Sunday, January 31, 2021

Some Thoughts on Separation

Consider.

Consider this:

…since reducing the non-White proportion of the U.S. population to 10% would still require the separation and removal of over 100 million non-Whites, or over three-quarters of them, it raises the question, “Why stop there, at that point, instead of going all the way when you’re most of the way there.” It seems arbitrary…

By the same logic, since achieving McCulloch’s objective would require a massive upheaval of American society, possibly even a civil war, then why stop at the point of sacrificing part of the USA for multiracial and Amerindian nations?  Isn’t that arbitrary?  Why not go all the way and take it all, send the non-Whites back to their homelands, including the Amerindians back to Siberia (albeit Russia may have objections)? An argument would be that White Americans have an innate sense of fairness and would not want to deprive non-White “Americans” of an American homeland, or that such a homeland or homelands would lessen non-White resistance to separation. 

With respect to the second consideration, I do not buy it. Any time Whites want to separate, even in the informal manner of de facto residential segregation, non-Whites (implicitly) insist that they have a fundamental human right to have access to Whites. That’s why we have forced racial integration. I doubt that some homeland out in the desert will lessen resistance. With respect to the first consideration - White perceptions of “fairness” - that is undoubtedly the main issue here, let us be realistic where we are right now. About half of the White American population are masochistic leftists who believe that even multiracial “America First” civic nationalism is “racist” and “fascist.”  A large fraction of the other half of the White American population are aracial civic nationalists; like Tucker Carlson they believe we are all “stuck with each other” and they would reject separation as unrealistic, evil, or insane. Further, demographic change means that even if you can convince a majority of White Americans to support separation, a democratic and orderly solution is unlikely. The solution likely requires physical resistance, a scenario that bodes ill for a declining and aging White American population as time goes on.  

In any case, given these realities, in order for White Americans to support separation, and to make the necessary sacrifices, the situation for White America will by necessity have degenerated to such a point of desperation that it is unlikely that even “High Trust” Whites would care much about "fairness" to non-Whites.  At that point, where outcomes would be determined by blood and iron and not by debates and voting, these detailed plans and non-White homeland maps, never mind the phenotype charts and the to-the-decimal-point 23andMe “data,” would all be irrelevant. At that point, the efforts needed to convince Whites, in conjunction with the bad negative conditions that would make Whites amenable to be convinced, making them willing for extreme measures, would be such that “why stop there, at that point, instead of going all the way when you’re most of the way there,” would be a fair assessment with respect to the division of territory.  If Whites would be willing to fight for most of America, why not for all of America? If conditions get so bad that even cucked Whites are willing to fight for survival, would they really care about being “fair” to non-Whites or to White leftists and other traitors who brought us to this condition? (Note: Many of these same arguments hold with respect to repatriation of non-Whites from Europe; but here I focus on the American White ethnostate scenario.)

I’m not trying to be obstructionist – I support the ethnostate idea and have written about it previously (although I disagree with others on the details).  But we must be realistic.  First, we are far, far away from having any significant number of Whites even thinking about supporting the idea. To get to that point will take time and, unfortunately, much White suffering. Talk about “winning the hearts and minds of Whites” does not impress me, since the people saying such things have failed for decades, and lack the self-awareness to realize that their bizarre ideas (phenotype charts, decimal point test measurements, etc. – denounced as “Nuremberg Law-like” even by some TOO commentators: “Phenotype this” and “autosomal that” and soon we’re off to the races with phrenology and the Nuremberg laws. No one is going to accept this stuff. Look at the world we’re operating in. This kind of rhetoric is just not going to fly) are not attractive, and are unlikely ever to be attractive (even in the dire conditions discussed above, to most White Americans.  

Second, considering that if the ethnostate does happen, it will likely happen in chaos, in blood and iron, and not through parliamentary debates and scholarly white papers, whatever plans and ideas we develop need to be as fundamental, simple, and streamlined as possible. It is possible that even what I outline below is too complex for the coming reality. In the dark future ahead it is possible that “look White, think White, and act White” will be sufficient (although in my opinion, that would allow for too many Jews, White traitors, and other undesirables to slip through). Whatever the case, I doubt that the Whites of tomorrow will have much use for calipers, phenotype charts, or 23andMe “spit tubes,” while they are fighting for racial survival, or after the struggle is over and a new homeland needs to be built.

This comment about McCulloch’s third section is I think relevant to my own comments:

Some White Guysays:

January 28, 2021 at 8:40 pm

I read the third part of the article yesterday and have been thinking about it since. I have to say I am disappointed in the offered “solution”. It is a rehash of past proposals to divvy up the USA, which will never happen. Texans and others are not going to agree to having their states made into the corral areas for the mixed race peoples of North America. Absurd.

The people who run every element of our countries have a firm grip on all they control. They are making it very clear at present that we have no power and no control over any of it. Anyone who has spoken up is currently being arrested and/or ostracized from society.

They are not going to just let us do what we want. These types of “solutions” are beyond ridiculous. Anyone advocating for such things will be squashed like a bug by those who rule us. It is cruel and immature to suggest to people that such things are possible.

Call me a defeatist if you will, but I prefer realistic realism to fairy tales.

And in response to that comment:

Canadianersays:

January 28, 2021 at 9:20 am

Good post.

Lots of people have pie in the sky fantasies about ethnostates and seem to forget that we are a powerless ethnic group with no evidence that we are able to work together to achieve big goals.

You are absolutely right that the first order goal is to survive. We can do that by building strong communities. Big political schemes come second to survival and the basic process of “re-tribalizing” where we basically learn what it means to act tribally and how to achieve tribal goals.

As a side note, I agree that we do need to have contingency plans for Whites surviving as a stateless people in the event that the ethnostate idea is not actualized, or is not actualized for a very, very long time.  

With respect for the ethnostate, simplified considerations for the ingroup:

Biological:

To simplify and streamline, and to be most fair and reasonable, we consider as follows. Individuals who derive familial/genealogical ancestry from any or several of the native, indigenous peoples of Europe would be included in the ethnostate. The vast majority of White Americans know their ethnic background and their genealogy can be traced back to Europe, to a satisfactory degree, if required. That is sufficient. What if such cannot be determined? People may be adopted, or there may be a lack of knowledge for another reason, or there may be a good reason to suspect someone is being dishonest. For those specific cases, genetic testing can be considered, in the rational comparative manner described below.

What about “White Hispanics” or individuals who may have some low-level fractional Amerindian (or other) New World admixture (or whatever other low level admixture)?  This can be judged on a case-by-case basis, judging based on overall assimilability (phenotype, identity, intelligence and behavior).  In some cases, genetic testing could be considered, also  as described below.

