OK Boomer

And other items.

See this stupidity. And as the execrable Jeelvy demonstrates, the WN 2.0 crowd are no different.

What’s the reality?

The Millennials will go down in “movement” history as the generation that muffed the world historical opportunity given to them in 2015-2016 with the rise of Trumpian right-wing populism, the prominence of the Alt Right, and the seepage of certain Far Right ideas into the mainstream. And they took this opportunity and not only squandered it but brought American racial activism to the brink of disaster, defeat, and despair. Yes, they can pin some of the blame on their older, mostly late-Gen X, leaders, inept Quota Queens like Spencer and Johnson, but in the end, that’s a detail, a cop-out. For those leaders jumped on the Alt Right train, they were thoroughly immersed in, and on board with, the whole “youth culture” – Spencer as the leader of the Alt Right had his Beavis-and-Butthead podcasts and Johnson was a major promoter of the Alt Right in all of its Pepeist and Kekian juvenile stupidity. The Alt Right, so called “WN 2.0,” was a thoroughly  Millennial phenomenon, and the Alt Right crashed and burned in a monumental failure that has to rank among the greatest train wrecks in history. The Alt Right was Millennial through and through, and so that generation, and the Zers who followed them, must be held accountable for the incredibly destructive damage – some of it possibly irreversible – done to racial activism from the Alt Right disease.

The entire “movement” – even those of us who denounced and opposed the Alt Right from the very beginning – have been tainted by the stench of Millennial failure and by the ideological vacuity and intellectual emptiness of the Alt Right disaster. The Millennials and associated Gen Zers have no right to criticize anyone else, they are imbecilic failures unprecedented in racial activist history; we need to have an Interregnum of activity from them while they mature sufficiently to behave like men instead of like middle schoolers throwing sandwiches around in a cafeteria food fight.  OK Millennials?  OK Zoomers?

And as far as the broader society goes, these Millennials and Generation Zers cannot afford to talk negatively about anyone else. Examining American 18-30 year olds (as well as high school students), what do we observe?  Not only is a huge percentage of them non-White, including what Pierce termed “the raceless ones” (semi-Whites; bizarre hybrids of every ancestral and phenotypic configuration), but those who are White are weaklings, freaks, hysterical SJWs, blue-haired fatties, purple-haired deviants, pink-haired queers, an alphabet soup of sexual perversions, radical leftists, sobbing soyboys, masculinized feminists, feminized white knighters – yes, I know, I’m some grouchy old boomer/Xer/whatever yelling “get off my lawn.” That doesn’t change the accuracy of everything I just wrote.

Jeelvy on Boomers:

However, statistically speaking, they’ve engaged in wealth destruction, cuckery and mate poaching, which is no bueno..

Let’s consider “mate poaching.” It seems to me that the greatest incidences of that – statistically speaking, of course – is inter-racial and intra-generational, not intra-racial and inter-generational.  If you want to complain about “mate poaching” then you have plenty of Black males poaching White females and White males poaching Yellow females – all of which is very prevalent among Millennials. Indeed, it is among Millennials that the White male-Yellow female pairing has become ubiquitous, poaching all those Asiatrices from the Yellow male. After all, wasn’t it said (by a “movement activist”) that dating East Asian females is a “rite of passage” for men in the Alt Right?  No bueno!

And given the realities of female hypergamy, Millennial White males wanted mates should probably try to eschew the classic Alt Right behavioral patterns.

See this.  Given poor Millennial health, their “Day of the Pillow” might be reached by age 40. Millennial poor health – more wealth destruction.  No bueno!  Not to mention the prevalent leftism among them is prime cuckery.  No bueno!

Millennial Type Iism (Jeelvy):

…my thought process usually includes a lot of walking by the river, hiking up the local mountainside, lifting weights, staring into the distance while my wife accuses me of ignoring her, hashing out arguments in verbal form while playing action-packed video games…

OK Millennial.

Laugh at this.

Finally, we would like to broach a very delicate topic: your will. If you are planning your estate, please think about how you can continue helping the cause even after you are gone.

After all, Greg still needs to go to the movies and on his European vacations after you’re dead.

The essay “Majority Estate Planning” contains many helpful suggestions.

I’m sure it does.

Please give generously!

Hand over dem dere shekels, goys!

Note: Donations to Counter-Currents are not tax deductible. Real change never is!

Real change – the kind of real change that comes when a heroic leader fomenting this “real change” is banned from entering a country for a meeting; others are banned from the entire EU.  Definition of insanity – doing the same thing over and over again even though failure is (virtually) guaranteed.  Keep on trying to go to those Scandza meetings, Greg.

Remember: those who fight for the Golden Age live in it today.

And Greg is living in the “Golden Age” today as he deposits your money into Counter-Currents accounts. Given dem “D’Nations!”  – those who donate live in the Golden Age today!  And don’t forget your estate planning!  Screw your family, give to Greg!

Thank you for your support.

You suckers.

Anti-vaxx insanity.


Odds and Ends, 11/19/19

Some odds and some ends.

Counter-Currents reaches another new low in superficial, juvenile scribbling.

The races of mankind – from 1881.

The Gunpowder Plot – Suvorov’s law in action. See: 16:40-17:05.  We need to get to the point that the System is forced to give concessions and raise hopes.

Oh yes, HBDers, let’s use those PISA scores to “estimate” Chinese IQ, shall we?

The results from a global exam that evaluates students’ reading, science and math skills are in and, once again, Chinese students appear to be reigning supreme while American students continued to underperform.
But before you shake your head ruefully and scoff at the decline of Western-style education, take a look at how the data is organized.
The OECD’s Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) exams are held every three years. Coming first and third respectively in the 2012 exams are the Chinese cities of Shanghai and Hong Kong.
However, China is uniquely not listed as a country in the rankings — unlike the U.S., Russia, Germany, Australia and other nations judged on the basis of their country-wide performances. Instead, China only shares Shanghai’s score with PISA. (Hong Kong, a Special Autonomous Region of China, sends its own data.)
Shanghainese and Hong Kong students are much better educated than those elsewhere in China. Slate quoted the Brookings Institution’s Tom Loveless as saying that  “About 84 percent of Shanghai high school graduates go to college, compared to 24 percent nationally.” In addition, Loveless points out that affluent Shanghainese parents will spend large sums on extra tuition for the children — paying fees that far exceed what an average worker makes in a year.
By not providing full national data, China is in effect cheating.
As Loveless noted earlier this year, Shanghai’s test scores “will be depicted, in much of the public discussion that follows, as the results for China.” He added: “that is wrong.”
All of a sudden, rote-learning doesn’t look like China’s secret weapon.

China’s real secret weapon is the horde of buck-toothed, flat-chested Chinatrics with the secondary sexual characteristics of prepubescent boys, who are used as sexual bait to the cohort of White omega male HBDers, who are so desperate for anything ostensibly female that they’ll conspire against their own race’s interest to grovel to the Altar of Asia as part of the HBD cult. Asian cheating on exams (among other things) is apparently well known to everyone except for the “IQ estimators” of HBD.

All PISA all the time, as the Breezy one always says, eh?

Those “k-selected” Northeast Asians.

Read this, emphasis added:

AR Staff: Welcome back to American Renaissance! We’re glad to have you. Please tell our readers why you left, what you did while you were away, and why you came back?
Chris Roberts: That’s three questions in one.
As to why I left, the short answer would be “depression.” By late 2017, I was overwhelmed with disappointment over a number of things: Donald Trump’s presidency seemed to have become nothing but a string of let-downs and betrayals. 

