About Ethno-States
2018/09/10
About Ethno-States
Recently we have been bombarded with topics like the superiority of certain genes; that diversity is our strength; ethno-states; demographic replacements; racial hatred; white genocide and race wars. I have been meaning to make a presentation that would shed light on these subjects on a scientific/libertarian standpoint and I believe it is long overdue.
The first step would be to divide the problem in its smallest identifiable parts (which I have done in my introduction); the second step will be to define the terms I am going to use; then I could choose to classify the different groups that are predominant in this debate and point out the characteristics that define each groups (something I might do when I will touch on the racial hatred and the threat of a race war); then I will argue on each parts and I will provide proof to support my arguments. (Ahhh! Methodology, it makes everything so simple =D). So stick around, we are going to have a lot of fun.
The myth of superior genes
Let’s tackle the easiest item to solve first. Some people pretend there is such a thing as superior genes. This myth mostly come from black and white supremacists (oddly enough, the black supremacists are much more vocal then the white ones these days, but very few people call them out on their stupidity). So, I want to start by pointing out that the terminology used is wrong. A gene is only the information needed to code for one protein. The supremacists are referring to all genes that enable to produce an individual, not just a protein. The term they are looking for is genome, which is the complete genetic information contain within the nucleus of an individual.
So, what would make a specific genome superior to another? What are the criteria on which this scale of superiority is based on? What if one genome would produces an individual that is smarter, another genome produces an individual that is stronger and another genome produces an individual that as a greater longevity, which one is better? Biology would provide a very simple and effective answer to that question: Which allele frequency produces an individual that has an advantage in a certain environment which will increase his/her chances of procreation, making his/her allele frequency more prevalent in future generations of his/her species? I believe that you have all noticed the keyword here, environment. If the genome produces a viable baby that will survive until it reaches sexual maturity, the allele frequency is then always confronted to environmental pressures (natural selection). (Oddly enough, Richard Spencer believes this as well. He doesn’t believe that whites are superior and rejects the concept of superiority. So, good on him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TraWWyuQmTI&bpctr=1536731687 )
In an environment where potential mates are separated by a long distance and that a long period of time separates every contact between the members of that species, longevity will increase the probability and quantity of interactions between potential mates.
In a warm environment where hunting is the primary source of food and where predators are plentiful, physical attributes will provide a clear advantage. Physically fit individuals will clearly have an advantage in this environment.
(This image also helps debunk some myths concerning certain ethnicity’s oversize male member LOL)
In a cold environment where resources are limited during long winter, where the death rate is extremely high when bad decisions are made, where cooperation and ingenuity are essential to survival, intelligent individuals are more likely to survive and pass on their genes. (There is a reason why European migrants where able to turn South Africa into a country with such abundant resources. The South African terrain was arid. A population with the know how and willingness to cooperate was needed in order to work the land)
So when people are talking about superiority, I have no clue what they are talking about. I just assume that they live in La La land and they believe stupid crap like some bearded guy in the clouds chose them and this makes their genome better… I will quote Milton Friedman: ‘’ there is no point in arguing on a falsehood’’.
The other side of the political spectrum makes the opposite claim. They pretend that there are no differences between humans. I often hear the left (for which every concept in the universe is relative and that nothing can ever be known because the simple fact of making an assertion is somehow an act of violence…) use the declaration of independence and miss represent’s Thomas Jefferson’s words. If tarnishing the memory of one of my favorite historical figure wasn’t enough, they use this sophistry to promote their agenda. The left use the words ‘’we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal’’. By making the assertion that everyone is equal, they arrive to the conclusion that we are all the same. And from the second statement they arrive to the next conclusion, that everyone is interchangeable. So, if we are all the same and interchangeable, then race and gender are only constructs and everything is relative.
Unfortunately, the leftists omit to read the rest of Thomas Jefferson’s sentence: ‘that we are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness’’. Of course, by reading the sentence in its entirety, we realize that Thomas Jefferson meant that we are all equal in having the same rights. Those rights that Jefferson was referring too were the natural rights. It takes some mighty epic goddam freaky mental gymnastics on steroids to make the leap between: ‘’we have the same rights’’ to ‘’we are interchangeable’’. And what baffles me is that none of these idiots who believe the leftist narrative went to check the original text. I believe that it would be fair to make the assumption that some people will believe the interpretation of this text that suits them the most. Besides, the left has no respect for Thomas Jefferson and his work.
I know that this is completely off topic, but I want to talk a little more about this concept of equality.
In order for 2 items or people to be considered equal, they would have to be exactly the same; to have the same value; or to offer something of the same value.
Since no one on this planet is exactly the same, not even twins and clones (Even if twins and clones have the same genes than their counterpart. The condition of the womb, the environment they grow in, the circumstances of their lives, what they eat, different life choices… will make them different) we have to reject equality based on this factor.
