The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
My Review in Taki's Magazine of Geneticist David Reich's "Who We Are and How We Got Here"
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From my new column in Taki’s Magazine:

… Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions.

As Fitzgerald’s friend Hemingway ended The Sun Also Rises, “Isn’t it pretty to think so?”

But now the brilliant Harvard geneticist David Reich has published a bombshell scientific book, Who We Are and How We Got Here: Ancient DNA and the New Science of the Human Past, whose revelations would have been found congenial by a smarter version of Tom Buchanan (such as F. Scott Fitzgerald himself).

Despite Reich’s occasional need to stop his otherwise lucid narrative to spew irrational rage against his fellow race-science heretics such as James D. Watson, the genome expert conclusively demolishes the post-Boasian anthropologists’ conventional wisdom.

For poorly explained reasons, Reich feels it satisfying to occasionally vilify some of his own admirers, such as Watson, New York Times genetics reporter Nicholas Wade, the late genetic anthropologist Henry Harpending, reporter Jason Hardy, physicist Gregory Cochran, and economic historian Gregory Clark. In the funniest line in the book, Reich exclaims:

Writing now, I shudder to think of Watson, or of Wade, or their forebears, behind my shoulder.

Evidently, Reich has…issues. But a close reader of his book can enjoy his prodigious research without taking terribly seriously Reich’s prejudices.

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 254 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Reich hopes to avoid getting the Watson/Summers/Murray/Richwine/Damore treatment. Given his needless hostility to “Watson, Wade, and their forebears,” I can’t say I’d care if he does.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alfa158
    I can’t imagine why Reich thinks that will work. It never has in the past, and, he isn’t even throwing someone from the sled to save himself, since they have already been thrown to the wolves. All he is doing is pointing at the previous victims lying in the snow, and hoping that will distract the wolves. Someone this smart should have noticed that wolves hate truth and will devour anyone who speaks it.
    , @anonymous
    Reich (great name, by the way) has the same nasty habit as the rest of us members of homo sap--he needs to eat. As the saying goes he won't bite the hand that feeds him, hence the circumspection. As to Watson and Murray, Watson is an old, old man who made his bones back in the day and probably doesn't give a rat's ass what others think and Murray was essentially excommunicated by High Church Liberalism (assuming he was even a member) with "The Bell Curve." I guess you can credit Reich with having at least one eye open to reality--which is a lot more than you can say about his peers.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    Seems a tad ungracious to say the least, but he's early 40s and presumably wants another 20 years in post.

    I must say Steven Pinker walks close to the frame of the Overton Window and even shifts it, with only a selection of various GoodThinker platitudes that few would disagree with, and without feeling the urge to badmouth others.

    Given that Watson is one of the modern founders of his discipline, it's particularly uncouth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.

    It’s hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I’d rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome, @Almost Missouri
    Yes, all land was once owned by someone else, and it is probably also true to say that between former owners and current owners, all land has changed hands by conquest. So all land rights derive from conquest, as all land was either conquered by the current owner or received from someone who conquered it.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.
    , @Simon in London
    "Getting invaded is wrong".
    , @Seamus Padraig
    You must have missed the end of the article:

    Unlike in the days of barbaric nomads, we now have territorial states with internationally recognized borders, countries that are the joint property of their citizens and thus are not the property of noncitizens.
     
    Did the Indians fall under the Peace of Westphalia? Well, no. They were much closer to being "barbarous nomads" - i.e., Paleo/Neolithic peoples without permanent dwellings and (relatively) fixed borders. The only exceptions I can think of in N. America (that is, not Mexico or S. America) were the Pueblo-type Indians of the Southwest.
    , @European-American

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     

    No need to moralize it. Up to that point, the article made an excellent argument for the more straightforward, and curiously not always obvious in the mainstream:

    Invasion is bad.
     
    It obviously happens, but it’s best avoided, especially by the people being invaded...

    As for what’s wrong, what’s right... Eh...

    , @bartok

    It’s hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on ... if invasion is wrong.
     
    The mark of an adolescent worldview is to place avoiding hypocrisy at the top of one's moral/political priority list.

    Instead, consider Moldbug (citing Filmer's Patriarchia):


    ... [I]f you want stable government, accept the status quo as the verdict of history. There is no reason at all to inquire as to why the Bourbons are the Kings of France. The rule is arbitrary. Nonetheless, it is to the benefit of all that this arbitrary rule exists, because obedience to the rightful king is a Schelling point of nonviolent agreement. ...
     
    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/11/patchwork-positive-vision-part-1.html
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
     
    This.

    Every era presents a new environment. The only question is which groups are best suited to excel in that environment, usually defined as increasing their population relative to other groups.

    Unfortunately, people often confuse Survival of Fittest with Survival of the Best. Fittest doesn't mean smartest or most civilized or nicest (definitely not nicest). Ironically, Africans may be the race that best suits the current environment. It's a time of plenty and they breed big time when times are good. Europeans (and their diaspora) may be particularly ill-suited for this environment, which, ironically, we created.

    Conquest can come in many forms. It can be Conan and his buddies overwhelming lessor warriors or it can be African immigrants moving into the lands of a people that no longer has the will to defend their borders.

    Either way, the conquest is right from the standpoint of promoting those genes that work in the current environment and letting those genes that don't die out.

    Basically, I disagree with Steve: Invasion is good. Those who can't or won't defend their borders - their people - should be replaced by those who can.

    (How's that for being able to look objectively at a situation. I belong to a people being conquered, and I can't hate it more. But I've spent years tying to get friends, family and neighbors to wake up to what's happening and all I've got for my efforts is scorn. I'll keep trying, but it's tough being part of a suicide cult.)
    , @Pat Boyle
    Hitler suffered from an unlikely run of good luck. That terrible fate cost him his life and his nation.

    Hitler was seduced by his run of initial good luck. He thought he could bully everyone diplomatically because the US was isolationist, and Britain was led by Chamberlain. He thought he could gobble up the surrounding territories unopposed. But eventually the US entered the war and Churchill took over - his luck had run out. His last piece of good luck was that the war ended before the Jews could deploy the bomb they had invented. No point. Germany was already rubble from conventional bombing.

    He like everyone else expected a long war in France. But he stumbled into blitzkrieg victory. The French had more tanks and they had better tanks. But the quick victory over a more powerful opponent led him to try his luck against the Soviet Union. Germany relied on horses for transport. They had no petroleum. Russian tanks were also better and more numerous but again Hitler suffered the misfortune of initial success. He was lured into death struggle with a nation that overmatched his and his people were decimated and occupied.

    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.
    , @Jack D

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
     
    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only "might makes right"? I don't think so. Stalin "won" but this did not win the "argument" in his favor.
    , @Anon
    It’s hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate.

    Invasion is natural. It's the way of all organisms. Bacteria, weeds, wolves, rats, weasels, wild pigs, lions, hyenas, etc.

    For much of human existence, there was no morality. Just the way of nature with everyone invading everyone. The Zulus, Mongols, Macedonians, Romans, Turks, Russians, Polish-Lithuanian Empire, Vikings, and etc.

    But as nations developed, they began to put down roots and develop a deep bond with their land as homeland. Thus, the idea developed that further invasions must be ended. But even as people defended their own lands, they still wanted to invade other lands. This was more doable against primitive areas sparsely inhabited... like Siberia for Russians and North America for Anglos. The primitives were too few in number and too backward to mount any defense.

    But in parts of the world with sufficient native population, the invaders were pushed out... like in Algeria and Vietnam and India.
    So, we arrived at the New Order after WWII where nations would be sovereign and independent... but communicate and trade with one another. It became the Golden Rule.

    So...

    1. World was once open to constant invasions by everyone. Humans acted like animals.

    2. World saw the rise of kingdoms and states that could defend their own territories as homelands. But even as they defended their own lands, they sought to invade and dominate other lands.

    3. World finally rejected imperialism and arrived at the Golden Rule where all the world would be organized into defensible nations and all nations would respect the right of other nations NOT to be invaded. But there would be exchange of ideas and goods.

    But this Golden Rule is being destroyed by Globalism that is unleashing something like the Second Golden Horde, this time mostly from Africa. I'll take Golden Rule over Golden Horde. Just ask the Russians.

    Imperialism did a lot of good by opening up all the world to the advancement of the West. But it is ultimately problematic because peoples don't want to be ruled by foreigners forever. So, in the end, the ideas remain but the invaders return.

    Anyway, every inch of the world has been claimed at this point. There is nothing more to explore and discover. So, the way of nature -- the desire for invasion -- should be put to rest, and the world can now exchange goods and ideas. That way, all the world can have best of both worlds. National independence and international exchange of ideas.

    But globalism made mass invasion a 'human right', which is crazy. Granted, Israel gets pass-over rights to this toxic idea. I wonder why.
    , @megabar
    Invasion is morally acceptable if your choices are "expand" or "be extinguished". Given the primacy of population w.r.t power in past years, and the limited ability to extract food from the land, I suspect that there was a degree of truth in "expand" or "die."

    Now, however, power is more a function of technology, productivity, and infrastructure -- all of which are related. And so there is no need to expand, and therefore it would be immoral to do so.
    , @AnotherDad
    Disagree. I think Steve's wrap is excellent and make the distinction very well.

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:
    Invasion is wrong.

    Unlike in the days of barbaric nomads, we now have territorial states with internationally recognized borders, countries that are the joint property of their citizens and thus are not the property of noncitizens.

    Therefore, German chancellors should neither invade other peoples’ countries nor invite other peoples to invade Germany.
     

    We are now past barbarism--and will stay past if we can defeat the globalists! We have nations with defined borders that belong to their citizens. Others should respect those borders.

    That--one people nations behind defined borders--is the path to peace and human flourishing.

    ~~
    There's been a tremendous amout of retconning of what happened in the 20th century. And because the British were on the winning side in the great 20th century wars, the fundamental cause of these conflicts gets an incomplete airing.

    These conflicts weren't caused by "German nationalism", nor even by "the rise of Germany and Japan". But rather by the rise of Germany and Japan at a time when the world had been carved up into empires. These nations--of pretty on the ball people--were rising into a world that the British and French and to a lesser extent the Dutch had divvied up--and small bits by other European states. This pretty naturally caused frition. And there was of course the well noted friction of other peoples against domination by the Ottoman, Austrian and Russian empires.

    Fundamentally rising Germany and Japan--quite reasonably--didn't think they should be commercially locked out most of the world. And if the rule was "empire", saw no reason they shouldn't have empires of their own.

    The United States had actually developed the correct attitude at it's founding--stay out! We unfortunately climbed aboard the imperialist train ourselves at the end of the 19th century with the Spanish American War--arguably fine, kicking imperialists out--but then followed with the Philippine American War--our most unjustified and disgusting war--to be imperialists ourselves. A more robust American effort to stand consistently again imperialism and for national self-determination and free commercial access for all nations might have helped avoid much bloodshed.