The vast majority of determinations can be very simple and streamlined – of European ethnic genealogical ancestry or not? The minority of other cases can then be judged as indicated in the preceding paragraph, above. Thus, for most cases, there will be no need for bizarre alphabetical phenotypic charts or “testing” or whatever.

Cultural:

Only people who are part of the Western/Orthodox civilizational background – the Western High Culture with Eastern European Orthodox added on – should be included. From a religious perspective, what’s compatible with this background would be: Christian, pagan, agnostic, or atheist. Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, etc. are not compatible. Unfortunately, I do not advise excluding homosexuals, since they would be regenerated each generation. It is my opinion that the vast majority of homosexuality (particularly for men, but for some women as well) is biologically determined. So, unless you exile homosexuals every generation, a strict exclusion makes no sense. However, we should not accept gay cabals or general sexual degeneracy.

Political:

Individuals who have in their private and/or public histories significant anti-White activities should not be included. While the bulk of White liberals are probably redeemable, hardcore activists and political figures are not. Would we want the likes of Hillary Clinton or Angela Merkel in a White ethnostate?

Comparative Genetic Testing:

In general, the large majority of the White population have clearly defined genealogical roots in Europe and that is sufficient.  

For other specific cases, any genetic testing must be performed in a comparative not absolute manner. It is childishly naive and unscientific – and I have pointed out many times beyond the capability of the methodology – to set some hard-and-fast base-line (e.g., 91.567%) and then make distinctions based on that (91.658% good, 91.566% bad). Instead, comparative evaluations should be made – establishing what the “ethnotype” range of different European ethnies are and then observing whether the “unknown” is in the same general range.  For example, there are no European ethnies whose members would be 15% Amerindian and 10% sub-Saharan African.  Anyone with such a profile is obviously not of Old World European stock. Again, this would not be a case of rigid boundaries, but a common sense evaluation. If someone is 1% past the range of an ethny they claim membership in, that’s reasonable. 15% is not. If one wanted to be more objective, one could establish the standard deviation of genetic variation within an ethnotype range, but this possibly gets to the point of nitpicking.  It is fairly simple to ascertain if the genetic profile of an unknown sample is generally consistent with what would expect from various European ethnic groups. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to determine that, e.g., someone who is ~40% South Asian is either recently admixed or a Roma (and the timing of admixture could be determined – but in either case, 40% South Asian is obviously not consistent with any European ethny).

The relative objectivity of this approach derives from the fact that any flaws and imprecision in the methodology (that exist and will always be present to some extent) apply to both the known and unknown samples equally, and as long as the comparisons are done in a “fuzzy” manner, without absolute strict boundaries, then the inherent imprecision is not a barrier for making useful comparisons.

The other advantage of this approach is that it, by necessity, includes all European ethnies as the known reference samples. Thus, if a person claims to be of ethny X then they must be compared to X, not to Y or Z or any other group.

What about Hispanics and other groups that may have New World admixture, etc.?  The approach applied there would be to determine a set of “knowns” – for example “White Hispanics” determined to be acceptably assimilable based on chosen characteristics (phenotype, for example) – then determine the genetic range of these “knowns” and, finally, compare, in a general sense, whether the “unknowns” are similar to that range. 

But, my views and proposals may well as be as unrealistic as those promoted by others. However, I stand by my comments as being somewhat more reasonable; at the very least, the proposal, re: genetic analysis is the only semi-objective rational one I’ve seen. The only way to deal with imprecision and the myriad flaws inherent in these genetic approaches is to use a comparative analysis, utilizing fuzzy boundaries, and making sure each and every European ethny – and this includes regional sections of nations (East vs. West England, North vs. South Germany, North vs. South Italy - with Sicily and Sardinia each being separately represented – North vs. South Russia, Flemish vs. Walloons, North vs. South France, etc.) - are represented as "known" reference samples.  

In summary, besides offering my own ideas on the subject, a major criticism I have of “movement” separation schemes revolve around them being unrealistic and somewhat delusional based on the current situation we find themselves in, and the lack of self-awareness with respect to some of the bizarre and esoteric aspects of some of the obsessions of the individuals in question. There is also a lack of self-awareness with respect to decades of unending failure; none of these people seem to ever ask why their target audience rejects their message.

It is possible my ideas are all wrong as well. However, I argue otherwise, which is my right (and others will argue for their own ideas, as is their right). 

Of course, there is a difference between prescriptive and descriptive. It is certainly true that if the ideas of McCulloch or of myself or anyone else is prescriptively necessary than that argument should be made, even if the current descriptive situation with respect to White attitudes makes the prescription seem unrealistic. We cannot rely on description to make policy. After all, a purely descriptive approach – basing policy on what White public opinion currently is - would be to promote the “racial status quo” (like Weissberg) or to promote Sailerian “citizenism” (aka civic nationalism). However, I argue that McCulloch and others are also prescriptively wrong and I promote my own prescription instead, for all the reasons given here and in all my previous work on the subject.

But description should not be ignored.  Although we should not let description determine what we offer in general as a prescription, it does affect the form in which our prescription can take and also definitely influences the probability of success for our prescription, and, most practically, affects the approach we should take in achieving our prescriptive objectives. 

Ultimately, we need things like opinion polling and other empirical methods for understanding why Whites reject separation, what would make them change their minds, and if they would accept separation, in what form would they accept it? Again, that should not change our prescription if we believe our prescription is right and the White masses are currently wrong; instead, we can try and educate them and/or await for more propitious times.

But, again, description can tell us what approach we should take for that education and tell us what non-essential details of our prescription can be changed to make it more palatable, without changing the essentials. Who knows?  Maybe people would want to be evaluated by calipers and DNA tests; I doubt it – but let’s find out. Of course, those opinions shouldn’t ultimately influence whether those things are good or bad from a racial perspective, but if we deem them to be non-essential then at least we’ll know if that correlates with White opinion, and we can proceed from there.

We need data.

Saturday, January 30, 2021

The Times They Are Propitious

A fascistic observation.

Historically, fascist movements tend to arise under the following conditions:

1. An existential danger from the Left.

2. A crisis of national identity and/or some sort of general sense of national stagnation or degeneration.

3. Middle class suffering from the excesses and flaws of capitalism.

Consider the West today, particularly the rapidly declining political and social situation in the USA, playing out against the long-term collapse of that nation's (White) middle class.

The times they are propitious.

Other news:

Allied filth.  Got to grovel to Uncle Joe!  And what about people on the Far Right with their stupid Stalin worship?

Contrast this with McCulloch's fantasies. 

About Gamestop.


Thursday, January 28, 2021

Der Dishonest Right

Pathetic.

Laugh at this.

For instance, it would be useful to have a think tank to study social trends and craft nationalist policies. It would also be useful to have our own public interest law firm to protect our rights and attack our enemies through lawfare. But we don’t yet have the money and the personnel for such institutions.