The value of an individual is hard to measure. I do not want to bring the Libyan slave market in this discussion, so I will base value on other criteria. If we look at the Titanic as an example, the life of a woman had intrinsic value just for existing and the life of a man had no value. Women felt entitled and expected to be on the lifeboats and they had no problem leaving the men behind to die while they row their boats to safety. The men who believed their lives had any worth had a rude awakening. (I can only imagine the bitter that red pill was when they realized their disposability while they were shocking on icy water). If you look at family courts, the word of a woman is like the word of God. It should never be doubted as it is the undeniable truth… To many judges believe the stupid narrative that ‘’women can do no wrong’’, ‘’women are wonderful’’, ‘’women are victims we must shield and protect’’. Even the legislation supports this ‘’women are wonderful’’ myth. The word of a man, however, has no value. Countless men around the world are sacrificed at the altar of vagina and so few people actually question or push back against this injustice. You can see that the value of individuals, in are corrupted messed up society that isn’t worth shit and that I’m not convince is worth saving, is not the same just of the basis of sex. How could anyone claim that there is such a thing as equality of the sexes?
I also need to point out that we are a sexual dimorphic species. This means that, by definition, that men and women are not equal, they are complementary.
We could base value on sexual market value, but it doesn’t take a genius to understand that different people are not looking for the same characteristics in a mate. So, sexual market value is hard to determine.
Value could be measure by the value individuals are bringing to a free market. Even then, we realize that some individuals provide more value than others.
Ok, this was a small tangent. Let’s get back to the topic at hand.
Diversity is our strength
Is diversity a strength? Culturally, no. Lauren Southern made case in her book, Barbarian, how baby boomers, immigration and Islam screwed my generation, that different cultures, with opposing values, that are occupying the same geographical region only produce conflict. But, is there a case to be made about genetic diversity? If you look at the Saguenay Lac-St-Jean region in Quebec, you see and abnormal number of certain hereditary diseases. Two of these diseases are extremely rare in the world, but are very common in that region, tyrosinemia and fibromyalgia. During the French colonization of Canada, the population that colonized the city of Charlevoix (around 5000 people) all came from the same village in France. Later, 600 of the citizens of Charlevoix colonized the region of Saguenay Lac-St-jean. The high frequency of these hereditary diseases is then the result of two genetic segregations. This type phenomenon can also be observed in the British monarchy who wanted to keep the power inside the family (The new prince marrying a common girl will greatly help bring genetic diversity in this family); The Jews who only marry within their religion; The Muslims who have a tendency to marry their cousins (about 30% to 40% of Muslim marriages are between cousins).
Thankfully, you do not need many migrants in order to increase the genetic diversity of a nation. Canada and the USA have more than enough migrants needed for genetic diversity to last until kingdom comes. Unfortunately, migrants have a tendency to remain in large cities, so they will not fix the hereditary disease in isolated regions. Also, many of these migrants only marry within their religious faith or within their race. So, a lot of them won’t even provide any value when it comes to genetic diversity. Talk about being completely and utterly worthless to the host population.
Reducing the prevalence of hereditary diseases is a good thing. But is there a beneficial to finding a mate of a different ethnicity? This is a complicated question. You can find data going both ways. Some data is promoting the benefits to multiracial children and some data is showing the complete opposite. This subject is a taboo right now in science. Unless you have the ‘’right opinions’’ it is preferable to shut up or your career might be destroyed before you even realize it. And unfortunately, some scientists will allow their political bias to influence the results of their research. You end up with a lot of research that is completely made up.
Some solid research shows that multiracial children are very healthy. They have a stronger immune system and are taller than their parents. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3146070/Mixed-race-relationships-making-taller-smarter-Children-born-genetically-diverse-parents-intelligent-ancestors.html . The impact on IQ is where the scientific community disagrees. Some results show that multiracial children and a higher IQ and some results show that their IQ is lowered. I have seen some articles that show that the IQ of the females increase and the IQ of the males diminish. I do not believe we will settle this debate until we replicate the experiments and try to replicate the results. Unfortunately, not too many scientists want be publicly lynched for their research and to have their careers destroyed. So, it is very possible that this issue remain unresolved during our lifetime.
If I were to replicate these experiments, I would, primarily, focus on the ethnicity of the parents and the IQ of the parents. I would try to find a correlation between the IQ of the parents and the IQ of the children. The question would be: Are there certain mix of ethnicity that are more likely to produce children with higher IQs?
The Ethno-State
The question of an ethno-state is something we hear frequently online these days. Member of the alt right, like Richard Spencer and Jared Taylor; members of BLM; African and Asian governments, all advocate for the creation or to maintain ethno-states. This type of state is based on the homogeneity of the race within geographic borders. This concept is not impossible to achieve, however, I would argue that to create such a state and/or to maintain it, unbelievable amounts of government coercion would be require, thus causing an insurmountable amount of human misery. So, before we even tackle the question: ’’is such a government is desirable’’, I would argue that the cost, in human life and suffering would greatly exceed any benefits you would obtain from such a state.
