The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Tobias Langdon Archive
The Supremacy of Stupid
How Dumb Ideas about Race Flourish on the Left
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
The complexity of an ant. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

An ant is an amazing creature, a marvel of miniaturization and compressed complexity. With only a tiny brain, it absorbs and interprets a flood of data from its myriad sense-organs, navigating a complex and constantly changing world, co-operating and communicating with its nest-mates, collaborating in prodigies of architecture, engineering and logistics. No human robot can even come close to matching the abilities of an ant, let alone at such a minute size and on such a small budget of energy.

Dumb beats clever

But the highly sophisticated ant meets its master in the form of a mindless form of life far lower in the evolutionary scale. As I described in “How to Cure a White Zombie,” the fungus Ophiocordyceps unilateralis can subvert the complex nervous system of an ant, turning it into a zombified spore-spreader. You can sum up the behaviour of the fungus in two words: sitting and floating. It sits in its victims and then, in the form of spores, floats off to new victims. The behaviour of ants, by contrast, is endlessly subtle and varied. Ant-behaviour has filled entire libraries and fuelled long scientific careers. But the simple fungus beats the complex ant.

Another parasite, the microscopic protozoan Toxoplasma gondii, overcomes an even bigger evolutionary gulf and subverts the even more complex brains of rats and human beings. The fungus and the protozoan have no minds, no consciousness and no purpose but self-propagation. They’re dumb, but they’ve been beating clever for millions of years. That’s why we shouldn’t be surprised at the success of stupid ideologies in the world of politics. In competition and warfare, it doesn’t matter how you win: the only criterion of success is, well, success. The fungus and the protozoan are unconscious experts at chemical warfare, because they interfere with the brain-chemistry of their victims. In the world of human politics, parasites and predators interfere with brains by using words and ideas instead.

Pop-guns against a tank

The ideas can be very stupid ones, but that doesn’t matter. In some ways, stupidity can be an advantage, because stupid-but-simple ideas are easier to transmit than clever-but-complex ones, particularly when the stupid ideas exploit the brain-circuits devoted to morality. For example, the Indian Hindu writer Angela Saini has been spreading some very stupid ideas in her new book Superior: The Return of Race Science (2019). Steve Sailer and Greg Cochran have both pointed out the massive flaws in Saini’s reasoning and massive gaps in her knowledge, but it’s almost as though they’re using pop-guns against a tank. Superior rolls on regardless.

Ashley Montagu, né Israel Ehrenberg: “Race does not exist, goyim!”
Ashley Montagu, né Israel Ehrenberg: “Race does not exist, goyim!”

One reason for this is that Angela Saini has morality and goodness on her side. Sailer and Cochran are stale pale males, promoting the hateful and horrible idea of inequality between human races. Saini is neither stale, pale nor male, and she’s promoting the beautiful idea of equality in the only race there is, the human race. In fact, some of Saini’s leftist reviewers have gone even further than denying the existence of separate races. Colin Grant, a Black-Jamaican writer based in the UK, has promoted the concept of what you might call “anti-race,” whereby some human beings are more genetically similar to distant relatives than to close relatives. This is from Grant’s review of Superior in the highly influential leftist magazine the New Statesman:

In writing that is as impassioned as it is elegant, Saini charts how the tide turned against eugenicist thought and research, with Unesco declaring in 1950 [under the guidance of the Jewish anthropologist Ashley Montagu, né Israel Ehrenberg] that all mankind “belongs to the same species, Homo sapiens”. [Editorial note: This meant that “Good had won over evil,” as the Indian Alok Jha comments in yet another approving review of Saini’s book.]

Further, in 1972 a landmark paper by the [Jewish] evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin spelled out that there was greater genetic difference within groups than between them. So, for instance, a black man in Nigeria had more in common genetically with a white man in Scotland than he did with a black man in Tanzania. (Data of prejudice: the uses and abuses of the science of race, The New Statesman, 24th July 2019)

Black science expert Colin Grant at the BBC
Black science expert Colin Grant at the BBC

Colin Grant has worked since 1991 for the BBC, where he produces “science programmes.” That’s no doubt why he was asked to review Saini’s book for the New Statesman: to other leftists, he’s a Black expert in science. And yet he claims something that is both stupid and scientifically illiterate: that “a black man in Nigeria” can have “more in common genetically with a white man in Scotland” than with “a black man in Tanzania.”

Hymns of the hive

However, this stupid argument isn’t original to Grant: it’s been buzzing in the leftist hive-mind for a long time. In 2012, the Jewish journalist Deborah Orr proclaimed that “Race is a myth” and approvingly quoted the views of a Black soccer player: “Race is not a scientific reality. You could find a tribe in Africa who are genetically closer to Europeans than to an African tribe a hundred miles away.”

The words differ, the stupidity remains the same. Another reviewer of Angela Saini’s book is Gavin Evans, a professor of journalism in the “Department of Film, Media and Cultural Studies” at Birkbeck College in London. According to his page at the Guardian, he “has written widely on issues of race, IQ and genetics.” As you’d expect from his academic background, Evans knows about as much about genetics as a fruit-fly knows about deep-sea diving. His review of Saini’s book in the Guardian says this: “Race, like intelligence, is a notoriously slippery concept. Individuals often share more genes with members of other races than with members of their own race.”

Biologically meaningless concepts

Once again someone is claiming that human beings can be more closely related to distant relatives than to close relatives. It’s a ludicrous claim, but you’ll find it made again and again by scientifically illiterate leftists, many of them in positions of great power and cultural influence. For yet another example, try Sir David Cannadine, the Dodge Professor of History at Princeton University (having previously taught at Columbia and Cambridge) and the General Editor of the Penguin History of Europe and Penguin History of Britain. In his book The Undivided Past: History Beyond Our Differences (2013), Cannadine manages to stuff more nonsense on race into fewer words than one would have thought humanly possible:

According to the findings of the Human Genome Project, people of all backgrounds, locations and “races” share more than 99.9 percent of their DNA, and in the case of the remaining 0.1 percent, there is more variation within stereotypical racial groups than between them. This means that 99.9 percent of the genes of a “black” person are the same as those of a “white” person, and that the genes of any “black” person may be more similar to the genes of a “white” person than to another “black” person. Thus understood, race is a biologically meaningless concept, literally no more than skin deep. It is also neither innate nor permanent, for skin colour can change dramatically from one generation to another as a result of mixed-race marriages. (The Undivided Past, ch 5, “Race,” pg 217)

Again, Cannadine is not simply claiming that race doesn’t exist. Like Colin Grant and Gavin Evans, he’s claiming that anti-race exists: an unmixed Black can be more closely related to a White than to another unmixed Black. Let’s take one of these alleged individuals who are more genetically similar to members of another race than to members of their own race. Colin Grant spoke of “a black man in Nigeria” having “more in common genetically” with “a white man in Scotland” than with “a black man in Tanzania.” Nigeria and Tanzania are tropical African countries where languages in the Niger-Congo family are spoken, a good indication that gene flow between these two regions faces no big obstacles.

And where is Scotland? It’s in north-western Europe, separated from both Nigeria and Tanzania by thousands of miles of desert, ocean and mountains. Until recent times, gene flow between Scotland and those two African regions faced huge obstacles. So did other kinds of flow. As you’d expect, Scottish English and Scottish Gaelic have no linguistic kinship with any indigenous language of Nigeria or Tanzania.

Now let’s imagine the family trees of Grant’s three hypothetical men, the two Blacks in Nigeria and Tanzania, and the White in Scotland. You’ll find that at some point – call it time T 1 – the Black from Nigeria and the Black from Tanzania have common ancestors. At another point – call it time T 2 – all three men have common ancestors. But T 1 must be long after T 2. The two Blacks obviously have more recent and more numerous shared ancestors. And what do ancestors do? They transmit genes! So the Nigerian and Tanzanian must share more genes with each other than with the Scottish White, unless genes began mutating in the Nigerian’s line of descent in just such a way as to create more matches with the genes of the Scottish White.

Tropical Tanzania vs Cauld Caledonia

The odds against that are more than astronomical. It would be like a language in the Niger-Congo family being linguistically closer to Scottish English or Gaelic than to another language in the Niger-Congo family. Blacks in Nigeria and Tanzania live in the tropical, resource-rich environment of Africa, not the cold, resource-poor environment of Scotland. So how on earth could the genes of a Black in Nigeria have evolved to be more similar to those of a White in Scotland than those of a Black in Tanzania?

Colin Grant is making a ludicrous, scientifically illiterate claim. But it won’t affect his career in the slightest. He will continue to make science programmes for the highly influential BBC, just as the journalism professor Gavin Evans will continue to “write widely on issues of race, IQ and genetics.” Grant and Evans are saying what other leftists want to hear: “Race doesn’t exist! Human beings can be more closely related to distant relatives than to close relatives!”

Nonsense is no obstacle

Leftists like Saini, Grant, Evans and Cannadine do not harm their careers by talking nonsense about race. You can only harm your career by talking sense about race, as the Nobel Laureate James Watson proved in 2007 and the social scientist Jason Richwine proved in 2013. Watson and Richwine were punished and deplatformed because the Left do not want to allow free speech on these topics. They know they cannot win the argument. But even as they censor and silence their opponents, they deny that they’re attacking free speech. Angela Saini herself has written an article called “The Internet Is a Cesspool of Racist Pseudoscience” for Scientific American. She brings her finely honed powers of reasoning to bear on the topic of free speech:

What has started with a gentle creep through the back door of our computers could end, if we’re not careful, with jackboots through the front door of our homes. Populism, ethnic nationalism and neo-Nazism are on the rise worldwide. If we are to prevent the mistakes of the past from happening again, we need to be more vigilant. The public must hold the Internet giants to account, recognize hatred dressed up as scholarship and learn how to marginalize it, and be assiduous in squeezing out pseudoscience from public debate. This is not a free speech issue; it’s about improving the quality and accuracy of information that people see online, and thereby creating a fairer, kinder society. (The Internet Is a Cesspool of Racist Pseudoscience, Scientific American, 29th July 2019)

“This is not a free speech issue,” claims Angela Saini: it’s about “creating a fairer, kinder society.” She doesn’t have the honesty to admit that she wants to censor science to create a better world. After all, if she were honest about her intentions she might remind people of Stalinism and the biologist Trofim Lysenko (1898-1976), who proclaimed the easy malleability of biological forms and claimed that he could revolutionize Soviet agriculture. Lysenko was a bad scientist whose career flourished while good scientists who disagreed with him were sent to death by starvation in the Gulag.

The debate is over, haters

But Angela Saini’s ideas about free speech are no more original than Colin Grant’s ideas about race. Both Saini and Grant are buzzing with the leftist hive-mind. Here’s another leftist, the possibly Jewish Martha Gill, plugging the same line as Saini and pretending that censorship is not censorship:

Free speech advocates also misunderstand the motivation of those who might want to shut down a debate: they see this as a surefire mark of intolerance. But some debates should be shut down. For public dialogue to make any progress, it is important to recognise when a particular debate has been won and leave it there.

Even the most passionate free speech advocate might not wish to reopen the debate into whether women should be tried for witchcraft, or whether ethnic minorities should be allowed to go to university, or whether the Earth is flat. No-platformers are not scared – they simply think certain debates are over. You may disagree, but it does not mean they are against free speech. (Free speech isn’t under threat. It just suits bigots and boors to suggest so, The Guardian, 23rd June 2019)

“It’s not censorship!”: Martha Gill ends the debate
“It’s not censorship!”: Martha Gill ends the debate

When leftists decide that a debate is over, it’s not censorship when they silence dissenters. It’s just that the debate is over. The supreme leader has spoken! Or rather, the leftist hive-mind has spoken. In effect, Angela Saini and Martha Gill are claiming infallibility for leftist dogma.

Reeling on the ceiling

As many people have pointed out, leftism is a disguised form of religion. But I don’t know any overt religion that is as irrational as leftism or that denies reality so fervently. For another example, look at the transgender concept of the “cotton ceiling.” Some transgender activists claim that it’s bigoted of lesbians to refuse to sleep with “trans women” who still have penises. Here is one of those activists replying to a sceptical feminist:

Trans women are female. When our female-ness and womanhood is denied, as you keep doing repeatedly, that is transphobic and transmisogynist. As I said earlier, all people’s desires are influenced by an intersection of cultural messages that determine those desires. Cultural messages that code trans women’s bodies as male are transphobic, and those messages influence people’s desires. So cis queer women who are attracted to other queer women may not view trans women as viable sexual partners because they have internalized the message that trans women are somehow male.

The comparison to what cis males say also makes no sense. What trans women are saying is that we are women, and thus should be considered women sexually, and thus be considered viable partners for women who are attracted to women. What cis males are saying is that queer women shouldn’t be exclusively attracted to women, which is completely different. (The Cotton Ceiling? Really?, Femonade blog, 13th March 2012)

That’s where the leftist denial of reality and biology ends: in the idea that penises are “coded” as male rather than actually being male. Even some leftists – the TERFs or trans-exclusionary radical feminists – think that this is a step too far (see my article “Power to the Perverts!”). But the same leftists who reject transgender nonsense will accept much more harmful nonsense about race. Transgender activists may be noisy and obnoxious, but they aren’t an existential threat to Western nations. Mass immigration by millions of non-Whites is a huge existential threat to Western nations.

Clever will conquer

And what justifies the presence of those non-Whites and the endless privileges they are granted over their White Hosts? The supremely stupid ideas promoted by Angela Saini and countless other leftists, that’s what. Just as a dumb fungus can beat a clever ant, so a dumb ideology can beat a clever one. But that too is part of reality: truth is not always mighty and truth does not always prevail.

In this case, however, I think truth will prevail. And soon. As genetic analysis becomes ever cheaper and quicker, and our understanding of human evolution ever richer, the truth about racial differences will become ever harder to suppress. Astute leftists like the Jewish geneticist David Reich already know what’s ahead: We will see the supremacy of science, not the supremacy of stupid.

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology, Science • Tags: Political Correctness, Racism 
Hide 181 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Rational says:

    FOR JUDAISTS, THEIR ENTIRE LIFE IS A LIE AND TRUTH IS SUN THAT WILL MELT THE BUTTER.

    Thanks, Sir, for the great article. You are so right. I suspect frauds like Saini are being supported by Judaists. Maybe Judaists wrote her book, and paid her some money to publish it under her name.

    So why are Judaists constantly lying, attacking the white race, calling it a social construct, and saying whites are no better than blacks, or are the same genetically, etc.?

    This is because the Judaists need to believe this lie, so they can continue to believe in their other related lies—that they are “Jews” (Yehudi, citizens of Yehud, Judea).

    The problem is, Judea does not exist. So there are no more Yehudi, or Jews. Those who claim to be “Jews” are frauds.

