Category: Wikipedia

Odds and Ends, 6/21/20

In der news. In all cases, emphasis added.
Another example of how ethnonationalists ruin everything they touch:

1999, a manifesto of a second ‘European Liberation Front’ was published in Paris, but there is apparently no more active organisation of that name now. The manifesto takes its ideological inspiration from Yockey, and from Otto Strasser, who was expelled from the Nazi Party by Adolf Hitler in 1930.

Despite the pan-European style of its title, the ideology of the manifesto is ethnic and racial nationalism

Take over the name of Yockey’s organization and then promote an opposing ideology.  Very good!  Hail Der Movement!

Authentic pan-Europeanism does not exist in any organization of which I am aware over the last 50 years or more, except Lowell’s in Malta.

Forney on Spencer Part I.Part II.
Note that I do not agree on Forney on all his comments, but, nevertheless, the rank-and-file needs to understand where their affirmative action program leads.  I also find Forney’s glee at Spencer’s problems unseemly.  It is not funny, it is a tragedy.  I don’t care about Spencer himself, but we all need to realize that the White public – you know, the folks that your “movement” wants to recruit from – do not make fine distinctions between Spencer, Johnson, Forney, Taylor et al.  It’s all one.  Spencer’s downfall therefore reflects badly on the entirety of racial activism in the public “mind.”  
That downfall, ultimately, derives from the lack of judgment of “movement” “elites.”  Spencer should never have been allowed to be the head of NPI in the first place; that position should have gone to an older individual with more experience, maturity, and gravitas. Spencer should instead have been groomed for electoral politics, as the smiling young face of the Far Right, with mature adults as his behind-the-scenes handlers. 
The past cannot be changed. But going forward, the affirmative program needs to be eliminated.  That is step one.  It’s not a case of a single rotten apple that needs to be gotten rid of, it’s a whole case.  And as soon as one apple becomes so horribly decayed that it is thrown out, another one joins in. The entire crate needs to be thrown out, and the entire process of picking rotten apples changed.

A sincere man of genuine greatness.

Glad to see we got dem dere Republican conservative judges like “Earl Warren Jr.” Roberts there.

I’m no fan of Rushton, but the retraction of his hypothesis paper was unfair and disgusting, and I agree with this analysis, which is a refutation of leftist hysteria that helped get the paper unfairly retracted.  I also agree with the analysis in that the author of the leftist attack on Rushton-Templar doesn’t understand what pleiotropy is, possibly confusing it with epistasis (or who knows what).  I am also amused by the leftist critique of Rushton-Templar for having a “political bias.” Hoho!  What about the leftist critic’s bias?  Would he care to inform us on his views on say, race in America?  What’s his party affiliation?  Who did he vote for in 2016? What about, say, Lewontin’s biases?  Any comments on that?
If the Rushton-Templar paper was inherently flawed – even as a hypothesis – and this somehow escaped the notice of the reviewers at that time, then the appropriate response is to write a paper (for publication) refuting the Rushton-Templar logic and/or do studies that produce data refuting the Rushton-Templar hypothesis. Retracting the paper is politically motivated censorship, leading us to a scientific dark ages. The retraction is a disgrace.

Hey, it’s time for Trump to tweet LAW AND ORDER!  That’ll fix it.  Fat Don is like, you know, demonstrating his sincerity and his genuine greatness!

I was looking at Amazon reviews of Robert Griffin’s One Sheaf One Vine book, of interest to me since I am one of the people featured in it.  Two excerpts from the comments I found amusing:

1. Interesting anthropological study. Nothing really new here, but contains only interview available of Alex Linder. No other interviews with people who would go on to become personages. 

That’s a stinging rebuke of my lack of accomplishment I suppose.

2. Another observation I make, is that none of the people in the book, offer any solutions to the racial problems they criticize. In numerous cases, they simply flee those high-‘diversity’ problems by moving to other, whiter states. But none of them seem to envision the new domiciles undergoing future change.