    When the American system with decolonization and open trade was introduced after WWII the results have been rather positive for the world. Germany and Japan--even after the devastation of the War--quickly did well. (They didn't actually need to have empires for prosperity.)

    In addition, after the War, we had a "resorting" of peoples. Specifically getting most all the people who considered themselves to be "Germans" inside of Germany. (My best German friend's family is from the Sudetanland, but they had to move so he grew up as a Bavarian. Being in the right nation is a good thing.) You could think of Israel in this same vein--getting Jews into their own nation--except for the problem of the folks who were already there (hence the continued conflict).

    While nuclear weapons, the US army and the example of the War all play a big part, simply having people in their correct nations has been a huge boost to European peace. Where the resorting didn't happen--Yugoslavia--is precisely where the only significan European slaughter took place. It's just a trusim: "Good fences make good neighbors".

    And because this post-War ant-imperialist, nationalist settlement of people in their own nations free to manage their own business has been so successful ... we have these globalists goons out trampling on borders, inviting in invaders and generally trying to wreck it.

    , @Olorin
    Invasion is natural.

    So is resisting invasion. That's written into the smallest level of biological existence, as evidenced by our immune systems...or even the fact that we are a big bag of cells that distinguish between themselves and outsiders.

    And by the fact that the "plague doctors" of CDC, NIH/NIAID, etc., spend as much time monitoring/tracking biological invasions as fighting/resisting them where defined as "outbreaks."

    What these docs and researchers dare not do is discuss immivasion and its disease consequences, for in the realms of government and the Ed Biz, everyone on earth dying of Ebola/Marburg/MDR TB/newly aerosolized super-HIV is preferable to closing any geopolitical border/point of entry anywhere, at any time.

    Hell, in San Francisco I understand "AIDS prevention" now involves telling bug-chasers (men who deliberately seek to be infected by or infect others with HIV) how best to get a life-preserving supply of high-tech, current-generation, extremely expensive antivirals...paid for by others. "If we can save just one life!" is still the battle cry...to preserve those with little to no interest in preserving their own or others'.

    Robustness of a people, as that of an individual organism, involves a balance of invasion and resistance. The past 60 years of demolishing any concept of borders has been an agenda half stupid and half malevolent, while posing as altruistic--but very lucrative for those who can embrace its nihilistic path to various careers in the Ed Biz or government....

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.

    This is encoded in Norse myth in which great-grandparents are depicted as dark and squat, and descendants are increasingly lighter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rígsmál

    Also, the Aesir-Vanir war depicts the new gods from the east fighting the native gods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesir–Vanir_War

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    True. Likewise, many suspect that the Ancient (Doric/Aryan) Greek legends of the Minotaur and the Python were derived from the pre-historic religions of the Minoan and Mycaenian Greeks, who were of Semitic stock. It also known that the Iliad was based on a traditional epic poem first composed by the Hittites, describing their own historic war in 'Asia Minor' (modern Turkey).
    , @Sunbeam
    "Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes."

    Okay, I follow this. Seen bits and pieces of this in other places the past few years.

    But what about the Neanderthals? What complexion did they have? They spent what, at least ten times longer or so living in Europe and parts of Asia than however many years ago we are talking about the genes for lighter skin arising (around the time of agriculture in Middle East, whatever time it was for the Steppe dwellers).

    Were the Neanderthals dark skinned? I've always thought of them as white. Surely even the limited DNA we've found from them should answer this?
    , @S. Anonyia
    I think it's more likely blonde hair evolved around the Baltic and spread from there rather than coming in with a wave of invaders from the Eastern steppes (Yamnaya). Populations around the Baltic also happen to have the highest amount of "hunter-gatherer" ancestry in Europeans.
    , @syonredux
    RE: The Aesir-Vanir War*,

    Some have speculated that the IE "War of the Functions" ("sovereigny" and "warrior" functions vs farming-herding) might have a quasi-historical basis, which makes a passage like this rather interesting:


    You see, the Yamnaya steppe nomads who were the predecessors of the Aryans who invaded India were actually a hybrid of two even more ancient peoples: a northern steppe race and a southern race from Armenia or Iran.

     

    *From Henry Adams Bellows translation of the Völuspá

    On the host his spear | did Othin hurl,
    Then in the world | did war first come;
    The wall that girdled | the gods was broken,
    And the field by the warlike | Wanes was trodden.

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome.

     

    LOL
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. @Hippopotamusdrome

    indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome.

    LOL

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture
     
    Actually, the Battle Axe Culture is still in full swing (sorry) at your local DMV and other government agencies.
    , @Gunnar von Cowtown
    Yeah, that passage hit close to home.

    (So did battle axes; indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome. Hence, more recent academics renamed it after its pottery style to make these brutal barbarians sound dweebier and thus less interesting to boys.)

     

    I can remember being furious with my 9th grade world history teacher, because he'd yammer on endlessly about those civilized, toga-wearing Ancient Greeks and Romans. All the while barely mentioning Vandals, Visigoths, Jutes or Saxons. The thought of even more primitive Steppe Barbarians would have blown my mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Anon[117] • Disclaimer says:

    I find it fascinating that Fitzgerald was parodying his own views through Tom.

    So, the Nazis were right and the Boasians were wrong? I can see why Reich (Reich!) feels the need to counter-signal all the evil racists in his field.

    Or, maybe not. You see: the Aryan steppe master race was formed through the amalgamation of two other supreme master races. A “northern” race (from Ukraine) and a “Caucasian” race. Well, that debunks all of Hitler’s racist notions.

    Europe was presumably as overcast then (if not more) as it is now. So, I’m skeptical of the claim that the natives of Europe had “dark skin” (and blue eyes). The diet would have been different though, being more animal based would have facilitated vitamin D consumption, and not necessitated a pale complexion, so it’s hard to say. We may just be looking at the wrong skin tone genes, and be unaware that these natives had unique mutations for pale complexion, like exist in North East Asian populations.

    Similarly, I’m skeptical of claims saying: “once we find the genes for IQ, the genetic basis of the differences will be undeniable.” No. The genes that enable a bat to fly are not the same as enable a hawk to fly. The absence of those genes in the one, does not imply the flightlessness of the other. The same arguments will be made, probably with some legitimacy, for intelligence.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    I find it fascinating that Fitzgerald was parodying his own views through Tom.
     
    The mark of the true artist, I should think. As Fitzgerald himself put it, “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.”
    , @backup

    So, the Nazis were right and the Boasians were wrong?
     
    As the centerpiece of Nazi ideology is that war purifies a people and brings about it heroism we can safely say that the course of WW2 proved the Nazi's wrong. There is not a shred of doubt there.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Dr. David Reich isn’t by chance the 3rd of his name in his line is he? David Reich III. The 3rd Reich?

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    LOL
    , @Charles Pewitt

    Dr. David Reich isn’t by chance the 3rd of his name in his line is he? David Reich III. The 3rd Reich?

     

    Dr. David Reich isn't by chance related to former NFL quarterback Frank Reich is he? Reich had a hell of game against the Houston Oilers once.

    Are Frank and David related?

    https://youtu.be/AXxmmxKHD7o
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:

    Interesting that you mention Merkel, Steve.

    The historic myths of many nations involve an episode in which an outsider, a stranger tribe was invited into a certain land by the ruler in order to perform some particular ‘indispensable’ service for that ruler, only for, eventually, the strangers to take possession of the land they were invited into – after seeing it was good, and badly governed – and ultimately, killing the ruler who brought them in in the first place.

    Thus, England has the tale of Hengist and Horsa, and King Vortigern.

    The Romans invited the Goths ‘into the fold’ because they thought they would be ‘useful’ as soldiers.

    Etc etc. Perhaps many of these myths were embellished to read as morality tales.

    The modern parallel is quite obviously that the ongoing third world takeover of Europe is being promoted by The Economist on the wretched falsehood that the thirdworlders will ‘save’ the European economy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Speaking of Anglo-Saxons, has anyone else noticed the remarkable physical resemblance between recent Trump appointee John Bolton and the famous 'Sutton Hoo Ship Burial' helmet/mask, (as featured in the British Museum).

    Are they by any chance related?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Possibly the weirdest thing about our present attitude towards genetics is that we presently hold two completely contradictory ideas about human ancestry.

    A. You can and should have your DNA analyzed to find out “who you are.” This presumably answers many questions about you and your family, and ties in well with the genealogy craze.

    B. Race is completely and only a social construct.

    For A to be true, B must be false, and the reverse is also true. Yet we seem to, as a nation, have no trouble believing in both simultaneously.

    This cannot last, as scientific evidence that B is quite simply untrue continues to accumulate.

    A generally unexamined side-effect of this evidence is that the Blank Slate Theory of human nature is also being destroyed. If human nature is to a large extent genetic, then social engineers must re-examine what they can and cannot do.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  10. David is terrified of fourth Reich jokes and not being invited to cocktail parties ,doing porridge with Watson dosen’t appeal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Yes, all land was once owned by someone else, and it is probably also true to say that between former owners and current owners, all land has changed hands by conquest. So all land rights derive from conquest, as all land was either conquered by the current owner or received from someone who conquered it.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    Thanks, AM. You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: "Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds."?
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up. And it's only even an issue to the extent the farmers use their free time and division of labor to dream up post hoc ethical systems and muse about the hunter-gatherers.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    Yes. Sovereign systems are greatly misunderstood. They are anarchic, not civic, and nobody is more clueless about them than the libertarians and even the purported anarcho-capitalists themselves. There's no Supreme High Court of Sovereignty out there adjudicating sovereignty and telling the sovereigns what they can and can't do. Sovereigns can do what they will; that's what makes them sovereign.

    We'd be better off facing reality and recognizing that the drive for sovereignty is very strong and we should get all these competing sovereigns to agree to agree on their sovereignty before everybody tears everybody apart. That's what the eminently realistic Peace of Westphalia tried to do.

    It eludes most people that the state-run Open Borders experiment is probably the biggest threat to the Westphalian order.
    , @Luke Lea
    Well said, Almost Missouri. The miracle is that the right of conquest is no longer recognized. Let us work to keep it that way and be thankful. To live where we do is reparations enough.


    Nobody is innocent if you go back very far. Everybody was exploiting and being exploited by everybody else. Only the newborn were innocent.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    “Getting invaded is wrong”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    “Getting invaded is wrong”.

    Avoid being invaded. If there must be a choice be the who and not the whom.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @Simon in London
    "Getting invaded is wrong".

    “Getting invaded is wrong”.

    Avoid being invaded. If there must be a choice be the who and not the whom.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Almost Missouri
    Yes, all land was once owned by someone else, and it is probably also true to say that between former owners and current owners, all land has changed hands by conquest. So all land rights derive from conquest, as all land was either conquered by the current owner or received from someone who conquered it.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    Thanks, AM. You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.”?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    said:

    "how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.?"

    Demand, on a case by case basis, proof that 'their homes were blown to shreds' by the countries they are forcing their way into.