But, but, but…Greg says that Trump is a sincere – sincere in every way! – man of genuine greatness, and don’t you forget it.

The world of white advocacy was internally fractured and squabbling. The Unite the Right rally at Charlottesville had been an disaster in nearly every way. Two years earlier, the cause of saving our people seemed to be surging into the mainstream. In 2016, there were days when our cause seemed invincible and inevitable. But starting in February of 2017, and culminating that August, the sugar high had faded into a nightmarish hangover. I needed a break.

Those disasters didn’t just happen. They were the fault of incompetent “leadership.”

What did I do while I was away? Many things. I traveled a great deal, both nationally and internationally, taught English abroad for a bit, and worked in real estate here in the US for nearly a year. Probably of most interest to American Renaissance readers was that I lived with the Brimelows…

That’s of great interest no doubt.  Did you correlate their “D’Nations” income to their actual level of accomplishment?  Happy Penguins, indeed.

The Great Nation


The Great Nation, by  Jean Thiriart, a few quotes:

For us a nation is, above all, a community of destiny.

Originally, a nation is not an ethnic or linguistic entity. What constitutes the reality and vitality of the nation is the unity of its historic destiny.

When men, peoples have arrived at almost identical levels of maturity, when a culture is common to them, when geography makes immediate neighbors of them, and the same dangers and the same enemies threaten them, the conditions are given for making a nation.

For us nationalism is the identity of destiny desired in light of a great shared plan.

We state that the smaller a nation is the more it is subject to foreign influences.

Freedom is power. Power is dimension. It is true of nations as of men: only the big ones are really free (*).

It is a good book, very pan-European in outlook and also very much opposed to petty nationalism. There is also the issue of anti-Americanism, a common trait of continental European (particularly French or Belgian like Thiriart) nationalists (or those like Yockey who were similar in outlook). These types typically do not distinguish the American state from the (White) American people, or, at least for the latter, do not distinguish culturally European Whites from the booby masses.

He also notes – back two generations ago – the folly of importing migrant workers when automation will make their labor superfluous. Even if one were to accept the priority of economics (which we should not) and the idea that aging populations will have a shortage of younger workers, all of that is moot with sufficient automaton. 

Ultimately, the economy is based on productivity as well as the balance between production and consumption, between supply and demand.  Productivity can just as easily be achieved, and typically more efficiently, with automaton than with human labor (hence, the entire economic history of industrialization), and demand does not require ever larger masses of people, as per capita consumption can increase with higher and higher standards of living. Excess production – if a “problem” – can be siphoned off into mass projects such as space exploration and the creation of technical and cultural artifacts.

As an aside, I note the utter hypocrisy of filthy scum like Greta Thunberg who agonize over “the environment” while not opposing mass immigration and unrestricted Third World population growth. both of which are having, and will increasingly have, negative effects on environmental stability. You would think that a person really suffering from “the disability of Asperger’s Syndrome” wouldn’t care about the social sensitivities of political correctness and would just blurt out the truth.  But, alas,the Holy Ladogan does not do so.

*Then towering and statuesque heroes such as Johnson and Spencer are more free than manlets like Anglin or any of the scurrying two foot tall swarthoids old Humphrey was trying frantically to stamp out.

Political PopGen

And other news.

More mendacity.  I like how they are trying to surprise us with “you see, the Ancient World was really diverse” (shilling for modern mass alien immigration), while the fact that Rome itself (the city and immediately surrounding regions, specifically) became a cosmopolitan city has always been well known. In fact, if I recall correctly, some of the early work from the Cavalli-Sforza lab identified Rome and Naples (and areas immediately surrounding) as being somewhat genetically different from the rest of Italy, with the suggestion that it was because of the cosmopolitan aspects of these large cities throughout history. What about Alexandria?  It has always been known that it had a variety of ethnic groups.  What about the metics of Athens? Again, it was ALWAYS known that these large cities of ancient big states/empires, civilizational units, etc. were not purely homogeneous.  Why lie?  Why set up a strawman so you can knock it down with breathless accounts of the “surprising diversity?”  If for what other reason than to convince Whites to open their borders to the other today, and to cheerfully accept their demographic displacement and replacement?

Again, it depends what you mean by “Rome.”  If by that you mean the city itself, I don’t know of anyone who ever claimed the city did not attract migrants and take slaves. However, if by “Rome” you mean the entire Empire, including the mass of the area of current-day Italy, that’s a different story. Migrants (non-European) were not settling, in any substantial number,  in “backwaters.” There were slaves working farms, but those were hardly settled people who were reproducing (and were unlikely to have been spindly, flabby easterners in any case).

The city of Rome – no surprise. The entirety of “Rome” is not, obviously, going to reflect the same “diversity.”  By the way, population changes in Rome thousands of years ago do not obligate Italy – or any other nation – to accept immigrants today.  And, also, Ancient Rome itself was under no obligation to accept newcomers from its empire. They stupidly had slaves, yes, but as regards voluntary migrants – why accept them?  Just because you rule over various peoples does not obligate you to accept them as migrants. Even when universal citizenship was granted, it could have been enjoyed in place. There was no need or obligation to accept any influx into the city of Rome itself.

This is amusing though:

Then, starting about 1,700 years ago, the empire entered a phase of gradual dissolution. The Roman empire split in two halves and the capital moved to Constantinople. Around this time, the inhabitants of Rome changed their trading habits — and the new trade routes seem to have brought a fresh influx of ancestry into the region, Pritchard says. “People aren’t just trading with the north and the west, but their population is being replaced by new people coming in from those places.”

Race replacement!  But alas for “movement” narratives, the “race replacement” coinciding with “a phase of gradual dissolution”- the decline and fall – was coming from “the north and west.”

Der Movement, Der Movement, Der Movement marches on.

Get this, from that same article; Pritchard describing the data:

…a pleasant surprise…


Value judgments about scientific data? That crosses the line separating science from politics. I’ve always said that population genetics is a highly politicized field and this article is yet more evidence. These guys can’t just report their results. They need to “interpret” the data to the great unwashed – pontificating about the wonderfully surprising “diversity” of ancient cities.  Population shifts and replacements – pleasant.  And of course Pritchard is not alone. Ever notice that papers stressing the Middle Eastern ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews, and the consequent asserted continuity of modern Jews to the Levant, tend to come from Israel? Papers that stress continuity between ancient and modern Greeks tend to have Greek authors?  Papers that stress differences between Northern vs. Southern Italy tend to have Northern Italian authors? Papers that stress admixture and population shifts are typically about Europe?  That Chinese population geneticists are not going out of their way to interpret data to delegitimize the Han Chinese ethnography of their nation?  Coincidence?

I’m not saying the data are false and/or fabricated. Instead, similarly to what I have written about ancestry testing companies, the types of samples used and the types of analyses performed can determine the direction of the findings. Choices of parental populations, choices of analytical methods, underlying assumptions, etc. can create marked differences in the data output.  Further, how these people choose to interpret the findings can be highly subjective.

Never mind that all these guys are allergic to genetic kinship assays.

In any case, how about this for an interpretation – the city of Rome was “diverse” and the Roman Empire collapsed, a “pleasant” correlation there.

Hey, here’s your “alpha” Supreme Court Justice, Alt Right retards. Maybe we can have more analysis from Roissy of Trump and Kavanaugh shaking hands or how each one stands up straight (or in the case of “big paunch” Trump, does not).  