Let’s see.  I spend a significant portion of my interview talking about practical things that should be done.  So it would seem that this individual lacks any reading comprehension skills whatsoever.  As well, with respect to the second half of the criticism, I’m not one of the “numerous cases” since that’s nowhere in my section.
Also interesting is that if you search on Amazon for a book like this, you get “suggested reading” consisting of a host of anti-White diatribes.  Like Google, Amazon is another company I am going to personally “deplatform” from any spending.

Thus in summary: Sallis right, Johnson wrong.

Kevin Strom:

The purpose of the race that is is to bring into being the race that is to come. Let’s concentrate on that. Let’s concentrate on being the ones who decide that.I have been in this cause of ours for nearly 40 years. I have seen and heard and read so much wasted verbiage about why Russians or eastern Europeans generally, or southern Europeans generally, or even other odd subracial or national combinations should be read out of the White race. I have heard it all, please don’t repeat it to me. I’m sick of it.
The group or groups which coalesce to save our endangered race will be the ones who determine its genetic future. Beyond the obvious aesthetic that we know White when we see it, and a future that can include (but not be totally ruled by) accurate genetic testing, that’s all we need to know. If the White future is primarily Russian or Hungarian, so be it. If the White future is primarily pan-European American with strong German, Anglo, and Irish components, so be it. If the White future is predominantly Greek or Italian or Bulgarian or Nordic, so be it. None of us are in a position to pick and choose right now, nor does such picking and choosing make sense during this crisis.
Let’s just admit that every single group and sub-group of Europeans has racially devolved — due to dysgenics, due to genetic drift, due to past mixtures. Let’s just admit that every single White nationality could be — and, if we have anything to say about it, will be — helped by a healthy dose of eugenics.
But never forget this: We are targeted and marked for death as Whites. It is as Whites — not as dolichocephalic Red Nordids, or Paleo-Atlantids, or western Europeans only — that we must become awakened and fight back.

Very good; I obviously agree.  But then Strom has to admit that much of the work of Pierce and of the National Alliance was and is de facto opposed to that pan-European view. As regards Pierce accepting people with fractional Amerindian ancestry (and Pierce’s gibbering about “Caucasian” Amerindian tribes is nonsense – whatever their appearance, they are racial aliens from Asia), we must remember that the “Indian princess” stories – real or imagined – typically derive from “Nordish” Anglo-Americans. They’ve always gotten a “pass” for that – the “Pace Amendment” for example.

By the way, even Yockey himself wasn’t immune to a touch of Nordicism, with respect to his rhapsodizing about “Northern barbarians” in both Imperium and, more especially, Thoughts Personal and Superpersonal. I suppose we can forgive Yockey for that lapse, since the broader “movement” he derives from has always been marinated in Nordicism, but it is rather hypocritical of him given his pontifications about horizontal vs. vertical race.  And what would he think today, with all of the “Northern Barbarians” being the biggest race cucks of them all?

And by the way, Yockeyites past and present should know that The Doctrine of Fascism they so admire was really written by Giovanni Gentile, not Benito Mussolini.  But Gentile was one of those two foot tall superstitious Sicilians who so vexed Humphrey Ireland, so who cares about facts?

Newly discovered!  A film clip of Humphrey Ireland being overwhelmed by the scurrying Sicilian hordes.

Odds and Ends, 6/18/20

In der news.  In all cases, emphasis added.
Sallis right once again.  How many times have I warned you about Asian – particularly Chinese – infiltration of American STEM?

Some 54 scientists have resigned or been fired as a result of an ongoing investigation by the National Institutes of Health into the failure of NIH grantees to disclose financial ties to foreign governments. In 93% of those cases, the hidden funding came from a Chinese institution.