    But they have to keep believing these lies about their fake race but call other races as fake, because if they speak they truth, their scam of posing as “Jews”, and “God’s chosen people” will end. Other Judaists will leave, realizing they are no different than other whites, and the criminal cult will end.

    Judaists can’t allow that. So they have to lie about themselves and others, to keep their scam going.

    Judaists, the mentally ill, who do not know who they are, are going around the world telling others who they are.

    • Agree: Republic
    • Replies: @niteranger
    , @Richard B
  2. Rational says:

    RACE DENIALISM = TOOL TO EXTERMINATE THE WHITE GOY.

    Addendum:

    Another reason for these race denying scams by the Judaists is because they want to exterminate white goyim. By conning the public that blacks and whites are the same genetically, race is a social construct, etc. they help white women (esp) overcome the revulsion and disgust they naturally feel towards blacks, so black predators can brainwash them and con them that they are both genetically related, to promote race mixing, and eradicate the white race out of the gene pool, in retaliation of millennia of abuse of the Judaists by the white host population, such as Holocaust, Roman conquests, etc (real or imagined).

    • Replies: @Hossein
  3. Vinnie O says:

    In “Saxons, Vikings, and Celts”, Bryan Sykes, one of the most active DNA detectives, notes that in real Scotland (not the mythical one bordering Nigeria), there are VERY active and defensive communities who proudly trace THEIR ancestry to Norway. These Scotch Vikings dominate several of the offshore islands, and it’s more common for them to break into Norse than Gaelic. And of course up until the Viking invasions, the “people who came to be called Scots by foreigners” had about the same Celtic DNA overlay on ancient “British” as the Irish did. Surprisingly, Sykes didn’t find ANY measurable African DNA in Scotland.

    • Replies: @Bruno
    , @Amerimutt Golems
  4. Another ringer from Tobias Langdon!

    According to the findings of the Human Genome Project, people of all backgrounds, locations and “races” share more than 99.9 percent of their DNA, and in the case of the remaining 0.1 percent, there is more variation within stereotypical racial groups than between them.

    Here’s a fun fact to whip out at SJW warrior cocktail parties: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/8/chimps-humans-96-percent-the-same-gene-study-finds/

    Now tell me there’s no f*cking difference between a human being and a chimp!

    So the Nigerian and Tanzanian must share more genes with each other than with the Scottish White, unless genes began mutating in the Nigerian’s line of descent in just such a way as to create more matches with the genes of the Scottish White.

    You know, if a child (or a SJW–but I repeat myself!) were to superficially examine some birds, bats, and dogs, they might come to the conclusion that bats are more closely related to birds than to dogs because of their wings. But some evolutionary characteristics are older than others; and sometimes analogous features can evolve on two separate species independently. But understanding that assumes a fundamental grasp of basic biology, which, apparently, few modern journalists actually have.

    “Even the most passionate free speech advocate might not wish to reopen the debate into whether women should be tried for witchcraft …”

    Well, we can always dream big dreams, can’t we!

    As many people have pointed out, leftism is a disguised form of religion. But I don’t know any overt religion that is as irrational as leftism or that denies reality so fervently.

    Or if they do, at least they’re honest about, stating that reality is just an illusion (maya) or some such. One thing they don’t claim to be is modern empirical science. The New Lysenskoism, on the other hand …

    Transgender activists may be noisy and obnoxious, but they aren’t an existential threat to Western nations. Mass immigration by millions of non-Whites is a huge existential threat to Western nations.

    Well, strictly speaking, immigration may be a more immediate threat to the white race than ‘trans’ ideology; but biologically, it’s all of a piece. They are trying to eliminate our race as quickly as possible, and getting us to stop breeding only hastens the triumph of the dark races.

    But that too is part of reality: truth is not always mighty and truth does not always prevail.

    In the end it will prevail, but the problem is that our race may be long gone by then. Now you know why Hitler hired Goebbels!

  5. Nodwink says:

    There’s lots of bad stuff published here, but this has to be one of the worst articles I’ve seen. Endless hysterical screeching, with no data to back it up.

  6. Levtraro says:

    I would offer a different take on the authors’ critique of counting genes to conclude human races are not real.

    Colin Grant’s and other leftists’ assertion that two black people from close regions of Africa can share less genes than any one of them with a person from Scotland might be actually true in some (even in many) cases but this will not logically lead to the conclusion that races don’t exist. Essentially, the counting of the total number of shared genes is a meaningless exercise because not all genes are equal. Some genes are very important while other are mostly irrelevant (most DNA in humans do not carry out any known biological function, it’s called junk DNA or non-coding DNA). The important quantification for a determination of the material basis of race within the human species relies on observing the variation within a small set of very important genes.

    The naive, garden-variety leftist will extend the assumption of “all humans are equal” to everything is equal including “all genes are equal”. But the material reality in biological systems is fundamentally nonlinear, with lots of large impacts from small changes and lots of negligible impact from large changes.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
    , @Hypnotoad666
  7. @Nodwink

    Pointing, sputtering and name-calling does not constitute refutation, or even reasonable criticism.

  8. Lewontin’s fallacy in pictures:

    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/11/human-genetic-variation-fst-and.html
    https://infoproc.blogspot.com/2008/11/european-genetic-substructure.html
    http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2008/11/european-population-structure-with-300k.html
    https://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2008/11/21/more-genetic-maps-of-europe

    “Nonetheless, at a time when -due to a sort of mental hysteresis- proclamations that “races are social constructs” are still routinely made, the discovery that not only races, but even closely related ethnic groups (e.g. Norwegians and Swedes) can be distinguished with greater than 90% accuracy, serves to illustrate the scientific irrelevance of the ethnic nihilists and the affirmation that nations are, at least in part, genetic entities.”

    “The resolution of the study is sufficiently high that Swedes and Norwegians can be distinguished with 90 percent accuracy (Table 4)”

    “As you can see, there is population substructure within Germany. We need to map these things out now before the EU mobility wipes clear many of the historical information signals. These data will be a great boon to historians trying to understand the patterns of ethnogenesis in pre-modern Europe.”

  9. Miro23 says:

    As many people have pointed out, leftism is a disguised form of religion.

    I’ve noticed that It works in a very similar way – especially socially. The middle class is basically leftist with this interlocking set of views making a religious style package.

    In the same way that Islam answers all questions for the devout, Anglo-Jewish leftism includes the non-negotiable package of gun control (removal), multiculturalism, LGBT, free immigration, anti-Christianism, free sexuality, feminism and a selection of taboo subjects such as 9/11.

    It’s not a pick and choose. If you want to be invited to the dinner parties, the whole package is required. It even has its own counter-cultural dress code – formal jacket & worn blue jeans.

    • Replies: @Sin City Milla
  10. @Nodwink

    Do you actually need data to point out that the opponent’s data is bogus … or just plain lacking?

  11. Svevlad says:

    There are two ways to approach this.

    The stupid wins against the complex, but loses against the even more complex – a spider eats the infected ant. What the fungus gonna do, bitch and moan on the internet? Definitely not. Might be accused of arachnophobia. In our case, an AI would do fine. What the leftists gonna do, bitch and moan on the internet? Definitely not. Might be accused of automatophobia.

    On the other hand, humans have brains. No amount of stupid can infect you if you have a powerful immune system, even less so if you proactively disinfect and amputate all stupidity from existence.

  12. The antiSemitism in this article is patent and obnoxious. Many western intellectual Jews are Leftists but certainly not all.
    That other, perhaps many more, Leftist intellectual authors who hold the same liberal views and who are Gentile or Christian or perhaps Muslim is not mentioned by the writer but when there is possibility that the Leftist is Jewish the writer takes pains to point it out.
    This is blatant antiSemitism – period.
    And for this Rightist correspondent it is shameful and condemns the article to the trash can.

  13. Parfois1 says:

    As many people have pointed out, leftism is a disguised form of religion. But I don’t know any overt religion that is as irrational as leftism or that denies reality so fervently

    I did not count how many times the word “left” has featured in this article about race; certainly more than the word “race”. Ergo, one wonders what the author is on about, leftism or racism? He may be endowed with the simple characteristics of a fungus and not see that there is an ocean of a difference between those two words and meanings as there is between the putative Nigerian and Scotsman. Unless he wants to attach negative connotations to one another and brush both with the same taint. As a seasoned leftist with verifiable pedigree, I assure you all that leftism and race-denialism are very different concepts and should not assumed to be related or connected. It is dishonest for anyone to pretend otherwise.

    Leftism is a political concept and has no relation to genetics. It is concerned with a political organization of society where the economic mode of production is geared towards the satisfaction of the physical and spiritual needs of the people. This approach is in opposition to the capitalist mode of production whose chief concern is the aggregation and concentration of profit for the enjoyment and greed of a tiny minority – the ruling elite that oppresses us all. This tiny minority are our rulers in more ways than the body politic in government because they also govern the narrative that shapes our perception of reality, including the view that race is a social construct and irrelevant.

    In any social interaction, race is the first physical feature one notices, or sex for that matter. We are biologically tuned no discrimate those human characteristics out of evolutionary history and collective survival for we need to distinguish who is friend or foe, who is male and female. Even in homogeneous modern societies – where the fear of foe is absent – we tend to notice the facial features of the people we come across with to ascertain their closeness to us because we are programmed to do so by our capacity for intra-species recognition. And that explains why, for instance, we can easily distinguish members of our kin but have difficulty in telling apart one Chinese from another unless “trained” by frequent exposure.

    You are doing a great disservice to your cause by deliberately conflating political leftism with race-denial and other modern absurdities proliferated by the ruling elites to muddle the swamp and simple minds. If you can’t see that, you are doomed like the industrious ant infected by the malignant fungus.

    • Replies: @MarkU
  14. Idiot has no proof. He just says that the argument that there is more difference among races than between them is highly unlikely.

    Yeah, but it’s true. And it is not even highly unlikely. Gene science is too hard for you guys. Try something more in your line like tiddlywinks.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
  15. The supremely stupid ideas promoted by {{{Angela Saini}}}

    [MORE]

  16. me: size matters.

    tobias: size doesn’t matter.

    me: size matters.

  17. utu says:

    Astute leftists like the Jewish geneticist David Reich already know what’s ahead: We will see the supremacy of science, not the supremacy of stupid.

    Or is it another version of the old meme that “SALVATION IS FROM THE JEWS?” Poor Mr. Langdon. The poverty and sterility of his thoughts is astounding.

  18. @Rational

    Yes, the Jews are more than a bit mentally ill since they have the highest rates of mental disorders compared to the general populations. It’s about 30 to 40% above the rest of us according to recent studies. This is due to massive assortative mating and endogamy and they may have created their own genetic bottlenecks. “On average, all Ashkenazi Jews are genetically as closely related to each other as fourth or fifth cousins, said Dr. Harry Ostrer, a pathology, pediatrics and genetics professor at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York and the author of “Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People” Because of this Ashkenazi Jews practice a form of Eugenics to avoid serious diseases like Tay- Sachs, hemophilia and many others all due to their mating practices. For the most part, Ashkenazi Jews are usually 40 to 75% European.

    Of course, this Eugenics involves counseling and basically selective pairing but of course we are all the same race says the Magic Jews. Netanyahou the terrorist leader of Israel says Jews are separate race. But the media ignores this. What’s really amusing about all of this bullshit is that Saini’s nonsense and the rest of Scientific Mental Midgets on the Left are actually killing people. Studies are now showing that if the race, genetic load and other evolutionary components are not considered then the conclusions of these studies is invalid except for whites and mainly Europeans.

    Reich is scared out of his ass right now and fails to do genetic testing of those ancients buried in Israel because he knows what it would show. He is trying to walk the thin line but they will come for him too. Of course, it’s going to get worse. Try this:

    ” Instructors at a prominent university in Australia have been warned not to lecture on the natural historical record of that country; instead, they should teach a creation narrative regarding the origin of indigenous Australian people.

    Lecturers at the University of New South Wales “have been warned off making the familiar statement in class that ‘Aboriginal people have been in Australia for 40,000 years’,” The Australian reports…

    The document states that relying on the scientifically researched historical record to determine a date of Aboriginal arrival “tends to lend support to migration theories and anthropological assumptions.”

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  19. This looks like a good article from my initial scan, Mr. Langdon. However, I’ll have you know that we are not quite yet at Peak Stupidity. Or, is your title referring to a new upcoming Jason Bourne movie?

    I look forward to reading your article – a bit later. Thank you.

  20. Grok King says:
    @Jabberless

    Go to bed Boomer; you’re in the wrong comment section.

  21. Franz says:

    The author (good one, by the way) gets this part slightly askew:

    truth is not always mighty and truth does not always prevail.

    But you have to finish it: The truth also does not set you free. It imposes a nasty, sometimes impossible burden on truth-knower to find a way, however clever, however devious, to get the truth of the matter out there some how!

    And then the author concludes sagely:

    We will see the supremacy of science, not the supremacy of stupid.

    Let’s try it as follows:

    Winston Churchill: Sometimes the truth is so important it must be protected by a bodyguard of lies.

    Us, now: Sometimes the truth needs a layer of faux-stupidity to push its way into the mass mind.

    Or something of that sort. Any version/variation just might work.

  22. it’s about improving the quality and accuracy of information that people see online, and thereby creating a fairer, kinder society.

    Even the most passionate free speech advocate might not wish to reopen the debate into whether women should be tried for witchcraft,

    I presume these people are globalists, no borders, pro refugees and pro immigrants, so as such I’d expect that they should be talking to the whole world and not just to European based white societies where these matters have long been a non-issue. In fact importing third worlders to the west will create an unfairer and unkinder society, as anyone familiar with societies they originate from will know, and will also bring back witch-hunts. If they really wish to achieve what they say then they should be preaching to the Third World and the Jews instead of whites.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_witch-hunts

    These people are actually degrading and corroding society yet somehow they manage to twist it to pretend they’re helping to improve it. These hypocrites are blind, stupid or evil, but why are they given prominence over more sensible and intelligent individuals? Perhaps to create that neo-Nazi style backlash they themselves fear?

    But again who is truly more stupid, these idiots talking rubbish or whites listening to them and allowing them to promote their views?

    • Replies: @Sin City Milla
  23. El Dato says:
    @Nodwink

    Evidently, we could observe in the real world that 100% caucasians are occasionally born in deepest africa as the result of black/black pairings.

    We just don’t know it because they are immediately harvested for muti magic.

  24. It really amazes me how a wide variety of men of differing races can come and live in Britain, and for some strange reason they manage to develop the exact same cuck physiognomy of the native Anglos. It really astounds me.
    Is soy really that bad?

  25. WHO says:

    Non-whites with Saini as their leader have a sense that they are taking over. British elitists such as BBC and Guardian are suffused with noblesse oblige and want to see the takeover happen. Saini and the others aren’t scientists, they’re politicians. Writers with insight like you have will unmask them.

