoloid (east asian). 3 – 750M: White “Loosely” European Peoples (Subrace) means ‘european christendom’ which includes southern europeans: southern spain, the boot of italy, the byzantine balkans who are of anatolian rather than russo-ukrainian origins. 4 – 450M: White “Narrowly” Northern European Peoples (Minor Race) means descendants of atlantic, germanic, and slavic europeans from france to the urals, of aristotelian(atheist), protestant, catholic, and Orthodox backgrounds, who are primarily the descendents of russo-ukrainian, and built their civilization in the cold. White nationalists, and white identitarians use the narrow definition. When the rest of us refer to european civilization we use the looser definition. BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD BEFORE I’ve answered this question before (it’s a repeat). There are about 450M Northern European ‘white’ people. (atlantics, germanics, northern and eastern slavs) If we include earlier generations such as southern europeans (anatolians), and old europe (balkans) are about 750M white people. (FWIW: The white population of the united states is around 190m.) Quote from a specialist: —“The truth is that anyone who can read a PCA-plot will know that Europe is genetically divided into two different categories and that is North and South European, with the latter being less homogenous and closer to the Middle East in terms of FST-distance, which strengthens the idea that Southern Europe has received gene flow from West Asia. This becomes more evident when you see that Sardinians do not express this pattern (pulling toward the Middle East) despite having no Steppe ancestry.With that being said, you should take a look at the plot I attached by Lazaridis et al (2016) which showcases the intra-European division. Ignore the non-European clusters. What you will see is that Chris’ theory of Italy and Spain being supposedly half-White is null and void, although admittedly there is South-North cline within Italy (since Italy is the country with the highest genetic diversity in Europe).The point is that even the northern part of Italy is well within the Southern European genetic continuum. The only country which has a legitimate North Europe-South Europe crossover cline is France.”—EUROPEAN GENETIC PLOT (Attached)

    40468510_288780981718799_7210592238433206272_o.jpg

    WEST EURASIAN GENETIC PLOT (Attached)

    40406718_288781251718772_5349829599112986624_o.jpg

    WORLD GENETIC PLOT (attached)

    40390788_288781041718793_8816571091267878912_o.jpg

    TESTOSTERONE DIFFERENCES VS IQ

    11207345_10153376715007264_3058439401056591190_n.jpg

    NEOTENY IN HUMANS

    brin_neoteny.jpg

    NEOTENY IN CANINES

    developmentalstagesofthedog_wordweb.jpg

    THE PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC ATTACK ON CIVILIZATION. The curse of postmodern pseudoscience in most of the other answers. Postmodernism like Marxism was designed, like Abrahamic Religions, as an attack on European Peoples (civilization), to eradicate our civlization in the modern world just as Abrahamic religion was used to eradicate the five great civilizations of the ancient world: Roman New Europe), Byzantine (old europe), Anatolian, Persian (Iranic), Egyptian, and North African. All those civilizations were destroyed by the last attempt at cultural destruction. Why? Marxism/Postmodernism in the modern world, and Abrahamic Religion in the ancient world foster dysgenic rapid reproduction of the underclasses reversing genetic domestication under small farm mixed agrarianism, effectively weaponizing reproduction and ignorance and superstition against civilization. There are reasons that the Han, Koreans,Japanese and Europeans succeeded and other civilizations failed to maintain rates of innovation. The reason is that the Han, Koreans and Japanese remained insular and homogeneous, and whites succeed as long as they also remain homogeneous and practice eugenic reproduction through manorialism (meritocracy). The rest of the world did the opposite and the sizes of their underclasses pose such a burden that they cannot produce sufficient middle and upper classes to produce high trust commercially successful political orders. THE REALITY OF RACES, SUBRACES, MINOR RACES Races, Subraces, Tribes, Clans, Families and Classes can interbreed, but differences matter. The primary differences are the degree of neoteny (white and east asian) vs deeper maturity (semites, iranics, africans, and australoids), the more feminine or masculine structure of the brain (yes really), and the size of the underclass due largely to winter climates, manorial farming, and close cohabitation in winters while caring for animals. (Or in the european and chinese cases, aggressive use of criminal punishment – particularly european hanging of large portions of the underclasses every generation). Using size of class, degree of neoteny or maturity, and balance of masculine and feminine traits, each of the Races, Subraces, an sometimes Tribes, has evolved (adapted) for certain excellences that are geography, climate, means of production, and method of socialization dependent. Human domestication like animal domestication, uses neotenic selection to suppress sexual maturity and preserve the features and cooperative intuitions of youth. The goal for any polity is to increase intelligence, industriousness, and trust. Counter to our assumptions the San (the oldest continuous tribe) were more gentle, and humans appear to have become increasingly AGGRESSIVE in some regions and increasingly GENTLE in other regions, which is easily measurable by group testosterone distributions, rates and ages of maturity, and ‘hardiness’ of features (deeper maturity). By the upward redistribution of reproduction (china, europe, and jewish) you increase the distribution of neoteny in the public largely by the reduction of rates of reproduction of the underclasses. The simple fact is that many people are a harm to their fellows simply because they are a drag on norms, laws, traditions, values, and institutions, literacy, technology, and the workforce capacity – perhaps most importantly making a sufficient middle class to produce a voluntary organization of a Pareto hierarchy and market economy impossible, and forcing the dependence upon familial corruption (india, south america, south europe, all of islam) despite access to trade routes. THE OPTIMUM POLITICAL ORDER The optimum political order is homogenous – diversity is always and everywhere bad for obvious and well documented reasons. It trades short term profits for long term costs that destroy the political order and reduce it to levantine, south american, and indian levels of poverty and corruption. The optimum political order is Small – The only value of scale military power to exploit others. The only value of federations is to produce defense of trade routes and prohibit rent seeking (corruption) on those trade routes. THE EUGENICISTS WERE RIGHT. And any group of size (the east asians) who succeed will leave the rest of the world behind. The europeans managed by the late middle ages to nearly eliminate their underclasses. This is why European intelligence is dropping (the flynn effect is reversing). Not because of individuals. But because of restoration of their underclasses. If Norway can lose IQ (they have) then any group can. Smarter people are more moral – simply because they can afford to be. “NO MORE LIES”