The new numbers come from Michael Lauer, NIH’s head of extramural research. Lauer had previously provided some information on the scope of NIH’s investigation, which had targeted 189 scientists at 87 institutions. But his presentation today to a senior advisory panel offered by far the most detailed breakout of an effort NIH launched in August 2018 that has roiled the U.S. biomedical community, and resulted in criminal charges against some prominent researchers. {snip}

{snip}

In the vast majority of cases, Lauer reported, the person being investigated has been an Asian man in his 50s. {snip}

Lauer also presented data on the nature of the violations that NIH has uncovered. Some 70% (133) of the researchers had failed to disclose to NIH the receipt of a foreign grant, and 54% had failed to disclose participation in a foreign talent program. {snip}

Lauer said the fact that 82% of those being investigated are Asian “is not surprising” because “that’s who the Chinese target” in their foreign talent recruitment programs. {snip}

Someone knows the score:

WatchungEagle 

We don’t need Asians in our society. They have to go back.

Excellent, excellent.
Remember, don’t upset the HBDers.  China is sacrosanct.  Mumble about it being an adversary, but let’s not support anyone who wants to confront it.
See this.  Not bad, but this part is completely illogical:

Let us turn to dispel some of the things which you should not enlist for. I am hesitant to even address it, but enlisting for ‘‘boogaloo’’ training — as in infantry tactics, techniques, and procedures — is honestly silly. First, there are already legions of veterans, many with combat experience, who are already part of or adjacent to our movement. Virile men prefer virile jobs and virile politics; this is basic biology.

Second, there is a disturbing trend of the treasonous brass freaking out about ‘‘white supweeemacists’’ entering the ranks to obtain combat training. At first glance, this may seem like an argument to pursue it, as what the adversary doesn’t want is usually a good thing. However, it is probable that inquisitorial-like scrutiny will only increase. If you are doxed while in uniform, and especially in something that is combat-related or requires a security clearance, it’s not going to be fun. To the argument that you are dox proof because you aren’t part of an official nationalist organization, remember that doxing has been expanded to include moralistic busybodies reporting that guys once said the N-word two years ago and the like.

Assuming that you are not so stupid as to openly announce your intentions, then how are the “treasonous brass” going to distinguish the folks who joined the military for “boogaloo training” from those who want to get free college?  You are going to have the same risks of doxing or official persecution either way. And if you are not a member of an “official nationalist organization” and have never behaved like a jackass on social media, exactly what are you going to be persecuted about? Being White?  How would that change based upon your own private intentions and personal motivations? Again, I don’t understand how a person’s private and personal objectives are going to become magically known by the “treasonous brass.” And isn’t “combat training” – at least in its most elementary form – something you are going to get in the military regardless if you “pursue” it?  Something doesn’t add up here.

Yes, Greg, yes.  Now, let’s see what you wrote about Trump earlier – read here.

What Sallis wrote about Trump back right before the 2016 election:

…Trump is a vulgar ignorant buffoon, a Negro-loving beta race cuck civic nationalist with a Jewified family, an overweight imbecile, a lazy and ill-prepared debater, an embarrassment of a political candidate, a blustering clown, and a crass jackass

.And also. And this:

Let’s be honest though: Trump the man is a disaster, easily the worst general campaign candidate in my lifetime.  I’ve never seen such a combination of joyful ignorance, in-your-face laziness, unpreparedness, delusion, inability to learn from mistakes, the hysterical lack of restraint one would expect from one of Trump’s Negro friends (or even worse: a swarthoid Afrowop) – what is this Trump?  He’s a goddamn embarrassment.I endorse Trump, even though I personally believe he is lazy and ignorant buffoon, an idiot with Jewish family connections, unread and unprepared, not very bright, hysterically undisciplined, a race cuck to the Negro – it is not Trump’s supporters who are the “basket of deplorables,” it is instead Trump’s myriad personal flaws that instead constitute the basket.

Oh, and this is what I wrote immediately after the election:

You’ve been given a gift – a rare historical opportunity.  I doubt the Old Movement is up to the task.

Truer words never written.

There’s a joke in bodybuilding circles about men with good genetics for muscle-building – “he picked the right parents.” 
By analogy, we can say that people like Greg Johnson and Peter Brimelow “picked the right ancestors.” If they were instead named, say, Guido Wopirini or Boratoslav Balkanovic, no one in Der Movement would tolerate their buffoonery, much less give them a dime.  
Affirmative action!