    Their leftist fervor is religious panic and fanaticism. Anticipating their rule over us.

  26. GeeBee says:
    @Nodwink

    There is indeed a lot of ‘bad’ stuff published here, in much the same vein as, let’s say, a child reading that there is no such thing as Santa Claus might be traumatised and declare what it has read to be ‘bad’. When you adhere to an impossible chimera which your hive-mind upholds as being uniquely valid, then the truth is bound to come across as being ‘bad’.

    The astounding conceit of Left-Liberal Progressivism is that it upholds the collective bequest of the wisdom of several millennia – to which we ought to be the grateful heirs – not merely as being ‘bad’, but also as inferior to all of its own Progressive tenets, resplendant as they are in the most lurid absurdity.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  27. mikemikev says:
    @Levtraro

    Colin Grant’s and other leftists’ assertion that two black people from close regions of Africa can share less genes than any one of them with a person from Scotland might be actually true in some (even in many) cases but this will not logically lead to the conclusion that races don’t exist.

    It’s not true, see e.g. Witherspoon 2007, but you’re right that even if it was true, bean counting junk DNA doesn’t prove much.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  28. Not to forget Stephen Fry and his cooperation with Adam Rutherford, who is just another of those BBC and GUARDIAN experts who neglect the existence of races on the basis of Lowontin’s and Stephen Jay Gould’s work.

    The important task is to not underestimate Angela Saini – and especially her cool and quite effective use of proto-religious thinking while claiming that we are all – created equal. I pointed this out over at Gregory Cochran’s West Hunter blog – i. e. I wanted to, but Cochran chose to not publish my comment… It seems to hurt (Cochran, for example) to see, just how powerful those old ideas of being created equal and the leftist all humans worldwide will be brothers are, and how little it matters, that Saini (and Rutherford – not to mention Stephen Fry…) know very little about these things.

    • Replies: @Lurker
  29. Colin Grant is making a ludicrous, scientifically illiterate claim.

    That’s the beauty of it, of course. A corrupt Establishment such as ours uses propaganda not to educate, or even to silence, but to humiliate. The more nonsensical the thing they can get the masses to parrot, the more thorough the humiliation.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  30. Alfred says:

    The people who think that race does not matter should be sent to a place like Lagos and put up in a “middle class” household for a month or two. I doubt if they could last a couple of days.

    Sadly, when they return to the White world, they will be explaining how Nigerian households are just the same as their own in Edinburgh.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  31. Anonymous[182] • Disclaimer says:
    @GeeBee

    The astounding conceit of Left-Liberal Progressivism is that it upholds the collective bequest of the wisdom of several millennia

    At the same time, it has to reject everything written on logic, philosophy, wisdom and good taste that can be found in libraries as “patriarchic” or “white”. Barring that, it retcons ancient Greece as negro paradise to break the contradictions.

    Insane barbarians.

    • Replies: @Miro23
  32. @Jabberless

    Another 1 comment troll pops his head up from the bog.

  33. Miro23 says:
    @Anonymous

    @GeeBee

    The astounding conceit of Left-Liberal Progressivism is that it upholds the collective bequest of the wisdom of several millennia

    At the same time, it has to reject everything written on logic, philosophy, wisdom and good taste that can be found in libraries as “patriarchic” or “white”. Barring that, it retcons ancient Greece as negro paradise to break the contradictions.

    Insane barbarians.

    Maybe not insane. They’re associates of a powerful club, and the price of membership is to parrot whatever comes on the newsfeed.

    Soviet apparatchiks did the same. Mostly, they didn’t actually believe the Marxist-Leninist claptrap that they were repeating, but it did usefully allow them to have access to consumer goods and a relatively good lifestyle.

    The Liberal-Left dogma works the same way. It’s designed to be maximally humiliating to Anglo-Americans because that’s the class that’s being targeted.

    IMO when Anglo-Americans can be verbally abused every which way, then the game switches to physical abuse (detentions, transportation, “re-education” etc.) and the US is in full Bolshevism II.

    • Replies: @Whitewolf
    , @Sin City Milla
  34. “Transgender activists may be noisy and obnoxious, but they aren’t an existential threat to Western nations. Mass immigration by millions of non-Whites is a huge existential threat to Western nations.”

    Mass immigration is certainly the most pressing issue for the West, but homosexuals and transsexuals most certainly are a threat.

    This is illustrated by the homosexual infiltration of institutions that allows them access to and authority over young males, and its consequences. Tranny infiltration is more recent and conspicuous, but the results will be the same.

    • Replies: @Anon
  35. onebornfree says: • Website

    Here’s a really stupid idea that is shared by both sides of this tedious, never-ending race difference “scientific” debate here, and presumably [by implication] shared by the author of this very article:

    Really stupid idea: Government can and should decide which “scientific” side is right and enforce that “rightness” on all disbelievers.

    If that so-called “solution” is what the author is actually implying, then he has his head in the sand [ or, like much of humanity, fully embedded in his own lower anatomy].

    Government “Solutions” Never Work [For numerous reasons]:

    This just in: there are no government solutions to any social problems- including any/all perceived “scientifically researched” racial difference problems. Nor to any other difference of opinion concerning race, religion problem etc. etc.

    Government “solutions” simply never work. They never have in the past [although in the short term they might appear to work], and they never will in the future.

    Governments will never solve race difference issues, or differences in scientific opinion about racial issues [let alone immigration problems, “inequality” problems, wealth/poverty problems, infrastructure problems etc.]- they only exacerbate them by enforcing [“for the greater good” of course 🙂 ] one particular point of view on people who just don’t believe the same thing.

    And, even those who do believe them and who fantasize that their own “correct” view will now be enshrined/enforced/installed via some wonderful new laws, will ultimately be very disappointed when they finally discover that in reality, what they originally approved of because they thought that it would be the enforcement of their very own pet idea, has been corrupted beyond all recognition and is now, in reality, almost the exact opposite of what they originally thought would be enforced by “TPTB” on everyone else.

    It happens every time.

    But do the two [ or more] sides ever learn?

    No, they just clamor for even more government “solutions” to whatever ails them.

    “Stupid is a stupid does” …..and so it goes.

    “Why Government Doesn’t Work”: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?176722-Why-Government-Doesn-t-Work-by-Harry-Browne-FREE-PDF

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Pheasant
    , @Anounder
  36. anarchyst says:
    @niteranger

    There’s more to jewish mental illness. During the “male genital mutilation” (circumcision) rite, the “mohel” fellates the male jew child as part of the ritual. This insures that any STDs that the mohel possesses are passed on to the child. What better way to infect the child with mental-illness causing STDs…

    • Replies: @niteranger
  37. Saggy says: • Website

    The latest from Britannica …. https://www.britannica.com/topic/racism

    Since the late 20th century the notion of biological race has been recognized as a cultural invention, entirely without scientific basis.

    This would be unbelievable if it were not actually happening.

  38. Anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:

    Race and its associated metaphysics is to me frankly boring and a dead end, not because I am non-white and therefore unwittingly categorized as inferior by the numerous articles and posts here. But any discussions on identitarian politics based on pseudo science at best, appears to attract a following here because of the extremes of doomsday or feel-good messages for the Tribe. And for those “send them home” types, I will continue to read UR mainly because of its unrelenting and incisive critiques of the Anglo-Zionist empire, which I happen to agree with (not for its ethnic composition, but for the politics of abuse of power that inform it) and some oases of common sense like Linh Dinh pieces. I am perfectly aware that the price I must pay for visiting the site are the numerous reminders of my inferior status and the existential threat I hold for (many, not all) Whites, for which I couldn’t give a flying fcuk. Some even have the audacity of calling themselves “native” — terrified of their impending “displacement” by us or our potentially diluting their superior gene pool, often remaining totally and willfully oblivious of the real natives who have been displaced by pure violence. Gore Vidal’s United States of Amnesia does really come to life among some lead pieces and posts here.

  39. @Anonymous

    To summarize, you’re an unabashed parasite. Thanks for the honesty.

    • Replies: @Pheasant
    , @Anonymous
  40. headrick says:

    Fruits of hanging out around the facility lounge for years. Academics are a clique, a fraternity, and if you ever found yourself a TA or buzzed around the perimeter of that
    hive and wished to belong, you understand that the cost is high- submit to the common core beliefs in enlightenment and anti – bumpkin politics and religion. Including climate change and race questions – which have scientific hearts- the party line must be held in public and private, at parties, and in shunning heretics. Now many hears later, I like to listen to podcasts from the other side of being retired, most from academics. They don’t need to identify their perigee, you have to figure that out yourself. Hmmm mindscape, that might be interesting podcast stuff. So you get special about the book “Superior”, a siren call to return to your master the society of the educated is calling you home. They need you. Return from your mob of deplorable and nonredeemable uneducated rabble. Well I don’t think so. We have Unz and Ron Paul and you can take your offers of camaraderie and the siren song, and shove it. Like Judith Curry said in a tweet recently about pain of rejection inflicted upon her by here academic colleges
    and she said the left that all behind and now finds the freedom liberating and the awful weight of the burden of conformity is now only clear after being relieved of it.

  41. Leftism is indeed a form of religion, and I’m sure the author will come to realize many of its adherents reside here at UR after a short trip through the comments section. Tobias is absolutely correct to call leftism a form of parasitism. The problem with leftist is they seek to emulate the parasite through the destruction of their host, the society which came before them and enabled them to live the lifestyle they now enjoy while at the same time seeking to destroy it.

    Symbiosis can be defined as a a cooperative relationship (as between two persons or groups). Symbiosis is broken down into mutualism, commensalism, and parasitism based on how two species interact in their ecosystem. Mutualism is where both organisms benefit, commensalism is where one benefits but the other organism isn’t harmed, and lastly, parasitism is where one organism benefits and the other is harmed.

    There is no reason the human race should not be able to function at the mutualism level of symbiosis, or at the very least the commensalism level. Instead, we see parasites actively seeking the destruction of their host. It is a no win situation for all involved.

    The leftist, or Marxist/Communist movements are themselves based on destruction. For them there can be no advancement without destruction of individualism. Freedom belongs to the state and it will decide what is needed for the individual to have a happy and full life.

    But certain features are broadly alike in all visions of communism. Private property is eliminated, individualism goes by the board, individuality is flattened, all property is owned and controlled communally, and the individual units of the new collective organism are in some way made “equal” to one another. (1)

    And as always, there is nothing new under the sun. Marxist style Communism in it’s earliest form can be traced back to Judaism(aka Zionism).

    We need to ask: What kind of national liberation movement allies itself in every case and at every moment in its history with the powers of world imperialism? What national liberation struggle built its very existence on the colonization of another people, on the obliteration of that people’s history, their culture, and their land? The founding fathers of Zionism were much more honest about what they stood for. Over and over, one word appears in their writing: not national “liberation,” but “colonization.” Vladimir Jabotinsky, one of the founding fathers of the Zionist movement, wrote in 1923:

    [It is the] iron law of every colonizing movement, a law which knows of no exceptions, a law which existed in all times and under all circumstances. If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else–or else, give up your colonization, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempts to destroy or prevent this colonization, colonization is impossible, not “difficult,” not “dangerous” but impossible!… Zionism is a colonizing adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important to build, it is important to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot–or else I am through with playing at colonization. (2)

    From time immemorial, in even our sacred religious text, it has been about the destruction of “you” for the advancement of “me”.

    (1)https://mises.org/library/karl-marx-religious-eschatologist

    (2)http://www.isreview.org/issues/24/hidden_history.shtml

  42. Anonymous[373] • Disclaimer says:

    As many people have pointed out, leftism is a disguised form of religion. But I don’t know any overt religion that is as irrational as leftism or that denies reality so fervently.

    Seriously?! Well you must refer to expired religions. Religions flower and “swell” exclusively to those purposes, and that’s all they are used for. It’s their DNA you could say.
    Of course when they no longer work, they become “reasonable” and “tolerant” and maybe even interested in fairness and how things are: but by then they are powerless, because too few share those newly found goals.

  43. Bruno says:
    @Vinnie O

    What is scandinavian contribution to the world compared to Greek, Romans and NW european ?

    Cute people for sure. Maybe Bergman.

  44. Pheasant [AKA "anonymous Phazer"] says:
    @onebornfree

    ‘Here’s a really stupid idea that is shared by both sides of this tedious, never-ending race difference “scientific” debate here, and presumably [by implication] shared by the author of this very article:’

    Horseshoe theory isnt real and Jews are all liars

    This year in Jerusalem schlomo.

    • Replies: @Anounder
    , @Anounder
  45. Pheasant [AKA "anonymous Phazer"] says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    You tell em!

  46. @Anonymous

    terrified of their impending “displacement” by us or our potentially diluting their superior gene pool

    Every race/culture(Chosenites excluded)have many traits and customs that separate them from the heard and should be honored and kept alive. I can think of nothing worse than living in a world full of people with no history or culture of their own. A uni-color, uni-cultural, uni-sexual, uni-racial world would be the worst.

    In my 60 plus winters, I have found the only real divide to be those who own the color green and those who don’t.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  47. Logan says:

    Science has to do with discovering objective facts about reality. When it drifts away from that, it is no longer science.

    Part of the problem here is that we have forgotten that “facts,” as determined by science, are not the only type of truth. So if we are to believe that “all men are created equal,” then that must be a “fact,” which it clearly is not.If actual science diverges from our strongly held moral belief, then so much the worse for science.

    We used to understand that there are, among perhaps other types, also moral truths, which cannot be discovered using the scientific method. Wrong approach to answer that type of question.

  48. Logan says:
    @Saggy

    That is amazing. Scientific accuracy aside, it’s also historically inaccurate. This bizarre POV did not begin to acquire anything resembling consensus till well after WWII. In fact, the early years of the last century were amazing in their open and casual “racism.”

    I have read a couple of travel books from this period, and they casually discuss the inferiority of the various peoples they encounter so casually that it is obvious they take it for granted their audience will agree.

    This has almost entirely been forgotten.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  49. Hossein says:
    @Rational

    But the dumb white Goy is very happy and proud to finance the apartheid shit hole of Zion.

    It is not the jew who is trying to eliminate the “Whites” but rather the dumb trash , mostly ultra conservatives of Christian right numbering in millions, who proudly strengthen and defend the Jew state.

    Contrary to what you claim those Judaists are actually and ideologically way closer to the white racialists than you think. Are not these the white judaists who exert influence over national and international policies? And how about those 2 wild dogs of Alt right, Bannon and miller and other low life of Breitbart? All of them are proudly Zionist and yet draw huge supprt from the disgarceful dumb white conservatives. Why is that?

    The entire idea of so called”white nationalism” in the US is a fraud for it is organized ,directed and played by none other than those who have fleeced the US to the bone. President Nixon and carter knew that and they both got crushed by them.

    Sorry pal but the the white slave,the GOY, long ago decided to become a proud slave and neither the orange emperor nor smelly Bannon can change that.