Right…no money.

No money!

Someone earning ~$180,00 in one year as compensation for “running an online publication” – no money!

There is money.  There always has been money.  It is, in my opinion, being wasted.

Our movement is small, poor, and constantly harried by our enemies.

If true, whose fault is that? Why don’t the failed “leaders” accept responsibility for wasting decades of effort and wasting millions of dollars?

First, it helps if one supported Trump’s candidacy rather than sitting on the sidelines or voting to hand the country to Joe Biden, so he can treat Trump supporters as domestic terrorists and kick the Great Replacement into overdrive.

In other words, send your D’Nations to Johnson and not to Spencer or Griffin.

Pouring unjust scorn on Trump looks like an attempt to cozy up with the enemies of the people. How do you expect the people to take you seriously?

What is “unjust scorn?”  Answer – anything that questions Johnson’s judgment about Trump.

But it does prove my contention that Trump could have won in 2016 on a conventional Republican platform, because that’s exactly how he won in 2020.

What a dishonest creature this Johnson is. First, if Trump had “won” in 2020 in a more convincing fashion – by running as a hardcore populist – then all of the Democrat cheating would have been for naught, and Trump’s “win” would have resulted in an actual legal victory (as in 2016).  Second, and most importantly, how can you compare an incumbent President, who had no real primary challenge (2020), to a political novice reality TV star in a primary campaign (2016) against a large group of well-funded, well-known, experienced, GOP Establishment-supported, seasoned political figures? Third, just because Trump campaigned in 2020 more as a mainstream Republican, it doesn’t change the fact that the bulk of his supporters were people left over from 2016, when he did run as a populist – and who likely felt that the 2020 version of Trump was just pandering and didn’t really mean it.

Here's the problem for Johnson and others who promote the same "Trump is sincere" narrative. I for one labeled Trump as a fraud before the 2016 election. So what did I see that others missed? If Trump is and was sincere why did I (and others, no doubt) believe otherwise? It is convenient for the likes of Johnson to ignore this fact or to just label me as "insane." Why answer, engage with, or debate, someone who is "insane?" Johnson and the other liars can pretend that everyone thought Trump was sincere in 2016 and that some disgruntled ex-supporters only recently labeled him a fraud. 

My "take" on Trump was and is that the man may have had some incoherent civic nationalist beliefs, he may have a "law and order" distaste for illegal immigration, his taste for women indicates certain racial aesthetic affinities, but he had and has no underlying fundamental ideological ideals, no foundation of firm beliefs and ideas. He certainly was never an authentic right-wing populist, never pro-White, always a socially liberal New York billionaire with Jewish family connections and Negro friends and associates. If the man had any real ideology, and real deep concerns, then why did he squander the first two years of his Presidency when he had a Republican Congress to work with?  Why did he listen to Kim Kardashian and Kanye West while ignoring his own supporters?  Indeed, why did he allow his DOJ to persecute his own supporters?

I was right. Trump, as a real right-wing populist, was and is an insincere fraud, someone who used right-wing populism to distinguish himself from his GOP primary opponents and to also distinguish himself from the globalist Clinton. In 2020, he listened to the Kushner faction, took his White support for granted, and pandered to minorities. That was at no real personal cost to him, since that was always closer to his real inclination anyway.

Goodbye, Mr. Trump. I hate to see it end this way. But you will be vindicated. You will be avenged.

Never forget this.  What a hypocrite.

Greg Johnson seems to me to be an embodiment of dishonesty, an avatar of lies.

This is the time of the year when I remember how often Der Retards of Der Right like to talk about how much they love winter, and how much the "cold and snow" "resonates with the European soul" (or at least, the "Nordic soul" - which for them is the same thing).

Interestingly, these types invariably live in the warmer climes of the American South or West, where they are, mysteriously, bereft of the Wonder of Winter that they so breathlessly inform us is their genetic birthright. Further, and also interesting and mysterious, these warmer climes they live in tend to be racially diverse, heavily non-White, coastal cities, within which they are not only horribly deprived of cold and snow, but also deprived of the "flyover country" Whites that they assert they love so much.

What sacrifices they make!

More nonsense.

Given that the U.S. White population (as of 2015) is genetically 98.6% European...

Not 98.5% or 98.7% but 98.6% and don't you forget it!

Such divisions of the race, whether territorial or ideological, serve no racial preservationist purpose, and indeed no pro-White purpose, as such divisions would be harmful to White interests by placing the White population in a much weaker position both continentally and globally vis a vis other races.

Err...dividing people based on one person's racial aesthetic preferences would have the same net effect, no?

McCulloch's latest plan is certainly an improvement over earlier versions, putting aside my disagreements over the "racial science" (sic) components of his arguments, and his obvious distaste for "common Southern European phenotypes."

So, fine. For now, let's not argue about that. But there's a deeper concern here. Given the realities of today's America, indeed, the reality of the condition of the White race worldwide, I believe there are some more immediate concerns to focus on.  Certainly, I agree, it is good to have a long-term goal (although we may differ on the details). But if we all get censored off the Internet, and if America goes the way of Europe, re: free speech, then that is all sound and fury signifying nothing. I would suggest these types read the daily litany of woe that makes up American Renaissance news stories (Taylor is sufficiently "Nordish" so I assume reading that website is allowed), and then reflect on if pontificating about the fine details of "racial phenotypes" is in any way relevant to the political reality "on the ground" in today's America.

All of these guys have been at it for decades. They talk about "winnings hearts and minds" among Whites, but they have failed to do so at every turn. Don't any of them have the self-awareness to consider the possibility that they are doing something fundamentally wrong, and that their intended audience is not buying what they are selling?  Maybe folks are not buying what I'm selling either, but I note that my access to "movement" platforms has been, ultimately, somewhat, shall we say, limited for certain reasons?  Or reason, as in the singular?

Does anyone really believe that charts of overlapping phenotypic binning, or absurd "to-the-decimal point" "estimates" of racial ancestry, produced by tests that are laughably and obviously flawed, are going to convince those who need to be convinced?  The masses of the people will simply think it weird and off-putting, and the educated minority will quickly identify and pick apart the flaws in the arguments. And, like the "Pace Amendment," it is overly complex, and for similar reasons. Obsessing over phenotype, and trying to justify why 25% non-Whites should be accepted while indigenous Europeans (potentially?) rejected, is going to lead to arbitrary, hand-waving arguments. Then, trying to use 23andMe data, in a manner rife with misinterpretation, to further justify all of this leads to an even deeper hole dug for pro-White arguments. Ignoring cultural and civilizational arguments and identities is also a problem, as is ignoring sociopolitical beliefs. Should a White ethnostate contain Muslims and Marxists, regardless of "what they look like?"  Do you want racially White anti-White political leaders, responsible for promoting The Great Replacement, in a White ethnostate?