Let’s explore the cost of an ethno-state. Japan and South Korea have rejected all forms of migration for a very long time, even during the time of the Shoguns. Trading ships from all over the world had a limited access to Japan. They only had access to certain coastal towns and the mobility of the traders was restricted and monitored. Some would argue that Japanese people wanted to preserve their cultural identity by limiting outsider’s influences. I would argue that the elite class only wanted to control the lucrative trading, but I guess we will never know. However, limiting migration did not prevent the growth of the state; it did not prevent the ever increasing depth; it did not prevent the disposability of men, which led to men bailing out of society, leading to a societal collapse; it did not prevent the prevalence of male suicide and the decreasing birthrate. So shit can still hit the fan even if you close your borders. Those who say that life in Japan is so great… well there are 30 000+ Japanese men every year who believe otherwise. (If we want to change this, we need to talk about the disposability of men and men’s rights, which is a subject I care about and that I will address in another presentations)
If we look at South Africa, they wish to create an ethno-state by systematically wiping out an entire group of people based on physical characteristics. The Germans tried the same thing over 70 years ago and the Turkish government seems to have successfully genocide the Armenian people.
This is a disgusting and unforgivable act. History remembers such tyranny and no matter how much these murderous nations try to rewrite history we will never forget nor forgive what was done. Fortunately, sometimes karma bitch slaps these monsters. In the case of South Africa, the farmers will eventually fight back, leading to a civil war. If the South African Blacks win this war they will have brutally taken over a country with depleted lands and they won’t have the knowledge needed to provide for the African people. Tens of millions of African will starve to death (I heard that dying from starvation is extremely long and painful). They will beg the international community for help. Don’t! Don’t help the murderers. They deserve their fate.
I swear, if the South African blacks wipe out the Boer, I will organize a feast where we will gorge ourselves and literally shock on food while watching South African blacks lying on the ground, too weak to push away the flies that are eating them alive, and we will laugh our socks off. Sic Semper Tyrannis!!!
If you look at Germany, almost a century has passed since the holocaust and their history is still destroying their nations. The grandchildren of the Nazi and their children are still dealing with the shame of their grandparent’s actions. The descendants of these murderers are willingly celebrating the death of their culture and the replacement of their people. The holocaust did not destroy the Jews, but it did destroy the German people. Let this be a warning to those who suggest that a systematic extermination of a people is a viable solution. Genocide is a double hedged sword and it might end up destroying you instead. So all of you pimpled faced pseudo-NAZI basement dwelling morons who advocate the ethnic cleansing of the West, what you are suggesting would destroy the West. Why don’t you just hide in your video games and be forgotten by history like the pathetic little fucks you are.
Let me rephrase this, because this concept is very important. Nefarious groups, namely the Marxist left, often use horrible parts of a nation’s history and exposes it out of context in order to build disgust in the nation itself by the people of that nation. Then, the nefarious group can just sit back and observe the people of that nation tear itself apart while it is committing cultural suicide. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5It1zarINv0 , you can also read the book ‘’The Power of Words’’ where Sir W. Churchill describes how Polish citizens willingly destroyed their own nation, after WW1, due to Marxist propaganda. Other parts of Western history are used in such a matter, such as: Slavery in America; the way the Canadian people treated the Native American; and British colonialism. Often, your regular average folk will not study history. They will listen to the shorter dumb down version of history provided by SJWs in academia. And since, most people still believe that the social sciences in Universities are a credible source, it will be hard to correct the falsehood they believe in. I know, because I try to bring the truth on a one on one personal level to people every day. Most of the time, people will prefer to hate you than to change their views. People are lazy like that.
Another thing I want to say about pathetic Nazi losers. Do not waste your life; your personal relationships; and your future opportunities by following these idiots. Even on the most basic level, the way that leads to pussy is the complete opposite way these pseudo Nazi losers are taking. This is Mother Nature’s immune system working in real time, taking these parasites out of the gene pool through natural selection. Don’t be a Nazi loser, believe in freedom and be a winner =D.
Some alt-right activists made the suggestion that displacing groups of people according to physical attribute, religious beliefs or IQ would be the solution. In order to displace thousand, if not, millions of people, you need the coercive force of the state. As a libertarian, I strongly oppose such an act for the following reasons:
- To forcefully remove individuals from a geographic region against their will is the equivalent of kidnapping. This is an unforgivable attack on an individual’s natural rights. Any government or groups of people committing such a crime should be judged for crimes against humanity. (Of course, if someone entered a country illegally, his staying in a country when his/her visa expired and/or is trespassing on private property, then that person is a criminal who doesn’t respect borders and property rights. This criminal should be jailed and/or deported. I believe we can use some common sense and make the distinction between removing people from their homes and removing a criminal who shouldn’t be there in the first place. Well, unless you are a Democrat)
- You do not want to give the power to forcefully displace individuals to the government. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. You do not want to give the ability to coerce to a corrupt entity like the government.