This is a good Strom piece, but if he believes all of this, why doesn’t he openly and explicitly denounce the Jewish-Asian HBD cult?

Let’s rewrite some of it.

….what Sir John Harington said about treason in the 17th century. Harington was wondering why one hears so little about treason; he asked Why does treason not prosper? It must not be prospering, since we never hear about it — right? Wrong. Harington said: “Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

Similarly, today, few dare call into question the promotion of open borders, racial mixing, mass immigration, and slavish support for Israel and all things anti-White by the supposed “American” media — and few dare mention the real ethnic loyalties and background of the billionaire media elite — because to do so would bring smears, economic repercussions, legal persecution and sometimes even physical violence down on the truth-teller.

….what Sir John Harington said about treason in the 17th century. Harington was wondering why one hears so little about treason; he asked Why does treason not prosper? It must not be prospering, since we never hear about it — right? Wrong. Harington said: “Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

Similarly, today, few dare call into question the promotion of slavish worship of “high Jewish and Asian IQ,” aracial cognitive elitism, intra-European division, “race realist” lies and fairy tales, Jeurasian mongrelization, outrageously transparent pseudoscience, and all things anti-White by the supposed “movement” HBD faction— and few dare mention the real ethnic loyalties and background of the HBD elite — because to do so would bring smears, “movement” repercussions, and labels of “crazy and bitter” on the truth-teller.

If you tune in and see some Republican or Democrat talking head promoting another war or promoting more immigration or pretending he opposes more immigration on the television, and you switch it off immediately and more importantly forever, that doesn’t make the traitors stop existing. But it does give you a chance to perceive the world primarily with your own eyes and ears, and to draw your own conclusions instead of having them spoon-fed to you.

If you go online and see some HBDer talking head promoting intra-European division or promoting Jew-Asian worship or pretending he opposes more Asian immigration, and you switch it off immediately and more importantly forever, that doesn’t make the traitors stop existing. But it does give you a chance to perceive the world primarily with your own eyes and ears, and to draw your own conclusions instead of having them spoon-fed to you.

See how easy it is, Kevin?

Odds and Ends, 11/16/19

Various items.

As I often talk about “Type I” and “Type II” activists, here is a reminder of the principle involved.

Something to consider:

“If I had but one bullet and were faced by both an enemy and a traitor, I would let the traitor have it.”

― Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, For My Legionaries

Of course, this is metaphorical with respect to the present situation…by “have it” the traitors within the gates of racial activism should be shunned and defunded.  No more “D’Nations” for them.  HBDers are first among the traitors.

…appropriately dealing with violent white supremacist activity while not being perceived as painting with too broad a brush and impinging on legitimate right-wing political activity and free speech.

Err..you fundamentally dishonest System apparatchik….we have LONG SINCE PASSED the phase where “legitimate right-wing political activity and free speech” has been “impinged” upon.  The entire continent of Europe, as well as Canada, has ZERO free speech and the usual suspects want the same for the USA.  And what makes certain activity and speech “legitimate?”  As long as the Right sticks to talking about “capital gains tax rates?”  Probably that will soon be labeled “White supremacist hate speech” as well.  After all, why don’t privileged Whites want to pay more taxes to help Coloreds?  Racism!  White fragility!  Note to System shills…you have already lost the narrative.  And thank you for alerting us to your concern. We’ll make sure to constantly add that your agenda is specifically anti-White. We have our narrative as well. But, the major difference is ours is true.

A delusional letter (at the end):

Change in percentage of white children in public schools is a proxy for immigration-driven population change. As I wrote in September, white children were 81% of America’s public school students in 1972, 63% in 1997, expected to be 45% in 2022, and, assuming the same pace of annual decline, 27% by 2047.

This is trouble for everyone, especially the white population. A simple search engine “experiment” illustrates. Education Week has a paid circulation of 50,000 education professionals. I searched EdWeek.org using the term “whiteness.”

“Whiteness” is a word used with increasing frequency in progressive circles, particularly universities. The term conveys racial animus toward the white population. The EdWeek whiteness search turned up this 9-18-19 commentary: “’Mr. Turner, Are You Racist?’ A White Teacher Grapples With His Privilege.”

That search also produced news about the National Education Association. The NEA is a 2.9 million-member teachers professional association. The North Carolina Association of Educators is an affiliate. At its July convention, the NEA agreed to “incorporate the concept of ‘white fragility’ into NEA trainings and staff development, literature, and other communications.”

Concepts like “white privilege,” “white fragility,” and others highlighting problematic “whiteness” were unknown a few years ago. Imagine concepts that will be justifying educational, governmental, and corporate policy by 2047. If it’s bad now, how bad will it be in 28 years?

More on K-12’s ever-intensifying diversity challenge: A prominent education historian, Diane Ravitch, wrote a best seller in 2003: The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn. One revelation: hundred-page “bias and sensitivity guidelines” textbook publishers use to screen textbook content. The publishers want to avoid offending identity groups. Offending a sensitive group could derail approval of a textbook by state textbook adoption committees. At risk: millions in sales.

The mother lode of whiteness ideology, however, are America’s universities. I recently read The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture (2018) by Heather Mac Donald, Manhattan Institute fellow and frequent guest of Tucker Carlson. For a sense of The Diversity Delusion, watch her 38-minute YouTube interview with the Hoover Institution’s Peter Robinson. It’s had almost 500,000 views since April.

America is in a pickle. Its institutions, its leaders — all of them — have failed us for decades. But strange things can happen to disrupt disastrous trends/policies. One was the election of Donald Trump. Another would be his re-election.

Tom Shuford

Sure!  With the re-election of Donald Trump, his DOJ can start persecuting people like Shuford for ”hate speech.”  MAGA!  Pepe! Kek!  A sincere man of genuine greatness!

More on Rome and Odds and Ends

Several issues.

Read this.  Emphasis added:

Although inhumation was practiced regularly in archaic Rome, cremation was the most common burial practice in the Mid- to Late Republic and the Empire into the 1st and 2nd centuries. Crematory images appear in Latin poetry on the theme of the dead and mourning. In one of the best-known classical Latin poems of mourning, Catullus writes of his long journey to attend to the funeral rites of his brother, who died abroad, and expresses his grief at addressing only silent ash.[13] When Propertius describes his dead lover Cynthia visiting him in a dream, the revenant’s dress is scorched down the side and the fire of the pyre has corroded the familiar ring she wears.[14]

Ultimately, inhumation would replace cremation; a variety of factors, including decreasing levels of urbanization and changes in attitudes to the afterlife, would contribute to this marked shift in popular burial practices.

So, a problem with the recent Rome paper – that is of course not their fault but they could have specifically mentioned it as a limitation of their study – is that they had to work with the samples available, those that were inhumed. They do make a statement in their supplementary section about class differences in Rome and how they believe they have a relatively representative sample, but they really cannot know this. 

In any case, consider the cremation issue. First, this may in part explain why they had so few Iron/Age Republics samples.  Second, and perhaps more importantly, it raises issues of representation later on as well. Were certain classes of Roman society more likely to cremate vs. inhume in any given period?  One finding of the paper was that the dominant ethnotype of the Iron Age/Republic samples – the more “West Mediterranean” type – was grossly under-represented in the Imperial samples. Was that because of a demographic displacement/replacement so significant as to be mirrored in the sample representation?  Or is at least part of the explanation that during the Imperial period most of the old Roman stock cremated their dead, while newcomers were more likely to inhume?