    • Troll: Twodees Partain
  50. Logan says:
    @Jabberless

    Don’t waste your time. They know it’s anti-Semitic and approve.

    • Replies: @Jabberless
  51. @Logan

    Probably so – but why does Unz permit this blatant bigotry?

    For example mention is made in a derogatory fashion that Jews have more mental disorders. Perhaps so. But simultaneously Ashkenazi Jews as a group score very high on IQ, have many Nobel prize winners as well as noted professional successes etc for a small ethnocultural group. It is known that high IQ/genius and mental disturbance are often found together in a people. It is due to basic neurophysiology …

  52. I don’t know. Some humans seem to be more closely related to monkeys than to other humans from the same race.

  53. @Jabberless

    Anti-semitic? Why? The fact these leading proponents of bullshit are Jews is not any sort of bigotry. Just a fact. Indeed one of the facts which is the true cause of anti-semitism as it is commonly expressed.

    • Replies: @Jabberless
    , @Oracle
  54. unit472 says:

    One might also presume a man from the Congo is genetically closer to the chimpanzee than a man from Scotland but a 1% difference in their genomes make them quite distinct creatures. For the purposes of human achievement a tiny difference in genetic makeup can create astounding differences. We all know and recognize Leonardo Da Vinci as an artistic and scientific genius but has anyone ever heard of his brother ‘Fredo’ Da Vinci?

    Scotland has a small population, a little over 5 million people but it had an outsize influence in the world. Inventors like James Watt and Alexander Graham Bell. Scientists like James Maxwell and Alexander Fleming. Still 99,99 percent of the people from Scotland never achieved much. They were just average people even if far closer genetically to Maxwell and Watt than any African ever wlll be.

    OTOH if we depended on extraordinary achievement from Africans, Scotland would more closely resemble the Congo than Europe.

    • Replies: @Negrolphin Pool
  55. @Rabbitnexus

    The bigotry manifests clearly in pointing out the religion or ethnocultural background of politico-social commentators only when they are Jewish. Most leftist commentators are not Jewish but no mention at all of their ethnocultural or religious background is mentioned when speaking of them.

  56. MarkU says:
    @Parfois1

    I agree with most of what you are saying, the situation is that the real left as we remember it has all but disappeared, certainly from the corporate media. The ultra-rich must be laughing up their sleeves as the proponents of equality of opportunity and a more egalitarian society are casually conflated with the plethora of PC clowns and reality deniers that we see today masquerading as ‘leftists’. In essence the left has been hijacked the better to destroy it, “the best way to control the opposition is to be the opposition”.

    The problem is that most people are subject to Underwood’s law, they never use their critical faculties unless they are told something disagreeable. Since most people who use this site would identify as right wingers, you can say whatever you like about leftists, they will slurp it up so fast it won’t even touch the sides as it gets swallowed. So ‘leftism is a religion’ right?

    The same with both race deniers and racists, what little they know about genetic science could be written on a postcard (with a very thick crayon) but that won’t stop them having an opinion on the matter. If it comes from a seemingly authoritative source and it fits their ideological leanings then it doesn’t get questioned, its as simple as that.

    The climate debate is another example, the average person’s scientific education could comfortably be described as negligible and most of them haven’t even seen a scientific paper, let alone read one or tried to understand it. So how do they tell which of seemingly highly qualified but contradictory sources to believe? Simple, they believe the one that is telling them what they want to hear, or maybe the one that is coming from the end of the political spectrum they identify with. This applies to both sides btw.

  57. @Saggy

    The once famous jungle doctor Albert Schweitzer of famous Lambarene-hospital in Gabun was absolutely sure about the cognitive inferiority of his black clients. They are like children, you have to b patint with them, he used to say (andr write) quite often.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  58. I think this article’s analogy makes no sense. Comparing stupid biological organisms to stupid ideas is a dumb comparison, an idea is not a person. The people advocating these stupid ideas are not stupid, they are just liars, trying to advance either their ethnic interests, in the case of Jews, Negroes and other Anti-Germanic ethnicities, or trying to advance some other kind of interest based on a dishonest ideological agenda.

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  59. @Jabberless

    The antiSemitism in this article is patent and obnoxious. Many western intellectual Jews are Leftists but certainly not all.
    That other, perhaps many more, Leftist intellectual authors who hold the same liberal views and who are Gentile or Christian or perhaps Muslim is not mentioned by the writer but when there is possibility that the Leftist is Jewish the writer takes pains to point it out.
    This is blatant antiSemitism – period.
    And for this Rightist correspondent it is shameful and condemns the article to the trash can.

    Jews tend to be over-represented. Lewontin’s associate and co-ethnic Stephen Jay Gould also wrote Mismeasure of Man that was later used to counter The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray.

    The author is trying show how denying racial differences is harmful to Europeans. Simpletons like Colin Grant are using such falsehoods to justify their presence in Scotland and the UK in general. The sentence below is key to the whole article.

    Mass immigration by millions of non-Whites is a huge existential threat to Western nations.

  60. Oracle says:
    @Rabbitnexus

    Once one understands that the seemingly disparate aspects of the leftist agenda—feminism, open borders, affirmative action, promotion of abortion and destruction of the family, subversion of religion and culture, domination of media and education—all have the same objective and all are promoted by the same people, then it’s easy to understand why there is increasing animosity about it.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  61. @Vinnie O

    In “Saxons, Vikings, and Celts”, Bryan Sykes, one of the most active DNA detectives, notes that in real Scotland (not the mythical one bordering Nigeria), there are VERY active and defensive communities who proudly trace THEIR ancestry to Norway. These Scotch Vikings dominate several of the offshore islands, and it’s more common for them to break into Norse than Gaelic. And of course up until the Viking invasions, the “people who came to be called Scots by foreigners” had about the same Celtic DNA overlay on ancient “British” as the Irish did. Surprisingly, Sykes didn’t find ANY measurable African DNA in Scotland.

    They are just trying to push more diversity like the New Cheddar Man south of Hadrian’s Wall.

    Here is a panel discussing what it means to be English made up of six aliens. No comments allowed for obvious reasons.

  62. Anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Name calling —- is that all your ignorance and cowardice can summon?

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  63. @anarchyst

    Yes, I read about that in NY. It’s a bizarre ritual that should be called child molestation that has been covered up by the Jewish owned media. Imagine if some white guy had a religion with such a ritual?

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  64. Anonymous[256] • Disclaimer says:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    It can be a rather tedious affair reading and responding to the ramblings of a semi- literate and dyslectic individual. Your “heard” theory is a foolish assumption based on nothing that I wrote. Nowhere did I indicate my advocating entirely homogeneous organisation and culture or ethnicity of any group of people. The fact that I find the politics or metaphysics of identity futile hardly speaks to my own cultural affiliation or ethnic identity. Speaking of the kind of diversity you allude to, is that not what supremacists like yourself try to avoid at all costs? In sum, your 60 plus winters seem to have cultivated 6 plus decades of an intellectual void.

    • Replies: @Johnny Walker Read
  65. Adûnâi says:
    @Dieter Kief

    The once famous jungle doctor Albert Schweitzer of famous Lambarene-hospital in Gabun was absolutely sure about the cognitive inferiority of his black clients. They are like children, you have to b patint with them, he used to say (andr write) quite often.

    That deranged White doctor was saving Negro lives. It is incredible how you are able to find racism where there is suicidal anti-racism instead.

    • Replies: @bruce county
  66. Durruti says:
    @Jabberless

    The antiSemitism in this article is patent and obnoxious. Many western intellectual Jews are Leftists but certainly not all.

    I am not an antiSemite. I like Arabs.

    Semites are peoples from the Middle East. The overwhelming majority of Jews are NOT Semites. They hail from Europe.

    You might peruse: https://www.bing.com/shop?q=arthur+koestler+the+thirteenth+tribe&FORM=SHOPPA&originIGUID=7AE7E43BF54044069A9DC7CD160BF00F

    This is one of many links. Koestler cited many other sources of information for his thesis. And there are many other researches on this topic.

    After Koestler wrote The 13th Tribe, he beat his wife & raped 84 women. [Think Weinstein – after he supported the movie- MIRAL, which is sympathetic to Palestinians.] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/harvey-weinstein-miral-critics-are-167548

    Koestler was heavily criticized as a “womanizer.” I suppose he should have been a boyazer, like Bill Clinton. Koestler survived 3 Concentration Camps, worked on a Kibbutz in the 1930s, rejected Zionism, and was a Straight White Man. Therefore you never heard from one of the finest American writers, friend of Hemingway, Dos Passos, and a defender of the Spanish Republic.

    The Zionist Banking Oligarchs cynically misuse the term, Anti-Semite, in order to establish in people’s minds that Jews have a right to Ethnically Cleanse Palestinians from their land – because,- Jews are Semites, (Peoples from the Middle East). And if you hail from the Middle East, then, you may do anything you want – there.

    George Orwell’s Novel, 1984, centers on the very topic of misuse of Language & History by oppressors – to deny people their Liberty. What was Winston’s job?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four

    Of course; we will use language correctly, because we believe in Liberty!

    • Replies: @Adûnâi
  67. Adûnâi says:
    @Paul Bustion

    The people advocating these stupid ideas are not stupid, they are just liars, trying to advance either their ethnic interests, in the case of Jews, Negroes and other Anti-Germanic ethnicities, or trying to advance some other kind of interest based on a dishonest ideological agenda.

    What’s about the cases where it’s the Germanics that advance anti-Germanic views and policies? What else explains their suicide rather than the meme theory?

  68. @Anonymous

    Well you seemed to be having trouble understanding what exactly it is that you are. You’re welcome.

  69. Jews: “There is no such thing as race.”

    Also Jews: “Take this DNA test to prove you’re qualified to live in Israel.”

  70. Shermy [AKA "JJJay"] says:

    I didn’t notice it mentioned but another very important factor that de facto debunks the “race is a social construct” argument is the fully qualified scientific fact of Neanderthal genetic admixture enjoyed by ALL Europeans and beyond, while absolutely ZERO Neanderthal admixture can be foun in subsaharan blacks.

    This makes the assertion that a Nigerian can have closer to identical genetic coding to a Highland Scotsman, than a fellow in a neighboring subsaharan black tribe, absolutely impossible.

    The old saw is still true: Generally, when a person runs out of scientific steam to cope with chaos, they will most often turn to Magic. Always have. Always will.

  71. @Bruno

    Dyn-o-Mite! Nobel, Ibsen, Greig, Munch, Abba, Saab, Volvo…

  72. @Anonymous

    Whatever. Frankly I have a hard time interpreting any of your ramblings, as they seem to wander on aimlessly in a string of innuendos and false assumptions.

  73. Richard B says:
    @Rational

    “I suspect frauds like Saini are being supported by Judaists. Maybe Judaists wrote her book, and paid her some money to publish it under her name.”

    You’re probably right. Wouldn’t be a surprise to those in the know. That’s for sure.
    Either way, the constant lying leads to the sort of pretzel logic found in this beaut.

    “This is not a free speech issue; it’s about improving the quality and accuracy of information…”

    How can you improve the quality and accuracy of information without free speech?

    Power really does make people stupid. It doesn’t have to, but it often does. Conformity too.

    In fact, stupidity is conformity’s shadow.

    And these people are conformists with lots of power.

    So that’s a Double Whammy.

    The entire justification for Freedom of Speech is that only such a value makes it possible to discover new truths and get rid of old illusions.

    It presupposes intelligence and excludes stupidity.

    Which explains why these beneficiaries of free speech don’t know anything about it. Nor do they care. So we can add apathy to their ignorance.

    Include a heaping dose of radical ingratitude and you have a mob of the most repellant, obnoxious and unimpressive people in the history of the world.

    In any event, free speech makes it possible for us to improve the quality and accuracy of information that is eventually transformed into knowledge and the knowledge into wisdom.

    And developing the attributes of wisdom is exactly what an education in the Arts & Sciences used to be about.

    Attributes such as emotional detachment and intellectual insight. As well as prolonged problem-exposure and solution postponement, so as to avoid the premature termination of the all important process of data-gathering.

    And what exactly would we do with this wisdom?

    Solve problems and improve the quality of life.

    But now, thanks to the hive of dumbells running things now problems aren’t getting solved and the quality of life is in free fall.

    Talk about a Pyrrhic Victory.

    The one bright spot in all of this is that we’re still free to solve some of the many problems we’re facing today as individuals and as members of a race that is now being scapegoated on a global scale.

    Toward that end, the more we know about the subject of scapegoating (starting in families) the better the chances of working our way out of our current dilema.

    Every little bit helps.

    It also wouldn’t hurt to develop a stronger, more sympathetic affection, care and respect for one another.

    And I’m not talking about some hippy dippy, touchy feely, “F**k me I’m so sensitive” Jackson Browne school of seduction.

    I mean solidarity. We’re going to need we can muster.

    They might be sick, crazy and, as the above quote makes clear, stupid, but no of us doubt that they’re well-organized, well-funded, and highly motivated.

    And, so far as I can tell at the moment, their Designated Scapegoat isn’t.

    • Replies: @Richard B
  74. Wally says:
    @Jabberless

    So what’s wrong with “antisemitism”?

    fact:
    Jews demand low IQ, 3rd world immigration into the US & Europe while they support very strict Israeli immigration laws which mandate JEWS ONLY.

  75. Richard B says:
    @Richard B

    Spell Check:

    I mean solidarity. We’re going to need all we can muster.

    They might be sick, crazy and, as the above quote from Saini makes clear, stupid. But no one doubts that they’re well-organized, well-funded, and highly motivated.

  76. Richard B says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Mecca?

    A Shopping Mall in Baltimore?

    A Colin Flaherty video?

  77. Adûnâi says:
    @Durruti

    Why do you like Arabs? And why do you care about the Palestinian land? Are you a Palestinian Arab?

    • Replies: @Durruti
  78. Jews promote race mixing while deny it for themselves no such thing as the left
    Evolution? Debunked fake science and totally refuted 6 wways to Sunday as jewish propaganda issued out in a targeted fashion to attacked goyim religions.
    Race exists because its an act of God…1957 chevys magically popping out of volcanoes, and no mechanism, no way magically with input from outside world data for genetic construction on micro and macro level for usage outside materials to formulate biological material to then form and order for the further use through cells then organs outside elements, proteins through breathing eating for life sustaining processes.

    two sexes magically forming at mature self surviving state at the same time with all systems online and hyper compatible fully functional sexual organ systems with the life support systems all also fully online….the male and female sex organs are insanely complicated, and very tightly ordered with connections and creation replication, transmission, and delivery of a more hyper complex sub strata known as DNA which is then in a hyper complex process combined for the reproduction and creation of life.