We can look at different examples in history of forceful displacement of large groups of individuals based on certain attributes and the disastrous consequences of such actions:
In 1947, after India formally left the common wealth, the Indian government force the exile of Muslim Indian citizens based on religious beliefs. This led to the creation of Pakistan. Muslims and Indoos were forced against their will out of their homes and were relocated to a certain geographic region according to their religious beliefs. This led to a conflict that is still going on today. ¾ of a century later, this conflict did not diminish. In fact, the two nations now have nuclear weapons and they hate each other so much that one day they might exterminate each other.
Native Americans have been forcefully displaced from their homes and relocated in reserves by the American army. Some of these reserves are in arid desolate parts of North America. No matter how many centuries or generations pass; no matter how many excuses or compensations are made, a visceral hatred still consumes the hearts of the Native Americans. Who knows how many more centuries will need to pass until this issue is resolved.
During WW2, Jews were forcefully evicted from their homes across Europe; their property was seized by the state without compensation; they were forced into trains and were sent to death camps. Over 70 years later, we haven’t seen the end of this conflict. Although this is not an open conflict, a lot of Jews consider Occidentals has their mortal enemies and are actively working on destroying the West.
So what lesson can we learn from this? Forceful displacement of a group of people against their will is a coercive act that leads to endless conflicts and endless hatred. If you are an individual who advocates for this type of coercion, you are advocating for more conflicts in this world and not for solutions.
Another method that has been suggested to create an ethno-state is through Eugenic. This method was tried by the Germans during WW2. People were chemically or physically castrated and/or sent to death camps in order to prevent them from procreating.
This method was also used by the Muslim. Blacks who were victims of the Muslim slave trade were brutally castrated. If you want to understand the brutality of those castrations, you can listen to the presentation ‘’The Truth about Slavery’’ by Stefan Molyneux. The reason the Muslims did this is simple. They did not want those blacks to reproduce.
Today, Jared Taylor suggests that people should be denied the right to reproduce according to factors like intelligence or race. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTykeWsaBcw . Let me point out the obvious:
• Taylor has successfully demonstrated that he doesn’t understand what the founding fathers of America were about. He doesn’t understand anything about the natural laws, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
• Taylor showed that he is a statist who believes in a coercive government that has the power to change the demographic of a nation through chemical castration of undesirable people against their will.
All the arguments that Taylor made based on ‘’what America was intended to be’’ and ‘’what the founding fathers wanted’’ (which is the majority of his content) just went down the drain. Jared, you do not need enemies, you are your own worst enemy
People, if you ever come across a guy who talks about castrating people; who talks about forcing people to have a procreation permit; or who advocates for a government to have the power to forcefully limits the number of children you are allowed to have, and as you listen to all this bullshit you tell yourself ‘’MMMmmm, this sounds like a great idea’’. Well then you need to check into your closest mental institution so that nice people dressed in white can pump gallons of psychotropic drugs into your veins, because you are seriously fucked in the head and you clearly need those meds.
This form of eugenic violates two natural rights: the right to procreate and the right of bodily integrity. It is also a violation of basic human rights. These rights are bestowed to everyone and are unalienable. .
I’m disappointed that Jared Taylor chose Statism and decided to advocate for the worsts forms of coercion. I believe that Jared did such important work by exposing the injustices whites are exposed too in society and in schools. He was attacked left and right, yet kept his cool and his smile while he spoke the truth. I am truly sadden that his work is tarnished this mistake. But, I don’t think that all is lost. If Jared would rethink his position; reject state coercion; and reject the idea of castrating members of society that he believes are undesirable, I think he could save all the good he has done.
Stefan Molyneux has the solution to this problem: ‘’Freedom is always the solution’’. Trying to impose an ethno-state is just as bad as imposing a demographic replacement of a population. The solution is to remove the state or at lease to abolish welfare and to allow people to move freely and to have the right to make a life for themselves where they wish. Some people will try to make it in the competitive market of the west, some people will move to less industrialized countries where the price of living is cheaper and where they can earn a honest living growing crops or doing manual labor. If you remove the coercion of the state, everything falls into place and everyone as the opportunity to seek happiness according to their values and their abilities. Freedom is the way. I’ll never get sick of saying those words. And I swear, my last breath on this earth will be spent screaming out ‘’FREEDOM!!!!’’ like William Wallace did 😉.
I would like to point out something interesting about the supposed left or right, which this case are BLM and the alt-right, before moving on to the next subject:
• Both groups desire an homogeneous society
• Both groups want an ethno-state
• Both groups are authoritarians
• Both groups are statist
• Both groups are socialist
• Both groups want to live in a nanny state with the state providing institutions like health care, education and welfare
• Both groups want to achieve their goals through the coercion of the state
• Both groups advocate for free speech when it benefits their goal and both groups oppose free speech for the opposite side
• Both groups have difficulties with law enforcers
You know, if it was for the color of their skin, I believe that both groups would get along just fine. I would even say that they are carbon copies of one an other.