    Heretofore there is no proof that these neanderthals had their homes destroyed, period, let alone by the countries they are forcing their way into.

    , @27 year old

    honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.”?
     
    "Shut the fuck up nerd."
    , @Almost Missouri

    "You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy."
     
    According to Islam, immediately. According to blacks, more or less the same thing. (See Steve's coverage of the never ending appeasement of the #OscarsSoWhite crowd. With real estate, though, it turns out blacks can be relatively easily bought off the land with gibs. Mexicans not so much.)

    " how do you respond to someone who says: 'Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.'?"
     
    The overwhelming majority of Muslims entering the US (and even Europe) were never attacked by the US (or even Europe), but they know well the West's strange guilt fetish and have no qualms about exploiting it. Even in the rare instance that "we" did blow up their house, how about we rebuild their house in their own country among their own people, wouldn't that be better for everyone? Oh wait, we're already doing that to the tune of $trillions!
    , @wrd9
    There are over 50 Muslim majority countries. The vast majority are not at war. The "refugees" can go to any one of them.
    , @ben tillman

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.”?
     
    I respond that "we" didn't do jack shit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. “… Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions.”

    Apparently none of this made it down to the level of history teaching from elementary school to college level. I was educated in the 50′s and early 60′s, graduating with a major in history in 1964 and was taught more about ancient wars than pots by two or three orders of magnitude. The Aryan invasions were taught about as an accepted fact and the Indian caste system was attributed to the ancient Aryans, not the late-coming British. These days, the main denier of Aryan invasions is Indian PM Modi and his Hindu nationalist party. They contend that India was always Aryan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "I was educated in the 50′s and early 60′s, graduating with a major in history in 1964 and was taught more about ancient wars than pots by two or three orders of magnitude. The Aryan invasions were taught about as an accepted fact and the Indian caste system was attributed to the ancient Aryans, not the late-coming British."
     
    I can assure you it was already very different by the 70's and 80's.

    Today, it' simply delusional. "[A] new secular religion that reject[s] observable reality," as the Z Blog commenter put it.

    , @whereto beguine
    India was invaded by ancient Iranians/Aryans who looked like the Kardashians (Armenians have a claim to being the 'original Aryans'). Genetics tells us they remained distinct as the Brahmin caste.

    First, note that the Iranians have no 'untouchability'. That seems to be an indigenous thing which the Brahmins made use of to enforce their power (pre-Hindu Indian priests may have been 'untouchable' because they had dangerous magic. Clever move by the Brahmins to marginalise the competition with their own beliefs).

    Then, Brahmins were never dominant among the Indian tribes (except in remote elite circles) until the British made Brahmin laws the basis of modern India's 'rule of law' (because the shrewd Brahmins saw which way the wind was blowing, and had many books of 'law' which few had even seen because Brahimn law said non-Brahmins weren't allowed to read them!) . So, by imposing modernity and systematising a previously ad hoc set of negotatiations, 'the British created (what we know as) the caste system'. Before the first British census during Victoria's rule, many Indians didn't even realise they were distinct as Muslims. Just as Saudi money recently had similar effect in other places.

    Buddha led a mass movement against the Brahmins which took over much of India. It took 2000 years for the Brahmins to quash the Buddhists, and again it was the British who unwittingly sealed Brahmin dominance over Buddhists. A group called the Lingayats who everyone thinks are Hindu have just got Supreme Court recognition that they're outside the Brahmin system. Before the British this was not an issue. Most accept the British innovations now, but it's complex. The problem is when outsiders like Americans want to use India as a football in their domestic struggles, and the American left is most guilty of this. In MLK's 1960s struggle, Indians are all over the place and not clear support for either side in your black and white politics.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Writing now, I shudder to think of Watson, or of Wade, or their forebears, behind my shoulder.

    Would a chemistry professor shudder to think of Lavoisier over his/her shoulder? Would a physics professor feel that way towards Newton? No, because as John Derbyshire put it in 2007:

    Ordinary unintellectual people went on believing that the sky was a crystal dome long after careful inquiry had shown that this was not the case. So it will be with nurturism — more so, in fact, since theories about human nature, on account of their emotional appeal and religious affiliations, have a “stickiness” that theories about astronomy do not have. Hardly anyone really cares what the sky is made of; we all care very much what we are made of.

    http://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/USPolitics/nurturistinchief.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. The last stretch of posts from ca. Monday on is – overwhelming. (I have to admit, I’m no professional iSteve reader, I even have a job and stuff (plus I eat ‘n’ ride the bike and take some photographs here and there – I even spoke to my wife, recently, if nort for long, but anyhow…).

    - GREAT! (Unparalleled – no other writer in sight on the english (german, french)-speakig part of the web, at least none that I’d know of).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kylie
    Steve has always been spectacular in an unobtrusive sort of way. And only Henry James and Iris Murdoch were funnier.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    You must have missed the end of the article:

    Unlike in the days of barbaric nomads, we now have territorial states with internationally recognized borders, countries that are the joint property of their citizens and thus are not the property of noncitizens.

    Did the Indians fall under the Peace of Westphalia? Well, no. They were much closer to being “barbarous nomads” – i.e., Paleo/Neolithic peoples without permanent dwellings and (relatively) fixed borders. The only exceptions I can think of in N. America (that is, not Mexico or S. America) were the Pueblo-type Indians of the Southwest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    Some were, some weren't. Northern coastal tribes had permanent settlements somewhat like Jomon settlements in ancient Japan. The Chumash had long-established settlement in the Channel Islands. The Iroquois had a relatively advanced economy and even a political system. But there is substantial evidence for major demographic replacement with the Athabaskan migration through the Great Plains and points beyond. Those on the receiving end would have been fortunate to face a result more like that of the European migration through North America.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. @TelfoedJohn

    Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    This is encoded in Norse myth in which great-grandparents are depicted as dark and squat, and descendants are increasingly lighter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rígsmál

    Also, the Aesir-Vanir war depicts the new gods from the east fighting the native gods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesir–Vanir_War

    True. Likewise, many suspect that the Ancient (Doric/Aryan) Greek legends of the Minotaur and the Python were derived from the pre-historic religions of the Minoan and Mycaenian Greeks, who were of Semitic stock. It also known that the Iliad was based on a traditional epic poem first composed by the Hittites, describing their own historic war in ‘Asia Minor’ (modern Turkey).

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    True. Likewise, many suspect that the Ancient (Doric/Aryan) Greek legends of the Minotaur and the Python were derived from the pre-historic religions of the Minoan and Mycaenian Greeks, who were of Semitic stock.
     
    The Mycenaeans were not Semitic:

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

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

    As for the Minoans, there's quite a bit of uncertainty as to what linguistic family they belonged to, but the notion that they spoke a Semitic language does not have priority

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

    It also known that the Iliad was based on a traditional epic poem first composed by the Hittites, describing their own historic war in ‘Asia Minor’ (modern Turkey).
     
    Which Hittite epic poem is that?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Evidently, Reich has … issues.

    Evidently, Reich is … Jewish.

    “… today’s divisions are recent phenomena, with their origin in repeating mixtures and migrations.”

    Well, that’s true of dog breeds, too. But would anyone deny that they exist?

    “Mixture is fundamental to who we are, and we need to embrace it, not deny that it occurred.”

    No half-way intelligent person denies the existence of miscegenation. Our only point is that the very concept of mixed-race presupposes the notion of race. You can’t have the former without the latter.

    If only Hitler had known, you see, that the Aryans came from the east, he would have been ashamed to invade Poland … Realistically, Hitler would likely have seen any theory as justifying his invading Poland.

    The theory that first inspired Hitler to invade Russia was a geopolitical one, not a racial one. The latter served largely as a justification. Look up the Septemberprogramm, which reflected the early twentieth-century German version of Eurasianist theory.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. Reich has to spew rage at his betters for the same reason the “nation of immigrants” has to spew rage at the nation of settlers: Kill the creditors and you don’t have to pay the debt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    (((Harold Bloom))) called it "the anxiety of influence."
    , @Anonymous
    Sailer has a habit of overpraising relatively mediocre Jewish figures like Reich and Pinker who end up taking credit for stuff pioneered by others.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. @TelfoedJohn

    Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    This is encoded in Norse myth in which great-grandparents are depicted as dark and squat, and descendants are increasingly lighter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rígsmál

    Also, the Aesir-Vanir war depicts the new gods from the east fighting the native gods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesir–Vanir_War

    “Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.”

    Okay, I follow this. Seen bits and pieces of this in other places the past few years.

    But what about the Neanderthals? What complexion did they have? They spent what, at least ten times longer or so living in Europe and parts of Asia than however many years ago we are talking about the genes for lighter skin arising (around the time of agriculture in Middle East, whatever time it was for the Steppe dwellers).

    Were the Neanderthals dark skinned? I’ve always thought of them as white. Surely even the limited DNA we’ve found from them should answer this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andy
    Keep in mind that the neanderthals come into picture thousands of years before this, the last neanderthal live maybe 40,000 years ago and these invasions are all well after the last ice age (10,000 BC)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. All I find shocking in the least is that a prominent anthropologist has taken the trouble to write a book categorizing what pretty much everyone who follows this science at all already knows. His preaching aside, Reich has nailed what I’ve read through other sources, if Steve accurately reflects what’s written in the book, which I’ve no reason to doubt.
    All they have left is a battle over terminology, it seems; ancestry rather than race, and what to call the ancient Aryan peoples.
    The biggest battles of modern science are all about the feelz, and not about the results, or actual science. Has Reich’s career been “Bell Curved” with this book? Will his speeches be protested, as Murray’s have been? Maybe as only Nixon could have gone to China, only a tribesman could write this book.

    Read More
    • Replies: @James N. Kennett

    All they have left is a battle over terminology, it seems; ancestry rather than race, and what to call the ancient Aryan peoples.
     
    "Race" originally meant ancestry: the term has its origins in horse racing. Somehow the meaning changed to something like "visible phenotypic differences shared by a group". Hence it was possible for 18th Century writers to talk about "the German race" or "the French race", although nowadays we would think of the two as belonging to the same race.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.

    No need to moralize it. Up to that point, the article made an excellent argument for the more straightforward, and curiously not always obvious in the mainstream:

    Invasion is bad.

    It obviously happens, but it’s best avoided, especially by the people being invaded…

    As for what’s wrong, what’s right… Eh…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Oh, and no comments allowed on Taki’s for this article?

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    That was a surprise. I don't remember ever seeing no comments allowed on an iSteve Taki's article before. What is up?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Cavalli-Sforza defined indigenous peoples according to who occupied territory before 1492. Thus, Native American Indians are indigenous to the Americas, and ethnic Europeans are not. Reich encourages us to “embrace” mixture and recognize that Cavalli-Sforza’s classifications reflected earlier migrations and invasions.