Sample sizes and assumptions about how representative the samples are – these are the two biggest weaknesses of the study. There’s nothing the authors can do about what the Romans did for their funerary practices but, as stated, they should have mentioned this, explicitly, in the main text of the paper. One can hope for more studies on other samples, if such are available.

With respect to “movement” heavy breathing, these issues can cut in both directions. Der Movement may wish to claim that all the Dolph Lundgrens in a toga were cremated and thus not analyzed; a counter-argument could be that the old Roman upper classes were all Julius Evolas in a toga, and that these are under-represented in the Iron Age/Republic because of cremation.  

Ancient Rome has become an excavation site known for its rather extravagant cemeteries. All in all, the commoners and wealthy families of Rome were buried in the same cemeteries; the wealthy, however, had more elaborate tombs. The tombs of the wealthy were typically cut out of bedrock and rectangular in shape. 

Any way of correlating the remains studied to social status?  According to the authors, no.

A Medicist critique of the paper by Crimson Guard:

They do not use any ancient samples aside from the Italian ones, but instead choose to use modern non Europeans Middle Eastern peoples as if these people have never underwent change,lol.  A minority of the Imperial samples group around Cypriots and where Ashkenazi/Sephardic Jews would often cluster around. Such Jews are mixed with European (primarily Roman era Italians and Greeks). It also does not take into account that certain Mediterranean populations like Druze and Turks tend to be closer to Southern Europeans due to a Neolithic and Bronze/Iron Age connection(including Sea People/Philistines) along with West to East migrations, here they interpret everything based on historical movements where its basically one way admixtures. They try to connect African to mean Sub-Saharan and Phoenicians with Sub-Saharan Africans and do the same with the North-African Ibero-Maurasian(which somehow also means or includes Neolithic Moroccans to them)  – meanwhile the R475 sample Etruscan is no where near North Africa let alone  Sub-Saharans Yoruba.  R80 and R132 are much more closer to Cypriots than to North Africans.

They also claim that I-M253 haplogroup arose in Northern Europe meanwhile early examples were found among  Linear Ware samples from Hungary.  LBK   had affinities to modern-day populations from the Near East and Anatolia. Steppe peoples were not Western Hunter Gathers either and they were not “European either.

These criticism are mostly correct.  And the inclusion of Basques in the Central/Northern Europe cluster is not only mindboggedly stupid, but is made to look nonsensical by the PCAs they included in their own paper. The haplotype sharing data became skewed by these bizarre and subjective decisions, never mind the labels they gave to various genetic ancestry components.

I’m sure the Nordicists will have different complaints and/or wildly alternative explanations.  I have repeatedly said that it is difficult to separate politics from population genetics. And if you believe that population geneticists themselves are free of political bias when it comes to their science, then you are painfully naïve.

However, there is much useful information in the paper, so we need to sift through the trash to find the isolated useful nuggets.

From the paper’s supplementary section (emphasis added):

…highlighting the substantial influence of this “eastern” influence on the genetic makeup of central Italians in Iron Age. Furthermore, the influence of this “eastern” ancestry is not limited to R437 and R850, as R1016 and R1015 can also be modeled as RMPR_CA + Anatolia_IA.SG, and R1016 (but not R1015) as RMPR_CA + Armenia_LBA

Thus, the Iron Age/Republic samples, at least some of them, seem more “Mediterranean” than those from the preceding Copper Age.  This is not consistent with “movement” dogma, despite whatever “spin” they would like to give.

Further, the higher WHG-related ancestry in some Iron Age/Republic samples are most likely due to derivation from the Copper Age situation in which higher WHG ancestry came into play, possibly through admixture with Neolithic populations with greater WHG percentages.  Based on the PCA data, those would seem most likely to be of the Ibero-Basque West Mediterranean type.

HBD fraud on display.

Yet another of the pitiful juvenile retards that Greg Johnson is dredging out of the Alt Right sewer to “write” for Counter-Currents.  The kids are alright!  Or Alt Right? 

We’re thin, fit, handsome, with strong jaw lines and good haircuts…We dominated them not only physically with our high testosterone voices….

Brandon/Brendan is getting ready to flirt.

Where does Johnson find these people?  Does he advertise? Wanted: Immature Millennial numbnuts to write for “traditionalist” ethnonationalist webzine. Triple digit IQ not required.

In all seriousness, it is good that these “Groypers” are challenging the false conservatives (that includes Trump himself by the way, that “sincere man of genuine greatness”), but the “kids” need to grow up.

Der Alt Right marches on:

Jane Dough 

Oh good. Another article telling the alt-Right to man up. We need more of those.

Gregory, please let us know the date and location for your IRL counter-insurgency, I’ll mark it on my calendar and try to attend.

What’s that, Gregory? Your job is to inspire others to man the barricades?

Oh. Okay.

txjon18  Jane Dough 

Conte is a dunce. Skipping to keep up with Richard Spencer, who himself has the brain of a woman. The problem with the American Alt-Right are the dumb people attempting to speak for it.

Russell McGinnis 

Oh, Good God, who keeps posting the whining and wailing of the Charlottesville drama queens?

They’re gonna continue to have for sure *plenty* to kick, whine, wail and shout about as they get bent over by the opposition…

…they are now Palestinians and have been for some time.

This author is “lazy and weak” because neither he nor his comrades will be caught dead actually taking the time to model the problem and design an actual material response that doesn’t involved whining, histrionics and 40 year jail terms.

Videogames have destroyed an entire generation

Putting aside the Beavis-and-Butthead aspects of the podcast, and whatever ideological criticisms I have – they are essentially (whether they admit it  or not) pathetic pro-minority Christian civil nationalists – the criticisms they make of Spencer and the Alt Right are on point. Unfortunately, these idiots are just as bad as what they criticize.  

Great Christians there who say “go fuck yourself” to anyone who disagrees with them.  Yes, you idiots, I don’t believe in “god” ‘– “god is the truth.”  I will quote Pontius Pilate – “what is truth?”  Cue these idiots telling me to “go fuck yourself.”  Very “godly” that! Godly!  Christian!  The mocking and ridicule of Richard Spencer – Godly! Christian!  I dislike Christians not only for ideological reasons but because of their consistent personal hypocrisy.  In my life I have known many people who called themselves “Christian” but in fact I have never known a single authentic Christian – someone who walks the walk and not just talks the talk.  Nietzsche was right – there was only one Christian and he died on the cross.  On second thought, St. Francis was also a genuine Christian – so here is a role model for all the Christnats to emulate.

And so one night, before bed, I decided to try it. I knelt down, next to my futon, adjusting my bare knees on the hard floor. I put my hands together, did one last eye-roll, cleared my throat, and commenced speaking to God.

It wasn’t a long conversation. But I did notice a certain calm come over me as I whispered in the dark. Also, it clarified in my mind what was really important in my life at that moment. That I stay sober. That I support my family and friends. That I be a good person to whatever degree I could.

I felt a sense of completion and satisfaction when I was done. Who, specifically, I was talking to when I did this, I could not determine then, and have never bothered to figure out since. My “God” is neither an old man on a cloud or the supernatural father of Jesus. He remains the same formless presence that appeared across from me that first night.

But if I actually stop and think about it, I would have to admit that this invisible entity definitely feels more male than female. To me, God is like a wise older man . . . a father, or a coach. But he isn’t always older. At times he’s like a close friend, a person who knows me better than I know myself, and whose perspective is larger than my own. In that sense, my personal God probably is male. To be totally honest, I cannot picture God as a female.