It seems to me the ingroup should be people of Old World European ethnic background, with room for some limited number of essentially White people that may have low-level New World admixture (would anyone object to Ted Williams in a White ethnostate?). Further, these people need to be of a civilizational background that is Western or Orthodox (if you want to consider Orthodox Eastern Europe as separate from Catholic-Protestant Western Europe), and, at least, not overt political enemies of the White ethnostate. The vast majority of White Americans would fit in (most "liberal Democrat" Whites, while superficially hostile, are not deep-seated enemies), excluding some Whites who we should not want in the first place. A small minority of Hispanics - those fully or predominantly European - could fit in as long as they have a White and European identity. No need for bizarre charts or getting into decimal point ancestry estimates.

If folks are confused about what I mean by “supervised admixture analysis” here is a very simple layman’s explanation, suitable for the Nutzi crowd IQ level:

…in which some individuals are "fixed" as belonging to a particular population (100%), and the ancestral proportions of the remaining ones are estimated…This type of analysis does seem to work best when good-sized samples of the ancestral populations are available, and these populations are well-differentiated genetically.

In my opinion, the caveats for “work best” do not apply for some (all?) of the commercially available tests, and “analyses” based upon their methodology.

The “some individuals” are the parental reference samples.  It is obvious – at least to anyone with a triple digit IQ – that the choice of who is “"fixed as belonging to a particular population (100%)” for comparing to others is going to absolutely determine the results of those others. Just like we had Durocher breathlessly telling us about MENA “admixture” in Southern Europeans from a paper that used Germans being fixed as "European" (and even so, some Northern European populations were still getting low levels of MENA even when compared against Germans).

How you decide to label those ancestries will of course also result in different interpretations. If someone labels Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry as “European” and someone else labels it as “Middle Eastern” and a third person labels it simply as “Jewish” or “Ashkenazi Jewish” then the same results will be interpreted by the naïve layman in three completely different ways.

In response to McCulloch’s charts and pictures, here are some samples of an alternative analysis:

A “sunny” A/B European type.

So, this is a G/H semi-mongolid phenotype.

Bromstad! Hey! A gay interior decorator who lives in the Miami area!  Fancy that!  Curly says it all.

See this.  But when a Holy Oriental does it against Trump voters, no problem, and no doubt the HBD filth would agree.


Wednesday, January 27, 2021

Against Counter-Currents and McCulloch

In all cases, emphasis added.

Let’s see.

He focused on preserving America’s founding Nordic stock.

What else could be important?  OK, let’s see what else is associated with that:

he argued that the United States should recognize the Soviet Union after the Bolshevik Revolution and he supported Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal…He eventually became chairman of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Sounds about right.

And, something that the fundamentally dishonest Counter-Currents leaves out:

From 1900 to the 1920s, Ross supported the alcohol Prohibition movement as well as continuing to support eugenics and immigration restriction.  By 1930, he had moved away from those views, however.

Laugh at this.

I was proud of the fact that Michigan, where I vote

Not where he lives though, eh?  When are the long suffering people of Hungary going to be free of the Morganian invader?  Ethnonationalism!

It quickly became apparent, however, that those individuals who found themselves thrust into the Alt-Right spotlight lacked the character, maturity, and judgment to make it happen. 

Sure.  Let’s name some prominent Alt Righters: Greg Johnson, John Morgan

…the fact remains that the Alt-Right’s spectacular and tragically unnecessary failure will continue to hamper us for many years to come.

I seem to recall someone predicting the downfall of the Alt-Right by late 2016, certainly by early 2017.  I wonder who that was.

When it comes to the Dissident Right, Trump offered little but empty rhetoric. Despite occasionally talking about establishing controls over Big Tech to prevent their blatant censorship of non-conformist views that challenge the neoliberal narrative, no action was ever taken in this direction. Apart from his Charlottesville press conference, neither did Trump ever take a stand in defense of white advocates, and he often went in the other direction, such as in September, when he promised to declare the “Ku Klux Klan” a terrorist organization (thus opening the door for any Dissident Right groups to be targeted given the lack of an easily identifiable unified KKK organization), calling for Juneteenth to be declared a federal holiday, and promising $500 billion in aid to black communities.

But, he’s a sincere man of genuine greatness, and don’t you forget it!

One thing that is certain is that these new leaders must be completely disconnected in every public way from the fiasco that was the Alt-Right.

No Greg Johnson or John Morgan then.  Ted Sallis is still in play, eh?

Of related interest.

The sole consideration for ingroup status should be race as determined by phenotype and ancestry. Basing the ingroup on non-racial categories such as religious beliefs or sexual orientation...

Interesting that "sexual orientation" is specifically cited as a category that should be of no consequence. 

As I have previously noted, every once in a while, like a flash of lightning illuminating a dark landscape, the power of the cabal is nicely illustrated.

...would indicate that the purpose of the proposed solution is at least to some degree something other than racial preservation. 

As it should be. If you are creating a new nation and a new society, why not utilize considerations other than McCulloch's racial aesthetics?  Why should race traitors, anti-White leftists, criminals, feaks, and perverts be included in a state of our creation?  Just because we need to satisfy one person's single-minded obsessions about racial aesthetics?

In fact, any attempt to divide the White race on ideological or other non-racial lines would be contrary to White racial interests and incite internal division and opposition.

But dividing groups and families based on McCulloch's bizarre and laughable "racial phenotype charts" is, of course, not at all divisive and would not " incite internal division and opposition." That nonsense like this has been tolerated in Der Movement for decades is one very significant reason why pro-White activism has made ZERO progress in that time.

In the great majority of cases, ingroup classification can be determined by the traditional and natural way by the visible physical phenotype which is also the method most consistent with White racial sensibilities and would therefore enjoy the strongest support and agreement. 

There is zero evidence that is true other than McCulloch's solipsic assertion that it is.

The standard for this determination should be based on the normal European phenotypic range, not on rare exceptions and outliers.

Should people who think that Mariah Carey has no non-White ancestry, and "looks more recessive" than Al Pacino, dictate racial views to those of us with a normal visual cortex?

I propose that persons of at least three-quarters (75%) European ancestry and within the normal European phenotypic range—i.e., with no visible physical indication of non-White mixture should be racially classified as White. Phenotypically borderline cases, including some common Southern European phenotypes that are also common in the populations of North Africa and the Middle East, should be decided by establishing at least 15/16ths (93.75%) European ancestry.