Racial hatred
Racial hatred is a point of view. It is a dumb point of view that can only pollute your life because it will make you see the world in a negative way and it will affect many of your social interactions, but you have every right to have a dumb opinion. I would never want to police people’s opinions.
Just the fact that we have hate speech laws and hate crimes laws is absurd. If someone attacks a person or his property, you judge him on his attack. You don’t speculate on how he feels about a skin color or a gender. We all know that these hate laws were created by the left to give harsher punishments to white men for the same crime. This is undeniable because the only group of people on the planet who can be accused of a hate crime are white men.
Also, hate speech is a myth. Stefan Molyneux explained this very clearly. To attribute the label of hatred to speech is just a way to discredited speech without addressing the argument. It proves that the person you are talking too, who resorts to this cheap tactic of labeling speech as hate speech, doesn’t have an argument or even a rebuttal to your argument.
There is only speech and freedom of speech is not a spectrum, either your speech is free or it isn’t. An analogy I would make to explain this concept is E.Snowden who explained that your information is secured or it is not secured. It is a binary and not a spectrum. Either your shit is safe or your shit is being hacked. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s488jRN5R68 . Speech works the same way, either you say what you think or you are prevented to express yourself through coercion.
One of the nice thing about freedom of speech is that you know what other people think. We live in a period where racial tensions are extremely high and we owe this climate of hate mostly to Obama who has escalated the racial tensions in America and in Africa. A lot of people wonder what Obama’s legacy is, well there it is, Hate and Depth. Truly the worst American president in history.
The West has been incredibly generous. We have opened our border and are arms to the world. We have welcomed hundreds of millions of people from every back ground and from every ethnicity. We have self policed ourselves and have been intolerant of the intolerants. We have spent trillions of this social experiment that is the multi cultural melting pot of the West. Now that we realize that our economy, our safety and our cultures are in danger we want to postpone this social experiment until we fix our problems and that we are able to welcome strangers into our country without endangering the existence of the West. We are even making sure that this doesn’t affect the migrants that are presently inside the West in any way.
We naturally expect the migrants to be understanding and to be thankful for the generosity we have shown so far.
Hell No!!! What we get is a completely Bat Shit Crazy Shit Show. Migrants are calling out false white supremacy; people are getting attacked in the streets; calls for the end of whiteness is heard all over the internet, tv and movies; People who haven’t even been accepted into the West DEMAND that we acknowledge their supposed right to enter our borders so that they can live off welfare; spineless politicians bend over, take it up the ass and thank their aggressors for curing their imaginary white privilege.
This is a waking up experience for the West. If you make yourself vulnerable and give away free shit at the same time, don’t be surprised if people abuse you. This abuse is usually verbal. You only need to spend 2 minutes online to hear unpleasant comments like:
• Kill whitey
• You owe us retribution
• Check your white privilege
• You have a melanin deficiency
• You need to make retribution by giving up your bank account
• Allow black people fuck your wife
• Give away your kids to the state
• Don’t give any heritage to your children
• Give your home and/or your car to a black person
• Kill yourself
• You white people are going extinct
I’m pretty sure that the garbage the German NAZI spewed to Jews was a bit nicer. But the point is that this shit is just garbage. It is nothing more than verbal pollution from weak hateful idiots who have no idea how to fuck up your life except by fucking up your day. It makes no consequence. If some guy attacks you with a weapon, you fuck him up, but someone attacking you with words is pathetic.
I’m glad that they are honest. I can acknowledge that they are shitty people. I will not help them or harm them. You just go on with your life. Do not waste your energy on people like that. And please, do not judge them collectively.
If it is a government official in South Africa who is talking about changing the constitution in order to steal your property and brutally kill your family, this is different. These people are planning to make some terrible crimes. You should take that shit seriously. When they dance while singing ‘’Kill the Boer’’, then they are making tribal dances to condition the collective to commit mass murder. This is very different to some loser insulting you on the net. We need to make a distinction between verbal harassment and planning mass murder. The hatred in the message is meaningless. The only thing that matters is if it bares real world consequences.
You need to understand something very important. The left controls the media, the big tech companies and the education system. When feminists and minorities are attacking you with insults on social, in your work space or on the street, they are only baiting you. They are trying to get a response out of you. If they do get a response out of you, no matter how small it is, they can show only this little segment of the interaction and then they will be able to show that your side is hateful, bigoted and violent. The media will show your response every 5 minutes on TV, Google will make it the top search result and the education system will use this as an example for why we need feminism. You need to be very careful in what you say and arguing with a leftist is a waste of time. These leftists are on a power trip, destroying a man’s life is like a drug for them. They literally get pleasure out of it.