This is the guy cruising around Eastern Europe looking for native women to lay.  Apparently God – in the guise of Roissy and Roosh – was advising him on that. Note as well we’re apparently dealing with another Alt Right drunk.

The worst writer in the history of the Far Right strikes again.

Why would a handsome Prince of the Realm be dating Gavin Newsom’s 50-year-old sloppy seconds? Kim Guilfoyle is a year older than Melania Trump, and unlike the First Lady, does not carry the Balkan genes which have made Barron Trump a giant among men…

Cue Greg Johnson sweatily comparing the height of Barron Trump to that of Tom Cruise. Perhaps he can borrow some really big calipers from Durocher to accomplish the task.

But assuming you’ve got no time, patience, or energy for more than one Jeelvyan irascible philippic per day, the operative concept is the following: In order to shore up their relevance, Alt Lite, center-Right, and centrist types have to constantly proclaim victory after victory and loudly trumpet the size and scope of their following.

Sounds like Der Movement, no?  But then….

The deeper, Dissident Right doesn’t need to be massive…

That’s good, since the influence of the “Dissident Right” can be measured in microns.

…or even win all that often…

Good to see they are sufficiently self-aware there.

…in order to be relevant…

Which they’re not.

…our legitimacy…

Is non-existent.

…is derived from our allegiance to the truth. 


We do not have to signal our high status…

There’s nothing to signal.

…it is self-evident from our quest for the answers to the really tough questions. 

Tough question – how to squeeze more “D’Nations” from all them suckers?

This makes us robust…

As a mouse.

…even a little bit antifragile to failure.

Good to hear it, or else they’d be falling apart several times per day.

I’ve noticed that whenever there is a Jew-Gentile conflict in the United States, there is often a Yankee vs. Jew situation in play…This also applies in the in the Demjanjuk case. Of course, Demjanjuk’s ancestors weren’t on the Mayflower or Arbella, he was most certainly not a Unitarian Universalist or Congregationalist, and he’d probably never heard of Cotton Mather. However, put his son and son-in-law (both shown in the film) in a blue Union Army uniform and they wouldn’t look out of place in Mr. Lincoln’s Army.

I mean, this is incredibly, outrageously retarded even for Counter-Currents. This idiotic author inserts a completely superfluous aside about “Yankee vs. Jew situation” conflict – which hasn’t existed for decades, quite the opposite according to Lind’s “American Tribes” paradigm – in an essay about the Demjanjuk case, and then tries to justify using a Ukrainian to illustrate the “Yankee vs. Jew situation” with “…put his son and son-in-law (both shown in the film) in a blue Union Army uniform and they wouldn’t look out of place in Mr. Lincoln’s Army.”  If I actually tried to mock and ridicule Counter-Currents by attempting to invent some sort of absurdity one would expect from the site as it is exists today, I couldn’t be able to come up with anything so ludicrous. Congratulations for hitting a new low.

It is amazing that even after the embarrassing collapse of the Alt Right, the complete exposure of WN 2.0 as a pitifully pathetic empty shell, and the humiliations of Trump’s endless betrayals, the Beavis-and-Butthead crowd are still pushing the Pepe nonsense.

But, but, but…He’s a sincere man of genuine greatness, and don’t you forget it!  Also, send in those “D”Nations” to Counter-Currents.  After all, those who give live in the golden age today!

And what if someone’s entire “activist” history is one long “faux pas?”  Any accountability?

Hey! If affirmative action is still banned in Washington state, then why do we have “movement leaders” living there?

A book for Der Movement.

Fisking Zman:

One of the curious things about conservatism, as in Buckley-style conservatism, is that it never examined its failures. Even today, when asked about why they were unable to muster a defense against the homosexualization of the culture, a guy like Charlie Kirk is poleaxed by the question. He’s standing in front of a sign that reads “culture war” alongside a homosexual and he is baffled about the question. Even the more thoughtful and honest among conservatives have a huge blind spot for their past.


One of the curious things about Der Movement, as in the Alt Right, is that it never examined its failures. Even today, when asked about why they were unable to muster a defense against the homosexualization of the “movement,” activists are poleaxed by the question. They talk about “traditionalism” alongside homosexuals and are baffled about the question. Even the more thoughtful and honest among Alt Righters have a huge blind spot for their past.

Back to Zman:

Conservatives never stop to think that maybe California is what the ruling class wants for all of North America. After all, the people running those tech giants are living great lives. In fact, they live lives no mortals have experienced in the history of man, so from their perspective, the system works. It’s not just the plutocrats at the top. All the way down the line, the managerial elite is now living as aristocrats. Sure, there is rot down toward the bottom, but that’s true of all ruling elites.


Rank-and-file activists never stop to think that maybe Der Movement is what the ruling class wants for all of racial activism. After all, the people running those blogs and organizations are living great lives. From their perspective, the system works. It’s not just the “rock stars” at the top. All the way down the line, the Quota Queens are now living as racial aristocrats. Sure, there is rot between the ears, but that’s true of all “movement” elites.

Back to Zman:

The United States was never a nation in the tradition sense. It was always a federation of nations. The structure the Founders created was an explicit acknowledgement of it. The regional difference in the colonies at the time of the founding were not superficial. Those regional differences are still with us today, despite the migrant wave unleashed on many parts by the ruling class. America was always a house with many mansions.

These guys extend their ethnonationalism to the concept of America itself.  There is nothing they don’t try to divide. Ever notice that all these types are supporters of HBD?

The Senate, People, and Genes of Rome

Der Movement is right about the existence of change over time, but is wrong about mostly everything else.

See here. Abstract, emphasis added:

Ancient Rome was the capital of an empire of ~70 million inhabitants, but little is known about the genetics of ancient Romans. Here we present 127 genomes from 29 archaeological sites in and around Rome, spanning the past 12,000 years. We observe two major prehistoric ancestry transitions: one with the introduction of farming and another prior to the Iron Age. By the founding of Rome, the genetic composition of the region approximated that of modern Mediterranean populations. During the Imperial period, Rome’s population received net immigration from the Near East, followed by an increase in genetic contributions from Europe. These ancestry shifts mirrored the geopolitical affiliations of Rome and were accompanied by marked interindividual diversity, reflecting gene flow from across the Mediterranean, Europe, and North Africa.

Note: By the founding of Rome, the genetic composition of the region approximated that of modern Mediterranean populations.

That’s a key finding, and at odds with “movement” dogma.

Overall, the findings are somewhat similar to what I previously reported.  Some highlights (emphasis added):

We generated whole-genome data for 127 ancient individuals from 29 archaeological sites in Rome and central Italy (Fig. 1 and table S1). 

The oldest genomes in our dataset are from three Mesolithic hunter-gatherers (10,000 to 7,000 BCE) from Grotta Continenza, a cave in the Apennine Mountains. In PCA, these individuals project close to Western hunter-gatherers (WHG) from elsewhere in Europe, including those from the Villabruna cave in northern Italy and from Grotta d’Oriente in Sicily (12–15) (fig. S17).

As reported previously for WHG groups (12, 14), these individuals show particularly low heterozygosity, ~30% lower than that of early modern central Italians (7). After this period, we see a sharp increase in heterozygosity in the Neolithic Age and smaller increases afterwards, reaching modern levels by around 2000 years before present (fig. S6).

The first major ancestry shift in the time series occurred between 7000 and 6000 BCE, coinciding with the transition to farming and introduction of domesticates including wheat, barley, pulses, sheep, and cattle into Italy (Fig. 2) (6, 16).

