Category: HBD realities

Odds and Ends, 3/14/24

In der news.

Vomit from this.

I’ve been avoiding Counter-Currents recently, but this is just too much. If you want to get a full understanding of the danger of Johnson/Counter-Currents, as well as the reality of WN 3.0, read that piece, and pay particular attention to what I am stressing below (emphasis added):

In fact, I started my podcast because mainstream YouTubers were reluctant to interview people such as Jim Goad and Greg Johnson.

Both were affable guests, and the latter is always willing to put me in contact with other dissidents when I ask. He also ensures that I am paid on time.

Am I reading this correctly? Johnson not only is promoting Negro Lipster among the Dissident Right but is actually PAYING him? If I am misunderstanding this, please correct my misunderstanding, but it seems clear enough.

More:

…not even vile anti-feminists want to hear Nick Fuentes degrade women. 

So – anti-feminists are “vile,” and we we must not “degrade women.” What about women degrading men? The women in question are White, who else are the Dissident Right focusing on? Hmm..does the Lipster have a particular interest in White women?

Nick’s followers might be a little smarter, but they are primarily emasculated guys who salivate over his hysteria. They are men who want to be engaged in a movement, but just as they are unable to get a woman, they are too lazy to do real work. They assume that shouting on Twitter/X or normalizing the incel cult…

Counter-Currents hosts a male Negro mocking White incels, while supporting milady. Need any more evidence of my idea about homosexual White Knighting as a passive aggressive spiteful attack against heterosexual White men?

White Nationalists should rebrand themselves as human biodiversity advocates, and when their new publications acquire some esteem, they must infiltrate the mainstream with dissident ideas. Saying that you are a White Nationalist is a losing strategy, since people don’t want to be associated with a movement they equate with hate. But one can be a human biodiversity advocate without being a White Nationalist.

So, we should abandon WN and instead promote anti-White HBD, which divides Whites against each other while pushing a Jewish/Asian supremacist agenda of replacing kinship-based racialism with a ranking of traits favoring Jews/Asians. What can go wrong?

Keep on supporting Counter-Currents and WN 3.0, all you numbnuts out there. Meanwhile, I’m banned and blacklisted and get minimal support. You all deserve your fate.

A good comment responding to Lipster’s screed.

HBD is a dead end. No one who hates White people gives a crap about ‘science’ that doesn’t reaffirm their hatred of White people. All that HBD does is smuggle in a bunch of pro-non-White ideas (like jewish and asian superiority) into ‘racial thinking’ for Whites. No non-White cares one iota about HBD unless it serves their ethnic interests.

HBD is just another form of liberal rear-guard action against North American liberalism’s only real political opposition: White Nationalism.

By the way, this is what Lipster writes for other audiences, when he’s not peddling HBD to gullible White nationalists. It’s all geography and the tsetse fly, folks, not Negro IQ:

In general, we are not implying that Africa’s challenges are impossible to solve. However, due to its unique geography, the region requires policies that account for its peculiar condition. As such, primacy should be accorded to improving transportation networks and reducing barriers to trading. Solving the problem of a harsh geography demands bold thinking and surely Africans are up to the task.

Uh huh.  HBD is for YOU, White man, so you reject kinship-based racialism, scorn your fellow Whites, and embrace Jewish/Asian supremacism. For Blacks, we’ll read that: “Solving the problem of a harsh geography demands bold thinking and surely Africans are up to the task.”

The White Man always loses. Let’s consider the fundamentals of the Russia-Ukraine war:

1. Slavs are killing each other.

2. The Russian side is led by an authoritarian multiculturalist, now a vassal of China, who opposes “Nazis” and is repopulating occupied parts of Ukraine with Asiatics.

3. The Ukrainian side is led by a Jew (*) controlled by anti-White America and Western Europe, and the long-term plan there is mass alien immigration to replace dead Ukrainians.

4. Meanwhile, Der Movement takes sides in this war, as if anyone outside of the Dissident Right cares what Nutzi freaks “think” and as if either side is even remotely compatible with long-term White interests.

See what decades of Eloi White leadership – at all levels – has brought you?

* A Jew leading Ukraine is historically analogous to an ethnic German leading Israel.

Another gift from the Eloi. The Eloi are dangerous. The Eloi should not have leadership positions in ANY field, including, obviously, academia .

Some more diseases for female Eloi bioethicists to consider: For women, the disease of menstruation. Bleeding every month? Bloating? Cramping? Mood swings? Disease! Cure – be either pregnant or breastfeeding throughout the entire reproductive period. For heterosexual men, the mental disease called marriage. Voluntarily associating with a dangerous, vicious exoparasite that inflicts significant morbidity. Disease! For bioethicists – life. What? Don’t you experience pain and other disorders? Don’t bodily function decay? Life is a disease for you; what steps will you take to remediate?