Someone can be 25% non-White and still pass muster!  25%!  And then we have the no good “common Southern European phenotypes.” You see, phenotypes common in Southern Europe are also common in "North Africa and the Middle East." Looking at David Bromstad and Bjork we can ask if phenotypes common in Northern Europe are also common in Central and East Asia, but that's another issue.

Then we have - 93.75%!  Let's calculate to the last 0.75%!  Is that determined by genealogical ancestry? What? Any other determination is absurd – how could you accurately and precisely genetically distinguish 93.75% from 93.74% or 93.76%? Or from 94%? Or 95%? Or 90%? Or, for that matter, with "tests" that report results at the 50% confidence level, differentiate 93.75% from, say, 85% at a sufficiently high level of accuracy? And if genealogical ancestry is the only way to get precise and reproducible measurements then you could simply make that your politically relevant yardstick (as I do). But then he gives us:

A 2014 autosomal genetic study by Katarzyna Bryc et.al. (see Figure 2) found that the average proportion of European ancestry in a “23andMe” sample of 8,663 Hispanic-Americans (“Latinos”) was only 65.1%, a proportion that would not qualify them to be classified as White as a group, although perhaps about 10–15% of Hispanic-Americans would qualify individually as White by European standards. This is in sharp contrast to their “23andMe” sample of 148,789 non-Hispanic European-Americans, whose average proportion of European genetic ancestry was determined to be 98.6%. The study also found that only 3.5% of European-Americans have 1% or more African ancestry, only 1.4% have 2% or more African ancestry, and only 2.7% have 1% or more of “Native American” ancestry, with about 94% having essentially no genetically measurable non-European ancestry.

Anyone who uses 23andMe and its methodology as a serious yardstick for anything is not to be taken seriously. There are many population genetics papers that give real measures of Hispanic ancestral components. I also enjoy how we are given percentages here to the decimal point, when results can vary up to ten to twenty percentage points every time the company makes an update to their parental reference base. And, hey. why 23andMe?  Why not Ancestry?  Living DNA? Maybe we can dig up old DNAPrint data?  Never mind the fact that these estimates are based on supervised admixture analysis and are thus completely dependent on what samples are used as the references and how those are classified.  Does McCulloch know that 23andMe considers Ashkenazi Jews to be fully "European," so that a hook-nosed pure Jew would be "100% European?"  Back to phenotype and genealogy, I suppose. This is the vaunted scholar upon who we look to consider how many significant digits we should extend our analysis. Why depend on serious academic analysis instead? Also note how he is completely inconsistent.  I though phenotype was all important?  So, if a Hispanic is 25% (or 24.9%, eh?) Amerindian-Negro, but "looks Nordish" then what's the problem?  

In his part I, McCulloch makes the reasonable point that:
So by any reasonable standard Europeans should be regarded as purely European.
I agree. After all, if - IF! - you did supervised admixture analysis with an unbiased and comprehensive set of parental reference samples, covering the full entirety of the European ethnoracial spectrum, then you would indeed find that Europeans would be "purely European" - or close enough with statistical error.  After all, you would be essentially comparing people to themselves (i.e., to their co-ethnics).  To break this circular reasoning you would need an independent rationale for identifying genetic ancestries as "European" - see here.  You could draw a line around PCA clustering, but the precise boundaries would require some of these other considerations as well, as would the identification of genetic elements in unsupervised admixture analysis. 

Note I am not saying that genetic analyses are unhelpful - quite the opposite.  But you need to understand the limitations and you need to avoid both circular reasoning as well as avoid bias in supervised analyses. Someone could do an analysis in which "Sardinian" is defined as "European" and then sit back and watch Northern Europeans all test out as significantly Siberian/East Asian. Would that be reasonable?  Of course not. DNAPrint defined "European" as the CEU sample (mostly British ancestry from Utah), which caused some German ancestry people to have significant "Asian admixture." That was unreasonable - a biased reference sample. Populations not well represented in the parental reference banks will demonstrate more false positive "admixture" than those populations well represented. Further, if Ashkenazim are defined as "European" then full-blooded Jews will be "100% European" (or close), even though real population genetic studies put Jews as 50% European ("European" being defined as the indigenous stocks of Europe, as opposed to diaspora nomads).

All of this confusion derives from McCulloch obsessing over details of phenotype, rather than just genealogical ancestry, which would yield:
So by any reasonable standard Europeans should be regarded as purely European.
With some reasonable exceptions being made for White Americans with slight Amerindian ancestry or "White Hispanics" who are of overwhelmingly Iberian ancestry.

Pareto Principle - simplify.  Thus:
So by any reasonable standard Europeans should be regarded as purely European.
Is that so difficult?

Tuesday, January 26, 2021

Some Observations, 1/26/21

Observations.

Very cognitive, very elite. I suppose that’s just the Arctic Alliance hard at work.

Another example of autistic earnestness:

When I took the garbage out earlier this week, I saw a fox crossing the street. We stared at each other for a prolonged moment before it ran off. During that encounter, I felt a strange connection with this wild animal. As much as I related to wolves in the past, I think that modern dissidents share some characteristics with foxes. Just as every fox looks after its own tail, each person in our community can outfox our enemies and adapt to our changing environments.

During my high school years, I became fascinated with wolves...

If I wrote something like that as a parody of Counter-Currents, people would think I was being childishly unfair.  But it is all too real.

“Freedom” in academia. The Soviet Union was not any more repressive than modern day America.

See this. McCulloch cites a paper that utilizes 23andMe’s methodology, which has been criticized here before, in great detail:

See this.

And this.

And also this.

The net result of these (fairly obvious) flaws is that "admixture" is over-estimated in those groups for which proper and/or sufficient parental references samples are lacking, while possible real admixture is under-estimated or undetected for those groups that are being essentially compared to themselves, being well represented among parental reference samples.  Overall, the effect is to over-estimate the already low "admixture" in Europeans, but also to skew the results of whatever is in fact detected.  That these measurement biases favor Der Movement's favorite groups, while disfavoring despised groups, is no doubt a major reason that laughably flawed methodologies are accepted as gospel. Amusingly, the same people can be tested with different companies and get radically different results; even more laughably, the same people can be analyzed by different updates of the same company - said updates typically involving adding different sets of parental reference samples, thus proving my criticisms correct - and get radically different results.

Then:

A similar racial transformation of the populations of the countries of Northwest Europe also began in the aftermath of World War II with much the same ethnic and ideological basis.

The radical population shifts taking place in nations such as, e.g., Italy and Spain, are to be, of course, completely ignored.  They're all wogs anyway, so who cares?


Monday, January 25, 2021

Johnsonian Odds and Ends, 1/25/21

In der news.

Exactly as I predicted here. The seriousness of the situation cannot be overestimated.  Never forget Der Retards who called covid-19 a “nothingburger” a year ago, and Der Retards who today call it a “cold” or “flu.”

