OT:

Sadly it looks like Razib Khan has just been erased from the NYT opinion pages.

http://www.nytimes.com/column/razib-khan

That has got to suck. One day you’re in, the next day your’re out.

That may have been a related to this Gawker story which connected Razib to Steve, Takimag and Vdare:

http://tktk.gawker.com/new-times-op-ed-writer-has-a-colorful-past-with-racist-1692187849

Small numbers of warriors have taken over large populations throughout history. Because throughout most of history, most of the people of large populations were subsistence farmers who did not engage in fighting and were busy working just to keep themselves alive. They didn’t face the small groups of invading warriors. The small groups of invading warriors fought the small numbers of people that comprised the ruling government, not the wider population.

Mass mobilization and political awakening is a modern phenomenon.

I’m sticking with the historian Thomas Carlyle who asked what had England ever been before the Normans arrived

I don’t think it was the Normans themselves who bequeathed greatness upon England. Most of it comes from the nearly thousand year eugenic program which was English society from the Norman invasion until the industrial revolution. Part of this is certainly due to Norman genes, but if that was the biggest part of it, then the Viking homelands, with a much higher percentage of Norman stock, would’ve come to dominate the world, no?

“So the huge area of red on the map covering most of England except the blue northeast”

minor quip, northwest and southeast. feel free to not post this.

There is a YouTube video of a White House concert in honor of Paul McCartney. At the end Barry O delivered a speech about a “young Englishman” who came to America in 1964, conquering its heart. Paul did not say anything about that because that’s not his style. If Lennon lived to our days and got into that kind of a situation, he would have probably said something smart-assy in response, something that would have gotten him denounced by every major newspaper and banned from every official gathering for the rest of his life.

I was taught in school that Norman=France but Wiki says that is wrong. William the Conqueror fought the kings of France. He was descended from Norsemen and Normandy was their base of operations.

His army was filled with foreigners. Sound familiar?

What are these kids, 20 years old? Never heard of gnxp.com?

Gawker didn’t do him in, Jamelle thinks any debate about blacks and intelligence is strictly off limits.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jbouie/status/578273519093579776

I would have thought the Times would have known about Razib’s race writings at least. The irony is I doubt any of his race writings would have seen the light of day at the Times so what’s thebig deal?

‘Ringo Starr’– a.k.a. Richard Starkey– will (with luck) turn 75 years old, this coming July 7th!

(July 7th also would have been the 80th birthday of one Katherine Genovese– a.k.a. ‘Kitty’. Her killer, Winston Moseley, turned 80 years old, earlier this month, and is supposedly the longest-serving inmate in the history of the State of New York– fifty-one years, as of this past Wednesday afternoon, discounting the few days when he escaped, in Buffalo, in 1968, and raped a couple of more women!?!)

In this emerging age of neobolshevism (a.k.a., “Cultural Marxism” or, more simply, “P.C.”), I often think of what Richard Starkey, playing ‘Ringo Starr’, in the Beatles’ second feature film, “Help” (1965), said to the High Priest ‘Clang’ (played by native-Aussie Leo McKern), in the climactic scene, on the beach, after ‘Ringo’ has been painted red, in preparation for his being sacrificed by the Indian cultists: “I don’t subscribe to your religion!”

What the Normans did is establish a tax administrative unit. They wanted to tax as much an area as possible, so they did a survey:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesday_book

A good response for Britain and other European countries to “X has always been a land of immigrants” piffle when you don’t have the opportunity to debate the particulars (or even when you do): So you mean today’s immigration invasion is nothing new, Britain has always been invaded by immigrants in the past? Other invasions worked out well enough in the long run so maybe this invasion will too?

The reason I like it is because the white nitwits who mouth “X has always been” do so in large part to convince themselves that everything is fine and dandy, and the word invasion in this context – which they would tend to reject in other contexts – forces them to confront the negatives of immigration, which they are at least vaguely aware of but push to the back of their minds.

Anybody know if they have been able to tease out the Norse genetic component from the closely-related Anglo-Saxon/Jutish component in the British people?

But all the stuff about “Normans” running the country for the next thousand years is drivel.

Of course. Everyone knows the country was run by Dutch and Germans. (The House of Orange, the House of Hanover, and the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha)

The colours used in the map were not chosen to indicate genetic closeness. From the cladogram it can be seen that the blue triangles and circles are in fact very close (genetically) to the red squares, so the clusters of blue adjacent to areas of red do not represent any great genetic contrast.

It is interesting to see the contrasting ways in which this study has been reported in the media. Some have emphasised that the Anglo-Saxon incomers did not totally annihilate the ‘Celts’ (which nobody has believed for many years) while others have emphasised that they really do account for a substantial proportion of English ancestry (contrary to the views of many recent writers on the subject). As an English ‘Anglo-Saxon’ I am mildly pleased by the results. At least we’re not a bunch of bloody Welsh.

It is also interesting that some commentators have described the Anglo-Saxons as ‘immigrants’ rather than ‘invaders’, implying a lack of violence or oppression. Tell that to Gildas. In the earliest Anglo-Saxon laws the words for ‘slave’ and ‘Briton’ are the same, which tells its own story.

It looks like those Scots-Irish, Borderers, border reviers or whatever they should be called actually are genetically somewhat distinct, to no great surprise. Maybe history has a real effect on genes, huh? Who knew?

“the defining characteristic of British history …. was simply its length”: the only seriously old border in W Europe is the Scottish/English one.

I am English and I am and am not surprised by these findings. Britain is an extremely class-conscious society and those classes must have some kind of genetic basis because you can tell people apart just by how they look. It’s the same with accent. Differences that are imperceptible to an outsider are very obvious to a local. Scotland runs a parallel, but even more suffocating class system. They just dress it up as tradition.

New Zealand is similar, but the class system has had less time to become entrenched. Still, the kids at private schools are perceptibly different from those in deile one schools even accounting for the ethnic disparity.

The general porkiness of the lower orders can be ascribed to poor diet. The differences in colouring and facial features cannot.

I lived in Japan for a long time and I can sometimes tell Japanese people apart by class just by looking at them. But the differences seem alot less marked.