Category: genetic pacification

More Brief Comments on Crowley

Type I follies.

Fetishist:

Concerning the Etruscans and their origins, I’ve found the works of Prof. Cavalli-Sforza to be the most convincing. Specifically, he posits that the Etruscans developed in an autochthonous fashion from the earlier Iron Age Villanovan culture.

…support the hypothesis that the genetic structure of Italy still reflects the ethnic stratification of pre-Roman times.

And these are those autochthonous Etruscans – who portrayed themselves as darker than even modern day S. Italians.

There’s a very good possibility that the original peoples of Italy were swarthier, and more dissimilar to Crowley, than are the Italians of today.

Since Crowley is so obsessed with “Viking Supermen” he can reflect on the absence of such men in contemporary Scandinavian populations, which are generally characterized by racial liberalism, pacifism, feminism, openness to invasion, and sociopolitical conformity.  Changes in culture and behavior can occur without Kempian fantasies.  

Frost’s genetic pacification is a more realistic possibility:

Over the last 10,000 years, the human genome has changed at an accelerating rate. The change seems to reflect adaptations to new social environments, including the rise of the State and its monopoly on violence. State societies punish young men who act violently on their own initiative. In contrast, non-State societies usually reward such behavior with success, including reproductive success. Thus, given the moderate to high heritability of male aggressiveness, the State tends to remove violent predispositions from the gene pool while favoring tendencies toward peacefulness and submission. This perspective is applied here to the Roman state, specifically its long-term effort to pacify the general population. By imperial times, this effort had succeeded so well that the Romans saw themselves as being inherently less violent than the “barbarians” beyond their borders. By creating a pacified and submissive population, the empire also became conducive to the spread of Christianity–a religion of peace and submission. In sum, the Roman state imposed a behavioral change that would over time alter the mix of genotypes, thus facilitating a subsequent ideological change.

So, pacified Romans of the 5th century passively watched as Germanic barbarians sacked Rome; today, pacified Scandinavians watch as non-White barbarians sack Stockholm. 

How does that square with the idea that the “high trust hunter gatherers” evolved to be egalitarian altruists from the very start?  No fear, Der Movement Spindoctors will get out Occam’s Butterknife and spread around some more pseudoscientific speculation and it’ll all work out just fine.

How immigration destroyed Rome.  No, not all the “slaves” and consequent “racial degeneration.”  Instead it was the acceptance of unassimilable hordes of German tribes.  The Merkelization of Rome. 


And with that, enough with Crowley and the TOO disaster.

Advertisements

Two Science Items, 10/29/14

Science in the news.

Humans domesticating themselves.  Ideas similar to Frost’s genetic pacification.

Competition for niche space can promote evolution.

In recent years, biologists have increasingly recognized that evolutionary change can occur rapidly when natural selection is strong; thus, real-time studies of evolution can be used to test classic evolutionary hypotheses directly. One such hypothesis is that negative interactions between closely related species can drive phenotypic divergence. Such divergence is thought to be ubiquitous, though well-documented cases are surprisingly rare. On small islands in Florida, we found that the lizard Anolis carolinensis moved to higher perches following invasion by Anolis sagrei and, in response, adaptively evolved larger toepads after only 20 generations. These results illustrate that interspecific interactions between closely related species can drive evolutionary change on observable time scales.


One can speculate that this may apply to humans: negative interactions between different hominid subspecies (i.e., races) can promote evolution of particularly a native subspecies whose territory is invaded by a related subspecies.  The Third World invasion of the West may be stimulating rapid evolution of European human organisms.  The question is: in what direction? If the evolution has a “group selection” aspect, evolution may be in the direction of greater ethnocentrism.  However, a purely individualist selective pressure may actually select for even less ethnocentrism than even the feeble degree exhibited by extant Europeans.  Thus, on an individual level, short-term fitness may accrue by “throwing your race under the bus” so to speak, due to the massive incentivization of White dispossession described by KMacD at TOO. Whatever the case, Europeans are likely exposed to novel selective pressures due to the occupation of their territory by alien hominid forms.

Duchesne and Frost

Decline of European Man.

In the comments section of his blog, Duchense makes the following insightful comment:


Decline of the West is obvious and not only in the face of mass immigration; it is evident in the very physiology of Europeans; current males are not the same as in the past; even if they “understand” that their lands are being occupied by forces that will destroy them, many will still not react, they have lost their basic survival instincts; it is not their ideas of human rights only, but their temperament is very low in aggressive in-group energies.


Is this related to Frost’s concept of genetic pacification?  Not that it happened overnight, but, perhaps, as part of a long process of genetic pacification and de-barbarization of European Man, a threshold level has recently been passed, resulting in pathologically low levels of aggressiveness.  Or, have the two world wars of the last century resulted in a civilization-wide “nervous breakdown,” destroying the West’s will to resist?

As to the latter possibility: to think we still have retards who continue to promote intra-European division, both in the American “movement” as well as in some petty nationalist European nationalist parties. “First as tragedy, then as farce” – Karl M. was on to something there with his insight into repetition in history.