  • No More Lies on Race

    RACES EXIST, ARE MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT, AND IMPORTANTLY SO.The Immateriality of Race Is a Social Construction (lie) to Destroy Great Civilizations 1 – The Four Major Races: West Eurasian (European), South Eurasian (today’s islam and india), Mongoloid(East Asian), and Negroid (African). The rest are hybrids of these four. 2 – The South Eurasian Race: Includes the  peoples of north africa, the levant, and  mesopotamia, caucuses, iran, the central asian steppe, india,  and what we consider the turkic branch is a hybrid of iranic and mongoloid (east asian). 3 – 750M: White “Loosely” European Peoples (Subrace) means ‘european christendom’ which includes southern europeans: southern spain, the boot of italy, the byzantine balkans who are of anatolian rather than russo-ukrainian origins. 4 – 450M: White “Narrowly” Northern European Peoples (Minor Race) means descendants of atlantic, germanic, and slavic europeans from france to the urals, of aristotelian(atheist), protestant, catholic, and Orthodox backgrounds, who are primarily the descendents of russo-ukrainian, and built their civilization in the cold. White nationalists, and white identitarians use the narrow definition. When the rest of us refer to european civilization we use the looser definition. BEEN DOWN THIS ROAD BEFORE I’ve answered this question before (it’s a repeat). There are about 450M Northern European ‘white’ people. (atlantics, germanics, northern and eastern slavs) If we include earlier generations such as southern europeans (anatolians), and old europe (balkans) are about 750M white people. (FWIW: The white population of the united states is around 190m.) Quote from a specialist: —“The truth is that anyone who can read a PCA-plot will know that Europe is genetically divided into two different categories and that is North and South European, with the latter being less homogenous and closer to the Middle East in terms of FST-distance, which strengthens the idea that Southern Europe has received gene flow from West Asia. This becomes more evident when you see that Sardinians do not express this pattern (pulling toward the Middle East) despite having no Steppe ancestry.With that being said, you should take a look at the plot I attached by Lazaridis et al (2016) which showcases the intra-European division. Ignore the non-European clusters. What you will see is that Chris’ theory of Italy and Spain being supposedly half-White is null and void, although admittedly there is South-North cline within Italy (since Italy is the country with the highest genetic diversity in Europe).The point is that even the northern part of Italy is well within the Southern European genetic continuum. The only country which has a legitimate North Europe-South Europe crossover cline is France.”—EUROPEAN GENETIC PLOT (Attached)

    40468510_288780981718799_7210592238433206272_o.jpg

    WEST EURASIAN GENETIC PLOT (Attached)

    40406718_288781251718772_5349829599112986624_o.jpg

    WORLD GENETIC PLOT (attached)