This was laughable.

First hour: 

Johnson’s self-indulgent nonsense about his favorite music, etc was sickening.  Who cares, except the semi-retarded sycophants who give D’Nations?

Then he spewed his usual lies about Trump’s “sincerity” – that flies in the face of the entire Trump Presidency. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – Trump is and was a fraud; I identified Trump as a fraud before the 2016 election, and if he was going to “go the easy way” of having “the politics of John McCain” he would never have been elected President to begin with.  Few voters would have tolerated Trump’s repulsive personality and juvenile behavior if he had campaigned on a Jeb Bush political platform. Why vote for a Jeb-style neoconservative Donald Trump with his “grab pussy” persona and zero political and governmental experience if you could vote for the original Jeb Bush instead?  If their political views were equal, then do you really believe that Evangelicals and other straight-laced conservatives in the South and West would have voted for Trump over Bush? Really? Add to the mix that Trump likely never expected to win the election in 2016, and instead expected to leverage his populist popularity to grift and create a “conservative media empire.” Once elected, Trump was trapped by his rhetoric and the expectations of his supporters; but no worries, he hardly did anything for them – whenever he (rarely) used his power it was to benefit Israel and Black prison reform. Johnson cannot admit to being wrong, so he continues to endlessly lie.

The gaslighting liar Johnson also continued to spread his nonsense that WWI had nothing to do with nationalism or ethnonationalism, but was instead due to “a battle of empires.”  That utter stupidity has already been refuted here before.

Johnson’s definition of “bad nationalism” is precisely what the ethnoimperialists of Counter-Currents embody with their behavior; e.g., John Morgan having no respect for the ethnic sovereignty of the Hungarian people – that sounds like “bad nationalism” to me, hypocrites.

I also noted Johnson’s HBD worship of Chinese. Always observe the lickspittle groveling of HBDers to Asians. Hail IQ!  Hail HBD!  Hail!

As far as high-achieving Chinese in America go, what proportion of them are descended from 19th-century immigrant labor stock (who faced down all of that dastardly White racism, according to Johnson - after all, let us remember the 1970s Kung Fu TV series) and how many are derived form the post-1965 immigration, including intellectual and financial elites? I understand that the onanistic HBDers, who take Chinese "PISA scores" at face value, believe that every Chinese peasant rooting around in a rice paddy is a cognitive elitist high-IQ genius, but others are a bit skeptical.

The second hour: 

Between Jeelvy’s superficial “analysis” and Johnson’s voice, I shut it off early. Johnson is “astonished” that Trump didn’t do anything about the election fraud - he “doesn’t get that.”

THAT IS BECAUSE TRUMP IS AND WAS A FRAUD, UNDERSTAND?

Trashing Trump is “self-indulgent” and “pointless” – yeah, pointless, after all, that may end up pointing the finger at all of Johnson’s poor judgement, naiveté, and gaslighting lies.

“Is there anything to be gained by attacking Trump?”  Yes, so Der Movement doesn’t make the same mistake over and over again. But I suppose that Quota Queens don’t worry about making the same mistakes over and over again, since the affirmative action policy protects them from the consequences of their repeated failures.

“Trump won” – but I thought you said in August 2019 that Trump is “toast” and would “lose in a landslide?”

I disagree 100% with Johnson on Ann Coulter – her more recent anti-Trump writing is the only really good material she’s produced.

At that point, my disgust with Johnson got the better of me and I listened no more.  

Laugh at this from their newsletter:
Since 2001, Trevor Lynch has developed a fervent following with his dissections of philosophical, political, racial, and sexual themes in a wide variety of films and television shows. 
Yes, let’s have a livestream or podcast featuring Greg Johnson, Jared Taylor, Trevor Lynch, and Thomas Jackson. I can think of “two” other Alt Right/HBD “personalities” (who shall remain nameless here) who can join in as well.

Sunday, January 24, 2021

Odds and Ends, 1/24/21

In der news.

One final word (at least for now) about Taylor asking that “pro-White Indian” whether he plans to move to India. Now, although the question could possibly have been phrased more tactfully (from the perspective of Amren, which is more “classy” – to use Silver’s word – than is, say, EGI Notes), I see the question as perfectly legitimate.  It is the same with Derbyshire’s absurd “Arctic Alliance” – if East Asians really wanted to help Whites as part of such an “alliance” then they could start by stop immigrating to majority White nations, optimally followed by reverse migration; i.e., repatriation back to their homelands (including “Rosie and the kids”). Likewise, the number one thing South Asians could do to help is the same, although, to be fair, from the perspective of net EGI, a “pro-White Indian” – as a single individual doing authentic pro-White activism – could be a net plus for White EGI. But, still, in general, the principle holds – ultimately, Whites need their own nations so a non-White genuinely concerned about White interests would acknowledge this and consider their own situation. Of course, these people do have a legitimate gripe in the sense that they did not force their way here; they were invited in. Now, for post-1965 American immigration, the response could be that it was the Jews (and their helpers) who did the inviting, not White Americans in general (although they helped elect politicians who served Jewish interests), but that’s not the fault of the immigrants (and their progeny) themselves. In the case of Canada, where the South Asian Taylor interviewed is from, the situation may be even murkier; the bottom line is that these Asiatics can rightly claim that they are “here” (wherever “here” is) because someone invited them.

But at the very least, if nothing else, they should agree with the principle of freedom of association – putting aside the issue of repatriation, Whites are under no obligation to live among any type of non-Whites anywhere (of course, no one, even intra-White, should be so forced).  Further, these types should agree that there should be no more immigration of their co-ethnics. Then, later, the issue of actual geographical separation, including repatriation, could be discussed.

Let’s compare this leftist hysteria with this reality here.  So, why isn’t endless violent leftist protest, which include driving the President into a bunker at the White House, trying to burn down a police station with police barricaded inside, storming statehouses, attacking political headquarters, and establishing an “autonomous zone” for godssakes – why is that not “insurrection” and a “threat to democracy?”  We have major league gaslighting going on here, that’s for sure.

Very cognitive, very elite.

Time to investigate the HBDers.

And who has been telling you that HBD is a tool of Jewish and Asian interests?  Who has been telling you to prioritize genetic and cultural kinship above a ranking of IQ?  Who has been telling you HBD is enemy propaganda, outright anti-White lies?

John_Engelman 

…I like immigrants. I have been in love with a few…I have always liked Orientals.

No doubt, Asiatrix “Ben Dover” likes John Engelman in return.

HBD is the enemy, the traitor within the gates. In order for the White race to live, the false ideology of HBD must die.

HBD is NOT “race science” or ANY sort of science. HBD is nothing more or less than a political movement to privilege Jewish and Asian interests over that of Whites. The constant lies of HBD are easy to refute, and such refutation is a common theme of this blog.