Similar to early farmers from other parts of Europe, Neolithic individuals from central Italy project near Anatolian farmers in PCA (13, 14, 17–19) (Fig. 2A). However, ADMIXTURE reveals that, in addition to ancestry from northwestern Anatolia farmers, all of the Neolithic individuals that we studied carry a small amount of another component that is found at high levels in Neolithic Iranian farmers and Caucasus hunter-gatherers (CHG) (Fig. 2B and fig. S9). This contrasts with contemporaneous central European and Iberian populations who carry farmer ancestry predominantly from northwestern Anatolia (fig. S12). Furthermore, qpAdm modeling suggests that Neolithic Italian farmers can be modeled as a two-way mixture of ~5% local hunter-gatherer ancestry and ~95% ancestry of Neolithic farmers from central Anatolia or northern Greece (table S7), who also carry additional CHG (or Neolithic Iranian) ancestry (fig. S12) (14). These findings point to different or additional source populations involved in the Neolithic transition in Italy compared to central and western Europe.

Note: Different or additional source populations. Genetic differences in Europe were established at least as far back as the Neolithic.

During the late Neolithic and Copper Age, there is a small, gradual rebound of WHG ancestry (Fig. 2B and fig. S24), mirroring findings from ancient DNA studies of other European populations from these periods (10, 13, 18, 20). This may reflect admixture with communities that had high levels of WHG ancestry persisting into the Neolithic, locally or in neighboring regions (tables S9 to S11).

The Iron Age and the origins of Rome

The second major ancestry shift occurred in the Bronze Age, between ~2900 and 900 BCE (Figs. 2 and 3, A and B, and tables S13 and S14). We cannot pinpoint the exact time of this shift because of a gap in our time series.

We collected data from 11 Iron Age individuals dating from 900 to 200 BCE (including the Republican period). This group shows a clear ancestry shift from the Copper Age, interpreted by ADMIXTURE as the addition of a Steppe-related ancestry component and an increase in the Neolithic Iranian component (Figs. 2B and 3B). Using qpAdm, we modeled the genetic shift by an introduction of ~30 to 40% ancestry from Bronze and Iron Age nomadic populations from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe (table S15), similar to many Bronze Age populations in Europe (10, 13, 14, 19, 22). The presence of Steppe-related ancestry in Iron Age Italy could have happened through genetic exchange with intermediary populations (5, 23). Additionally, multiple source populations could have contributed, simultaneously or subsequently, to the ancestry transition before Iron Age. By 900 BCE at the latest, the inhabitants of central Italy had begun to approximate the genetics of modern Mediterranean populations.

That last part is the authors’ broad conclusion from their data.

The Iron Age individuals exhibit highly variable ancestries, hinting at multiple sources of migration into the region during this period (Figs. 2A and 3B). Although we were able to model eight of the 11 individuals as two-way mixtures of Copper Age central Italians and a Steppe-related population (~24 to 38%) using qpAdm, this model was rejected for the other three individuals (p < 0.001; table S16). Instead, two individuals from Latin sites (R437 and R850) can be modeled as a mixture between local people and an ancient Near Eastern population (best approximated by Bronze Age Armenian or Iron Age Anatolian; tables S17 and S18). An Etruscan individual (R475) carries significant African ancestry identified by f-statistics (|Z-score|>3; fig. S23) and can be modeled with ~53% ancestry from Late Neolithic Moroccan (table S19). Together these results suggest substantial genetic heterogeneity within the Etruscan (n = 3 individuals) and Latin (n = 6) groups. However, using f-statistics, we did not find significant genetic differentiation between the Etruscans and Latins in allele sharing with any preceding or contemporaneous population (|Z-score|

In contrast to prehistoric individuals, the Iron Age individuals genetically resemble modern European and Mediterranean individuals, and display diverse ancestries as central Italy becomes increasingly connected to distant communities through new networks of trade, colonization, and conflict (3, 6).

Imperial Rome and the expanding empire

During the Imperial period (n = 48 individuals), the most prominent trend is an ancestry shift toward the eastern Mediterranean and with very few individuals of primarily western European ancestry (Fig. 3C). The distribution of Imperial Romans in PCA largely overlaps with modern Mediterranean and Near Eastern populations, such as Greek, Maltese, Cypriot, and Syrian (Figs. 2A and 3C). This shift is accompanied by a further increase in the Neolithic Iranian component in ADMIXTURE (Fig. 2B) and is supported by f-statistics (tables S20 and S21): compared to Iron Age individuals, the Imperial population shares more alleles with early Bronze Age Jordanians (f4 statistics Z-score = 4.2) and shows significant introgression signals in admixture f3 for this population, as well as for Bronze Age Lebanese and Iron Age Iranians (Z-score < −3.4).

two-thirds of Imperial individuals (31 out of 48) belong to two major clusters (C5 and C6) that overlap in PCA with central and eastern Mediterranean populations, such as those from southern and central Italy, Greece, Cyprus, and Malta (Fig. 4B). An additional quarter (13 out of 48) of the sampled Imperial Romans form a cluster (C4) defined by high amounts of haplotype sharing with Levantine and Near Eastern populations, whereas no pre-Imperial individuals appear in this cluster (Fig. 4AC). 

Notice that these are two separate groups – a majority of European Mediterranean genetics and a significant Near Eastern minority.

some of the individuals in this cluster also project close to four contemporaneous individuals from Lebanon (240 to 630 CE) (fig. S18) (28). In addition, two individuals (R80 and R132) belong to a cluster featuring high haplotype sharing with North African populations (C4) and can be modeled with 30 to 50% North African ancestry in explicit modeling with qpAdm (table S28).

Different individuals.

The average ancestry of the Late Antique individuals (n = 24) shifts away from the Near East and toward modern central European populations in PCA (Fig. 3D). Formally, they can be modeled as a two-way mixture of the preceding Imperial individuals and 38 to 41% ancestry from a late Imperial period individual from Bavaria or modern Basque individuals (table S24). The precise identity of the source populations and the admixture fractions should not be interpreted literally, given the simplified admixture model assumed and the lack of data for most contemporaneous ancient populations (7). This ancestry shift is also reflected in ChromoPainter results by the drastic shrinkage of the Near Eastern cluster (C4), maintenance of the two Mediterranean clusters (C5 and C6), and marked expansion of the European cluster (C7) (Fig. 4C).

The high interindividual heterogeneity observed in Imperial Rome continues into Late Antiquity (Figs. 3D and 4). Late Antique individuals are distributed across the eastern Mediterranean (C5), Mediterranean (C6), and European (C7) clusters in roughly equal proportions. Using f-statistics, we identified three outliers who are genetically distinct from others in the same period, including R104, who genetically resembles Sardinians, and R106 and R31, who overlap with modern Europeans in PCA (Fig. 3D). 

In the Medieval and early modern periods (n = 28 individuals), we observe an ancestry shift toward central and northern Europe in PCA (Fig. 3E), as well as a further increase in the European cluster (C7) and loss of the Near Eastern and eastern Mediterranean clusters (C4 and C5) in ChromoPainter (Fig. 4C). The Medieval population is roughly centered on modern-day central Italians…The Normans expanded from northern France to a number of regions, including Sicily and the southern portion of the Italian Peninsula (and even sacked the city of Rome in 1084), where they established the Kingdom of Sicily (3, 36). 

Sallis Summary

Of course, we would like to have more samples, particularly for the Iron Age/Republic period, but the data are (for now) what they are, with the samples available, and we can, for the time being, make an assumption (that may be valid or invalid) that these samples are representative of the wider population. Also, how class differences in that period (e.g., patricians vs. plebeians) can be genetically modeled is unknown. Perhaps more samples will be found, and assayed, in the future.