An updated biography of Johnson is here.  My contention that most (if not all) people in the “movement” who were originally libertarians are utterly useless is supported.  And then we have those who were originally liberals.  Indeed, most of the Quota Queen leadership were one or the other.  That alone tells you something.

Well maybe we could find out this information if money was channeled in the right direction, instead of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year disappearing into the VDARE black hole.

This is America.  But, hey, be Amnats, not Wignats – we gotta preserve dem dere constitutional rights!

The Nation of Death

China and disease.  Asia – the curse on humanity.  In all cases, red font emphasis added.

The Antonine Plague of 165 to 180 AD, also known as the Plague of Galen (after Galen, a Greek physician who lived in the Roman Empire and described it), was an ancient pandemic brought to the Roman Empire by troops who were returning from campaigns in the Near East.

Ancient sources agree that the epidemic appeared first during the Roman siege of Seleucia…Rafe de Crespigny speculates that the plague may have also broken out in Eastern Han China before 166…Raoul McLaughlin wrote that the Roman subjects visiting the Han Chinese court in 166 could have ushered in a new era of Roman Far East trade, but it was a “harbinger of something much more ominous” instead. McLaughlin surmised that the origins of the plague lay in Central Asia…

From Asia, always from Asia.

The epidemic most likely emerged in China shortly before 166 CE spreading westward along the Silk Road and by trading ships headed for Rome. Sometime between late 165 to early 166 CE, the Roman military came into contact with the disease during the siege of Seleucia..

China, China…the land of plague, China, China, the land of death.

Genetic studies of modern and ancient Yersinia pestis DNA suggest that the origin of the Justinian plague was in Central AsiaThe most basal or root level existing strains of the Yersinia pestis as a whole species are found in Qinghai, China.

Asia, China…China, Asia…the curse on humanity.

The Black Death most likely originated in Central Asia or East Asia, from where it travelled along the Silk Road, reaching Crimea by 1347. From there, it was most likely carried by fleas living on the black rats that travelled on Genoese merchant ships, spreading throughout the Mediterranean Basin and reaching Africa, Western Asia, and the rest of Europe via Constantinople, Sicily, and the Italian Peninsula.

One famous 14th-century account claimed that plague was introduced to Kaffa deliberately, through a Mongol biological warfare attack that involved hurling plague-infected corpses over the city’s walls.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, eh?  Hate-filled genocidal East Asians deliberately spreading disease and death. Black Death. Covid-19. Asia, Asia, the curse on humanity.  

Y. pestis evolved in or near China, and has been transmitted via multiple epidemics that followed various routes, probably including transmissions to West Asia via the Silk Road and to Africa by Chinese marine voyages.

Back then, by ship. Today, by plane.  In both cases, Orientals wage a remorseless war of genocidal extermination against humanity. Humanity does nothing in response.

…a Canadian historian believes he has discovered evidence to support those who theorized that the “Spanish flu” actually started a world away in China.

According to a new article published in the January 2014 issue of the journal War in History, historian Mark Humphries of Canada’s Memorial University of Newfoundland points to newly unearthed records to make the case that the lethal influenza pandemic first appeared in China in 1917…

China, China, always China.

China, China, always China.

Of course Africa does its part as well, with HIV and the earlier Plague of Cyprian.

The Plague of Cyprian erupted in Ethiopia around Easter of 250 CE. It reached Rome in the following year eventually spreading to Greece and further east to Syria.

Colored is as colored does.  TROPICAL Asians, TROPICAL Africans, it is all one.

Human Symbiosis

What can we say about symbiosis in human interactions?

Symbiosis (from Greek συμβίωσις “living together”, from σύν “together” and βίωσις “living”)[2] is any type of a close and long-term biological interaction between two different biological organisms, be it mutualistic, commensalistic, or parasitic. The organisms, each termed a symbiont, may be of the same or of different species.