White Genocide
Before defining what white genocide is, maybe we should define what being white is. What is whiteness? If you look at Europe, you will see many skin colors and physical attributes. Look at an Italian and an Irishman side by side. One’s skin is clearly darker and the hair colors are different. Then look at a Lebanese from Asia next to a Frenchman. Who the fuck is white? Are they all white or are none of them whites.
Some of you will say: ‘’But Gato, the South of Europe was invaded for many centuries by the Moors, so there has been interracial mixing between Africans and Southern Europe.’’ And I would answer ‘’Bravo!!! Well done 😊! You hit the nail right on the head’’. There is a debate right now on where did the first man appear. Was it in Somalia or in Greece? Most of that question has to do with: What do you consider to be a man? It is similar with the question of when did a reptile with wings began to be called a chicken? When did it have enough characteristics similar to a modern chicken that we can call it a chicken? (By the way, the ancestor of the chicken laid eggs, so no matter which bird you consider to be a chicken, it came out of an egg. So the egg clearly came first. 😉 ).
Going back to our humans, ever since we started migrating, we have had interactions with other tribes. Women were exchanged in marriage or as a trade good. Some tribes were conquered and their women were used as sex slaves. There were many scenarios that led to breeding between tribes. There were also more than one migration to the North and we have genetic proof that the Neanderthals bred with the Homo sapiens. So we are all mixed race. I would love it if some alt-right advocate could point to me which genes exactly are white and which aren’t. But, in order to do that, he would have to get out of his mother’s basement and actually get a diploma in biology. (Oh Snap! 😉)
On the other hand, I believe that the hypothesis explaining the IQ differences of certain regions by the high mortality rate due to harsh climates of certain regions has a lot of merit. This hypothesis claims that you had to be resourceful and that we had to be able to cooperate in order to survive. Stefan Molyneux pointed out that in a cold region; you have to defer gratification by not eating your seeds during winter to grow crops in the summer. This means that self control became an important factor for natural selection. We can then define those who survived this natural selection as whites for now.
But what about the Greeks? Greece is a very tempered region with abundant resources. So cold wasn’t a factor for natural selection. But we all know that Greeks were very intelligent. They invented philosophy; they invented democracy; most of the foundations of the civilized world come from Greece. So what was special about Greece. I can think of 3 things:
• Trade
• Wars
• Small states
Greece is part of the Mediterranean region that is characterised by trade with many nations. Ships used to be the fastest way to trade goods with different regions. Being honest and civil with trading partners from other countries was certainly beneficial. This allowed some people to acquire great wealth which increase their sexual market value. So instead of have environmental factors that kills the individuals that are not suited for the environment, you have factors that increase the probability of breeding and passing down their genes to the smartest members of a society.
The Mediterranean was a region that was frequently plunged in wars. There were wars between the nation states within Greece, there were wars between Greece and Persia and there were a lot of pirates in that region. Some Greek states were well known for their ability to wave war, like the Spartans. A soldier is place in an environment where he must process a lot of information very quickly while he is under a lot of stress. Some correlations have been made between the survivability and effectiveness of a soldier and his IQ. I hate to say it but war is a form of natural selection and it was instrumental in raising the IQ of the Greek people.
Ancient Greece was not a single country under one ruler. Look at Greece as a people, which was divided into city states. These states formed trade agreements and military alliances. These agreements were voluntary and beneficial for both states. When a state was attacked, it would call on the contract it had with neighboring states to help defend itself. If a state broke its contract and did not come to the aid of its allies, then no one would come to its aid when they were attacked. Ancient Greece was a libertarian paradise (except for the slavery). The governments were as small as possible; these governments were mostly democratic; and politics was based on creating and honoring contracts. This environment enables a lot of freedom. Where there is freedom you can express yourself more freely and you can be more creative. Creativity is an important component in problem solving. Instead of having only one answer, when you are thinking in a linear fashion, creativity allows you to make associations and to find multiple solutions to a single problem. https://www.highiqpro.com/iq-creativity/creativity-and-iq . This social trait of the Greek might have been essential to the development of their nation and instrumental to the great feet they have accomplished. So once more, Freedom is the solution.
Let’s use as a definition of what constitute white people: The people of European descent whose ancestors went through the natural selection cause by the environmental pressures of the European climate and the selection caused by social political setting of Europe prior to modernization. I think we can work with this definition even if it does sound a bit deterministic.
Now that we have define the ‘’white people’’ we can now explore the question of white genocide. Is it even possible to make genocide of the white people without exterminating all of the world’s population? Let’s explore the different ways white genocide has been presented.
Some people on the right propose that white genocide might happen by interracial breeding. If you were to use the classification of black and white provided by popular culture, which advocates that a person is considered black even if he/she is only 1/100 or less black, then yes, white genocide is possible. But as you know, popular culture is stupid and unscientific.