    Of course. We can “embrace” mixture as a historical reality, but we do not have to embrace invasions and mass immigration. Cavalli-Sforza’s “genetic clusters,” which correspond to laypeople’s conceptions of race, are simply referred to by Reich as ancestry groups. Fine. “Race” has become a poisonous word. Words matter. The underlying reality is that the ancestry groups have distinctive average IQ scores and socioeconomic outcomes, and the research to date (e,g., Rindermann) indicates that, in the main, cause and effect runs from ancestry group to IQ to socioeconomic outcomes, and not so much from socioeconomic outcomes to IQ. Reich has a laudable and unflinching commitment to genomic truth, but flinches when faced with the social realities involved.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Each passing day, I become more convinced that the robot histories will call the 20th century the Age of Lunacy or maybe the Age of Talmudic Ooogily-Boogily. Perhaps the Age of Jewish Crackpots. We have about three generations, following the last European industrial war, creating a new secular religion that rejected observable reality, with regards to human nature.

    It really is incredible.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. So the moral to the story is: try to be nice to one another as much as we can, when we can, because sometimes you just can’t. The moral arc of the universe is shaped like a battle axe blade.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    Truly funny....

    especially considering the outline of the double headed axe was scribbled as graffiti into megalithic stone monuments all across Europe, back in the day.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. What happened to the comment section at Takis?

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    Got too obstreperous for the editors (too much complaining about [[[YouKnowWho]]]).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. As the saying goes “Just because you are paranoid, doesn’t meat they are not out to get you.” Well, “Just because the Nazis were evil , doesn’t mean that race doesn’t exist.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  31. White Monkey Puts It Succinctly:

    Anti-White Jews don’t want anybody looking into why all these anti-White, nation-wrecking social theories were cooked up by anti-White Jews.

    Monkey De Blanc Says:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. Reich doesn’t want to be lumped in with men who happen to be far more blunt than himself, since he’s still allowed to circulate in polite society. But he’s tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder. The problem – as many people even on the left understand but will not say out loud – is that this does not mean there would be a leveling of the various disparities between the major racial groups. It’s much easier for the left to think and act as though it’s the champion of oppressed people who otherwise would be just as successful and capable as everyone else, rather than the champion of the losers in life’s genetic lottery.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alfa158
    I think there are increasing numbers of the Left who are now emboldened to state baldly a fundamental principle of the Left: Equality means equal outcomes. Equality of opportunity is worthless unless it means everyone comes out the same. You have to apply quotas, financial subsidies and differential laws until you get that. They don’t want a level playing field, they are demanding a level scoreboard. The attempt to make school discipline cases racially balanced is a perfect example. Ultimately, they don’t care about picking out exceptional kids from “disadvantaged” backgrounds and helping them flourish. They make good examples, but they are examples of “see kids are all the same, this shows how we can rescue all these kids from the oppression of racism if we just give them a chance”. Ultimately all kids from all races have to have the same average performance otherwise; racism!
    , @Harry Baldwin
    But he’s tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them.
    , @Calvin X Hobbes
    "There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder."

    Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world.

    Among our young black American citizens, there are a few who are "high-ability", though most of those are already in decent schools, not in typical "majority minority" dysfunctional schools. But even in the worst schools there are black students who are at least average in ability and willing to work and behave themselves. The low-hanging fruit in improving the education of those students is to not let disruptive students sabotage their education, but of course the effect of the "school-to-prison pipeline" nonsense is to promote that sabotage.

    And of course there are millions of "low-ability" Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let's do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Hey I thought of something else I want to know.

    Okay the Steppe guys conquered things, killed the men, raped the women. Only the matrilineal lines survive from the initial farmers from the Middle East.

    But:

    “After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.”

    Did the farmers do the same thing to the original Euro hunter-gatherers? Was there any genetic contribution, matrilineal or otherwise from these “OG” Euros to the farmers?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. @Almost Missouri
    Yes, all land was once owned by someone else, and it is probably also true to say that between former owners and current owners, all land has changed hands by conquest. So all land rights derive from conquest, as all land was either conquered by the current owner or received from someone who conquered it.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up. And it’s only even an issue to the extent the farmers use their free time and division of labor to dream up post hoc ethical systems and muse about the hunter-gatherers.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    Yes. Sovereign systems are greatly misunderstood. They are anarchic, not civic, and nobody is more clueless about them than the libertarians and even the purported anarcho-capitalists themselves. There’s no Supreme High Court of Sovereignty out there adjudicating sovereignty and telling the sovereigns what they can and can’t do. Sovereigns can do what they will; that’s what makes them sovereign.

    We’d be better off facing reality and recognizing that the drive for sovereignty is very strong and we should get all these competing sovereigns to agree to agree on their sovereignty before everybody tears everybody apart. That’s what the eminently realistic Peace of Westphalia tried to do.

    It eludes most people that the state-run Open Borders experiment is probably the biggest threat to the Westphalian order.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    Good, thoughtful comment.
    , @RebelWriter
    "To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up."

    I know you're just trying to be humorous, as there's no evidence of any conflict between the WHG's and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG's thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture. Now as to Africa, that might be a different story, but how many places still have HG's and farmers living near each other?

    As an aside, my autosomal DNA is just slightly more WHG than ANE, with around 10% Indo European Invader ancestry. My Y DNA is WHG, and so is 47% of my autosomal DNA. How far outside the norm is this, I wonder?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Racial theories of history have as about as problematic a record as, say, subprime mortgages. In both cases, proponents may feel pretty confident that they’re still more or less right but the rest of us tend to be rather skeptical.

    Point being, you’d want honest genetics researchers to do what David Reich is doing and avoid immediately jumping to racial explanations for the data, as much as possible.

    For example, I’ve never really understood why historical correlation of last names with social status implies anything much about mobility. If you find that people with the last name Blacksmith 1000 years ago were….uhh, blacksmiths, and that holds true today, would you conclude that there has been no social mobility at all in the descendants of those ancient Blacksmiths? Or would you think that, maybe, they changed their last name some time after they changed occupations?

    Read More
    • Replies: @joklo
    So look at the surnames of nobles who are preoccupied with their lineages and police each other assiduously. Sweden is instructive here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. “To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up.” That’s only half of it. The farmers in turn are in trouble when fiercer or better-armed farmers or cowboys turn up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flip
    Vikings and Mongols invade from the cold north...
    , @pyrrhus
    The Farmers always seem to lose against migratory herdsmen who can hit and run...It's bad to be a fixed target.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. Anonymous[382] • Disclaimer says:

    The book says that Neanderthal genes are not present in blacks, present in whites, and more so in Asians. The genes are associated with infertility (related to hybridization).

    Shades of Rushton’s r/K theory?

    Read More
    • Replies: @ziapetto
    You are misunderstanding the claim. It doesn’t mean “more Neanderthal” = less fecund. Read about Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @The Anti-Gnostic
    To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up. And it's only even an issue to the extent the farmers use their free time and division of labor to dream up post hoc ethical systems and muse about the hunter-gatherers.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    Yes. Sovereign systems are greatly misunderstood. They are anarchic, not civic, and nobody is more clueless about them than the libertarians and even the purported anarcho-capitalists themselves. There's no Supreme High Court of Sovereignty out there adjudicating sovereignty and telling the sovereigns what they can and can't do. Sovereigns can do what they will; that's what makes them sovereign.

    We'd be better off facing reality and recognizing that the drive for sovereignty is very strong and we should get all these competing sovereigns to agree to agree on their sovereignty before everybody tears everybody apart. That's what the eminently realistic Peace of Westphalia tried to do.

    It eludes most people that the state-run Open Borders experiment is probably the biggest threat to the Westphalian order.

    Good, thoughtful comment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @AndrewR
    Reich hopes to avoid getting the Watson/Summers/Murray/Richwine/Damore treatment. Given his needless hostility to "Watson, Wade, and their forebears," I can't say I'd care if he does.

    I can’t imagine why Reich thinks that will work. It never has in the past, and, he isn’t even throwing someone from the sled to save himself, since they have already been thrown to the wolves. All he is doing is pointing at the previous victims lying in the snow, and hoping that will distract the wolves. Someone this smart should have noticed that wolves hate truth and will devour anyone who speaks it.

    Read More
    • Agree: AndrewR
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.

    Isn’t it pretty to think so?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    It’s hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on … if invasion is wrong.

    The mark of an adolescent worldview is to place avoiding hypocrisy at the top of one’s moral/political priority list.

    Instead, consider Moldbug (citing Filmer’s Patriarchia):

    … [I]f you want stable government, accept the status quo as the verdict of history. There is no reason at all to inquire as to why the Bourbons are the Kings of France. The rule is arbitrary. Nonetheless, it is to the benefit of all that this arbitrary rule exists, because obedience to the rightful king is a Schelling point of nonviolent agreement. …

    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/11/patchwork-positive-vision-part-1.html

    Read More
    • Agree: Antlitz Grollheim
    • Replies: @Anonym
    The mark of an adolescent worldview is to place avoiding hypocrisy at the top of one’s moral/political priority list.

    What is adolescent is to never advance beyond the purple prose period of junior high. Your link... are they attempting to convey a point or to spam paragraphs in case one might hit the target? He jokes about "always be closing" - he was indeed joking.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. @Arclight
    Reich doesn't want to be lumped in with men who happen to be far more blunt than himself, since he's still allowed to circulate in polite society. But he's tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder. The problem - as many people even on the left understand but will not say out loud - is that this does not mean there would be a leveling of the various disparities between the major racial groups. It's much easier for the left to think and act as though it's the champion of oppressed people who otherwise would be just as successful and capable as everyone else, rather than the champion of the losers in life's genetic lottery.

    I think there are increasing numbers of the Left who are now emboldened to state baldly a fundamental principle of the Left: Equality means equal outcomes. Equality of opportunity is worthless unless it means everyone comes out the same. You have to apply quotas, financial subsidies and differential laws until you get that. They don’t want a level playing field, they are demanding a level scoreboard. The attempt to make school discipline cases racially balanced is a perfect example. Ultimately, they don’t care about picking out exceptional kids from “disadvantaged” backgrounds and helping them flourish. They make good examples, but they are examples of “see kids are all the same, this shows how we can rescue all these kids from the oppression of racism if we just give them a chance”. Ultimately all kids from all races have to have the same average performance otherwise; racism!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Arclight
    Definitely - whenever you see the term 'equity' what they mean is anything other than perfect proportional representation in outcomes, interests, careers, and so on between different racial groups or men and women is evidence of systemic oppression...which must be fought by destroying our culture and building up a structure of lies/religious beliefs to explain away the bald fact that not everyone has the same capabilities and there are persistent and measurable differences in different groups in our country.

    This crap has seeped from the universities and down to elementary schools in some cases, in which 'marginalized' people are supposed to be able to hold forth at will and be given special consideration when it comes to their wishes while those who are members of the oppressor class are not supposed to express themselves at all. It's completely totalitarian but dressed up as the most caring and empathetic point of view.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    This.