Let’s consider some aspects of symbiosis in human interactions, with an emphasis on inter-ethny relations.  This is not meant to be a comprehensive or final determination but merely an introduction, so these paradigms can be applied in future discussions when and where appropriate.

From the standpoint of gross EGI – looking at ethnic genetic interests without doing a full “balancing of the books” with respect to all the costs and benefits that determine the final outcome of adaptive fitness – then the presence of any genetically distinct minority group (no matter how small the genetic distance to the majority group) within a majoritarian state will exhibit parasitism, or at least amensalism, with respect to the majority group. The majority group is always harmed by the presence of the minority group with respect to gross EGI because the fixed carrying capacity of the territory reduces the final number of majority members that can fill that niche space, due to the presence of the minority group. This is akin to Yockey’s “Culture Parasitism” in which the parasitic group (in Yockey’s thesis, the outgroup is defined in terms of culture rather than genetics) reduces the numbers of the host High Culture majority group.  If the parasitic group benefits (as is usual) from living in the territory of the majority group that is parasitism; if there is no benefit, it is amensalism. The majority is harmed in all cases.  If the majority fights back, then we have competition, which can be harmful to both sides.

This conflict can end once assimilation of the minority group takes place; the minority becomes part of the majority so that symbiosis per se is not relevant.  However, the genetic costs to the majority of assimilating the minority is harmful to the EGI of the original majority stock (and is of course harmful to that of the minority stock). Once assimilation is complete however, we have a new people with its own set of genetic (and other) interests.

What about net EGI – the final, adaptive fitness outcome when the “balancing of the books” is complete – as well as proximate interests?  We can consider the various types of symbiosis.

Mutualism – both groups benefit.  For groups living in different polities it is possible – there can be alliances, cultural or economic exchanges, many possible types of mutualistic interactions, particularly between relatively closely related groups. For groups living in the same polity, this becomes more problematic.  One can envision two relatively similar groups supporting each other in competition with more alien competing outgroups – and this alliance become more tenable when the closely related allied groups are undergoing inter-marriage and assimilation. The various European ethnic groups in America are an example of this. Of course, this imposes costs on gross EGI; however, it may, dependent upon context, boost net EGI, if the benefits of the alliance – e.g., outcompeting the more genetically and culturally alien outgroups – outweigh the genetic costs in diluting a more concentrated EGI.

Commensalism – one group benefits while the other is neither harmed nor helped. Commensalism is common in individual or small scale human interactions.  Person A throws out some garbage, while person B finds that garbage useful and derives benefit from it. B is helped, while A is neither helped nor harmed.  It is difficult to think of examples – even when disregarding gross EGI – where larger scale human interactions within the same territory are truly commensal.  Perhaps, interactions between different separate nations can be commensal – the byproducts (even memetic) of one nation/people/ethny benefit another and the originator of the product is neither helped nor harmed.  But if both groups are residing in the same niche space, truly authentic examples of commensalism would be relatively rare.  Usually there are at least some benefits or harms, even if relatively marginal, to one group in contrast to the more obvious benefit enjoyed by another group. Unfortunately, many human interactions in the same niche space is zero sum game – parasitism, predation, and competition will be more common than commensalism. Given the relatively rarity of a true lack of effects on large groups, mutualism will be more common than commensalism as well.

Parasitism – one group benefits while harming the other group is harmed. The classic example is of Jews living in White nations, with the Jews benefiting and the Whites being harmed. This has been such a constant paradigm throughout history that a Wikipedia article has been made on it.  Of course, in some cases, Jewish parasitism descends into predation and/or if the afflicted host peoples fight back, competition.

Bowery’s ideas about extended phenotypes in human groups – as an extension of some of Dawkins’ work – are relevant here. One group controls the behavior of a second group so that the former benefits and the latter are harmed; here the second group acts as the extended phenotype of the first.  Jews controlling the societal milieu so as to modify White gentile behavior for Jewish benefit (and White harm) comes to mind; thus, White gentiles often become the extended phenotypes of Jews. The Whites are unable to control their own behavior and behave self-destructively to serve Jewish interests.