Very cognitive, very elite.


Saturday, January 23, 2021

The NY High School Mendacity

More "movement" lies.

The following is reproduced from Richard Lynn's Pseudoscience:

Another oft-quoted statistic online is that in the late 1980s/early 1990s, the Italian-American high-school drop-out rate was the third highest in NYC, behind Blacks and Hispanics. This, allegedly, is linked to the low IQ of these southern-Italian descended people. If we look at the data (here), it is true that in, for example, 1988, the NYC high-school drop out rate for Italian-Americans was indeed the third highest behind Blacks and Hispanics. However, the Italian-American rate of 20.6% was only marginally higher than that of non-Italian Whites at 18.5%. Further, this “White” group presumably included high-achieving Jews, a group not noted for “school drop outs.” Most likely, the Italian-American drop-out rate in 1988 NYC was no higher than that of other gentile Whites. More importantly, moving forward to 2000, the NYC high school drop-out rate for Italian-Americans was now 8.63%, lower than that of the non-Italian Whites (12.13%) and also lower than that of Asians at 11.10%. Consider again that the non-Italian White group almost certainly includes Jews; this would suggest that the Italian-American drop-out rate in 2000 was considerably lower than that of other White gentiles. Did Italian-American IQ suddenly rise from 1988 to 2000? Or, are these proxy measurements of educational attainment not the best evaluation of “g?”

Comment: The "oft-quoted statistic" was being so quoted by Type I "movement" Nordicists. Once again, we see that Der Movement is, virtually by definition, fundamentally dishonest, and, as well, obsessed with Italians, in a purely negative sense (there is a reason I call them feishists and why Sallis' Law exists).


Thursday, January 21, 2021

Farewell Vulgar Buffoon

In der news.

A sincere man of genuine greatness!

“All Americans were horrified by the assault on our Capitol. Political violence is an attack on everything we cherish as Americans. It can never be tolerated.”

You should have thought about that before you instigated it, Antifa Don Trump. Also - all Americans? All? Speak for yourself, you Negrophilic, Jewish-family-linked, obese and clownish buffoon. Further, weren't the people who "assaulted" "our Capitol" also Americans? Were they horrified by their own actions? This retarded dimwit is so stupid it is incredible. 

MAGA! Pepe! Kek!

Further - if political violence "can never be tolerated" then why did YOU tolerate it for months when it came from the Left, doing nothing (as usual) except tweeting (Law and Order!) even why they drove you into the basement bunkers of the White House?  Roissy praised Trump for having a "leonine appearance." Yeah, like this.

“We reignited America’s job creation and achieved record-low unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women — almost everyone.”

Almost everyone…almost.  Yeah, maybe if you would have included European-Americans (Whites) then the list would have been like, you know, more complete and all.

“We passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history. We slashed more job-killing regulations than any administration had ever done before.”

More money for Big Business! Populism!

“We recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.”

Oy vey! Jared was proud!

MAGA! Pepe! Kek!

Hmmm…look at this.

In the 2016 election, we elected a demagogue, a narcissist, a plutocrat and a reality television celebrity as president of the United States who cynically exploited nationalist and populist themes to build a cult following and get himself elected. Everything that followed over the next four years during which he inflicted unprecedented damage upon our cause flowed from this central fact.

True.

2017 was the watershed year that began to separate real populists from fake populists. The people who were principled populists began almost immediately to sound the alarm about the incoming Trump presidency.

Liar.  I was sounding the alarm about Trump before the 2016 election.

What about the brain trust of the White Nationalist movement? How did they do in the Trump era? Greg Johnson continued to push the old “mainstreaming” strategy which hasn’t worked for 50 years in the vain hope that somehow having Trump in office as a “symbol” was advancing the cause of White Nationalism.

Well, “brain trust of the White Nationalist movement” is sort of an oxymoron.

An absolutely beautiful comment:

Mike549

JANUARY 19, 2021 AT 1:22 AM

His most loyal supporters will suffer decades-long prison sentences, financial ruin and suicide. Meanwhile, Trump, Giuliani, Jr, Stone and Kushner may suffer some financial and legal headaches, but none will spend time behind bars despite their irresponsible incitement and will continue to live in luxury the rest of their days. Trump’s legacy is that of a selfish, hateful betrayer of everyone but jews and his immediate family. Trump did more damage to heartland Americans than any president, ever.

And now we have His Fraudulency Dementia Joe spewing vile racist hatred against White Americans, essentially declaring war against White folks,  while calling for "unity."  Thanks, Donnie Fats, for wasting the last four years of your failed Presidency. 

Asian filth:

In Vietnam, for example, the creation of the Hanoi sewer system at the turn of the 20th century saw a boom in rat numbers; in response, in 1902 the French colonial government began paying a bounty for their carcasses—that is, until it realized locals were breeding them to cash in on the reward.

Colored is as colored does. White progress will always be impeded by Yellow corruption. East Asians = a TROPICAL race.

To the vegan hypocrites, see here about how plants feel and the social interactions they have. If you won’t eat animals, you should not eat plants either. More consistency and less hypocrisy, please.


Wednesday, January 20, 2021

Well Then

After thirty years? 

Considering again the comments for this podcast, we observe something interesting. Some time ago, at Counter-Currents, I had a back-and-forth with Silver (in his guise as “Verlis”) about Amren and Taylor.  In contrast to Silver’s pro-Taylor, pro-Amren views, I took a negative view – that after a quarter century or more (at that time) of activity, Amren and Taylor really haven’t accomplished anything (and the same holds for Der Movement in general); thus:

…Given the standard human lifespan, and given the current negative and rapidly declining racial trends, it is not unreasonable to look for ***some*** signs of progress after 25-30 years of sustained effort. No, we are not asking for “victory” and we are not asking for “rapid growth” – merely asking: is the experiment better off today than when it started? Better than 20 years ago? 10? Five years? Better in any way at all?

If we cannot see such signs, and if the experiment shows no signs of re-direction, we can say, without rancor, without personal animus, with good faith and sincerity – “I appreciate what you have done, and best of luck to you, but I need to try something else.” It is also possible to critique other ongoing experiments without personal rancor (note I did not name anyone in my original comment).

Moderation, trying to appeal to a historically hostile group that does nothing but denounce you, this has not led to success. And, over time, it has real costs – “turning off” dedicated activists, diluting and diverting the message, misdirecting efforts,

Equating “what has been accomplished in a QUARTER-CENTURY?” with “Dad, are we there yet?” is the height of mendacity. I don’t know, if that kid has been driven around aimlessly for 25 years, probably he should ask if he’s there yet or not. The “movement” certainly is not “there” yet, or anywhere close to “there.”