    Every era presents a new environment. The only question is which groups are best suited to excel in that environment, usually defined as increasing their population relative to other groups.

    Unfortunately, people often confuse Survival of Fittest with Survival of the Best. Fittest doesn’t mean smartest or most civilized or nicest (definitely not nicest). Ironically, Africans may be the race that best suits the current environment. It’s a time of plenty and they breed big time when times are good. Europeans (and their diaspora) may be particularly ill-suited for this environment, which, ironically, we created.

    Conquest can come in many forms. It can be Conan and his buddies overwhelming lessor warriors or it can be African immigrants moving into the lands of a people that no longer has the will to defend their borders.

    Either way, the conquest is right from the standpoint of promoting those genes that work in the current environment and letting those genes that don’t die out.

    Basically, I disagree with Steve: Invasion is good. Those who can’t or won’t defend their borders – their people – should be replaced by those who can.

    (How’s that for being able to look objectively at a situation. I belong to a people being conquered, and I can’t hate it more. But I’ve spent years tying to get friends, family and neighbors to wake up to what’s happening and all I’ve got for my efforts is scorn. I’ll keep trying, but it’s tough being part of a suicide cult.)

    Read More
    • Agree: Harry Baldwin, Kylie
    • Replies: @Luke Lea
    "It's tough being part of a suicide cult" Good line.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Reich is dealing with massive cognitive dissonance, or maybe just the need to sanitize his great research so he doesn’t get Watson’ed…

    BTW, I don’t see any comment box or comments on this review at Taki’s…censorship?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  45. Hey, clever review, Steve. Tongue-in-cheek witty as usual.

    You say, “Conan the Barbarian-like warriors with their horse-drawn wagons came charging off the Eurasian steppe and overran much of Europe and India.”

    My own $0.02. When I was walking through the museums of China I studied the chariots–or what was left of them–intensely. Reconstructions were on display that combined the wooden parts, the shape of which had to be drawn from surviving illustrations and paintings on vases and such, with the still existing bronze parts which were even today in very good shape.

    What gave me cause to pause is that a high speed wheel requires a bronze bearing surface. The creaky old wooden axle/wheel hub will turn if kept well greased, but it won’t ROLL as in “Let’s rock and roll!”

    It seems implausible that an invader’s chariot wheel could have been based on wood to wood contact. Such a setup wouldn’t have turned fast enough to outrun a man on foot. So, for the invaders to have been “charging off the Eurasian steppe” they must have had smooth running wheels which means that all this steppe invader stuff is predicated upon sophisticated bronze casting for creating wheels/hubs and the other high stress connectors needed to keep the light-weight chariots together.

    So is there evidence from tombs for this kind of metal working this early?

    And finally, this past history dovetails nicely with European man’s love affair with his car, which even today, he calls his chariot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Karl
    45 ThreeCranes > So is there evidence from tombs for this kind of metal working this early?


    you can go and touch with your own hands, King Solomon's copper mines at Timna

    Copper mining is a LOT of work = much labor - a big payroll.

    You wouldn't do that to have copper. For cooking, pottery works as well as copper pots and pans.

    you'd do it to make bronze. Weapons-grade bronze.

    some people claim that they see evidence of trade-office representation by the Jerusalem Throne in (the now) UK, which is the nearest place with really cheap-to-buy tin

    And of course, a thousand years before anyone knew HOW to make bronze, the Lebanese ("Phoenicians") on our northern border were already running scheduled vessel service to most parts of the known world. They even had "bottomage" - marine insurance - offered by speculators.

    My dream and prayer is that one of my ancestors was one of those speculators.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @The Anti-Gnostic
    To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up. And it's only even an issue to the extent the farmers use their free time and division of labor to dream up post hoc ethical systems and muse about the hunter-gatherers.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    Yes. Sovereign systems are greatly misunderstood. They are anarchic, not civic, and nobody is more clueless about them than the libertarians and even the purported anarcho-capitalists themselves. There's no Supreme High Court of Sovereignty out there adjudicating sovereignty and telling the sovereigns what they can and can't do. Sovereigns can do what they will; that's what makes them sovereign.

    We'd be better off facing reality and recognizing that the drive for sovereignty is very strong and we should get all these competing sovereigns to agree to agree on their sovereignty before everybody tears everybody apart. That's what the eminently realistic Peace of Westphalia tried to do.

    It eludes most people that the state-run Open Borders experiment is probably the biggest threat to the Westphalian order.

    “To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up.”

    I know you’re just trying to be humorous, as there’s no evidence of any conflict between the WHG’s and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG’s thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture. Now as to Africa, that might be a different story, but how many places still have HG’s and farmers living near each other?

    As an aside, my autosomal DNA is just slightly more WHG than ANE, with around 10% Indo European Invader ancestry. My Y DNA is WHG, and so is 47% of my autosomal DNA. How far outside the norm is this, I wonder?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    I know you’re just trying to be humorous, as there’s no evidence of any conflict between the WHG’s and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG’s thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture.
     
    Dunno. HGs typically don't take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists.
    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    Back in the days we're talking about, "assimilation" meant slaughtering the restive, uppity men, and breeding with the nubile women.

    There was an interesting episode after WWII, when French women accused of consorting with the Nazi conquerors had their heads shaved.

    https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/french-female-collaborator-punished-head-shaved-publicly-mark-1944/

    Some things don't change.
    , @S. Anonyia
    This is completely normal and I think typical of mixed western euro populations like Americans or maybe south Dutch/Belgians/Swiss. Mine is slightly more ANE than WHG, with 13 percent invader ancestry. Husband did same test with virtually identical results.
    , @gcochran
    "there’s no evidence of any conflict"

    Sure there is. Read War Before Civilization.
    , @AnotherDad

    I know you’re just trying to be humorous, as there’s no evidence of any conflict between the WHG’s and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG’s thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture.
     
    Anthropologist!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Arclight
    Reich doesn't want to be lumped in with men who happen to be far more blunt than himself, since he's still allowed to circulate in polite society. But he's tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder. The problem - as many people even on the left understand but will not say out loud - is that this does not mean there would be a leveling of the various disparities between the major racial groups. It's much easier for the left to think and act as though it's the champion of oppressed people who otherwise would be just as successful and capable as everyone else, rather than the champion of the losers in life's genetic lottery.

    But he’s tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Calvin X Hobbes
    "Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them."

    Do our masters think they'll benefit from this somehow? Or are they so malevolent that they're willing to do harm to themselves so as to do even more harm to the rest of us? Or are they mentally ill? It's a mystery to me.
    , @phil
    Also, the weighty journal Nature has just been merged with Springer; you can be sure that the higher-ups already intend to be the gatekeepers of the truth as the genomic evidence continues to come out. And the New York Times and other MSM outlets will make sure that the people hear what they need to know.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Suddenly, steppe barbarians, bearing the Bell Beaker culture, arrived, and almost immediately most of the old Britons died off.

    Don’t you mean ‘Ball Breaker’ culture?

    Read More
    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    Hahahaha. Good one.
    , @keypusher
    Honestly, I did a double take at that point in the article, because ball breaker is what I thought it said at first. Hey, I thought, awesome names are making a comeback!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @Arclight
    Reich doesn't want to be lumped in with men who happen to be far more blunt than himself, since he's still allowed to circulate in polite society. But he's tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder. The problem - as many people even on the left understand but will not say out loud - is that this does not mean there would be a leveling of the various disparities between the major racial groups. It's much easier for the left to think and act as though it's the champion of oppressed people who otherwise would be just as successful and capable as everyone else, rather than the champion of the losers in life's genetic lottery.

    “There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder.”

    Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world.

    Among our young black American citizens, there are a few who are “high-ability”, though most of those are already in decent schools, not in typical “majority minority” dysfunctional schools. But even in the worst schools there are black students who are at least average in ability and willing to work and behave themselves. The low-hanging fruit in improving the education of those students is to not let disruptive students sabotage their education, but of course the effect of the “school-to-prison pipeline” nonsense is to promote that sabotage.

    And of course there are millions of “low-ability” Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let’s do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Eagle Eye

    And of course there are millions of “low-ability” Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let’s do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.
     
    Exactly.

    And that is exactly what the new "elites" do NOT want to do. They have defined this group as evil white males and targeted them for slow-motion genocide.

    In fact, many of the worst-off Americans are African-Americans, and it is their (former) jobs that are being taken away by illegal hordes intentionally brought in by the elites, and increasingly by automation.
    , @Arclight
    Unfortunately for all of us, we have a political party whose electoral fortunes rely on sidelining as many traditional Americans as possible in favor of huge numbers of low-education immigrants who vote for more socialized/centralized government. And the nominal opposition has done absolutely nothing to stop this because the flood of cheap labor helps out the companies who write campaign checks, and because they have balls the size of a flea when it comes to standing up to leftists on issues of diversity.
    , @AnotherDad

    Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world. ...

    And of course there are millions of “low-ability” Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let’s do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.
     
    Very good comment end-to-end Calvin.
    , @MBlanc46
    Hear, hear.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. @TelfoedJohn

    Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    This is encoded in Norse myth in which great-grandparents are depicted as dark and squat, and descendants are increasingly lighter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rígsmál

    Also, the Aesir-Vanir war depicts the new gods from the east fighting the native gods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesir–Vanir_War

    I think it’s more likely blonde hair evolved around the Baltic and spread from there rather than coming in with a wave of invaders from the Eastern steppes (Yamnaya). Populations around the Baltic also happen to have the highest amount of “hunter-gatherer” ancestry in Europeans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    Yes.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.
    , @inertial
    The earliest individual with the derived allele for blond hair was found in Siberia. She is dated to about 16,000 BC. At the time, Baltic Sea hasn't even existed yet.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. “Reich lists numerous examples from around the world where genetic data show that newcomers enslaved or murdered the local men and turned their women into concubines.”

    It can’t be an accident that the drama in The Iliad begins with the head OverLord-Dude Agamemnon taking away Achilles prize of war, his concubine Briseus.

    Achilles’ resists furiously and complains, saying in effect, “Sure, he’s the head Dude and all that, but that’s by agreement not Divine Mandate. I too come from Royalty and among us, we Royalty, we are all equals. Agamemnon has no Right to take away from me my lawfully-earned-by-valor-in-combat concubine. She’s my property by Right, by long established custom of our people.”

    And the rest, as they say, is history.

    Why did Homer use this particular incident as the catalyst for what follows?

    Read More
    • Replies: @vinteuil
    "It can’t be an accident that the drama in The Iliad begins with the head OverLord-Dude Agamemnon taking away Achilles prize of war, his concubine Briseus."

    Not to mention that the whole war is based on Paris' seduction/abduction of Helen - an irony not lost on Achilles, in his great speech in Book 9.

