It’s the last chance for White America!
Some good sense.
The AltRight.com article is reasonably sound, although one caveat is that if one approaches these tests with a sense of realism with respect to their limitations – limitations spelled out in my Counter-Currents piece – then getting tested may not be a bad idea. Having the raw data could be useful if you can find someone who can do a genetic kinship analysis with it. But taking the details of the data literally – thinking that there’s a real difference between 100% A, 0% B vs. 99.3% A, 0.7% B, for example – is ludicrous. I would take even the 90% confidence readings with a large grain of salt, and the 50% confidence readings are so absurd that the salt grain needs to be the size of the iceberg that sunk the Titanic.
The other caveat to the article is that the comments section is mixed; some comments are useful, some are asinine, so caveat emptor.
There are two basic questions here.
1. Is 23andMe a good test?
2. Assuming an ancestry test is good, is it worthwhile?
To which I answer: 1) No and 2) Maybe, depending on context.
In an absolute sense, 23andMe is superior to DNAPrint’s tests from ~15 years ago; in a relative sense – comparing each test to the “state of the art” available at the time – it really isn’t better at all. With the level of understanding and methodology we have today, coupled with a prudent interpretation of the data, one could do much better.
What if a test was sound? Well, sure, it can be interesting, but I’ll repeat something I’ve been hammering home here over the past few years – the only biopolitically relevant genetic metric is genetic kinship (at all levels of genetic integration). If one can measure that, then it is useful. All else can be interesting, but not directly important from an EGI standpoint.
And if people are going to hysterically obsess over sub-fractional admixture percentages then this is missing the forest for the trees.
I agree there is an attempt to make a coup against Trump. Given how outrageously inept Trump and his staff are, it’s not really difficult. For the System and all its henchmen, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel, or, more appropriately for Trump, taking candy from a baby.
Even just considering this proves Fat Don is an ultra-cuck. Cuckadoodle!
A complete moron. Truer words never said.
Latest anti-racist lunacy.
The latest anti-White poisonous meme being promoted (in a recent issue of Science, for example) is that of the “myth of origins” in defense of mass migration. In other words, peoples (i.e., White people) have the “erroneous” idea that they have a single point of origin, which leads to “bias” against “migrants.” Instead, we are told, peoples are the product of “multiple migrations” with no single origin, hence – and this is really a non-sequitur – there is no rational justification to oppose migrants.
Now, my first response to this “argument” was – “hey, does that mean we don’t have to worry about all the oppressed indigenous peoples anymore?” You know what I mean here – all of those (carefully defined so as to exclude Europeans) indigenous peoples that we – and the United Nations! – need to worry so much about. Amerindians, native Hawaiians, Australian aboriginals, etc. – no need to “feel bad” about their displacement by the White man! After all, all those peoples are merely the product of “multiple migrations” and so the arrival of Europeans should have been met with great joy and welcoming.
A second response would be to ask whether this leftist logic applies to non-Whites: so that Africans, Asians, etc. all should welcome displacement and race replacement. Good luck with that.
With respect to actually answering the “argument” itself, I state that:
1. Any reasonable definition of “indigenous” – including and especially my own definition – should be based upon the act of ethnogenesis, which itself takes into account those migrations that are part of the history of virtually all peoples (some more than others, of course). It simply does not matter in the last analysis how a people came to be – they exist, and if their ethnogenesis is tied to a particular territory, and if they are the oldest extant people on that territory, then they are indigenous to that territory, and their origin there is a reality, not a myth,
2. Regardless of how different peoples came to be, they differ genetically and culturally, and they have an inherent right to safeguard their uniqueness, an inherent right to their own territory, and an inherent right to resist displacement and race replacement.
3. It follows then that the actual mechanisms of origin, and the actual mechanisms generating a people’s genetic and cultural uniqueness, are irrelevant to their Identity, and to their self-conception tied to a territory and to an origin in that territory. Group interests are inherent to group existence, and anyone who attempts to delegitimize those interests – for example by delegitimizing a sense of origin and a sense of identity – are threatening the group’s existence and are thus promoting genocide.
White racial activists like to bring up the United Nations Genocide Convention and how it applies to White displacement. They need to get more serious about it. As part of Political EGI, nationalist politicians should openly accuse their opponents of promoting genocide, and assert that those opponents need to be hauled into court for crimes against humanity. Not that this “hauling into court” will occur (for now, only nationalists are so “hauled”), but it is excellent political rhetoric and sets the tone for the future.
Part V will continue this discussion.
In the previous analysis I noted Steve King’s denial of a racial basis for his comments on immigration and civilization, and his assertion that it is only “cultural.”
How would a more honest and EGI-informed individual responded instead? Perhaps like this:
Of course it is about race – race, ethnicity, and demographics. I can make the argument – and it is a sound argument – that only the people who create a specific culture and civilization are the ones truly capable of carrying it forward, maintaining it, and building upon it. And Western civilization was built by Whites, by people of European extraction.
But I’ll go further. Any people have an inherent right to exist, even independent of their cultural, or any other, accomplishments. All life, and all human life, has an interest in its own continuity – and that’s genetic continuity, not just culture. We do not begrudge a family its interest in its existence and continuity, in its posterity, its children and grandchildren, etc., and any ethnic group or race is like a very large extended family. No one would condemn Africans or Asians or Latin Americans the right to their existence and continuity, but it is only Whites, Europeans, who are specifically excluded from the most basic rights of existence and self-interest granted all other peoples. Why is that? Who exactly are the haters here?
He could have abbreviated that, if space was an issue, but the major points are clear, and could be expressed in non-scientific language understandable by the average person. And are these comments so “bad?’ If King was condemned for saying this, would that reflect badly on him or those making the condemnation?
The same principles apply to more openly nationalist politicians, such as in Europe or Australia. Stop conflating everything to “culture” and stop tip-toeing around the issue – which is physical biological, demographic, genetic race replacement. And more fundamentally: White racial interests. Read Salter’s book, for godssakes. How can someone call themselves a (White) nationalist leader and not even have the time, interest. Or understanding for something so basic as EGI?
On Genetic Interests is a mine of ideas, a toolkit, for White nationalists and nationalist politicians (actually, of use for those of any race, but it are Whites who are uniquely challenged today).
Part IV will continue this discussion.
Just off the top of my head, more or less.
Race: A branch of humanity that is, in general, more genetically similar to each other (more genetic kinship) than with other groups, and that have, in general, a greater number of most common recent ancestors with each other than with other groups. Races also, in general, tend to share a constellation of phenotypic characteristics than, in toto, distinguish them from other groups. Layered upon these biological characteristics (biological race) are the historical and cultural components that contribute to racial identity and which influence, and are influenced by, the aforementioned biological characteristics.
Meet June Chu.
Are we surprised that the pro-Jewish King Cuck Trump administration rolls out the red – or is it yellow? – carpet for Chinese frauds (Chinese frauds – a redundancy)? After all, being pro-Jewish and pro-Asian go hand-in-hand, eh, Silkers?
Meet June Chu – anti-White Asian par excellence. Never forget – Asians hate, hate, hate White people, or as they call them “White trash.” The existential meaning of Asians is hatred of Whites. Needless to say, this bizarre is not being fired or made to resign. After all, Asians work hand-in-glove with Jews as part of the anti-White System, so Asian expression of anti-White hatred is all “par for the course.”