    40390788_288781041718793_8816571091267878912_o.jpg

    TESTOSTERONE DIFFERENCES VS IQ

    11207345_10153376715007264_3058439401056591190_n.jpg

    NEOTENY IN HUMANS

    brin_neoteny.jpg

    NEOTENY IN CANINES

    developmentalstagesofthedog_wordweb.jpg

    THE PSEUDO-SCIENTIFIC ATTACK ON CIVILIZATION. The curse of postmodern pseudoscience in most of the other answers. Postmodernism like Marxism was designed, like Abrahamic Religions, as an attack on European Peoples (civilization), to eradicate our civlization in the modern world just as Abrahamic religion was used to eradicate the five great civilizations of the ancient world: Roman New Europe), Byzantine (old europe), Anatolian, Persian (Iranic), Egyptian, and North African. All those civilizations were destroyed by the last attempt at cultural destruction. Why? Marxism/Postmodernism in the modern world, and Abrahamic Religion in the ancient world foster dysgenic rapid reproduction of the underclasses reversing genetic domestication under small farm mixed agrarianism, effectively weaponizing reproduction and ignorance and superstition against civilization. There are reasons that the Han, Koreans,Japanese and Europeans succeeded and other civilizations failed to maintain rates of innovation. The reason is that the Han, Koreans and Japanese remained insular and homogeneous, and whites succeed as long as they also remain homogeneous and practice eugenic reproduction through manorialism (meritocracy). The rest of the world did the opposite and the sizes of their underclasses pose such a burden that they cannot produce sufficient middle and upper classes to produce high trust commercially successful political orders. THE REALITY OF RACES, SUBRACES, MINOR RACES Races, Subraces, Tribes, Clans, Families and Classes can interbreed, but differences matter. The primary differences are the degree of neoteny (white and east asian) vs deeper maturity (semites, iranics, africans, and australoids), the more feminine or masculine structure of the brain (yes really), and the size of the underclass due largely to winter climates, manorial farming, and close cohabitation in winters while caring for animals. (Or in the european and chinese cases, aggressive use of criminal punishment – particularly european hanging of large portions of the underclasses every generation). Using size of class, degree of neoteny or maturity, and balance of masculine and feminine traits, each of the Races, Subraces, an sometimes Tribes, has evolved (adapted) for certain excellences that are geography, climate, means of production, and method of socialization dependent. Human domestication like animal domestication, uses neotenic selection to suppress sexual maturity and preserve the features and cooperative intuitions of youth. The goal for any polity is to increase intelligence, industriousness, and trust. Counter to our assumptions the San (the oldest continuous tribe) were more gentle, and humans appear to have become increasingly AGGRESSIVE in some regions and increasingly GENTLE in other regions, which is easily measurable by group testosterone distributions, rates and ages of maturity, and ‘hardiness’ of features (deeper maturity). By the upward redistribution of reproduction (china, europe, and jewish) you increase the distribution of neoteny in the public largely by the reduction of rates of reproduction of the underclasses. The simple fact is that many people are a harm to their fellows simply because they are a drag on norms, laws, traditions, values, and institutions, literacy, technology, and the workforce capacity – perhaps most importantly making a sufficient middle class to produce a voluntary organization of a Pareto hierarchy and market economy impossible, and forcing the dependence upon familial corruption (india, south america, south europe, all of islam) despite access to trade routes. THE OPTIMUM POLITICAL ORDER The optimum political order is homogenous – diversity is always and everywhere bad for obvious and well documented reasons. It trades short term profits for long term costs that destroy the political order and reduce it to levantine, south american, and indian levels of poverty and corruption. The optimum political order is Small – The only value of scale military power to exploit others. The only value of federations is to produce defense of trade routes and prohibit rent seeking (corruption) on those trade routes. THE EUGENICISTS WERE RIGHT. And any group of size (the east asians) who succeed will leave the rest of the world behind. The europeans managed by the late middle ages to nearly eliminate their underclasses. This is why European intelligence is dropping (the flynn effect is reversing). Not because of individuals. But because of restoration of their underclasses. If Norway can lose IQ (they have) then any group can. Smarter people are more moral – simply because they can afford to be. “NO MORE LIES”

  • NO MORE LIES ON RACE RACES EXIST, ARE MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT, AND IMPORTANTLY SO

    NO MORE LIES ON RACE

    RACES EXIST, ARE MEANINGFULLY DIFFERENT, AND IMPORTANTLY SO.