Now, Silver (who admits not even having listened to the interview), calls Taylor a “clown,” mocks him as “Mr. Classy,” and states: How could someone have been at this for over thirty years (!) and think "why don't you go back to your own country" is a good look?

silviosilver  H J 

Mr. Taylor asks why don't Indians go back to India.

I couldn't be bothered listening to the interview, but did Taylor actually ask that?

If he did, sheesh, what a clown. So much for his reputation as "Mr. Classy." Does he really think that question makes the pro-white side look good?

silviosilver  HamburgerToday2020 

It's not a question of fairness, it's a question of effectiveness. How could someone have been at this for over thirty years (!) and think "why don't you go back to your own country" is a good look?

I myself never called Taylor a clown (that is unfair) and I do not think Taylor did anything wrong in the interview with respect to the question at hand.  But, note how Silver is now questioning Taylor’s “effectiveness” after “for over thirty years (!)” of activism.

Well then.  Once again, who was right in the first place? 

Other news:

Poor quality control and corruption in Chinese factories…in 1900.  The more things change, the more they stay the same. HBD!

Exactly as I have written – the longer the covid-19 crisis is allowed to continue, the greater the probability of a devastating mutation.  Der Retards and the other anti-vaxx filth may result in the development of an extremely dangerous strain.  What absolute garbage they are - pitiful mewling babies afraid of “jabs” and all humanity has to suffer because of them.

Rappers Lil Wayne and Kodak Black who were prosecuted on federal weapons offenses, were also granted pardons.
Laugh at this.  Some of us knew that five years ago.

More sincere and genuine greatness!  The last chance for White America!  MAGA! Pepe! Kek!

And, oh, by the way, that South Asian commenting on the Amren thread:
You are triggered because I'm superior to you in every way imaginable. I pity you.
Well, that’s HBD right there, in a nutshell.

Tuesday, January 19, 2021

Odds and Ends, 1/19/21

In der news.  In all cases, emphasis added.

A gift from the ethnonationalist filth.

Ethnonationalist hypocrisy:

Johnson:

The ethnonationalist vision is of a Europe — and a worldwide European diaspora — of a hundred flags, in which every self-conscious nation has at least one sovereign homeland, each of which will strive for the highest degree of homogeneity

Ah, yes!  “…the highest degree of homogeneity.”  Very good!  Excellent!  So, John Morgan can get the hell out of Hungary and Full Moon Ancestry can end his intermittent Bang East Europe tours. I can’t wait!  And we all await, with bated breath, for Der Movement to criticize British expat colonies in other people’s nations to the same extent they decry “Polish plumbers” in the UK.

HBD begins to devour itself.  Good, good.

Most scientific discoveries have originated from Europe, and Europeans have won 20 times more Nobel Prizes than have Northeast Asians. We argue that this is explained not by IQ, but by interracial personality differences, underpinned by differences in gene distribution. In particular, the variance in scientific achievement is explained by differences in inquisitiveness (DRD4 7-repeat), psychological stability (5HTTLPR long form), and individualism (mu-opioid receptor gene; OPRM1 G allele). Northeast Asians tend to be lower in these psychological traits, which we argue are necessary for exceptional scientific accomplishments. Since these traits comprise a positive matrix, we constructed a q index (measuring curiosity) from these gene frequencies among world populations. It is found that both IQ scores and q index contribute significantly to the number of per capita Nobel Prizes.

From ancient natural philosophy to modern physics, the history of science has been dominated by Europeans.

Virtually everything said in this podcast about electoral politics is exactly what I have been saying on this blog for years. Years.  Interesting that Taylor explains why he is not interested in electoral politics.  OK, fair enough.  If someone is not interested, if they believe they are not suitable, who are we to say otherwise?  But what about really organizing and helping others who are so qualified?  Grooming Amren supporters for such?

The comments section gets into Sallis' Law as well as the failures of HBD. Some "North Indian" comes there and asks why he needs to leave America since he's so superior in every way (cognitive elitism!).  You see, if you follow the HBD approach of ignoring genetic kinship, ethnoracial identity, and High Culture/civilization, then, yes, I suppose a "high IQ Indian" is acceptable (of course, one has to evaluate the "q index" HBDism discussed above). But, the whole idea of White nationalism and racial preservationism is based on racial identity, and EGI is based on genetics, not to mention Yockeyism, which is based on High Culture and the overall Identity (racial, civilizational, etc.). The reason to exclude a South Asian is precisely because they are South Asian and not European, and it doesn't matter "what they contribute."

Then we get into Sallis' Law and the typical NEC behavior of using Southern Europeans as some sort of "racial yardstick" for comparison (phenotypically of course, genetics are ignored).  The alien Asian asserts that if he mated with a White woman, the mongrel offspring 'would look like an Italian or Greek."  So, we see the usual NEC mendacity in this regard.  Of course, it doesn't matter what this alien believes his potential mongrel offspring would look like, it matters what they would actually be, racially speaking (genetically half-Indian, and from outside the Western civilization).

What someone believes someone looks like is irrelevant; what matters is what they actually are.

Then we have Silver talking about "woppish Italians."  So, Sallis' Law is, as usual, in full force. Indeed, Sallis' Law is more of a natural law than anything you can find in physics.

Monday, January 18, 2021

Spencerian Apostasy?

In der news.

Once again, Greg: What qualifications did Richard Spencer have for being made President of the NPI? Apparently, all of Scott Greer’s “qualifications,” sans the “187 IQ.” And, many of your "qualifications" for being made TOQ editor, sans the PhD.

We are getting closer and closer to my prediction of Spencer dropping out of/repudiating Far Right activism.  It is possible that it won’t be a “clean break” but simply a gradual shift, and at some point we can say the line has been crossed and then that will be that. Keep in mind, once again, that this is the person who was made President of NPI.

If anyone is ultimately responsible for terminal White decline it is The Retard Right and its affirmative action “leadership.” Johnson will, of course, continue to deny that the affirmative action policy exists.

Thus, let us rewrite this:
Every time you think a man has fallen as far as he possibly go, you quickly realize how wrong you were.
To this:
Every time you think Der Movement has fallen as far as it could possibly go, you quickly realize how wrong you were.
When you read this, remember that Der Retards say that covid-19 is only a “cold” or a “flu” or a “hoax.”

(((fellow White people))) They’re HuWhite!

Cervantes:
…you are a female, and consequently inconstant!
…a female, as you observe, will follow here natural disposition, in spite of all you can do to oppose it.
…the natural disposition of women, which is always injudicious and imperfect.
…inveigh against the levity of the female sex: their fickleness, their double dealing, their rotten promises, their broken faith; and finally, their want of judgment in bestowing their affections.