Are White HBDers the extended phenotypes of Jews and Asians, particularly East Asians?  Were “White ethnic” members of the National Alliance the extended phenotype of William Pierce? 

Free-riding also comes into play here. When one group benefits from collective social goods to which they do not contribute, they benefit while the contributing groups are often harmed, since they carry the burden of contributing not only for themselves but for the non-contributing group. That is parasitism.

Predation – one group openly attacks and destroys the other.  For example, considering the role Jews play in America controlling sociopolitical systems to benefit themselves at the expense of Whites, that can be considered parasitism; however, considering Jews in the Soviet Union killing millions of Slavs, that is predation. The criminal attacks of Coloreds against Whites in multiracial nations is also predation, although of course parasitism is another key feature of Colored-White relations (typically, Coloreds benefit while Whites are harmed, although Negro slavery can be an example of the reverse). Race replacement, displacement, and White flight are examples of parasitism moving into predation, with undertones of competition when, rarely, Whites resist.

Neutralism – no effects for either group. Neutralism is possible between peoples living in separate nations, but for people living in the same territory, neutralism is extremely unlikely. There will be some types of positive and negative effects for either or both groups. There may be limited examples of very closely related groups living in the same polity that can have, in certain contexts and for certain periods of time, neutralistic relations, but that is rare.  More distant groups are unlikely to be neutralistic, even when disregarding gross EGI, because the differences between them will always manifest in proximate frictions that affect net EGI.

Amensalism – one group suffers no benefit or harm, but the other group is harmed.  Like commensalism, this is expected to be rare, since it is unlikely that the harm to one group in a polity would not benefit another. Perhaps there can be examples with relatively closely related groups.  If the groups are in separate nations it can be possible that the activities of one harms the other without benefiting the one causing the harm.  Symbiosis in which both groups are affected in some way would be more common than that in which one or both groups are not affected at all.

Competition – both groups are harmed. Competition is considered harmful to both sides, and often this is the case, at least until one side emerges victorious (if such occurs), after which the relationship may change (to, e.g., assimilation, parasitism, etc.).  

Both Yockey and MacDonald have written that the reaction against an intrusive group, even when necessary, can harm the group resisting.  If I recall, Yockey invoked the analogy of a fever, which, while helpful in combating the invasive pathogen, also harms, at least in the short run, the invaded host.

On the other hand, one can think of situations where, in the long term, competition could be beneficial to one or both sides even in the absence of a “final victory.”  Some would say one reason why Europe had so many advancements was the competition between different European nations – a completion that forced and fostered a constant “arms race” of competitive advantages – as opposed of a centralized massive Chinese state lacking in the dynamism of such constant internal turmoil. Of course, today, the level of competition is global, so the same dynamism could be provoked by a confederation of Europe vs. China.  

However, if one defines competition as something which is inherently harmful to both sides, then a situation in which competition is beneficial to one side but not the other would be, for example, parasitism and if beneficial to both sides, mutualism.  

The problem in putting predation into the completion category in that sense is that one could argue that predation benefits the predator (although there are risks in predation, sometimes the prey can kill the predator). One could argue that natural selection from predators improves the prey – mutualism?  It’s complicated.

It is of course possible for the types of symbiosis to change over time (e.g., from parasitism to predation). In heterosexual relationships, particularly marriage, the typical trajectory is that the relationship starts out as mutualism (both sides benefit) then transitions to commensalism (female benefits, male is neutral), and then ends up as parasitism (female benefits, male is harmed).  If the marriage ends up in divorce, female parasitism on the male can become extreme, even moving into predation. Note than even during the mutualism phase, the male can be considered as the extended phenotype of the female, with male behavior controlled through sexual exploitation. Also see this. The man is hormonally domesticated so as to be exploited by the woman in marriage.

Ultimately, the woman is to the man as the Jew is to the gentile.

What is observed in marriage can apply on a broader scale to relations between ethnies.