    THE IMMATERIALITY OF RACE IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION (LIE) TO DESTROY GREAT CIVILIZATIONS

    1 – The Four… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=288782095052021&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-31 00:06:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1035317768567046144

  • “When the world ends, do you think it’s gonna look like a lush paradise as God p

    —“When the world ends, do you think it’s gonna look like a lush paradise as God promised, or look like the planet is beyond ravaged?”—

    There are no gods, they are mere fictions men invented so that we can lie to ourselves about being a transitory life form that must struggle to survive ,and use the comfort of that lie to manipulate people politically rather than educate them so that they can act rationally to improve their condition, or welcome the end to their discomfort.

    The planet will turn to ash first because the sun will expand.

    The planet will be destroyed and absorbed by the sun after it expands.

    The sun will collapse and take everything with it at the end of its life.

    We are in adulthood of our star and do not have unlimited time to get off the planet.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-08-30 21:28:00 UTC

  • Heathen: People of the Land – Our Land. (Not Urbanites)

    Heathen: “People of the Heath.” “Rural”. “We/Us”.

    —“Heathen: It is most probable that the Gmc. word *haiþana- referred to a person living on the heath, i.e. on common land, i.e. a person of one’s own community. It would then be a neutral word used by heathen people in order to refer to each other.”–

    Operational Name:

    The term isn’t Pagan or Heathen vs. Abrahamist so much as it’s NATURALIST vs SUPERNATURALIST.

    Heath or Land

    land (n.) Old English lond, land, “ground, soil,” also “definite portion of the earth’s surface, home region of a person or a people, territory marked by political boundaries,” from Proto-Germanic *landja- (source also of Old Norse, Old Frisian Dutch, Gothic land, German Land), perhaps from PIE *lendh- (2) “land, open land, heath” (source also of Old Irish land, Middle Welsh llan “an open space,” Welsh llan “enclosure, church,” Breton lann “heath,” source of French lande; Old Church Slavonic ledina “waste land, heath,” Czech lada “fallow land”). But Boutkan finds no IE etymology and suspects a substratum word in Germanic, Etymological evidence and Gothic use indicates the original Germanic sense was “a definite portion of the earth’s surface owned by an individual or home of a nation.” The meaning was early extended to “solid surface of the earth,” a sense which once had belonged to the ancestor of Modern English earth (n.). Original senses of land in English now tend to go with country. To take the lay of the land is a nautical expression.

  • Heathen: People of the Land – Our Land. (Not Urbanites)

    Heathen: “People of the Heath.” “Rural”. “We/Us”.

    —“Heathen: It is most probable that the Gmc. word *haiþana- referred to a person living on the heath, i.e. on common land, i.e. a person of one’s own community. It would then be a neutral word used by heathen people in order to refer to each other.”–

    Operational Name:

    The term isn’t Pagan or Heathen vs. Abrahamist so much as it’s NATURALIST vs SUPERNATURALIST.

    Heath or Land

    land (n.) Old English lond, land, “ground, soil,” also “definite portion of the earth’s surface, home region of a person or a people, territory marked by political boundaries,” from Proto-Germanic *landja- (source also of Old Norse, Old Frisian Dutch, Gothic land, German Land), perhaps from PIE *lendh- (2) “land, open land, heath” (source also of Old Irish land, Middle Welsh llan “an open space,” Welsh llan “enclosure, church,” Breton lann “heath,” source of French lande; Old Church Slavonic ledina “waste land, heath,” Czech lada “fallow land”). But Boutkan finds no IE etymology and suspects a substratum word in Germanic, Etymological evidence and Gothic use indicates the original Germanic sense was “a definite portion of the earth’s surface owned by an individual or home of a nation.” The meaning was early extended to “solid surface of the earth,” a sense which once had belonged to the ancestor of Modern English earth (n.). Original senses of land in English now tend to go with country. To take the lay of the land is a nautical expression.