    Both the particular incident that triggers The Iliad and the larger context are all about the central importance of female fidelity, and the honoring of that fidelity by other men. This is the central pillar of civilization, Western division. Violate it, and one opens the door to fire and the sword.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @TelfoedJohn

    Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    This is encoded in Norse myth in which great-grandparents are depicted as dark and squat, and descendants are increasingly lighter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rígsmál

    Also, the Aesir-Vanir war depicts the new gods from the east fighting the native gods: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesir–Vanir_War

    RE: The Aesir-Vanir War*,

    Some have speculated that the IE “War of the Functions” (“sovereigny” and “warrior” functions vs farming-herding) might have a quasi-historical basis, which makes a passage like this rather interesting:

    You see, the Yamnaya steppe nomads who were the predecessors of the Aryans who invaded India were actually a hybrid of two even more ancient peoples: a northern steppe race and a southern race from Armenia or Iran.

    *From Henry Adams Bellows translation of the Völuspá

    On the host his spear | did Othin hurl,
    Then in the world | did war first come;
    The wall that girdled | the gods was broken,
    And the field by the warlike | Wanes was trodden.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Don’t forget the modern verse of Page & Plant. ;)

    How soft your fields so green
    Can whisper tales of gore
    Of how we calmed the tides of war
    We are your overlords
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8OtzJtp-EM
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Harry Baldwin
    But he’s tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them.

    “Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them.”

    Do our masters think they’ll benefit from this somehow? Or are they so malevolent that they’re willing to do harm to themselves so as to do even more harm to the rest of us? Or are they mentally ill? It’s a mystery to me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Look up 'Beefman's Law' on iSteve.
    , @Eagle Eye

    Do our masters think they’ll benefit from this [flooding the West with Third World men] somehow? Or are they so malevolent that they’re willing to do harm to themselves so as to do even more harm to the rest of us? Or are they mentally ill? It’s a mystery to me.
     
    It is puzzling. Certainly there is a divide-and-rule aspect, but clearly more than a whiff of revenge for ancient hatred, particularly the Left's disappointment in the (former) "working class" for not carrying the Left on their shoulder to power in the 19th and early 20th centuries. You don't disappoint your betters with impunity.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    It's a mystery to me, too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions.

    Once again, you let exaggeration get the better of you. The Aryan invasion theory of India hadn’t even been propounded by that time. The Indus Valley Civilization excavations were just getting started in the 1920s, and historical theories weren’t former until later.

    And in articles like these, why do you keep harping on the hypothetical (though highly plausible) Aryan conquest of India instead of, say the well-known Saxon or Normal conquests of Britain? Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner’s boot, is, eh?

    There is literally no one who claims that the British created or imposed a caste system on India; that’s something you’ve just plucked out of thin air. What some people have claimed is that the British codified caste into law and tied it to the political rewards system, which made it rigid and inflexible in a way it wasn’t before (though it could be plenty bad for the lower castes.) If anything, the latest genetic evidence reveals that there must have been large scale mixing of different castes until not too long ago. It was likely the invasions (Muslims and then British) that forced the creation of multiple tiers of subaltern castes that then severely proscribed intermarriage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    And in articles like these, why do you keep harping on the hypothetical (though highly plausible) Aryan conquest of India instead of, say the well-known Saxon or Normal conquests of Britain? Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner’s boot, is, eh?
     
    Probably because the Norman Conquest doesn't ruffle PC feathers.
    , @syonredux

    Once again, you let exaggeration get the better of you. The Aryan invasion theory of India hadn’t even been propounded by that time. The Indus Valley Civilization excavations were just getting started in the 1920s, and historical theories weren’t former until later.
     
    Theories about the Aryan Conquest of India pre-date the 1920s. Cf, for example, the work of Sir Herbert Hope Risley:

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

    Excavation work on the Harappan civilization in the 1920s simply altered the way that the invasion was characterized, with the Aryans now being pictured as something akin to the Germans during the Fall of Rome.
    , @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner’s boot, is, eh?
     
    To paraphrase Trump: Somebody’s doing the paintings.

    https://static.toiimg.com/photo/msid-45096599/45096599.jpg?99389
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.

    The thing that the hysterical opponents of HBD never get is that essentially all of the real progress we’ve made as a species is due to advances in our moral systems, not due to changes in our beliefs about basic facts regarding human beings.

    In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it. Hitler’s regime wasn’t demolished because we didn’t accept that Germans were Aryans, but because of the horror of what he brought to pass.

    If we finally accept HBD, our protection against consequent inhumanity and cruelty will be what it always has been: our moral beliefs.

    And in fact, and of course, it is only the truth of HBD that will free us from our current delusions and resentments regarding oppression and guilt.

    Read More
    • Agree: Almost Missouri
    • Replies: @Samuel Skinner

    In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it.
     
    Slavery wasn't abandoned- it was eliminated by military force which was advocated and spearheaded by people who didn't own slaves. Taking away a competitors economic foundation happens today (see environmentalism) and is not motivated by benevolence as much as envy cloaked in self-righteousness.

    It is also questionable how much it was an improvement- in the US most blacks became sharecroppers and instead of whipping them restriction of food was used to get them to work.
    , @ThreeCranes
    "In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it."

    Well, I beg to differ. Slavery was abandoned because of the invention of the steam engine, which rendered animal power obsolete. Slavery was as doomed as the horse and buggy would eventually be and for the same reason. Ethics, higher morality etc. had little or nothing to do with it.

    North American Slavery was neither as cruel nor inhuman as today's critics argue. Slaves' life expectancy far exceeded that of Africans in their pre-European contact civilization and still does today if by "slave" you mean what Jesse Jackson does when he opines about the status of black NFL players.

    Had the steam engine and its equivalent not been invented, slavery would be found all over the world to this day--as indeed it still is in unindustrialized parts of the world.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. (So did battle axes; indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome. Hence, more recent academics renamed it after its pottery style to make these brutal barbarians sound dweebier and thus less interesting to boys.)

    Lol

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  57. @Numinous

    Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions.
     
    Once again, you let exaggeration get the better of you. The Aryan invasion theory of India hadn't even been propounded by that time. The Indus Valley Civilization excavations were just getting started in the 1920s, and historical theories weren't former until later.

    And in articles like these, why do you keep harping on the hypothetical (though highly plausible) Aryan conquest of India instead of, say the well-known Saxon or Normal conquests of Britain? Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner's boot, is, eh?

    There is literally no one who claims that the British created or imposed a caste system on India; that's something you've just plucked out of thin air. What some people have claimed is that the British codified caste into law and tied it to the political rewards system, which made it rigid and inflexible in a way it wasn't before (though it could be plenty bad for the lower castes.) If anything, the latest genetic evidence reveals that there must have been large scale mixing of different castes until not too long ago. It was likely the invasions (Muslims and then British) that forced the creation of multiple tiers of subaltern castes that then severely proscribed intermarriage.

    And in articles like these, why do you keep harping on the hypothetical (though highly plausible) Aryan conquest of India instead of, say the well-known Saxon or Normal conquests of Britain? Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner’s boot, is, eh?

    Probably because the Norman Conquest doesn’t ruffle PC feathers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. @candid_observer

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.

     

    The thing that the hysterical opponents of HBD never get is that essentially all of the real progress we've made as a species is due to advances in our moral systems, not due to changes in our beliefs about basic facts regarding human beings.

    In fact, slavery wasn't abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it. Hitler's regime wasn't demolished because we didn't accept that Germans were Aryans, but because of the horror of what he brought to pass.

    If we finally accept HBD, our protection against consequent inhumanity and cruelty will be what it always has been: our moral beliefs.

    And in fact, and of course, it is only the truth of HBD that will free us from our current delusions and resentments regarding oppression and guilt.

    In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it.

    Slavery wasn’t abandoned- it was eliminated by military force which was advocated and spearheaded by people who didn’t own slaves. Taking away a competitors economic foundation happens today (see environmentalism) and is not motivated by benevolence as much as envy cloaked in self-righteousness.

    It is also questionable how much it was an improvement- in the US most blacks became sharecroppers and instead of whipping them restriction of food was used to get them to work.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Slavery wasn’t abandoned-.
     
    It was abandoned in the North.

    it was eliminated by military force which was advocated and spearheaded by people who didn’t own slaves. Taking away a competitors economic foundation happens today (see environmentalism) and is not motivated by benevolence as much as envy cloaked in self-righteousness.
     

    it was eliminated by military force which was advocated and spearheaded by people who didn’t own slaves. Taking away a competitors economic foundation happens today (see environmentalism) and is not motivated by benevolence as much as envy cloaked in self-righteousness.
     
    Rival systems. As Lincoln noted in his "House Divided" speech, to survive, the USA had to be either all slave or all free.

    It is also questionable how much it was an improvement- in the US most blacks became sharecroppers and instead of whipping them restriction of food was used to get them to work.

     

    Most Blacks didn't seem eager to bring back slavery.....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Anonymous[249] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome


    indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome.

     

    LOL

    early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture

    Actually, the Battle Axe Culture is still in full swing (sorry) at your local DMV and other government agencies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Numinous

    Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions.
     
    Once again, you let exaggeration get the better of you. The Aryan invasion theory of India hadn't even been propounded by that time. The Indus Valley Civilization excavations were just getting started in the 1920s, and historical theories weren't former until later.

    And in articles like these, why do you keep harping on the hypothetical (though highly plausible) Aryan conquest of India instead of, say the well-known Saxon or Normal conquests of Britain? Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner's boot, is, eh?

    There is literally no one who claims that the British created or imposed a caste system on India; that's something you've just plucked out of thin air. What some people have claimed is that the British codified caste into law and tied it to the political rewards system, which made it rigid and inflexible in a way it wasn't before (though it could be plenty bad for the lower castes.) If anything, the latest genetic evidence reveals that there must have been large scale mixing of different castes until not too long ago. It was likely the invasions (Muslims and then British) that forced the creation of multiple tiers of subaltern castes that then severely proscribed intermarriage.

    Once again, you let exaggeration get the better of you. The Aryan invasion theory of India hadn’t even been propounded by that time. The Indus Valley Civilization excavations were just getting started in the 1920s, and historical theories weren’t former until later.

    Theories about the Aryan Conquest of India pre-date the 1920s. Cf, for example, the work of Sir Herbert Hope Risley:

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

    Excavation work on the Harappan civilization in the 1920s simply altered the way that the invasion was characterized, with the Aryans now being pictured as something akin to the Germans during the Fall of Rome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. anonymous[205] • Disclaimer says:
    @AndrewR
    Reich hopes to avoid getting the Watson/Summers/Murray/Richwine/Damore treatment. Given his needless hostility to "Watson, Wade, and their forebears," I can't say I'd care if he does.

    Reich (great name, by the way) has the same nasty habit as the rest of us members of homo sap–he needs to eat. As the saying goes he won’t bite the hand that feeds him, hence the circumspection. As to Watson and Murray, Watson is an old, old man who made his bones back in the day and probably doesn’t give a rat’s ass what others think and Murray was essentially excommunicated by High Church Liberalism (assuming he was even a member) with “The Bell Curve.” I guess you can credit Reich with having at least one eye open to reality–which is a lot more than you can say about his peers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    Like other commenters here, I can't regard Reich's gratuitous slandering of the giants on whose shoulders he stands as a mere technical glitch of no larger significance. That the victims of his slander are old or were already character-assassinated in prior pogroms are not mitigating factors.