What we need to address this question is science. I will start by making two book suggestions: The Introduction to Genetic Analysis, by Griffiths, Wessler and Lewontin, and The Molecular Biology of the Cell by Alberts, Johnson, Lewis, Raff, Roberts and Walter. Now Hop on the science train and let’s have some fun 😉.
There are two types of reproduction: Haploid, which means one set of each chromosome(s), and diploid, which means two sets of each chromosome(s). Most single cell organisms have a diploid reproduction that is also called mitoses. Multi-cellular organisms have a haploid for of reproduction. In order to produce gametes, the cells will copy its genetic material but the chromosome will remain joined by the centromeres during the first cellular segregation, called the telophase I. Then the chromosomes will separate before the second segregation, called the telophase II, which will produce four cells with only one copy of each chromosome. This is called the meiosis. When haploid cells interact with haploid cells of a member of the same species of the opposite sex, it will result in the production of a zygote.
Some single cell organisms use both methods of reproduction. These life form belong to the domain of the eumycete, such as the yeast.
I believe there is no word in both, the English and French language, that is more misused then the word ‘’sex’’. It has been misused for so long that people will probably think I am weird for pointing it out. Sex is a synonym for haploid reproduction. When two yeast cells conjugate in order to produce a zygote, it is sexual reproduction. So when God fearing Christians say that sex is the intercourse between a man and a woman in the goal of producing an offspring, they are absolutely right. It is important to have a good definition of sex to understand what follows.
Personally, I don’t mind all the kinky stuff and I will be the first one to admit that kinky is a lot fun but doing anal sex, oral sex, women fucking themselves with strap-ons… you name it. That is not sex, it is something else that maybe one day, some guy will have a free afternoon and will care to produce a definition for the kinky stuff. But it is not important for this presentation.
Now, let me present you a good friend of mine, Gregor Johann Medel (1822-1844). He is commonly known as the father of genetic. He was a Augustinian friar who was in charge of the garden. This allowed him to explore the heredity of phenotypes. Play around with haploid cells of peas and observe the results. The phenotypes observed were the color of the flowers, the color of the peas and the shape of the peas. He noticed that the characteristics of the offspring varied depending on the characteristics of the parents. Often, certain phenotypes could be observed that neither of the parents possessed. At that period, they did not have the technology to understand the molecular mechanic of genetic, but he understood certain very important concepts: Part of the characteristics are passed down by both the mother and the father; some characteristics are dominant and some are recessive; and he made the mathematical equations that explain the probability that these characteristics will be expressed.
A century later, two young men stood up in a café declaring that the now understood the origins of life. James Watson and Francis Crick made the amazing discovery of the double helix of DNA. It was finally possible to understand how genes are expressed. Today, we understand that DNA is transcribed into RNA by a series of enzymes. Messenger RNA will be read by ribosome. With the help of transfer RNA, the ribosome will assemble amino acids according to the codons of the mRNA to produce a protein. Most enzymes are proteins and very few metabolic reactions can occur without the help of an enzyme. So these enzymes dictate how you are shaped and everyone of your bodily function. You are a meat machine instead of organic molecules in a puddle of water because of the genes your parents handed down to you.
Today we understand that sexual reproduction creates genetic diversity because the zygote contains one set of chromosomes from the father and one set of chromosome from the mother. Another mechanism that produces more genetic diversity is recombination. During the first and second meiosis, alleles are transferred from one chromosome to another chromosome, making this chromosome different from the parental chromosome. This means that the genotype in the gametes is the same as the genotype of the organism that made them, but the arrangement of the alleles between the chromosomes are not the same.
In order to be thorough, I need to point out that genetic mutations also increase genetic diversity. However, the frequency of mutation is quite low. Usually, mutations only involve one nucleotide pair (SNP) and these mutations can be trace back in family tree and geographically. But if I were to explain how mutations occur it would prolong this presentation quite a bit; and the subject of mutation is not essential to this presentation.
Ok, now we have the theory that will allow us to answer the question of white genocide.
It is almost impossible for white people to be extinct in the same way that the Neanderthal never really went extinct. The Neanderthals procreated with the Homo Sapiens Sapiens and thus, the Neanderthal genotype has never been as prolific as it is today because hundreds of millions of people have Neanderthal alleles contained in their genome. If you are a white person and you mate with a black person, the offspring produced will not have the same skin color as you nor your partner. But this child is as much related to you as if you mated with a white partner. (I’m sure that Jared Taylor’s head just exploded if he is reading this 😉). The problem with the left, the alt right and the race realists is that they confuse the concept of a phenotype and a genotype. A phenotype is the characteristics that can be observed of a living being: the color of his eyes, the color of his skin; how tall he is… A genotype is the totality of the genetic information contained in the cells of an individual.