The only part of the narrative that fits “movement” dogma is the genetic shift to the “east and south” (Eastern Mediterranean and Near East) during the Imperial period. However, it is interesting that the Fall of the Western Empire coincided with the later genetic shift to the “western and northern” directions. That is wholly opposite of “movement” dogma, which suggests Rome fell because of the influence of the “eastern and southern” influx (I suppose they’ll spin it that the “eastern rot” could not be reversed). The major anti-“movement” finding is that the original Romans (as per the study’s limited samples) were not Nordic, they were not Dolph Lundgren walking around in a toga. Similarities of the old Roman stock to modern “Mediterranean” populations suggest that the genetics of later Roman populations were roughly returned part-way to the original genetic “centroid” (see Figure 3) by the later “western and northern” influences that counter-acted the “eastern and southern” Imperial influx, resulting in the more modern Roman populations – although this of course only partly approximated the original genetic position, and did not recapitulate the original stock. 

Note that the study is about Rome and surrounding regions (and not all of the areas that constitute the modern Italian nation state). Rome was obviously a very cosmopolitan city as the center of a vast empire, and therefore genetic heterogeneity there over time would be expected to be significantly higher than in other parts of Italy and in the empire as a whole. Thus, likely, genetic heterogeneity in the Roman Empire was at its maximum in Rome and surrounding regions..

So, the “movement” is “one for three.”

1. The “movement” is correct about “eastern” (and “southern”) influences in the Imperial period, and a genetic shift from the Republic to Imperial periods. Likely, Der Movement will be happiest about Figure 4C (as well as the changes shown in Figure 3), and concentrate on that to the exclusion of all else, as it demonstrates these shifts in a dramatic visual fashion. However, keep in mind that – similar to population genetics in general – the labels for genetic components (e.g., in Figure 4C) are descriptive and not meant to be taken literally, and that by “European” the authors are talking about samples whose PCA position is mostly in the area of Northern Italy-Tuscany, extending to Spain/France/Croatia at the far edges (not Northwest Europe proper and certainly not Scandinavia). 

One thing that people have a hard time understanding, and what I harp on about here frequently, is that labels given to things are not equivalent to the things themselves. For example, some of the populations included as “Mediterranean” (or even “Eastern Mediterranean” if that includes Greeks) are European populations; the distinction between that and “European” is arbitrary.  With specific respect to the PCA placement of the Ancient Roman (Iron Age/Republic) samples “European” is more South-Central  European.

The somewhat subjective labeling of Figure 4C can be interpreted in light of some of the fundamental “raw” data. Figures 4A and S26 show haplotype sharing between the Roman samples and modern populations. To be fair to the “movement,” some (not all) of the Iron Age/Republic samples have significant haplotype sharing with “Central and Northern Europe.” However, most of the Roman samples with significant haplotype sharing with “Central and Northern Europe” are actually those from the Late Antiquity and Medieval and Early Modern periods.  Moreover, looking at Roman samples with significant haplotype sharing with “Southern Italy” and “Greek” (as well with the general “Southern Europe and Mediterranean” category), some of these are Iron Age/Republic. In fact, some of the same Iron Age/Republic Roman samples have relatively high haplotype sharing with both sets of modern populations (Europeans in general tending to share many genetics) – sample R1 is a prime example of this phenomenon.  Note that “Basque” is included in the “Central and Northern Europe” category and some Iron Age/Republic samples (R473, R105) with relatively high “Central and Northern Europe” actually have relatively higher haplotype sharing with Basques and French.  

Figure S27 is a PCA of the Figure S26 haplotype data and clarifies some issues. Of the Roman samples that are outside the range of modern (North-Central-South) Italy, those that are shifted in the direction of populations of actual Northern and Central European origin (e.g., Roman samples R1219,106, 62, 1286, 1288, 1224, 116, 31) are all from the Late Antiquity and Medieval and Early Modern periods (decline, fall, post-fall).  Several of the Iron Age/Republic samples that seem to show relatively high haplotype sharing with “Central and Northern Europe” in Figure S26 are actually shifted in the direction of “Spanish” and “Basque” (and to some degree “French”) in Figure S27 – these include the aforementioned R473 and R1015. The aforementioned R1 sample clusters near “Northern Italy.” Another Iron Age/Republic sample (R850) is in between “Southern Italy” and “Cypriot” in Figure S27. Other Iron Age/Republic samples are close to “Spanish.” Thus, the Iron Age/Republic samples are mostly “West Mediterranean” with some being “Central Mediterranean” (and one or two are outliers), with the former “West Mediterranean” group tending to have more of the relatively high haplotype sharing with “Central and Northern Europe” (likely due to the Basque or Basque/French similarities). I do not observe any of the Iron Age/Republic samples overlapping Northern European populations in the PCA of Figure S27.

Thus, the fraction of Iron Age/Republic samples that exhibit significant haplotype sharing with “Central and Northern Europe” tend to either (1) also exhibit significant haplotype sharing with “Southern Italy/Greek” as well as “Northern Italy” and “Central Italy” and hence end up overlapping with Northern Italy; or (2) be shifted in the direction of Basques/Spain, exhibiting a West Mediterranean genotype more Western Hunter Gatherer (WHG)-enriched than other “Mediterranean” populations, thus resulting in enhanced haplotype sharing with other WHG-enriched populations. On the other hand, a smaller fraction of the Iron Age/Republic samples are of a Central/East Mediterranean type (along with an unusual Etruscan sample that may or may not be an outlier for the general Etruscan population), with less haplotype sharing with WHG-enriched populations and, in general, modest haplotype sharing with several of the other population groupings used for comparisons.  

The Iron Age/Republic samples therefore crudely cluster in two groups – the larger group centered on Northern Italy, Central Italy, Basques, Spain, and to some extent France; and a smaller group centered on Central Italy, Southern Italy, general Southern Europe/Central Mediterranean, with some associations with East Mediterranean, as well as that Etruscan sample previously mentioned. This interpretation is broadly consistent with the authors’ comments on their overall findings in the main text, and is also consistent with the right side of Figure S25, which summarizes data of haplotype sharing, identifying “recipient clusters containing ancient individuals.”  Most of the Iron Age/Republic Roman samples are in cluster C12 – “Northern Italy, Central Italy, Spanish, French.” The remainder of the Iron Age/Republic Roman samples are in cluster C22 – “Southern Italy/Greek, ” and cluster C21 – “Spanish.”  The Roman samples shown in cluster C10 – essentially Northern Europeans – are Medieval and Early Modern.

Further, and importantly, Figures S10-12 show admixture analyses for different Roman samples and population groups, along with timelines. To my eyes, the Iron Age/Republic Roman samples exhibit an admixture profile relatively similar to present-day Italy as well as to the various of Roman history in between Iron Age/Republic and modern Italy (including the Imperial period), contrasting to the admixture profile of Northern Europe, which is clearly more different.

Figure S29 gives functional allele frequency data, which mirrors the general genetic data. For example, throughout most of Roman history, lactase persistence is low, and increases only toward the end periods, starting with Late Antiquity, precisely those periods that have samples exhibiting the most haplotype sharing with “Central and Northern Europe.”  Blue eye color was highest in the earliest (Mesolithic) and latest (Late Antiquity and Medieval and Early Modern) Roman periods; Iron Age/Republic and the Imperial periods look similar.  Hair color was not studied.