    I won't be buying his book.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Watson is an old, old man who ... probably doesn’t give a rat’s ass what others think

    Not so sure (from 28 Nov 2014):

    James Watson, the world-famous biologist who was shunned by the scientific community after linking intelligence to race, said he is selling his Nobel Prize because he is short of money after being made a pariah.

    Mr Watson said he is auctioning the Nobel Prize medal he won in 1962 for discovering the structure of DNA, because "no-one really wants to admit I exist"....

    Mr Watson told the Financial Times he had become an “unperson” after he “was outed as believing in IQ” in 2007 and said he would like to use money from the sale to buy a David Hockney painting.

    Mr Watson, who shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for uncovering the double helix structure of DNA, sparked an outcry in 2007 when he suggested that people of African descent were inherently less intelligent than white people....

    Mr Watson said his income had plummeted following his controversial remarks in 2007, which forced him to retire from the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, New York. He still holds the position of chancellor emeritus there.

    “Because I was an ‘unperson’ I was fired from the boards of companies, so I have no income, apart from my academic income,” he said.
     
    The Russian billionaire who bought the medal returned it to Watson out of respect.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. anonymous[205] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    Dr. David Reich isn't by chance the 3rd of his name in his line is he? David Reich III. The 3rd Reich?

    LOL

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @RebelWriter
    "To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up."

    I know you're just trying to be humorous, as there's no evidence of any conflict between the WHG's and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG's thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture. Now as to Africa, that might be a different story, but how many places still have HG's and farmers living near each other?

    As an aside, my autosomal DNA is just slightly more WHG than ANE, with around 10% Indo European Invader ancestry. My Y DNA is WHG, and so is 47% of my autosomal DNA. How far outside the norm is this, I wonder?

    I know you’re just trying to be humorous, as there’s no evidence of any conflict between the WHG’s and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG’s thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture.

    Dunno. HGs typically don’t take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @james wilson
    "Dunno. HGs typically don’t take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists." You mean, like, American Injuns?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @JackOH
    Thanks, AM. You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: "Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds."?

    said:

    “how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.?”

    Demand, on a case by case basis, proof that ‘their homes were blown to shreds’ by the countries they are forcing their way into.

    Heretofore there is no proof that these neanderthals had their homes destroyed, period, let alone by the countries they are forcing their way into.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Calvin X Hobbes
    "Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them."

    Do our masters think they'll benefit from this somehow? Or are they so malevolent that they're willing to do harm to themselves so as to do even more harm to the rest of us? Or are they mentally ill? It's a mystery to me.

    Look up ‘Beefman’s Law’ on iSteve.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Calvin X Hobbes
    I did and got:
    No results found.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. @Seamus Padraig
    True. Likewise, many suspect that the Ancient (Doric/Aryan) Greek legends of the Minotaur and the Python were derived from the pre-historic religions of the Minoan and Mycaenian Greeks, who were of Semitic stock. It also known that the Iliad was based on a traditional epic poem first composed by the Hittites, describing their own historic war in 'Asia Minor' (modern Turkey).

    True. Likewise, many suspect that the Ancient (Doric/Aryan) Greek legends of the Minotaur and the Python were derived from the pre-historic religions of the Minoan and Mycaenian Greeks, who were of Semitic stock.

    The Mycenaeans were not Semitic:

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

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

    As for the Minoans, there’s quite a bit of uncertainty as to what linguistic family they belonged to, but the notion that they spoke a Semitic language does not have priority

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

    It also known that the Iliad was based on a traditional epic poem first composed by the Hittites, describing their own historic war in ‘Asia Minor’ (modern Turkey).

    Which Hittite epic poem is that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    It looks like I may have oversold the Hittite theory. Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Homer#Hittite_evidence
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Great review Steve, throwing it on the pile…if only there was a way to extract the findings sans the preaching…alas!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  68. @RebelWriter
    "To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up."

    I know you're just trying to be humorous, as there's no evidence of any conflict between the WHG's and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG's thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture. Now as to Africa, that might be a different story, but how many places still have HG's and farmers living near each other?

    As an aside, my autosomal DNA is just slightly more WHG than ANE, with around 10% Indo European Invader ancestry. My Y DNA is WHG, and so is 47% of my autosomal DNA. How far outside the norm is this, I wonder?

    Back in the days we’re talking about, “assimilation” meant slaughtering the restive, uppity men, and breeding with the nubile women.

    There was an interesting episode after WWII, when French women accused of consorting with the Nazi conquerors had their heads shaved.

    https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/french-female-collaborator-punished-head-shaved-publicly-mark-1944/

    Some things don’t change.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Abe
    So the moral to the story is: try to be nice to one another as much as we can, when we can, because sometimes you just can’t. The moral arc of the universe is shaped like a battle axe blade.

    Truly funny….

    especially considering the outline of the double headed axe was scribbled as graffiti into megalithic stone monuments all across Europe, back in the day.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @James Bowery
    Reich has to spew rage at his betters for the same reason the "nation of immigrants" has to spew rage at the nation of settlers: Kill the creditors and you don't have to pay the debt.

    (((Harold Bloom))) called it “the anxiety of influence.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Steve writes: “But a close reader of his book can enjoy his prodigious research without taking terribly seriously Reich’s prejudices.”

    Those aren’t prejudices. They are insecurities. If you watch his lectures and look at the body language it is clear that he is a timid man. Also pretty egocentric and proud. What do you call timid nerdish proudness? Scared boldness? Something like that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
    The mannerisms of someone who knows he's handling dynamite and better be really careful?
    , @Harry Baldwin
    Nicholas Wade is very mild-mannered also. He was the featured guest at a dinner group I used to attend.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Hubbub

    Suddenly, steppe barbarians, bearing the Bell Beaker culture, arrived, and almost immediately most of the old Britons died off.
     
    Don't you mean 'Ball Breaker' culture?

    Hahahaha. Good one.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @Anon
    I find it fascinating that Fitzgerald was parodying his own views through Tom.


    So, the Nazis were right and the Boasians were wrong? I can see why Reich (Reich!) feels the need to counter-signal all the evil racists in his field.

    Or, maybe not. You see: the Aryan steppe master race was formed through the amalgamation of two other supreme master races. A "northern" race (from Ukraine) and a "Caucasian" race. Well, that debunks all of Hitler's racist notions.

    Europe was presumably as overcast then (if not more) as it is now. So, I'm skeptical of the claim that the natives of Europe had "dark skin" (and blue eyes). The diet would have been different though, being more animal based would have facilitated vitamin D consumption, and not necessitated a pale complexion, so it's hard to say. We may just be looking at the wrong skin tone genes, and be unaware that these natives had unique mutations for pale complexion, like exist in North East Asian populations.

    Similarly, I'm skeptical of claims saying: "once we find the genes for IQ, the genetic basis of the differences will be undeniable." No. The genes that enable a bat to fly are not the same as enable a hawk to fly. The absence of those genes in the one, does not imply the flightlessness of the other. The same arguments will be made, probably with some legitimacy, for intelligence.

    I find it fascinating that Fitzgerald was parodying his own views through Tom.

    The mark of the true artist, I should think. As Fitzgerald himself put it, “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @JackOH
    Thanks, AM. You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: "Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds."?

    honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.”?

    “Shut the fuck up nerd.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Your signal to noise ratio is very low.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Hitler suffered from an unlikely run of good luck. That terrible fate cost him his life and his nation.

    Hitler was seduced by his run of initial good luck. He thought he could bully everyone diplomatically because the US was isolationist, and Britain was led by Chamberlain. He thought he could gobble up the surrounding territories unopposed. But eventually the US entered the war and Churchill took over – his luck had run out. His last piece of good luck was that the war ended before the Jews could deploy the bomb they had invented. No point. Germany was already rubble from conventional bombing.

    He like everyone else expected a long war in France. But he stumbled into blitzkrieg victory. The French had more tanks and they had better tanks. But the quick victory over a more powerful opponent led him to try his luck against the Soviet Union. Germany relied on horses for transport. They had no petroleum. Russian tanks were also better and more numerous but again Hitler suffered the misfortune of initial success. He was lured into death struggle with a nation that overmatched his and his people were decimated and occupied.

    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tulip
    Hitler got 60 miles from Moscow in 1941, before the US entered the war. If the German Army had gotten some milder weather or some better logistics, Eurasia might be speaking German today.
    , @Anonym
    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    It was basically triumph of the GDP. USA + Russia > Greater Germany.

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

    I wonder if Hitler had let the USSR invade, would the results have been different? Russia is a horrible place to try to invade. An invading USSR would tend to galvanize support for Hitler and against Stalin, one would think. I am not sure that the amount of territory that Hitler conquered prior to Barbarossa was favorable for this. Stopping at some point earlier might have been advisable.

    That error was committed back in the MK days though. Who would have thought that Russia would have been able to throw off the communist shackles? If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. @candid_observer

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.

     

    The thing that the hysterical opponents of HBD never get is that essentially all of the real progress we've made as a species is due to advances in our moral systems, not due to changes in our beliefs about basic facts regarding human beings.

    In fact, slavery wasn't abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it. Hitler's regime wasn't demolished because we didn't accept that Germans were Aryans, but because of the horror of what he brought to pass.

    If we finally accept HBD, our protection against consequent inhumanity and cruelty will be what it always has been: our moral beliefs.

    And in fact, and of course, it is only the truth of HBD that will free us from our current delusions and resentments regarding oppression and guilt.

    “In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it.”

    Well, I beg to differ. Slavery was abandoned because of the invention of the steam engine, which rendered animal power obsolete. Slavery was as doomed as the horse and buggy would eventually be and for the same reason. Ethics, higher morality etc. had little or nothing to do with it.

    North American Slavery was neither as cruel nor inhuman as today’s critics argue. Slaves’ life expectancy far exceeded that of Africans in their pre-European contact civilization and still does today if by “slave” you mean what Jesse Jackson does when he opines about the status of black NFL players.

    Had the steam engine and its equivalent not been invented, slavery would be found all over the world to this day–as indeed it still is in unindustrialized parts of the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad


    “In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it.”
     
    Well, I beg to differ. Slavery was abandoned because of the invention of the steam engine, which rendered animal power obsolete. ...

    Had the steam engine and its equivalent not been invented, slavery would be found all over the world to this day–as indeed it still is in unindustrialized parts of the world.
     

    Three Cranes, you're hitting on a useful point--these nominally "moral" concepts take place in a social, economic and technological context.

    However, i don't think this answers what was going on. Steam power which had been around 100 years still wasn't dominating the economy--mining industry? some textile mills?--when the British outlawed the slave trade. High pressure steam engines were really just getting going. Locomotives and steam ships didn't exist. Most useful work was done directly by human or animal power.

