Al Pacino – eginotes

More incredible stupidity.

At this post, we see this comment made:

…but can’t have much more than 5 percent African ancestry.

About this individual. I mean, I can’t make this stuff up. Look at the picture, read the comment, and realize that these are the people we depend upon to write about racial issues, and present the “rightist” case to the public. I think the only case being made is the case for more regular eye exams.

This reminds me of something that happened some time ago, where a certain “movement” hero asserted that Mariah Carey – who has a part-Black father, who openly identifies as Black (albeit of course mixed), who even today with whatever cosmetic enhancements celebrities have displays obvious signs of African ancestry, and whose easily accessible high school picture clearly shows she’s a typical coffee-and-cream mulatto – “has no Black ancestry” whatsoever; further, she is “more recessive” (i.e., “more White”) than dago actor Al Pacino. Compare those two pictures. Is Carey the “more recessive/White” of the two? Once again, these are the race experts of Der Movement.

Then we have Derbyshire writing:

In Taiwan once I actually saw two middle-aged businessmen get into a shoving match because both insisted on picking up the tab. They knocked the table over.

The only way that differs from Negro behavior is that the Negroes would be fighting over who would NOT pay.

And then we have this nonsense.

Here MacDonald cites a paper that – while it is certainly interesting and may be factually correct – was made by authors who consider “blaming others” a type of maladaptive pathology. Well, OK, at least it’s a peer-reviewed paper. But how does he justify a north-south cline on individualism and egalitarianism? An interview with HBD Chick (no, I’m not making this up), and citations of papers concerning the well known north-south cline of (ancestral) gene frequencies in Europe.

This chart – featured on his own site! – is not mentioned, showing Italy and Hungary relatively low on collectivism and high on individualism. Russians are part of the northern end of the European genetic cline, and yet are high on collectivism. [Oh – we will be told that they are “Eastern Europeans outside the Hajnal line” – there’s an answer for everything, don’t you know]. While Hungary takes a hard line, Spain accepts a large and growing immigrant population – despite sky-high unemployment – without “blaming others,” and Italy not only has a growing immigrant population, but cheerfully accepts the swarming masses of migrant invaders. Is that all consistent with the dogma? Let’s not let facts and data get in the way of nice HBD stories now, shall we?

And as has been discussed here and elsewhere, “amoral familism” is actually a variant of individualism, not collectivism (hence, the comical ineptness of social organization in dago-land). What then is this “blaming others?” Is it intra-ethnic or inter-ethnic? If it is merely a bunch of greasy wops throwing meatballs at each other across the dinner table, while at the same time welcoming Nigerian migrants, the relevance for ethnic and racial politics is questionable.

Of course, unlike Der Movement and HBD, we must be open-minded. It is very possible that MacDonald’s ideas about “northern hunter-gatherers” are correct. It is possible that the paper cited in that TOO post has some relevance. It is even possible, albeit highly unlikely, that HBD Chick is some sort of “creative genius” – just like the charming, well-spoken, and mild-mannered Greg Cochran. But for now, we must insist on actual evidence, said evidence not including self-citation or ignoring contrary data.

This all goes along with one of the Sallis laws of activism: once any entity becomes tainted with HBD, it drifts away from being a vehicle for empiricism-based pro-White activism and starts to promote HBD for its own sake (and we know, ultimately, who benefits from that – just read Derbyshire).