All of these data suggest a predominantly West Mediterranean character of the Iron Age/Republic (responsible for the haplotype sharing patterns discussed above), with some Central and Eastern Mediterranean influences. That is consistent with the overall PCA of Figure 2, as well as with the authors’ general conclusion that the area approximated modern “Mediterranean” genetics by the time of the founding of Rome. Thus, the general PCA positions (Figure 2) of the Iron Age/Republic samples show that a majority of these fall in the area of Northern Italy/Tuscany (“European”) with a minority (keeping in mind the low number of samples from this period) in the area of Central and Southern Italy (“Mediterranean”). These are different parts of Italy, in Southern Europe; hence, again, the authors overall conclusion is that “By the founding of Rome, the genetic composition of the region approximated that of modern Mediterranean populations.” 

Two other points. First, the authors make clear that genetic modeling of the Imperial population was a problem due to a poor data fit, suggesting that “this was a complex mixture event, potentially including source populations that have not  yet been identified or studied.” That sounds a lot like the parental population problem exhibited by commercially available ancestry testing.  Second, for those interested in single locus data (I am not), mitochondrial DNA (Figure S4) and Y chromosome (Figure S5) show changes over time similar to that of the autosomal genome.

One critique of the paper is that they could have, in the main text, discussed the haplotype sharing data in more detail. Needless to say, genetic kinship analyses would have been helpful, but as I have noted at my blog many times, population geneticists typically eschew performing such determinations.

Now, I have already observed signs that the dishonest “movement” is retconning their dogma, making believe that they never said that the original Romans were Celto-Germanic Nordics. No, now, with 20-20 hindsight, they make believe that they asserted that the original Romans were akin to Northern Italians/Tuscans – that is a complete fabrication of the dogma as well as not fully reporting the full spectrum of the ancient individuals’ genetics. 

Essentially, very crudely speaking, Iron Age/Republic was shifting in the direction of Benito Mussolini, Imperial was shifting toward – and past – Julius Evola, and then Late Antiquity and Medieval was shifting toward Il Duce again, but not getting back to the original position. These are just very crude approximations; the peoples of that period were not literally exactly the same as similar modern peoples. Further, even though genetic heterogeneity in Rome obviously significantly increased after the establishment of Empire, the samples assayed exhibit genetic heterogeneity even before Empire – The Iron Age individuals exhibit highly variable ancestries, hinting at multiple sources of migration into the region.” If we assume these samples represent the general population (obviously an important assumption for this study), then the founding of Rome was due to a somewhat diverse population base. Whether that correlates to patricians vs. plebeians is an interesting question. Regardless, the existence of genetic heterogeneity from the beginning of the Roman state is not consistent with much of “movement” dogma.

Another point, as alluded to above, is that while we can determine which extant groups seem most similar to Roman samples from different time periods, with Iron Age/Republic being of particular interest, that doesn’t mean that the Romans of any particular period were actually the same as any extant group or groups. Populations change over periods of centuries and millennia and this is particular true of an area with the history of Rome, with various population movements and important historical events over time. Similarity is not the same as exact identity.  Ancient peoples no longer exist as they did at their time, but we can determine which extant groups are most similar, and when the extant groups occupy similar territory as the ancients, then the extant groups are likely to be in part descended from those ancients. The Roman stock as such no longer exists, but we can determine what a small subset of them were like genetically (and get some phenotypic characteristics from functional genes), and make possible associations with modern populations. A careful study of busts and statues from, e.g., the Roman Republic shows facial phenotypes that are not really precisely the same as any extant group. One can look for phenotypic similarity, as with the genes, but not exact identity, when comparing ancients and moderns. The same goes for other groups. There are no Gauls anymore, as they were back then, but there are extant groups similar, with likely a linkage of descent between them.

2. The “movement” is wrong about the Fall of the Western Empire being associated with an increasing “eastern” and “southern” component. It is the other way around. The Fall occurred as the population of Rome was, genetically speaking, moving “west” and “north.”  Unlike Der Movement, I do not postulate (a crudely deterministic) cause and effect between these genetic changes and the sociopolitical situation in Rome (as far as I understand, corruption was maximal in Late Antiquity). Der Movement would of course, I presume, make distinctions between “decline” and “fall” and assert that the “fall” was due to the “decline” caused by the “eastern (and “southern”) influx.” Indeed, one can expect the most “interesting” interpretations of these findings by the “movement.” Nevertheless, the Roman state was founded by a Southern European population likely most akin (but not identical) to modern Northern Italians, but with Central and Southern Italian influence as well, and at the height of Imperial power, the city of Rome was more “Mediterranean” in character, albeit with some unfortunate significant influences from regions outside of what is today Italy (or Europe as a whole). 

3. Most of all the “movement” is wrong – 100% wrong – with the idea that the original Romans were Nordics akin to modern Northwest Europeans.  See my comments for points 1 and 2 above; also as regards point 3, I once again cite from the paper:

After two major prehistoric population turnovers—one with the introduction of farming and another prior to the Iron Age—individuals in central Italy began to genetically approximate modern Mediterranean populations…The Iron Age individuals exhibit highly variable ancestries, hinting at multiple sources of migration into the region during this period An Etruscan individual (R475) carries significant African ancestry identified by f-statistics (|Z-score|>3; fig. S23) and can be modeled with ~53% ancestry from Late Neolithic Moroccan (table S19). Together these results suggest substantial genetic heterogeneity within the Etruscan (n = 3 individuals) and Latin (n = 6) groups….In contrast to prehistoric individuals, the Iron Age individuals genetically resemble modern European and Mediterranean individuals, and display diverse ancestries as central Italy becomes increasingly connected to distant communities through new networks of trade, colonization, and conflict (3, 6).

From a historical-sociopolitical narrative, pride of place first of all does of course has to go with the founders of Rome, who established the city and its traditions, as well as conquered the bulk of what was to become the Empire – the Iron/Age Republic group.  However, from the same narrative perspective, second place has to go to the extenders, maintainers, and rulers of the Empire, who established the Pax Romana.  Now, one cannot conflate all of the urban rabble of any period (Iron Age/Republic as well as Imperial, or later) with the ruling strata. Thus, from a biopolitical perspective, the ruling strata of the Imperial period would likely be those of European Mediterranean stock; that Imperial population would likely be similar to the smaller “group 2” fraction of the Iron/Age Republic era described above. 

An important take-away point on all of this is that the political situation of a polity can affect its genetic composition (which we know intuitively, but it is demonstrated here). The division of the Roman Empire between West and East shifted the genetics of Rome in a more “western and northern” direction. Indeed, these data support a trend opposite of “movement” dogma – it is more that political changes drive genetic changes than vice versa (although, in theory, there can be feedback in both directions; the point here is that the Roman data – from the “movements” own assumptions about population character – support the politics affecting genes’ direction and not the reverse).

Similar to Ancient Rome, a European Imperium that deports non-Europeans and cuts off population movements with non-Europe will decrease kinship overlap between Europe and non-Europe and increase kinship overlap between European peoples, given enough time (and the latter will occur without any panmixia). 

In any case, with respect to the paper, we can expect the most outrageous lies, distortions, and misinterpretations about it from the fundamentally dishonest “movement.”  They’ve done it  before.  I urge the reader to take a look at the paper itself (and much of the text is reproduced here, above), including the supplementary data section, and come to your own conclusions. Hopefully, you’ll see that my summary is essentially correct and that whatever nonsense Der Movement comes up with is just that – nonsense.