Something the right and the race realists are obsessed with is the IQ of populations. It is true that we can observe a huge difference in the average IQ of different population. But correlation doesn’t mean causation. You need to look at the genome of the high IQ of these populations. There are more Asians and whites who have the genotype that allows an individual to have a high IQ, but an African with a similar IQ probably has those same alleles in his genome. Also, the majority of every population have an IQ lower than the average of the respective group. So we need to focus on the individuals who possess the alleles instead of the respective groups.
I have some things to say about genetic and IQ, but it is off topic. I will address some of the hypothesis I have and how I would proceed if I were to do some research on the topic, if I had the opportunity to do this research, in another presentation.
When someone from the alt-right makes the assertion that white people are going extinct because they are breeding with members of other ethnicity, they are actually stating that they have no understanding of genetic. They need to understand two important concepts that are heredity and genetic proximity.
Let’s explore those two concepts by creating an example. We will create the situation with the following subjects: A great grand-father, a grand-father, a father and a son:
The son will share 50+% of his genome with this father. This is because he receives half of his chromosome from his father. The genome of the son can be over 50% similar to his father genome if the father and the mother had the same alleles (for example, they both have brown eyes). If the parents are related, then the similitude of the genome of the son and the father will be much higher, but I don’t want to talk about incest in this presentation.
The son and the grand-father have genomes that are 50-% similar. However, mathematically the son and grand-father would share ⁓25%. If the son’s genome would be 50% similar to the grand-father’s genome, then the father would have to pass down the exact same genes to his son the father received from the grand-father. This means that there is no recombination of genes during both the meiosis I and meiosis II (which is almost a statistical impossibility).
So logically, the son and the great grand-father share ⁓12.5% of their genome.
Now, let’s trigger some BLM and alt-right. Let’s have the great grand-father be a white man. Also, let’s have the great grand-mother, the grand-mother and the mother be blacks. The great grand-father might be the whitest man in history and the son might be black as night, this doesn’t change the fact that the greatest genetic proximity of everyone of this man is with their father and their son. Even if the great grand-father has 50 chalk white friends, he has more genetic proximity with his black son even if the son’s phenotypes are different from him.
So, no matter what color of skin your descendant has he/she is still carrying part of your genome to the next generation. This means that your bloodline continues and therefore, you are not going extinct. Of course, some of your genome might be lost after many generations, especially if some alleles create a disadvantage in a certain environment (natural selection). But it is very probable that some of your genome will survive for many generations. If some alleles give an advantage to your offspring, then this allele frequency will increase after a couple of generations. If you look at whiteness in the form of alleles frequencies, then you will be less stressed by interracial breeding.
I also need to point out that it is impossible to kill off all the whites without killing everybody on earth. Let me explain. Interracial breeding has been happening for millenniums. The Romans, the Macedonians, the Persians, the Mongols, the moors, the French, the Germans and the Americans have expended their empires throughout the known world. The soldiers abroad mated with foreign women and these alleles have been spread to the population through the many generations that followed the occupations of these countries. The slave trade also contributed to the spreading of alleles across the planet. It is very safe to say that, unless you are part of a tribe in some Amazonian jungle that has never had any interaction with the outside world; everyone on earth has white alleles in their genome to some degree. I do not believe that humanity will become extinct in the near future, so it is very unlikely that whites will disappear any time soon.
Race wars
Of all the stupid things created by mankind (not peoplekind 😉), a war based on skin color is the most absurd and unbelievably retarded thing ever that was ever thought of. Just for the record: if you ever come across some who is advocating for a race war, you have my permission to swiftly slap them across the face using your backhand and inform them that they are retarded.
Unfortunately some governments are stupid enough to wage wars based on racial attributes. Moronic governments like the South African government. Yes, I’m shitting again on the South African communist government, but for my defence, this government would deserve a Mount Everest of horseshit crashing down from the heavens and landing directly on their heads. Unfortunately, I am unable to produce that much shit, so I am giving myself permission to verbally shit on them at my leisure 😉.
Imagine how South Africa could prosper if it wasn’t for the black communists. That country is waste and full of resources. Blacks and whites could work together and live in one of the richest nation on earth. Instead, this government wants to eliminate the whites which will lead to unimaginable misery and death of the black people.
This hatred of the white people is unfounded and this conflict is more than moronic. The Boer ended apartheid; they were willing to live in a rainbow nation; the Boer had no racial hatred towards the blacks.
I would make a plea for peace, but I know that even if black Africans were listening to this, they would refuse any peace. There are over 1 billion people living in Africa. How many will die when the food runs out? ¼? 1/3? I’ll make a guestimate and say that between 200 to 300 million Africans will die from this (combined with the economical crash of Europe, which will stop the forceful redistribution of resources from whites to blacks) and this blood will be on the hands of the black Africans. Yes, black African communists; you are your own worst enemy.
Conclusion
If you had the courage to read all of this presentation, good on you. I hope it was a stimulating presentation and that you have enjoyed it.
Gato Villano