    Claiming anything outside of Intelligent Design always has been discredited and proven absurd by the simplest of reasoning, always. Evolution from fake slow transition lie to the jewish bolshevik soviet insane “rapid leap” lie soundly refuted also impact, “science” is a talmudic masons racket of ignorance and stupid made up lies that have nothing to do with history or reality…its all made up psyops and disinformation…pure lies based a satanic judaic agenda

  79. @Jabberless

    So, you’re saying what many of us have observed already; that to call a Jew a Jew is antisemitic.

  80. Anounder says:
    @onebornfree

    Shouldn’t you be arguing that fags should be allowed to be express themselves instead of forced into the closest by the state and women allowed to kill their children without asking the permission of their husbands or patriarchs (also called being Pro-Choice)?

  81. Anounder says:
    @Pheasant

    The Anarchkiddie/Lolbertarian crowd does draw broken women and Jews, yes. With Ayn Rand both a broken woman and a Jew.

  82. Anounder says:
    @Pheasant

    It says much that only Amerifats and Jews have ever taken Libertarianism seriously. Even Adam Smith called for the state to step-in when needed and supported welfare.

  83. JackOH says:

    Tobias, thanks—only had time for a quick scan.

    “Simple-but-stupid” caught my eye.

    Try “venal, venereal, and violence” as guideposts for thinking about political behavior or political ideologies. Maybe I’m in cranky White dude territory, but a political philosophy that promises to money people up and sex people up, and uses violence or the credible threat thereof to gain power, punish dissenters, and enforce orthodoxy stands a chance of being a winner. (Hope that doesn’t sound too whacky.)

  84. Durruti says:
    @Adûnâi

    Why do you like Arabs? And why do you care about the Palestinian land? Are you a Palestinian Arab?

    Very unusual question. You might ask me if I care about MOSSAD agents (Traitors), Epstein and Ms. Maxwell. Or about anyone? They must be brought in front of a Court of Law, not taken from us.

    I like Weinstein, he tried to do something brave, (Movie Miral), I like Julius & Ethel Rosenburg; they were innocent. I like Sen. Franken, he thought he was a Senator, and tried to behave like one. Arthur Koestler, Bobby Fischer, do I need a verb? Poor Senator Rand Paul (son of a great father), they tried to kill him, and are not finished.

    I care about my family, my Ex, children & grands.. I care about my students & Joan Baez (who I demonstrated with), Kris Kristofferson, Rita Coolidge, Willie Nelson, Jackie Evancho, and many more. I love my Country, its People, and I wish Liberty for all.

    Our last Constitutional President, John F. Kennedy was assassinated. I knew him not. I admire him now. His book “Profiles in Courage” was a plea to all Americans.

    https://www.bing.com/shop?q=profiles+in+courage&FORM=SHOPPA&originIGUID=C03DC4A33CC14A60B8AD4CC4F07D4326

    Yes, I like Arabs. Specially Palestinians. While anyone is oppressed, and have their land taken from them, no one is truly free.

    I like Hassan Nasrullah. I like Dieudonné, and Alain Soral, and the Gilets Jaunes.

    Your question put me in a good mood.

    God Bless.

    Durruti

    • Replies: @getaclue
  85. @Adûnâi

    You mean this Dr. Schweitzer..

    [MORE]

    “I have given my life to try to alleviate the sufferings of Africa. There
    is something that all white men who have lived here like I must learn and
    know: that these individuals are a sub-race. They have neither the
    intellectual, mental, or emotional abilities to equate or to share equally
    with white men in any function of our civilization. I have given my life
    to try to bring them the advantages which our civilization must offer, but
    I have become well aware that we must retain this status: the superior and
    they the inferior. For whenever a white man seeks to live among them as
    their equals they will either destroy him or devour him. And they will
    destroy all of his work. Let white men from anywhere in the world, who
    would come to Africa, remember that you must continually retain this
    status; you the master and they the inferior like children that you would
    help or teach. Never fraternize with them as equals. Never accept them as
    your social equals or they will devour you. They will destroy you.”

  86. Whitewolf says:
    @Miro23

    IMO when Anglo-Americans can be verbally abused every which way, then the game switches to physical abuse (detentions, transportation, “re-education” etc.) and the US is in full Bolshevism II.

    If you’re right the gulags can’t be far away. There’s just the pesky second amendment to get rid off so Whites can be disarmed.

    • Replies: @Miro23
    , @Nodwink
  87. Saggy says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    You are not ‘unwittingly’ categorized as inferior, there is an infinite amount of evidence that the white races are superior, you’re looking at one right now, your computer monitor. One hundred years ago anyone who claimed that the races were intellectually equal would rightly have been considered unhinged or insane. I could post a few pictures to make the point, but I’ll leave them to your imagination.

  88. getaclue says:
    @Durruti

    Read up–Rosenbergs were not innocent–guilty as sin, Soviet spies!—the truth fully came out after the Berlin Wall fell, surprised you haven’t come across that?–their own children researched to prove their parents’ innocence and concluded they were Soviet Spies…Why? because they were….: https://www.history.com/news/rosenberg-sons-admit-father-julius-guilty

    • Replies: @Durruti
  89. @Miro23

    You forgot: Earth worship, white guilt as expressed by zero children, openness to pedophilia, militant Veganism, sacralization of melanin, suppression of free speech n majority voting, n scorn for private enterprise unless it involves suppressing free speech n promoting tbe Unified PC political platform.

  90. @Jabberless

    The Zionist Banking Oligarchs cynically misuse the term, Anti-Semite

    The charge anti-Semite is a complete fraud. Since Palestinians are Semites while most Jews are not, to be anti-Jew is in fact to be pro-Semite. Jews use the term anti-Semite to suggest that opposition to Jewish policies is a form of racism, while it is actually opposition to the political agenda of a coterie of wealthy Jewish oligarchs, both Left n Right, who themselves see the world in racial us-versus-the-goyim terms. These Jewish Supremacists n their golems in academia n the media are the true racists. The article has it right.

  91. @Levtraro

    The important quantification for a determination of the material basis of race within the human species relies on observing the variation within a small set of very important genes.

    At the end of the day it’s only the difference in phenotypes between groups that really matters. It doesn’t matter how statistically “different” or the “same” the group’s genotypes are.

    You can change one line of code in a computer program. It may then be 99.99999% the same as the original, but it may now crash and be useless. Or maybe that one line fixed a bug that makes the “new” program 100% more effective at what you need it to do.

    Conversely, you could write a program to mimic the exact functionality of another program without using any single line of code that is exactly the same. (That would be like convergent evolution.)

    Playing around with the statistics of DNA may be good for something. (Like figuring out when two populations diverged genetically). But group differences are only important to the extent they are expressed in the prevalence of actual functional traits – like IQ, personality type, disease resistance, etc.

    When people who already don’t know what they’re talking about also confuse the basic concepts of genotype and phenotype, the result is pure gibberish. That’s what a lot of these leftists are doing, I think.

  92. @Commentator Mike

    Yes, the ignorance n naivete of Peace & Love & No Borders Leftists is astounding. Having zero personal experience with equatorial societies, they remain blissfully unaware that cannibalism, child rape, domestic abuse, domestic slavery, animal sacrifice, n even the burning of witches still happens, n in some places has even made a comeback since the end of colonialism, yet our PC types have no problem letting them in without the slightest vetting.

    I recall once in grad school one of my advisors instructed me to remove a factoid in my thesis about several thousand Nigerians dying during conflicts between Muslims n Christians on the grounds that it “could not be true”. She required me to cut the figure down to 1000. She knew nothing about Nigeria n did no investigating, she simply “knew” it could not be true. This is the kind of fraud n manipulation of facts that goes on in academia all the time. People who resist this manipulation do not get the recommendations, the grants, n the peer acceptance necessary to get tenure. I’ve become a believer that progress in academia happens only one funeral at a time, ie when the top dogs finally die off letting new ideas seep in, often long after the rest of society has already learned the truth n progressed.

  93. Jason Liu says:

    Your debunking makes no sense because you misunderstand the argument. Equalists say one person is more similar to another from the other side of the world because there is clearly genetic overlap between all human populations.

    The leftist argument is that ONE Scotsman can be more genetically similar to ONE Tanzanian compared to all other Scotsman. This is technically true, it’s just not true on a group vs group basis.

    Lewontin’s fallacy relies on a semantic handwave in which diversity within a group negates diversity between group averages, which sounds convincing to the public but isn’t true.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  94. @Miro23

    The Dems in Congress, fresh from their fraudulent elections in California, have already begun this with their anti-white Inquisition. It will only grow in vehemence n violence from here.

  95. Here’s the essential point that leukophobes and other haters deliberately miss:

    Racial differences are not about any range of variation, they are all about degree of correlation.

    Race is based on strong correlation between certain alleles. Racial partitions may be small within a total variation of characteristics, but that is irrelevant. Instead, racial characteristics highly correlate with other racial characteristics.

    This is especially obvious at a genetic level. DNA alone can confirm genetic groups with high precision (H.Tang et al. (2005) Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2005 Feb; 76(2): 268–275.). Genetic clustering and genetic markers are sufficient to easily discriminate between racial groups. The stupid leftist excuse for scientific argument ignores the fact that most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data, and not simply in the variation of the individual factors.

    “Hating racism” is like “hating temperature”. Saying that there is no such thing as race is the same as saying there is no such thing as temperature. There are lower-energy molecules and higher-energy molecules, but nobody gives a damn about those because instead we want to know about the average energy of the population as a whole in order to make useful predictions and perform useful actions therefrom. It is anti-science to say there is no such thing as temperature, and is is both anti-science and anti-reality to say there is no such thing as race.

    But here’s where it gets truly grotesque: The vicious fantasy about whites being the font of all evil is deliberately contrived to inflame the hatred of lesser minds so that they can be more easily enslaved by their leftist masters. The left cynically sets the great brown masses to do the dirty work of eliminating whites for them. Those who believe the left are utterly stupid, those who foist it off on the stupid are utterly depraved, and all who engage in it are utterly consumed with hate.

    50 years ago if someone had said that the left would initiate a race war against white people, he would have been laughed out of the building. Right now the left is clamoring for forced re-education for whites. We can therefore extrapolate leftist hate: 15 years from now leftists will be firing bullets into the back of your white head in American gulags.

    In contrast to the fantasy morality peddled by the secular religious cult of leftism, here’s reality: All races except whites are unashamedly racist. They always have been, they always will be. The only way forward is for whites to also be openly racist, without apology, without guilt. Racism is just pattern recognition, as in ‘science’. One man’s racism is another man’s pattern recognition. This has absolutely nothing to do with “hate”, assuming you had telepathy to actually discern it in the first place. Racism is realism. All whites should proclaim themselves to be realist. Diversity is never strength… diversity is division, diversity is divisive. Diversity plus proximity always historically leads to war.

    In the final analysis, segregation is the only moral solution.

  96. @Jabberless

    In the case of Ashkenazi Jews there is nothing basic or routine about it. For an interesting discussion on how the two are tied together among Ashkenazis, see A Troublesome Inheritance by Nicholas Wade. .

  97. Good readable review of the race science but the article is very optimistic about science’s ultimate triumph Human biogenetic equality is a Jewish idea serving Jewish interests. Jews are in a race to preserve their post war intellectual hegemony from the newly emerging goy enlightenment. For Jewish elites, too much depends on racial egalitarianism as a concept. If it falls as a concept, people will start looking at Jews as they always more or less have – as an ethnicity with natural interests. The Jews cannot allow this to happen because for 75 years they have been disingenuously and ethnocentrically promoting their own interests as human interests. They cannot simply stand by and allow science to emerge victorious. because science will ultimately point the finger at them. After all, the Jews derailed race science. Forget about the Jewish geneticist Reich acknowledging science. He is an anomaly and even he tries to continue rationalizing the multi cultural project. Remember the Jews have the media and the higher educational system. They are locked into anti science by their own past. To kill science, they have to nail free speech both legally and socially. Given the post WW2 triumph of Semitism, unfortunately I wouldn’t bet against them. They are smart, rich. politically powerful and they mean it. Remember these are the people who gave the world Bolshevism

  98. mikemikev says:
    @Jason Liu

    The leftist argument is that ONE Scotsman can be more genetically similar to ONE Tanzanian compared to all other Scotsman. This is technically true

    No it isn’t

  99. Miro23 says:
    @Whitewolf

    IMO when Anglo-Americans can be verbally abused every which way, then the game switches to physical abuse (detentions, transportation, “re-education” etc.) and the US is in full Bolshevism II.

    If you’re right the gulags can’t be far away. There’s just the pesky second amendment to get rid off so Whites can be disarmed.

    There are some differences between Soviet Bolshevism and Bolshevism II (USA) – and they’re not in favour of US Jewish revolutionaries. These involve the armed forces, the weapons held by the public, the supporters of the two sides, the nature of the promised “Better World” and nuclear weapons among a collection of other factors.

    For example, the armed forces have the real decisive weapons. But will they use them against “domestic terrorists” who happen to be their own families and friends? There are nationalists and traditionalists in the armed forces who aren’t just in it for the money. Are they going to fight for a Globo/Homo world? I think that, at a minimum, the armed forces would split.

    Second Amendment weapons would normally be irrelevant, but this would be in a regular controlled conflict. If things got really chaotic, there are so many weapons in private hands that the US could slide into Rwanda II, with the Civil War being played out in a horrific way at the lowest level. This is a real possibility.

    There’s also the nature of support on the two sides. Traditionalists are united. They’re mostly the same ethnicity, and present themselves as the justified founders with the Constitution on their side. In contrast SWJ’s are more multi-ethnic (with their internal conflicts), have little historical base, and have an artificial power dependant on the Zio-Globalist, Cultural Bolshevik elite. Also their White collaborators are not really true believers. Many are only held in line by fear, and are really only there for money and benefits.

    How do you define a “Better World”? The Russian Bolsheviks defined as (at that time untried) Marxism. The dictatorship of working people, with the power and wealth of modern factory production returned to the workers. It had a mass appeal – especially compared to old washed out Czarist Imperialism. The SJW “Better World” is altogether different. It’s the US as a multiethnic Brazil – run by Zionists for Israel, and corporations for corporate profits, with a Gestapo like security system provided by the NSA and Homeland Security. The US public have already had a taste of this and they don’t like it.

    For nuclear weapons, they were designed to defend the US against other countries, not to be used against their own citizens. However, if the Zio-Glob saw that they were losing a civil war, they would certainly try to use them against the “Deplorables”. This would either succeed or fail, but the consequences of failure would almost certainly be terminal for Israel, turning it into a radioactive desert.

    In light of all this, it’s probably not surprising that plenty of US Jews are examining the odds and deciding to abandon their Neo-Bolshevik colleagues before it’s too late.

  100. Parfois1 says:
    @Alfred

    The people who think that race does not matter should be sent to a place like Lagos and put up in a “middle class” household for a month or two.