One objective of my IRL foray into democratic multiculturalism – akin to my Dissident Right activity – is as a test of sorts. Yes, most of my “colleagues” are rabid leftists, but I do not believe that all of them are. What of the others? If I publicly speak out, put myself “out there,” and declare that “the emperor has no clothes,” will those others become emboldened to speak out themselves? Will they “pass the test” and show some response if someone else takes the risk to pave the way for them? So far, predictably, the answer is a resounding no. The fearful and indolent stay silent, suppressed by social pricing, fright, and inherent do-nothingness. I’ll say this though – those who speak out today when others stay silent should be the leaders of tomorrow when those others become so desperate that they are finally forced to act.

European nationalists like to pose as superior to the “Amerimutts” but they still haven’t grasped the basic concept that it is difficult to politically deal with an issue if you are not allowed to talk about it. Of course, it is possible that if Europeans ever did get official free speech, then social pricing would ramp up, as exists in the USA. There needs to be both legal free speech and a solution to social pricing. Europeans need to fight for free speech while preventing the rise of social pricing; Americans need to fight against social pricing while preventing the rise of speech laws.

Jewish Identity and Odds and Ends

Various items.

I agree with those who do not consider Jews White, but it goes beyond a simple “they’re Semitic” comment. One needs to look at the totality of Identity. As regards the biology, I have written (and podcasted) multiple times about Jewish genetics. The Ashkenazim are a mix of Middle Easterners, Southern Europeans, and Northern/Eastern Europeans (other Jewish types are even more distant from Europeans). In addition, these Jews have undergone centuries of endogamy and selection to make them genetically and phenotypically even more distinct from Europeans. Culturally, Jews belong to the “Magian” High Culture, not the Western/”Faustian” one from which they have been in conflict with; in ancient times, they were similarly separate from, and in conflict with, the Classical High Culture. Historically, Jews identify with the Middle East and with the ancient Hebrews, not with Europe and Europeans, and when they decided to create a modern homeland that was done as Israel, in the Levant. Finally, Jews consider themselves to be, and are considered by many others to be, a distinct people, different from Europeans, from Westerners.  Jews are considered to be a minority group, they cannot be simply equated with White Gentiles. Jews are not an indigenous European ethnic group.

The idea of heritable behavioral differences between groups needs to be analyzed (like IQ was) via methods such as twin studies, adoption studies, looking at immigrants vs. the same ethnies in their own homelands, etc. Even the individualism vs .collectivism issue, which has been studies and with some genetic evidence obtained, could benefit from a more stringent analysis.  Are behaviors consistent, and linked to ancestry, as opposed to environment? Of course, things can be more complicated than typical simplistic HBD “thinking.”  It can be both genes and environment. Possibly, the genetic component will be reliably expressed only in certain environments. Possibly, some differences may only manifest when large numbers of people with the same traits live together, creating positive feedback and threshold synergy – in this cases behaviors, even on an individual level, would be more manifest in a homeland than in a Diaspora (and general environmental factors will influence this as well). For example, herd a lot of Italians together in a concentration (e.g., in Italy) and you get singing on balconies.  More dispersed Italian populations (e.g., in America) would not be so triggered to burst into sing while standing on a balcony. I suspect that all of these factors play a role. The childish HBD theme of absolutely deterministic genetic behavior in a wide range of traits is unlikely to be strictly true.  But it does not need to be true for heritable behavioral differences (to the extent they exist) to be important.  If predispositions to certain behaviors can manifest in certain contexts, then that is meaningful. That’s how cultural differences likely come about.

Another issue is the HBD cold climate = high IQ argument, followed by the struggle to explain why Eskimos are not all geniuses. While, all else being equal, cold is more selective for intelligence than warmth, I believe that that real drivers of enhanced human intelligence over time are seasonal variations and population density and its consequences. So, Eskimos in the Arctic are smarter than tropical Negroes, but not as smart as populations inhabiting areas that go through seasonal changes.  After all, all the Eskimos needed to adapt to was constant arctic frigidity.  Once that is figured out, it is a constant environment.  Seasonal change, also coupled to long term climate change (so it is not that the same seasons play out exactly the same year after year, there are constant variation), is more conductive to intelligence. Also, there is a low population density in the Arctic.  That not only limits opportunity for mutation, selection, assortative mating, etc., but also lacks the selective pressure for intelligence in more complex societies, with more social interaction, specialized societal roles and occupations, government and politics, resource competition and distribution, warfare, etc.  But expect the HBDers to simply gibber “cold…high IQ” and leave it at that.

In Faye’s Why We Fight:

Decadent civilizations designate their friends as enemies and their enemies as friends.

Sounds like Der Movement, which spurns the White ethnics who tried to join in good faith, while worshipping Color in WN 3.0 and, in HBD race realism, obsessing over the intellectual and behavioral superiority of Jews and Asians.  Also, consider the banning, blacklisting, and defaming of the “paranoid insane crap” Sallis compared to the eager embrace of the Lipster and Our Man in Arkansas.

Odds and Ends, 7/30/23

Some links for you to bookmark.

Johnson calls Yockey an enemy.

Taylor says that Asians are superior to Whites.