  • -“Q:How did the concept of race begin?”-

    I think this is well understood so I don’t know why anyone would ask it. However: HERE IS THE CORRECT ANSWER The categorization of people into groups of ethnicities is as old as the written record. People are referred to by the color of their skin and the egyptians who were an advanced people for many centuries were diligent in their depiction of the races. Greeks and romans categorized groups of people by region and skin tone and temperament. And the romans identified that personality traits were driven by geography and climate. 16th century, the ‘shrinking of the world’ due to the Age of Sail led to civilizational and ethnic categorizations. By the mid 19th century (1800’s) with the advent of Darwin’s research in particular, people both recognized that most ethnic groups could be categorized by regions of the world. The study of evolution made it rather obvious that we developed regional characteristics just as did all other animals. The success of the early eugenics movement, but the retaliation against the nazi use of eugenics led to postwar suppression of research, and pseudoscientific denialism of racial differences. The development of genetic studies has led to the restoration of research and the data is updated monthly with new findings. The most recent work with the most accessible data came out this year (2018) although I don’t think is available in paperback form yet. (“Who we are and how we got here” by David Reich). He tries to soft pedal against the race deniers, but the data is pretty solid now. The race-deniers have produced popular pseudoscience and been proven false. Those include Stephen j Gould (The Mismeasure of Man), and Richard Lewontin (“racial groups are more different internally than externally”) which is also false – and hard to believe anyone would even say such a thing. It’s so false that the profession has a name for it: “Lewontin’s Fallacy”. However it is better to take away that each group produced excellences given their geography, climate, regional competitors, and degree of development. And that the primary difference between the races that causes conflict (proximity creates hostility) is the vast difference in the size of the lower classes. IQ is the most accurate measure in psychology but when we average IQ we are really saying who has the smallest underclass and the bigger upper class? That’s what IQ by Race, Subrace, and Tribe means. So it is not so much that conflict is just racial, it’s that because the sizes of white, japanese, korean, and han underclasses are fairly small as a percentage of the population (and european jews have almost eliminated theirs), while the rest of the world tends to have much larger underclasses (from less hostile climates and less forced organized individual farms). So the problem is that our cultures are incompatible because cultures fill the needs of the median of the distribution – they must. If the eugenicists were successful and we did not have such a population explosion of the lower classes, then within a century the differences between the races would be merely trivial. But the fact that they are substantial because of the differences in the sizes of the underclasses and the political needs of those underclasses, the world remains a racially conflicted place. The east asians and indians are the most racist so far, with whites the least – which is just the opposite of what you’d think. Progressive Race, Inequality, and IQ Deniers vs Conservative Global Warming Deniers. Both deniers are trying to satisfy political ends. Truth is painful. Cheers

  • -“Q:How did the concept of race begin?”-

    I think this is well understood so I don’t know why anyone would ask it. However: HERE IS THE CORRECT ANSWER The categorization of people into groups of ethnicities is as old as the written record. People are referred to by the color of their skin and the egyptians who were an advanced people for many centuries were diligent in their depiction of the races. Greeks and romans categorized groups of people by region and skin tone and temperament. And the romans identified that personality traits were driven by geography and climate. 16th century, the ‘shrinking of the world’ due to the Age of Sail led to civilizational and ethnic categorizations. By the mid 19th century (1800’s) with the advent of Darwin’s research in particular, people both recognized that most ethnic groups could be categorized by regions of the world. The study of evolution made it rather obvious that we developed regional characteristics just as did all other animals. The success of the early eugenics movement, but the retaliation against the nazi use of eugenics led to postwar suppression of research, and pseudoscientific denialism of racial differences. The development of genetic studies has led to the restoration of research and the data is updated monthly with new findings. The most recent work with the most accessible data came out this year (2018) although I don’t think is available in paperback form yet. (“Who we are and how we got here” by David Reich). He tries to soft pedal against the race deniers, but the data is pretty solid now. The race-deniers have produced popular pseudoscience and been proven false. Those include Stephen j Gould (The Mismeasure of Man), and Richard Lewontin (“racial groups are more different internally than externally”) which is also false – and hard to believe anyone would even say such a thing. It’s so false that the profession has a name for it: “Lewontin’s Fallacy”. However it is better to take away that each group produced excellences given their geography, climate, regional competitors, and degree of development. And that the primary difference between the races that causes conflict (proximity creates hostility) is the vast difference in the size of the lower classes. IQ is the most accurate measure in psychology but when we average IQ we are really saying who has the smallest underclass and the bigger upper class? That’s what IQ by Race, Subrace, and Tribe means. So it is not so much that conflict is just racial, it’s that because the sizes of white, japanese, korean, and han underclasses are fairly small as a percentage of the population (and european jews have almost eliminated theirs), while the rest of the world tends to have much larger underclasses (from less hostile climates and less forced organized individual farms). So the problem is that our cultures are incompatible because cultures fill the needs of the median of the distribution – they must. If the eugenicists were successful and we did not have such a population explosion of the lower classes, then within a century the differences between the races would be merely trivial. But the fact that they are substantial because of the differences in the sizes of the underclasses and the political needs of those underclasses, the world remains a racially conflicted place. The east asians and indians are the most racist so far, with whites the least – which is just the opposite of what you’d think. Progressive Race, Inequality, and IQ Deniers vs Conservative Global Warming Deniers. Both deniers are trying to satisfy political ends. Truth is painful. Cheers