    And on their return to be the hosts for the “refugees” they claim to be supportive of to prove their genuine belief and concern.

    Reality-testing is the way to go to demonstrate how genuine one is about professed values. The politicians, opinion-shapers and writers who promote the abject social conformism propagated by the Jewish-sponsored ruling elites should be forced to have more than a simple taste of their own ideological medicine. The result: true belief betrayed en masse.

    I propose the same test to the riff-raff commentariat here for a sample of self-criticism and a measure of their authenticity and honesty, particularly in regards to their irrational aversion to the word “leftism” or “socialism” in a racial context.

    Assume you come to an on-going brawl between two groups, one white the other black. You don’t know why they are fighting and, instinctively, what do you do? One would reasonably think that the newcomer would join the group he racially identify with. Being a reasonable person, that’s what I would do.

    But one of the riff-raff here, arriving on the scene, would first ponder his predicament as what to do. A bit like the Buridan’s Ass, because he hates the blacks as much as the leftists (in fact he thinks they are another species) he would make inquiries as to the political leanings of the whites and in the process he got clobbered on the head (by a black unencumbered by political considerations) and put out of action before deciding what to do.

    Who is the traitor to his race? You see, race is an immutable trait imposed by nature; political or any other ideology are mere accidents or conditions shaped by our life experiences. You could be a left-winger or a neoliberal globalist; but you cannot change races, although admittedly there are some white house-negroes.

  101. Anonymous[251] • Disclaimer says:
    @mikemikev

    You’ve been refuted on this countless times.

    Witherspoon says no such thing, but the opposite:

    “On the other hand, if the entire world population were analyzed, the inclusion of many closely related and admixed populations would increase. This is illustrated by the fact that Formula and the classification error rates, CC and CT, all remain greater than zero when such populations are analyzed, despite the use of >10,000 polymorphisms (Table 1, microarray data set; Figure 2D).”

    Why do you lie so much Michael?

    https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/mikemikev

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  102. @Miro23

    The SJW “Better World” is altogether different. It’s the US as a multiethnic Brazil – run by Zionists for Israel, and corporations for corporate profits, with a Gestapo like security system provided by the NSA and Homeland Security.

    Well defined. I’ll have to remember this one.

  103. anarchyst says:
    @niteranger

    “Male genital mutilation” (circumcision) should be outlawed. It is no different than “female genital mutilation”. In both cases, a healthy body part is removed and is, in itself barbaric and unnecessary.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  104. Parfois1 says:
    @Miro23

    How do you define a “Better World”? The Russian Bolsheviks defined as (at that time untried) Marxism. The dictatorship of working people, with the power and wealth of modern factory production returned to the workers. It had a mass appeal

    You are making a laudable effort to educate simpler minds about the complexity of political ideas and actions. But you went astray with “Cultural Bolshevism” and “Neo-Bolshevism”, which are no more than crass and meaningless epithets boomeranged on the author.

    You see, the Russian Bolsheviks were a minority (in spite of the name) among the diverse revolutionary groups involved in the uprising. In fact they were initially against the rebellion in February because the proletariat was not sufficiently developed for revolutionary action. One could even say that the revolution was imposed on them! Someone had to rise up and save Russia when the German army was already in Pskov on the way to Petrograd, the capital, and the Kerensky government was planning to evacuate to the safety of Moscow.

    It is incorrect to say that they wanted a “Better World” – an abstraction. Their ambitions were quite modest as their motto stated: “Peace, Bread and Land” . As to the myth of Bolshevik totalitarian power it is well-known from contemporary sources that there were deep political divisions and factions during the formative years of Bolshevik rule, including a return to private enterprise. Perhaps there were greater differences among the Bolsheviks than between the Republican and Democrats in the US duopoly and the Russians had a freer press then than the US now! Shocking truths to the “patriots” here.

    Anyway, compared with the usual riff-raff inanities, there is a bit of improvement. There is hope yet!

    • Replies: @Miro23
  105. Arnieus says:
    @Jabberless

    “So what you are saying is:” Jewish scientists say race doesn’t exist and if you disagree you are bigoted toward their race. If race doesn’t exist then semitism doesn’t exist, therefore anti-semitism can’t exist.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  106. Durruti says:
    @getaclue

    Read up–Rosenbergs were not innocent–guilty as sin

    There are books that insist the Rosenbergs were innocent, & books that agree with the Zionist puppet American Imperialist Government & its Mainstream Media, that the Rosenbergs were guilty.

    There are articles that insist the Russians could not construct by themselves an Atomic bomb, or even a good Pastrami Sandwich.

    This recent Study insists that Ethel Rosenberg was innocent.
    https://www.foxnews.com/us/legal-scholars-claim-new-evidence-shows-ethel-rosenberg-was-innocent-in-infamous-spy-case

    The Rosenberg children are old, (and were children at the time of the Cold War Trial), and nothing they recall can be of relevance in 2019. Do the children support the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians? What pressures & brainwashing have they been subjected to? [You say none???]

    I have not the time or interest to ponder the Magic Bullet Theory, or the Rosenberg Case – in detail.

    1. The bullet was not magical; Oswald was innocent.

    2. The Rosenbergs were innocent.

    3. The rush to execute the Rosenbergs, (as with the ‘suicide’ of Epstein), and the death of the shooters of the False Flags, and the MM accounts of 9/11, & downplaying of the slaughter of the Liberty Sailors, (did I mention the Epstein ‘Suicide’?), impels me to doubt the Mainstream Media accounts of almost anything.

    You pick your books, I’ll pick mine.

    • LOL: Che Guava
  107. Che Guava says:
    @Nodwink

    Moron.

    Couldn’t work up the SNS steam for a DDoS attack (kind of thing a cretin like you would prefer) so decide on a little random troling instead? You know that what you say are lies.

    Sorry for you.

  108. mikemikev says:
    @Anonymous

    The chance of classification error is not zero with 10000 polymorphisms Oliver? The same paper says it is zero with enough loci. But then you know that, and it is of course you that is the pathological liar.

    https://vdare.com/articles/lunatics-take-over-asylum-oliver-d-smith-rationalwiki-and-the-wikipedeans

    Your endless failure to be correct on any point is why you resort to writing defamatory smear articles on your opponents, knowing that you’re judgement proof, being a penniless misanthropic psychopath.

  109. geokat62 says:
    @Arnieus

    If race doesn’t exist then semitism doesn’t exist, therefore anti-semitism can’t exist.

    Exactly! Or if race doesn’t exist then whites don’t exist, therefore white supremacy can’t exist.

  110. Chapter 6 of Mein Kampf explains the psychological reasons why propaganda for the masses must always be dumbed down.

  111. @Jabberless

    “The antiSemitism in this article is patent and obnoxious.”

    I didn’t see any reference to Palestinians.

  112. Sparkon says:
    @anarchyst

    Actually, there is a world of difference between female genital mutilation, and male circumcision, as the latter does not interfere with male sexual enjoyment and may improve health outcomes, while the former involves partial or total removal of the clitoris, at the very least, in an attempt to deprive women of sexual satisfaction, and motivation.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  113. @Jabberless

    Being called names doesn’t frighten us any more.

  114. Miro23 says:
    @Parfois1

    It is incorrect to say that they wanted a “Better World” – an abstraction. Their ambitions were quite modest as their motto stated: “Peace, Bread and Land” . As to the myth of Bolshevik totalitarian power it is well-known from contemporary sources that there were deep political divisions and factions during the formative years of Bolshevik rule,

    “Quite modest ambitions” doesn’t fit the Bolsheviks. They were intensely focused on gaining absolute power. Their principal method was to lead every kind of dissent in Imperial Russia, making promises to soldiers, farmers industrial worker etc. and invite them to help build the Socialist Paradise. It was of course a Bait and Switch operation. When they actually (violently) obtained absolute power, dissenting workers were quickly shot, free speech disappeared and their former socialist friends found themselves on cattle trucks to Siberia.

    It’s true, that prior to the Bolshevik coup. there were different political factions in Russia. Kerensky’s Provisional Government set up Constituent Assembly elections with a free vote for all parties. However by November 2017 it was late. The Bolsheviks filled the assembly hall with soldiers armed with rifles, grenades and machine guns and rejected the result (Social Revolutionaries 20,893,743, Bolsheviks 9,023,963 out of 36.257.960 votes). Lenin established his dictatorship claiming that, “The Soviet Republic represents a higher form of Democratic institution”.

    After Lenin’s death, leadership went to his all Jewish “heirs” appointed in his “testament”, i.e. Trotsky (Bronstein), Zinoviev (Apfelbaum) and Kamenev (Rosenfeld). There was some factionalism but it was all within the regime.

    Source: “Russia from the American Embassy, April 1916 – November 1918” by David R. Francis
    Francis was the mayor of St Louis, the Governor of Missouri, U.S. Secretary of the Interior and finally the U.S. ambassador to Russia for 5 years from March 1916 to March 1921 and knew well Trotsky, Kerensky and the rest of them.

    He reported to Washington that, “The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90% of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution.”

    https://www.amazon.com/American-Embassy-1916November-Classic-Reprint/dp/B008CB8WTU/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=russia+american+embassy&qid=1566241782&s=books&sr=1-1

    • Agree: Johnny Walker Read
  115. Anon[408] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jabberless

    The antiSemitism in this article is patent and obnoxious. Many western intellectual Jews are Leftists but certainly not all.

    Antisemitism is highly moral and an absolute priority for all good people.

    As has long been noted and is documented directly in Jewish religious texts, the Jewish so-called “theology” is contingent on destroying the Western nations and peoples to the end of Israel being the only nation left standing.

    See Zohar Shemot 32a and the associated Rabbinical commentaries for one reference of dozens that explains how non-Jews are to be genocided and their nations destroyed to bring about the Jewish messianic era.

    The group of people that hold these anti-Western genocidal beliefs especially includes so-called “conservative” Jews that in reality hold dearer to Jewish eschatology and who comprise the ideological core of out-group-hostile Jewish belief.

    Conservative Jews are at least as anti-White as liberal Jews and, in fact, supply the political power base (ie: the World Jewish Congress, etc) for so-called liberal Jews who are generally as in-group nationalist and are merely outwardly liberal as an attack on the nations in which they live among.

    In fact, these so called conservative Jews are often the largest and most damaging anti-White agitators (see World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder, who penned an early article defending the Muslim and African refugee invasion of Europe, see the Orthodox Rabbinical involvement in the American “Civil Rights” movement that has destroyed our cities by making Blacks our legal equals, something that Jews would never think to do for others in their law and nation).

    By definition, to be Jewish and to agree with Jewish ethnic destiny (Jewish eschatology and its Zionism, etc) is to agree with this Jewish intent that is openly and fatally hostile to all non-Jews.

    It follows that antisemitism is not only highly ethical and desirable, but the foremost priority for any non-Jew who wishes to survive. Judaism and all of its associates are clearly immoral as evidenced by their stated eschatological / political intent.

    Antisemitism is not a universal immorality as your post assumes, and it certainly isn’t assumed to be here. We would no more respect that attempt at an accusation any more than a group of Rabbis would entertain the immoral assumption of an anti-White accusation.

    I suggest that you think about what you write next time and try to make a point couched in the context of all known and acknowledged information about Jews (see above) as well as that doesn’t ignore fundamental assumptions on this board (ie: that antisemitism is generally logical). Because your subtext is nonexistent here and increasingly in the wider Western World.

    You Jews are consummate liars and deceivers, as has long been documented and consistently observed. Your words and complaints mean nothing. The day is fast coming when they will fall on deaf ears. The evidence against you is long, documented, and irrefutable.

    • Replies: @Achilles Wannabe
  116. Anonymous[251] • Disclaimer says:
    @mikemikev

    “The chance of classification error is not zero with 10000 polymorphisms Oliver? The same paper says it is zero with enough loci.”

    It doesn’t, but the opposite. Like I said, all you do is lie.

    The quote-mine fallacy you post is covered here:

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Racialism#Identification_of_race_via_genetics

    Similar to creationist quote-mines of evolutionist literature, online racialists often do the same with Witherspoon et al. 2007:[35]

    “Thus the answer to the question “How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?” depends on the number of polymorphisms used to define that dissimilarity and the populations being compared. The answer, Formula can be read from Figure 2. Given 10 loci, three distinct populations, and the full spectrum of polymorphisms (Figure 2E), the answer is Formula ≅ 0.3, or nearly one-third of the time. With 100 loci, the answer is ∼20% of the time and even using 1000 loci, Formula ≅ 10%. However, if genetic similarity is measured over many thousands of loci, the answer becomes “never” when individuals are sampled from geographically separated populations.”

    The above paragraph is what they spam, especially the bold. What they don’t post is the paragraph that immediately follows:

    “[b]On the other hand[/b], if the entire world population were analyzed, the inclusion of many closely related and admixed populations would increase. This is illustrated by the fact that Formula and the [b]classification error rates, CC and CT, all remain greater than zero when such populations are analyzed, despite the use of >10,000 polymorphisms[/b] (Table 1, microarray data set; Figure 2D).

    Two individuals from separate populations can then be genetically more similar than two individuals from the same population (with >10,000 SNP’s).

    You repeat the same fallacies over and over in and endless loop.

  117. Anonymous[221] • Disclaimer says:
    @mikemikev

    The paper clearly says classification error is never zero (but of course you don’t quote this part of the paragraph): “classification error rates, CC and CT, all remain greater than zero when such populations are analyzed, despite the use of >10,000 polymorphisms.”

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Racialism#Identification_of_race_via_genetics

    Your quote-mining would make Ken Ham proud, Michael.

  118. Anon[195] • Disclaimer says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    Mass immigration is certainly the most pressing issue for the West, but homosexuals and transsexuals most certainly are a threat.

    This is true.

    Any deviant sexuality provides a strong sociopolitical base for small-group mafia behavior that can easily take over institutions and more.

    Small-group mafias being what this nation is currently in a death-struggle with.

    These small mafias may not all get along, but they all share a common enemy in the majority.

    I suspect that this could be one of the hidden and yet exceedingly practical political motivations for historically zealous social suppression of homosexuals / homosexual behavior.

    It likely tended to undermine the State in a true nation (the State being defined as the organized and successful political Will the majority).

    There is no motivation for suppression like political, social, and economic stability for a State and its majority in a true nation (see modern Israel).

    In any nation that becomes subverted by small mafias (Jews, homosexuals, cooperating minorities, etc) the majority can no longer successfully exert its political Will and a pseudo-nation results that will look to expand its mafia-friendly system (ie: democracy, lax criminal punishment, “Civil Rights”, liberal social morals, legalized drugs) into more nations that it hopes to similarly undermine and use as hosts (see the Jews, the Italians, etc). Assuming that at least one controlling mafia is international in-nature and strong enough for this task.