I’ll be forgiven I hope for using a single anecdotal example to make a point, but I believe it is useful. I actually once knew a White person with an IQ of 88 (and no, not a relative). My experience can put some perspective on the IQ question.  This was a person who could not hold down a job, who could barely string together comprehensible words to make an understandable sentence, and who had a puppy that died because they could not take care of it or even feed it properly.  Worse, they dumped the puppy’s remains into a public garbage can out in the street as if that’s the proper means of disposing of a dead dog.  Now, given that, I’m skeptical of some of the low national/regional IQ scores that the HBDers assert. That certain European and NEC ethnies legitimately have IQ scores in the range of mid 80s to low 90s I do not believe at all. I am even skeptical of some of the very low Negro IQ scores.  Yes, I know, for the latter, the IQ apologists claim that “low IQ manifests differently in racial groups” (evidence?) and they make correlations between IQ and functional age and claim that “ten year olds can still function” (why doesn’t IQ manifest differently with age then?) – I don’t buy it.  And then there’s the Flynn Effect. I am not denying the importance of IQ or its substantial hereditability.  However, I do not believe the ethnoracial range of IQ is as wide as the HBDers report, I don’t believe that all the scores they report are objectively legitimate, I don’t think that extant IQ tests are the best measure of intelligence (we need better measures of problem recognition, problem solving, and imagination – even pattern recognition can be assayed better), and I don’t think that IQ explains everything (behavior influences accomplishment as well, and yes behavior can be heritable as well). Never mind that using PISA scores as a proxy or IQ introduces another level of error, and never mind that Lynn’s methods of “estimating IQs” via non-IQ tests or by averaging data from different tests, were scientifically unsound.  But the HBDers don’t want to hear any criticism; they just want to repeat the same nonsense over and over again.

I seem to be the only person outraged that Lynn was promoting his own work while writing under a pseudonym, perhaps because as a STEM person who has written and reviewed many papers I understand that serious academics would consider Lynn’s behavior a breach of ethics and treated him with derision. This brings up the question as to why he felt it necessary to write under a pseudonym. At that time he was not a young, early career academic in some unrelated field but was an elderly, late stage academic with an already infamous mainstream reputation as a researcher into race and IQ, and someone who was openly associated with Amren (going to conferences, etc.). What did he have to lose at that point? It is difficult to reject the hypothesis that he wanted to promote his own work (and that of his HBD buddies) while hiding behind the mask of a disinterested academic, unrelated to Lynn but who nevertheless admired Lynn’s work. Of course, it would have been silly for Rushton or Brand to have written as “Hippocrates” as well, given that both were already internationally known for their politically incorrect views. The major reason I suspected them was the timing of Rushton’s illness and death, Brand’s death, and “Hippocrates” no longer writing for Amren. That raises another question – since Lynn was working and publishing into his 90s, until relatively recently, why did he stop the “Hippocrates” nonsense? A cynical hypothesis would be that he realized that if “Hippocrates” continued after Rushton and Brand dropped dead then that would focus increased suspicion on Lynn (or his close collaborators). The deaths of Rushton and Brand were convenient to deflect suspicion in their direction once the “Hippocrates” column ended. If my hypotheses are “unfair” to the “Great Man” then folks are welcome to come on Western Destiny Radio and explain it all to us. Otherwise, we are left to speculate about these puzzling questions.

HBD fails the Mertonian norms. You can argue it meets the first two, but HBDers are hardly disinterested, and HBD 100% absolutely fails the “organized skepticism” part. Thus, HBD is anti-fallibilist – it promotes a rigid dogma that is ultimately never questioned; they start out with their desired conclusions and then work backward to produce and/or cherry pick “data” to support their pre-determined conclusion.

See this.  Very telling. “Hood” states, correctly, that Rufo is not one of us (e.g., not pro-White) but that he also is the most important (presumably rightist) activist extant today. What does that say about all of the Quota Queens, including “Hood” himself, who are “one of us?” What does it say about all of your Fearless Leaders, with their constant demands for D’Nations, that they are not as effective as some “conservative” with an Asian wife and mixed race children? “Hood” has tacitly admitted the failure of Der Movement and has therefore confirmed my criticisms of it.

The Quota Queens would no explain Rufo with the excuse that it is much easier to be an effective activist if you are an aracial conservative with mainstream appeal as opposed to a so-called “White advocate.” That’s true, but Rufo is objectively more successful than they even taking this into account; Rufo is much more effective specific to his field of activity than they are specific to their own. Rufo engages in practical activism; he gets concrete things done in the real world and understands the nature of power. The Quota Queens alternate between tin cup panhandling, promoting freakish unrealistic dogma, being inept, lurching from catastrophe to catastrophe, and focusing on “metapolitical” pseudo-intellectualism or “sieg heil and pass the beer childish acting out instead of on practical political work.

“Hood” writes about Rufo with respect to the latter not being a White advocate:

Married to an Asian woman and with interracial kids…

Hmmm…does that family structure apply to anyone else – for example, anyone that Amren is very familiar with?