  119. Anon[277] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Racialism#Identification_of_race_via_genetics

    LOL. The low intellectual horsepower, fact-selective, and partisan Marxists who edit “Rational”Wiki are as objective and credible as the fact-selective Marxists who run the partisan Factcheck sites that show up in my Google feed. Perhaps less so because their site gets less traffic and isn’t as publicly accountable. They couldn’t debunk their way out of a UFO convention.

    Its funny that you would post that here and think it a credible response. In reality, you’re being laughed at.

    Hominid admixture quality and quantity differences alone (presence and lack of), statistically consistent across all sub-races, are enough to differentiate humans into racial categories. That’s before we get into further, more commonly cited genetic minutia.

    In sum, you may wish to watch using the “lies” accusation as an undereducated and tone-deaf participant in this conversation. It tends to be an accusation, when disproven, which destroys one’s credibility going forward.

  120. anarchyst says:
    @Sparkon

    You are incorrect.

    Removal of the male foreskin DOES decrease sexual pleasure in the male, as membranes that are normally moist dry out and as a result have reduced sensitivity.

    As to health outcomes, as long as the uncircumcised male observe proper hygiene habits there is no downside to having an intact foreskin.

    Male genital mutilation IS just as horrific as female genital mutilation.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  121. Sparkon says:
    @anarchyst

    Complete nonsense. The loss of the foreskin certainly does not prevent or decrease male sexual pleasure, but loss of the clitoris may prevent a women from enjoying sex at all.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  122. cassandra says:
    @Bruno

    …and you’re forgetting the Slavs, who bore the brunt of massive tartar, turkic and mongol invasions from the east, thus letting western Europe live in complacently sheltered isolation, having only to war with each other. Here’s a contribution: if Sobieski hadn’t defeated the Ottomans in 1683, Eastern Europe might be now begin at the Rhine instead of the Danube.

    Don’t get no respect.

  123. @Anon

    Well said. Antisemitism should be embraced, not denied. It was embraced, at least relatively, when Euro gentiles knew how to stand up for themselves. By the way antisemitism is not necessarily hatred of Jews. It is, as you say , simply the recognition by our tribe that we are threatened by their tribe. Common sense really. But the post war brain wash designed by Semophiles was designed to eliminate common sense. It worked. I think you may be optimistic about our chances to recover

  124. anarchyst says:
    @Sparkon

    ANY removal of any healthy intact part of any organ is mutilation-male or female. PERIOD…
    You must be a jewish “doctor” or “mohel” who sees the “loss of business” if male genital mutilation” is outlawed.
    Shalom…

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  125. Morris L says:

    Your ridiculous sleight of hand doesn’t undermine his argument at all. The answer depends on which populations. If you choose ‘closely related and admixed populations’ to select your individuals from then you might be correct. However the chances of a Swede being more genetically similar to a Hausa than another Swede are zero.

  126. mikemikev says:
    @Anonymous

    LOL. You’re saying that with a limited genome scan and borderline samples that’s it’s *possible* they’ll be misclassified? You’re a joke dude.

  127. Sparkon says:
    @anarchyst

    The health benefits of male circumcision are well established and recognized by leading health authorities. There is neither valid evidence nor any physiological reason for MC to reduce male sexual pleasure. In fact, in one study of African men who had undergone MC as adults, 72% reported that their penile sensitivity had increased after having their foreskins removed.

    [MORE]

    US National Library of Medicine
    National Institutes of Health
    The World Journal of Clinical Pediatrics:

    Evidence-based policy statements by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) support infant and later age male circumcision (MC) as a desirable public health measure. Our systematic review of relevant literature over the past decade yielded 140 journal articles that met our inclusion criteria. Together, these showed that early infant MC confers immediate and lifelong benefits by protecting against urinary tract infections having potential adverse long-term renal effects, phimosis that causes difficult and painful erections and “ballooning” during urination, inflammatory skin conditions, inferior penile hygiene, candidiasis, various sexually transmissible infections in both sexes, genital ulcers, and penile, prostate and cervical cancer. Our risk-benefit analysis showed that benefits exceeded procedural risks, which are predominantly minor, by up to 200 to 1. We estimated that more than 1 in 2 uncircumcised males will experience an adverse foreskin-related medical condition over their lifetime. Wide-ranging evidence from surveys, physiological measurements, and the anatomical location of penile sensory receptors responsible for sexual sensation strongly and consistently suggested that MC has no detrimental effect on sexual function, sensitivity or pleasure. United States studies showed that early infant MC is cost saving. The evidence supporting early infant MC has further strengthened since the positive AAP and CDC reviews.

    (my bold)

    Early infant male circumcision: Systematic review, risk-benefit analysis, and progress in policy

    • Replies: @CBTerry
  128. mikemikev says:
    @Anonymous

    Another thing, how do you know they were misclassified with suboptimal genome scans? Because otherwise they were correctly classified?

  129. The more so called “educated” people are, the more idiotic they become ,to justify their “intellect”.

    Common sense is the rarest commodity. A Cocker Spaniel , and a Great Dane, also share 99% of their genetic code, and they are dogs. but only an idiot of the highest order would not notice the difference.

  130. Logan says:
    @Jabberless

    I don’t know why Ron chooses to let the bigotry run free. At first I found it kind of refreshing. Total freedom of speech. But you soon find that bigots seldom really have anything interesting to say.

  131. thordaddy says:

    Your race is your father(s).

    Anti-racists hate their father(s).

    And make common chaos wiff turd worlders fleeing their own fatherlands.

  132. the highly influential leftist magazine the New Statesman:

    In my youth I knew a man called William Le Gros-Clarke (I’m not sure of the spelling.) During WW2 he worked in the Ministry of Agriculture. He told me that his colleagues told him (he was blind) that they saw the editor of the New Statesman, Kingsley Martin enter the Foreign Office every Thursday, presumably to get the editorial line for the coming weekend.

  133. CBTerry says:
    @Sparkon

    The reduction of male sexual sensitivity has been given as a justification for male circumcision for ages and in fact I came across a paper rather recently that again used this as a justification.

    If you don’t think that it reduces pleasure, look at photographs of uncircumcised glans versus circumcised glans. The difference is striking. Then ask yourself why parents (who in the US have likely never seen an uncircumcised glans) are not shown such photographs as would be required per the doctrine of informed consent.

    If you believe any study coming out of Africa, you have obviously never been involved in a major medical study. I have. What Bismark said of treaties and sausages is most applicable to them.

    That being said, if this statement is valid, it is a justification for voluntary adult circumcision — which the procircumcision lobby tries to ignore as an option.

    As for the health benefits, I am tired of the Gish Gallop. Please give me the number one health benefit. I am not interested in the second. I want the best.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  134. @Saggy

    The latest from Britannica …. https://www.britannica.com/topic/racism

    Since the late 20th century the notion of biological race has been recognized as a cultural invention, entirely without scientific basis.

    This would be unbelievable if it were not actually happening.

    This not merely believable, it is predictable. The Zs have taken over nearly all the means of communication and are working on what’s left.

    For example try to send an e-mail to Presstv.com or Global Times. Sign up for Discus and if you criticise Israel, you will find yourself identified as a “robot” thereafter!

  135. @Bruno

    What is scandinavian contribution to the world compared to Greek, Romans and NW european ?

    Bear in mind that the Scandinavians are/were much less numerous than the Greeks, Romans & NW Europeans. In addition to the things mentioned by @Hippopotamusdrome, @Ancient Briton, & @Cassandra there is Niels-Bohr and Goldshmit (Nuclear physics and mathematics.) and the Viking Sagas. You could also credit them with founding Russia.

  136. @Jabberless

    Probably so – but why does Unz permit this blatant bigotry?

    I think you are being ridiculous. This site bills itself as a site which publishes authors rejected by most of the web. So what do you expect ? Only articles that you will like? Only articles with which you can agree?
    This site could take as its motto “Let a hundred flowers blossom – let a hundred schools of thought contend“. But you contend that some of the flowers are not to your taste, that they are, indeed, poisonous weeds! Well, HARD LUCK!

    In my view, you should be grateful that it gives you the opportunity to refute, in detail, the views that you find erroneous or obnoxious. Why don’t you?

  137. @Oracle

    the seemingly disparate aspects of the leftist agenda—feminism, open borders, affirmative action, promotion of abortion and destruction of the family, subversion of religion and culture, domination of media and education—all have the same objective and all are promoted by the same people, then it’s easy to understand why there is increasing animosity about it.

    As has been pointed out by other correspondents, the Left’s original agenda was economic/financial/political fairness. The Anti-left have since hit on the brilliant, ju-jitsu-like, tactic of adding on to that, all these other extraneous ideas of “equality”. A sort of reductio ad absurdam if you like. They have thus succeeded in making a mockery of the left and distracted almost completely from the economic argument that the left was, originally, all about. They have also succeeded in almost completely reducing political discussions to meaningless drivel. Brilliant!

  138. Sparkon says:
    @CBTerry

    The reduction of male sexual sensitivity has been given as a justification for male circumcision for ages and in fact I came across a paper rather recently that again used this as a justification.

    Show us this paper.

    Meanwhile, try clicking on the [MORE] button. For some strange reason known only to themselves, the mods here hid the main paper I was referring to behind it, but most of your questions are answered there. To summarize:

    • early infant MC confers immediate and lifelong benefits by protecting against urinary tract infections having potential adverse long-term renal effects, phimosis that causes difficult and painful erections and “ballooning” during urination, inflammatory skin conditions, inferior penile hygiene, candidiasis, various sexually transmissible infections in both sexes, genital ulcers, and penile, prostate and cervical cancer.

    • We estimated that more than 1 in 2 uncircumcised males will experience an adverse foreskin-related medical condition over their lifetime.

    • MC has no detrimental effect on sexual function, sensitivity or pleasure

    As far as I know, there is no segment of the male population clamoring for foreskin reattachment surgery.

    My point is that female genital mutilation is far, far worse for the poor female than male circumcision is for the male. Millions of men have lost their foreskins before they had any say in the matter, and the vast majority of men have no complaints about it, and maintain a healthy sex drive and satisfying sex life even without their widdle foreskins.

    The male counterpart to FGM would involve cutting off the entire dick and both balls, not just the foreskin, the loss of which has no appreciable bearing on male sex drive, so there are different reasons for circumcision and FGM.

    • Replies: @thordaddy
    , @CBTerry
  139. @HammerJack

    AGREED.

    They have not yet gotten to the ratting out your parents for incorrect thoughts and pouring of pig blood and hanging posters from our necks phases yet of this Cultural Revolution. Changing of the whole record of American and Western history is what the current phase is, but humiliation is indeed a big part of it, Mr. Jack.

    What they haven’t thought through completely this time around is that many of us are armed to the teeth. .308 has a truth of its own.

  140. Hey, I finally got around to reading this article, Mr. Langdon. Great job!

  141. @Logan

    Logan, as stupid as the “Encyclopedia” Brittanica blurb was, it said the late 20th century. That’s about right, and your “well after WWII” coincides. Am I missing something (besides my renewal money for any Encyclopedia Brittanica subscription I might have otherwise kept on hand)?

  142. thordaddy says:
    @Sparkon

    There is far too much secularized rationalizing above.

    Start with “‘male circumcision” as an ancient alien ritual of self-annihilation and then ponder its deconstruction into a benign medical “tradition.”

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  143. Sparkon says:
    @thordaddy

    There is far too much secularized rationalizing above….Start with “‘male circumcision” as an ancient alien ritual of self-annihilation and then ponder its deconstruction into a benign medical “tradition.”

    Rationalizing you say, as the pot calls the tea cup black?

    The rationalizations are all yours with these odd notions of “ancient alien rituals.” Whatever, dude. You and your allies here with foreskin fixation keep deflecting the conversation away from FGM which is my primary point. There is no equality or comparison between the two practices.

    There is good evidence and sound medical advice in favor of MC, while there is no valid reason on Earth for FGM.

    FGM is driven entirely by male fear of female sexuality.

    • Replies: @Charon
    , @thordaddy
  144. Charon says:
    @Sparkon

    Circumcision is hideous, vile, and primitive. And the only people who support such mutilation fit those descriptions themselves.

    Only a genuine idiot would presume to improve upon Nature’s design for the human body. Or a religious supremacist, but I repeat myself.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  145. Sparkon says:
    @Charon

    Why not contact the National Institutes of Health, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention with your complaints about MC, and leave the childish name calling to others? Or do you really want to look like a foreskin fanatic?

    By the way, speaking of improving nature’s design, do you brush your teeth, clip your nails, get your hair cut, or even take a shower? Do you use TP or just your hand? Do you wear shoes, glasses, or even clothing? Ever hear of appendectomy, tonsillectomy, dental braces, or fillings? What about joint-replacement surgery, or caesarean section?

    Or are you just a hypocrite?

    • Replies: @Charon
  146. CBTerry says:
    @Sparkon

    “but most of your questions are answered there.” If you knew how to read, you would know that I only had one question, actually a request: “Please give me the number one health benefit. I am not interested in the second. I want the best.” As I expected, you never gave me the best. You used a shotgun approach firing off multiple supposed benefits, substituting quantity over quality, the Gish Gallop of intellectual frauds.

    I also find it interesting that you never questioned my claim that proponents of circumcision have for ages used a reduction in sexual sensation as a justification. I suspect you know that this is true, from Maimonides up through Kellogg and beyond. I do not know why you want that recent paper, but I dug it up. It is from 1998 (seems recent to me; I am getting old): Journal of Genetic Psychology, Volume 159, Number 3, 367-378. The authors argue that “circumcision is low-grade neurological castration” which they rather bizarrely believe results in social benefits.

    But let’s put this conflict behind us. I am willing to accept your out-of-Africa claim that an amazing 72% of adult males – whose brains have reduced plasticity and whose foreskins have naturally unfused from the glans – have increased penile sensitivity following circumcision: an excellent reason for reserving this procedure for adults.

  147. @unit472

    OTOH if we depended on extraordinary achievement from Africans, Scotland would more closely resemble the Congo than Europe.

    Or neighboring Uganda. I was wondering if some of the research about the Bantu-Scotland connection might have been funded by the Idi Amin Institute.

  148. Sparkon says:

    If you knew how to read

    Leading with a cheap insult is bad form old chap, and I really should have stopped reading there.

    [MORE]

    Look, it’s up to you to figure it out for yourself and decide what is the number one health benefit, and not up to me to play your games.

    I have never met you, have no idea of your age, physical condition, lifestyle, diet, health history, level of sexual activity, and so on. So how could I answer your question, or why indeed do you think I should? I have shown some results of scientific studies reflecting the views of the CDC, NIH and others. If that’s not good enough for you, tough darts.

    For me it is staying alive and staying healthy, and yes, that does require a shotgun approach. Sorry to break it to you this way. For some strange reason you have arbitrarily restricted yourself to just one health benefit of circumcision, and demand I tell you what it is, so I would say to you that staying alive and staying healthy is that number one benefit.

    By reducing the various health problems, such as urinary tract infections, penile, and prostate cancers, one improves one’s chances for a long life, as well as reducing cervical cancers in one’s sexual partners, but please don’t think I’m suggesting you or any adult should get circumcised in the absence of any compelling reason to do so, rather I oppose this demonization of circumcision as if it were all bad, and as if it were the male equivalent of FGM.

    It isn’t.

    You really don’t need a foreskin; it serves no real purpose, gets in the way, and helps harbor germs, so your health (and your partner’s) may be better without it, and in any event, you can’t get it back once it’s gone.

    And now two questions for you:

    Why do you think you can determine the level of penile sensitivity by looking at pictures?

    How many guys are complaining about their circumcised dicks being insensitive?

    • Replies: @CBTerry
  149. @Jabberless

    When you have 2 percent of the population often making up 50 percent of the anti-white-vitriol bleating guests in our three-ring media circus, the vast disproportion of a hostile alien tribe with claws sunk into its host’s most vital organs is impossible to miss.

  150. @mikemikev

    That’s what he appears to be saying.

    His posts are hard to read without clicking through to rationalwiki’s agitprop viral reservoir. But it looks like he is arguing that because a >10,000 polymorphism test will misclassify a German for a Finn .1% of the time or whatever, he just proved that race doesn’t exist, despite a child being able to classify albinism sufferers of African ancestry versus people of European ancestry with near 100 percent accuracy from photos alone.

  151. Okechukwu says:

    Astute leftists like the Jewish geneticist David Reich already know what’s ahead:

    And if what’s ahead is confirmation that the smartest humans are in Africa (not at all implausible) you will never accept that determination. Instead you will dig deeper into your absurd pseudoscience to try to invalidate that scientific finding.

    So you and 95% of the commenters here aren’t really interested in science and empiricism. Real science, actual science is sort of like kryptonite to white nationalists. You run like hell from it. But pseudoscience, that’s the thing you are passionately in love with.

  152. John1945 says:

    20th century cultural anthropology was nothing more than an ideology masquerading as a science-thanks to Ashley Montague and his tribesmen.

    Physical anthropology (much maligned Carleton Coon) was almost defeated in the 60’s-well,not quite…Today thanks to Genome Sequencing Project one may call it born-again science.

    Best current book on this particular subject is “Race: The Reality of Human Difference” by Frank Miele and Vincent Sarich (2 Berkeley professors of physical anthropology)

    Yes,we all belong to the same species-homo sapiens.But there is further subdivision-race-which is just another name for subspecies.Taxonomy does not stop at subspecies either:

    Species
    Subspecies, or forma specialis (for fungi), or pathovar (for bacteria)
    Variety or varietas (in botany); or form or morph (in zoology) or aberration (in lepidopterology)
    Subvariety (in botany)
    Form or forma (in botany)
    Subform (in botany)

    Say,all dogs belong to the big happy family of dogs,species canis familiaris.But within this allegedly happy family there are pit bulls,german shepherds,poodles…Yes,a poodle may interbreed with a pit bull (just to make liberals happy) but nothing good will come out of it 🙂

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  153. Charon says:
    @Sparkon

    You honestly draw an analogy between brushing one’s teeth and mangling babies without anesthetic. Wow. No wonder hardly anyone here takes you seriously.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  154. Anonymous[301] • Disclaimer says:
    @mikemikev

    Try reading the actual study. You falsely claimed the chance of classification error is zero with 10000 polymorphisms, when this is the opposite of what the study shows (with enough population samples).

    There’s thousands of ethnic groups; of course, if you cherry-pick only two ethnic groups separated by over a 10,000 miles distance, from opposite sides of the globe, the classification error will be zero. What the study though shows is if you include a lot of ethnic groups between those two geographical extremes, the classification error rate will always be above zero because of gene flow between nearby populations.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  155. mikemikev says:
    @Anonymous

    The chance of classification error is not zero with 10000 polymorphisms Oliver? The same paper says it is zero with enough loci. But then you know that, and it is of course you that is the pathological liar.

    Using a good chunk of the 3 billion base pairs the classification error will indeed be zero. Are you saying people don’t share ancestry because some early method of genomics can’t elucidate that with 100% precision? What are you even talking about?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  156. Sparkon says:
    @Charon

    No I didn’t, and you don’t speak for anyone but yourself.

  157. Anonymous[301] • Disclaimer says:
    @mikemikev

    No, this is falsified in the study, which you’ve never bothered to still read.

    “With geographically intermediate and admixed populations added, however, equation reaches an asymptotic value of 3.1%, CC remains well above zero, and even CT does not reach zero (microarray data, Figure 2, C and D; Table 1).”

    These values are asymptotic, so they will never reach 0, even if you increase to millions of SNPs.

    As explained in the study, when you add “intermediate” populations between geographical extremes, there will always be a classification error.

    “How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?”

    So the actual answer is not never if you include enough population samples.

    Given classification errors do exist, one has to be sceptical about determining the biogeographical ancestry of individuals from genetics, quite the same for skeletal morphology.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  158. c matt says:

    Hopefully, the next time a criminal defendant is faced with DNA evidence, his attorney will cite to one of these leftists to argue it was some guy thousands of miles away who committed the crime!

    • LOL: mikemikev
  159. Anonymous[301] • Disclaimer says:
    @John1945

    You’re spreading a lot of misinformation there John.

    Ashley Montagu (at least in his early publications) never denied human races exist, rather he was an egalitarian who campaigned against racism. If you actually read his work, he didn’t deny races exist. In fact, this was something he was criticised for at the time by scientific race denialists such as Frank Livingstone and C. Loring Brace. Neither of the latter were motivated by anti-racism (Brace is an outspoken opponent of political correctness), but came to realise races don’t exist by looking at the data.

    The book you mention, ‘Race: The Reality of Human Difference’ is a piece of crap and has been widely debunked. It’s also now 15 years old. In that book Varich and Miele completely trivialise and re-define what race is e.g. they claim a ‘race’ can be merely inhabitants of a city like Athens. They use a vague geographical definition of population and try to substitute it for race. Doesn’t work at all.

    As for there being human subspecies – the answer is no. By definition subspecies are allopatric, so unless you’re talking about remote Amazonian Jungle tribes or the Amish people who are more or less isolated and cut-off from other populations, human populations don’t pass as subspecies.

    The main problem with ‘race realists’ is they’re ideologues and so constantly change the definition of race because the traditional definition doesn’t apply to humans. Mikemikev for example makes up his own definition of race that isn’t in use by any scientist.

    • Replies: @John1945
    , @Morris L
  160. thordaddy says:
    @Sparkon

    This isn’t a compare and contrast… Which is worse and which is better.

    Both male and female genital mutilation are ancient alien acts of ritual self-annihilation.

    All your “medical-benefit” hocus pocus is ad hoc modernism.

  161. thordaddy says:

    The only intellectually coherent argument for which distinguished “races” do not exist is in the unfalsifiable assumption of a single origin of life. Of course, this brings the human mind to a “seed.” Which then is anthropomorphized into “The Father.” In other words, a single Father seeds ALL of life thus negating competing “races.” But this does not jibe because this world is actually a bubbling cauldron of competing fathers perpetually seeding good and evil in their very mundane affairs while virtue-sniveling anti-racists deny The Father under the chaotic tolerance of a pathological ideology.

    Your race is your father(s) all the way through to the God-Father.

    When you fight for your race, you fight for your father(s) and your God-Father.

    Science be damned.

  162. CBTerry says:
    @Sparkon

    [Too much circumcision nonsense.]

  163. John1945 says:
    @Anonymous

    With all due respect,Mr. Anonymous, I am not spreading misinformation.I just mentioned one book that matches my own observations and life experiences.

    I read more than one book on the subject of race.Scientists which strike me as being 100% honest are Carleton Coon and John Baker (the British guy who wrote “Race” in the 70’s).

    Also I want to mention Mike Hart “Understanding Human history”.

    Mr.Hart is computer scientist and noted astrophysicist.His book reminds me of no-nonsense computer manual.Another fact that impressed me about Mr.Hart is that in the 50’s he volunteered and served honorably as an infantryman during the Korean War.

    I never volunteered for anything before or since.Rep.Pirnie won the draft lottery for me in 1969 and so I went.That is why Mike Hart is way ahead of me in this and many other areas of human endeavors.

    Since Mr.Hart is Jewish and can’t be a racist by definition his book was met with deafening silence 🙂

    All quoted authors basically used the same methods and came to the same conclusions.

    On the other hand Richard Lewontin is particularly mendacious and vicious, although highly intelligent.Steven Jay Gould is rambling and hare-brained.

  164. mikemikev says:
    @Anonymous

    And this mismatch is with “population” defined by location. Race is defined by ancestry, which can be inferred from genetic similarity. Your cousin is never going to be more genetically similar to you than your brother (I know in your case Oliver your brother is identical). You lie that I don’t have a definition of race. I’ve repeated this standard and simple definition over and over. But you continue to lie. All you are is a nasty psychotic troll.

  165. Wilrodx says:

    WOW!!!
    All they are saying is that humans share the same gene pool up to 99.9%. The difference among us is in the remaing .1%. How is this unscientific?
    Lanquage is NOT like GENES. That comparison is stupid. All of humanity started out with the same genes and then diversified to make all of our differences . That’s not very complicated to understand.
    Unless you are deeply into racism.
    WOW! The stupid things I read on this website is astounding.

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  166. John1945 says:

    Gentlemen;

    Yet again them damn evil racists diverted our discussion into some murky unscientific uncharted waters.

    This article is about how trusting,gullible,innocent Left was infected and subsequently manipulated by the Mysterious Parasite of the Mind.It is not polite and politically incorrect to point fingers and call names…Therefore let’s find perfect analogies and deep insights in a new science aptly named “neuro-parasitology”:

    Mind Control: How Parasites Manipulate Cognitive Functions in Their Insect Hosts

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5938628/

    (article from the academic journal “Frontiers of Psychology” posted on US Government web site)

    20 pages,reads like Shakespearean drama,especially Chapter 2 “Suicidal Behaviour”

  167. @Wilrodx

    All of humanity started out with the same genes and then diversified to make all of our differences .

    I tried looking this assertion up, and stumbled onto this article:
    The discussion thread following the article reveal a very strange and unexpected debate on human history. Among other unusual assertions, we have:
    * No genetic bottleneck due to expansion into the Americas.
    * African genetic diversity resulting from immigration _int0_ Africa.
    * A fairly clear indication that human genetic history is not at all as well defined as the science writers say.

    The article and comment thread are well worth reading

    Counterinsurgency

    1] Kambiz Kabrani.
    “Evidence That Two Main Bottleneck Events Shaped Modern Human Genetic Diversity”
    _Anthropology.net ~ Beyond bones & stones_, 2009/10/08
    https://anthropology.net/2009/10/08/evidence-that-two-main-bottleneck-events-shaped-modern-human-genetic-diversity-proc-r-soc-b-firstcite/
    The immediately above web page is 11 years old. Things may have changed.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  168. wilrodx says:

    Counterinsurgency
    I must always be sure that what I am reading is credible.
    I am sorry but I could not find any credible credentials for Kambiz Kamrani other than a loop of sites he directs and profiles on LinkdIn and WEBMD. Not where he graduated from or his particular specialty or anything specific about his background.
    He has a picture of himself seemingly in surgery but cannot specify what his credentials are or where he got them. Neither can webmd. I won’t use linknd as credible so no point in signing in .
    In any case the link you provide is just to a discussion group where anyone can contribute and say anything. He doesn’t claim to be an anthropologist but doesn’t provide any info on how he was educated or anything about himself other than the site you link to.
    If I were you I would look for better more credible sources. I am disappointed that I could not understand your response to my post. You just made reference to part of what I said.
    Thanks for the reply anyway

    • Replies: @Counterinsurgency
  169. @mikemikev

    mikemikev

    Thanks for the correction! It’s one reason I post links — so _I_ can learn something.
    I did not intend the conversation to be authoritative, just interesting and suggestive, in the hopes that somebody more qualified than I am would comment on it.

    I’ve just read the article that you cited [1] using your link. The article dates to 2014/12/24, so, again, things may have changed. Obviously, the article has been peer reviewed, and it presents a more coherent and plausible account than the article I referenced.

    So, thanks for bringing me up to date. I’m, if not the wiser, at least better informed.

    Counterinsurgency

    1] Nature (2014) doi:10.1038/nature13997,http://anthropogenesis.kinshipstudies.org/blog/2014/12/24/the-best-kept-secret-in-populaton-genetics-or-truth-about-african-genetic-diversity/

  170. @wilrodx

    Please disregard the other post to you. I was not being sarcastic, instead I got mixed up on who sent what. Sorry.

    You might be interested in this post from mikemikev:
    http://www.unz.com/article/the-supremacy-of-stupid/#comment-3411853

    It represents more of a consensus of research in 2014, and a quite different view of things than my post suggested. I should add that the area is new enough that new data or assimilation of old data may change the overall picture.

    Your original post was, I believe:

    WOW!!!
    All they are saying is that humans share the same gene pool up to 99.9%. The difference among us is in the remaing .1%. How is this unscientific?
    Lanquage is NOT like GENES. That comparison is stupid. All of humanity started out with the same genes and then diversified to make all of our differences . That’s not very complicated to understand.
    Unless you are deeply into racism.
    WOW! The stupid things I read on this website is astounding

    I didn’t really intend to comment on your post, just to present some information I thought might be tangentially interesting. Paid off, too: I’ve learned something I wanted to know about.

    Counterinsurgency

  171. Morris L says:
    @Anonymous

    As for there being human subspecies – the answer is no. By definition subspecies are allopatric, so unless you’re talking about remote Amazonian Jungle tribes or the Amish people who are more or less isolated and cut-off from other populations, human populations don’t pass as subspecies.

    That’s incorrect. An example off the top of my head: the Pacific Coast Black Tail Deer and Rocky Mountain Mule Deer are subspecies that interbreed wherever they meet.

  172. Nodwink says:
    @Whitewolf

    Americans should be disarmed. Gun culture there is sick.

    • Replies: @mikemikev
  173. mikemikev says:
    @Nodwink

    The tyrannical ZOG government is infinitely more sick

  174. Most people allow their likes and dislikes to influence their judgment of what is true and false. I do it too, but I try not to.

    Those on the right refuse to acknowledge the importance of genes in determining individual differences and average racial differences in intelligence and criminal behavior.

    Those on the right refuse to acknowledge the reality of man made global warming. Many continue to believe that tax cuts for the rich will pay off the national debt.

  175. White nationalists refuse to acknowledge that white Gentiles are not the most superior race in existence. Ashkenazi Jews are the most superior, followed by Orientals.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Tobias Langdon Comments via RSS