    I think you're basically right about "the world"--and ironically, especially Africa. It would still be full of slaves today but for the white man.

    But there was a long process of social and moral development in Europe--seen in the early aboltion of serfdom in the West and much later in the East. Moral sentiments driven by both Christianity and precisely the detribalization and creation of coherent--"we're all in this together" "one people"-- nations that so enrage Jews, but are a great thing for humanity.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Just finished Steve’s whole piece. A great review, as only he can do. Two questions though: why do Slavs seem so different from Teutons? Or are they? And France: there is a mixed state if ever there was one. Why do the Gauls seem that way?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Apparently, according to the work of Messrs. Ralph & Coop, any random typical German is a closer genetic relation to any random typical Pole than to another random German.
    , @RebelWriter
    That's a good question. All I know for sure is any attempted invasion by the Indo Europeans into Eastern Europe was not as successful as the Western expansion, and the admixtures there have a much larger percentage of WHG and ANE than Western Europe. Romania, I believe, has the greatest number of old WHG male bloodlines of any country. The Balkans were an Ice Age Refuge, and probably most of the WHGs stayed put.

    As for the French, they are a mix of Gauls (Celts) and Franks (Germans).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Anon[304] • Disclaimer says:

    I will never read the book of a scientist who spends his time throwing tantrums about other scientists while hoping that this will help him curry favor with the establishment. I’m interested in a man who has a basic respect for science and his data, not some immature twit who spends all his time attacking his colleagues.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  79. @Anon
    Dr. David Reich isn't by chance the 3rd of his name in his line is he? David Reich III. The 3rd Reich?

    Dr. David Reich isn’t by chance the 3rd of his name in his line is he? David Reich III. The 3rd Reich?

    Dr. David Reich isn’t by chance related to former NFL quarterback Frank Reich is he? Reich had a hell of game against the Houston Oilers once.

    Are Frank and David related?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. @Almost Missouri
    Yes, all land was once owned by someone else, and it is probably also true to say that between former owners and current owners, all land has changed hands by conquest. So all land rights derive from conquest, as all land was either conquered by the current owner or received from someone who conquered it.

    Political discussions could be more rational if everyone understood this simple and obvious, yet somehow presently obscure, truth.

    Well said, Almost Missouri. The miracle is that the right of conquest is no longer recognized. Let us work to keep it that way and be thankful. To live where we do is reparations enough.

    Nobody is innocent if you go back very far. Everybody was exploiting and being exploited by everybody else. Only the newborn were innocent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hippopotamusdrome


    the right of conquest is no longer recognized

     

    Someone tell Ms. Merkle.
    , @Almost Missouri

    "Only the newborn were innocent."
     
    The concept of original sin gets a lot of hate from Progressives, but--as usual--they forget that prior to Christianity, pagan cultures had all sorts of notions of heritable guilt, tainted ancestry, corruption of blood, etc.

    As is so often the case, it was denatured Christianity that paved the way for the subjective atomism that prevails in The Current Year.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Calvin X Hobbes
    "There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder."

    Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world.

    Among our young black American citizens, there are a few who are "high-ability", though most of those are already in decent schools, not in typical "majority minority" dysfunctional schools. But even in the worst schools there are black students who are at least average in ability and willing to work and behave themselves. The low-hanging fruit in improving the education of those students is to not let disruptive students sabotage their education, but of course the effect of the "school-to-prison pipeline" nonsense is to promote that sabotage.

    And of course there are millions of "low-ability" Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let's do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.

    And of course there are millions of “low-ability” Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let’s do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.

    Exactly.

    And that is exactly what the new “elites” do NOT want to do. They have defined this group as evil white males and targeted them for slow-motion genocide.

    In fact, many of the worst-off Americans are African-Americans, and it is their (former) jobs that are being taken away by illegal hordes intentionally brought in by the elites, and increasingly by automation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Calvin X Hobbes
    "Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them."

    Do our masters think they'll benefit from this somehow? Or are they so malevolent that they're willing to do harm to themselves so as to do even more harm to the rest of us? Or are they mentally ill? It's a mystery to me.

    Do our masters think they’ll benefit from this [flooding the West with Third World men] somehow? Or are they so malevolent that they’re willing to do harm to themselves so as to do even more harm to the rest of us? Or are they mentally ill? It’s a mystery to me.

    It is puzzling. Certainly there is a divide-and-rule aspect, but clearly more than a whiff of revenge for ancient hatred, particularly the Left’s disappointment in the (former) “working class” for not carrying the Left on their shoulder to power in the 19th and early 20th centuries. You don’t disappoint your betters with impunity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models

    Read More
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women."

    As we say in the UK, bollocks. While I'm sure you could make an argument that a reptilian hindbrain somehow sees anyone who can kill their man as "fitter", how did that work out for German women as the Red Army rolled over Saxony? I'm pretty sure they weren't too happy.

    It's just not the total disaster for women - who may get killed, but who may get taken and impregnated - that it is for the men, who get killed. And this has been true for all cultures and races across time, not just white people.

    Some cultures - like the Jews at Masada and York, and Sikhs during Partition in 1947 - kill their women rather than let them fall into enemy hands. But more commonplace are the examples of Iceland, where about half the female population have Scottish or Irish mtDNA, while the male yDNA is almost 100% Scandinavian, or Medellin, Colombia, where mtDNA is almost wholly Amerindian while yDNA is almost wholly European.
    , @Rosie

    Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models.

     

    You still haven't answered my questions, Whiskey?

    (1) If White women want work-shy brutes, why are White men not work-shy brutes? Put another way, would harsh Northern living conditions not select for an attraction to men with foresight, problem-solving ability, and task persistence?

    (2) Who brought black slaves to the Americas and why did they do it? Do you think that motivation continues to be a factor in the immigration issue today?

    (3) If White women want foreigners to come and kill our men, why did White women vote for Trump? In Georgia, for example, 70% of White women voted for Trump. Is there something fundamentally different about White women in Georgia that makes them not actually want foreigners to come and kill their fathers, uncles, brothers, husbands, nephews, and sons?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/ga

    (4) How do you explain women's desire for talented musicians as short-term sexual partners if dominance is the preferred trait?

    https://mic.com/articles/104964/science-finally-explains-why-talented-musicians-are-so-damn-sexy#.Bg866XcGI

    (5) Do you actually have any evidence at all for your theory of women as sadistic voyeurs of death and destruction?

    (6) If the answer to #5 is yes, do you think male infanticide of rivals' offspring might have contributed to any selection pressure for a preference for dominant males? (The lioness, for example, must mate with the strongest, who will otherwise come and kill her cubs by a weaker mate.). In other words, if our mating preferences are as you say, what does that say about men and their fitness to rule?

    (7) Would cuckolding as a female reproductive strategy not necessarily be limited to undetectable cuckoldry, that is, mating with genetically similar strangers?

    , @Harry Baldwin
    Whiskey, you should write a version of this called "Let's Generalize About Women."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu3FE7BswYI
    , @Pat Boyle
    Whiskey is like an old time Marxist - one who sees all phenomenon as yet another expression of something Marx once wrote - like Labor Theory of Value. Except Whiskey is stuck on the concept of beta males and sexual dominance as his explanation for everything.

    Obviously social/sexual dominance is a factor in human affaires but it isn't the only factor. People who have found "the one great truth" suffer from a kind of blindness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @Citizen of a Silly Country

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
     
    This.

    Every era presents a new environment. The only question is which groups are best suited to excel in that environment, usually defined as increasing their population relative to other groups.

    Unfortunately, people often confuse Survival of Fittest with Survival of the Best. Fittest doesn't mean smartest or most civilized or nicest (definitely not nicest). Ironically, Africans may be the race that best suits the current environment. It's a time of plenty and they breed big time when times are good. Europeans (and their diaspora) may be particularly ill-suited for this environment, which, ironically, we created.

    Conquest can come in many forms. It can be Conan and his buddies overwhelming lessor warriors or it can be African immigrants moving into the lands of a people that no longer has the will to defend their borders.

    Either way, the conquest is right from the standpoint of promoting those genes that work in the current environment and letting those genes that don't die out.

    Basically, I disagree with Steve: Invasion is good. Those who can't or won't defend their borders - their people - should be replaced by those who can.

    (How's that for being able to look objectively at a situation. I belong to a people being conquered, and I can't hate it more. But I've spent years tying to get friends, family and neighbors to wake up to what's happening and all I've got for my efforts is scorn. I'll keep trying, but it's tough being part of a suicide cult.)

    “It’s tough being part of a suicide cult” Good line.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Luke Lea
    Just finished Steve's whole piece. A great review, as only he can do. Two questions though: why do Slavs seem so different from Teutons? Or are they? And France: there is a mixed state if ever there was one. Why do the Gauls seem that way?

    Apparently, according to the work of Messrs. Ralph & Coop, any random typical German is a closer genetic relation to any random typical Pole than to another random German.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    Poles, and other groups throughout the Baltic region, have a mixed Germanic-Slavic heritage. The only distinctively Slavic thing about the Poles is their language.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    Interesting that you mention Merkel, Steve.

    The historic myths of many nations involve an episode in which an outsider, a stranger tribe was invited into a certain land by the ruler in order to perform some particular 'indispensable' service for that ruler, only for, eventually, the strangers to take possession of the land they were invited into - after seeing it was good, and badly governed - and ultimately, killing the ruler who brought them in in the first place.

    Thus, England has the tale of Hengist and Horsa, and King Vortigern.

    The Romans invited the Goths 'into the fold' because they thought they would be 'useful' as soldiers.

    Etc etc. Perhaps many of these myths were embellished to read as morality tales.

    The modern parallel is quite obviously that the ongoing third world takeover of Europe is being promoted by The Economist on the wretched falsehood that the thirdworlders will 'save' the European economy.

    Speaking of Anglo-Saxons, has anyone else noticed the remarkable physical resemblance between recent Trump appointee John Bolton and the famous ‘Sutton Hoo Ship Burial’ helmet/mask, (as featured in the British Museum).

    Are they by any chance related?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. @Luke Lea
    Well said, Almost Missouri. The miracle is that the right of conquest is no longer recognized. Let us work to keep it that way and be thankful. To live where we do is reparations enough.


    Nobody is innocent if you go back very far. Everybody was exploiting and being exploited by everybody else. Only the newborn were innocent.

    the right of conquest is no longer recognized

    Someone tell Ms. Merkle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @Hippopotamusdrome


    indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome.

     

    LOL

    Yeah, that passage hit close to home.

    (So did battle axes; indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome. Hence, more recent academics renamed it after its pottery style to make these brutal barbarians sound dweebier and thus less interesting to boys.)

    I can remember being furious with my 9th grade world history teacher, because he’d yammer on endlessly about those civilized, toga-wearing Ancient Greeks and Romans. All the while barely mentioning Vandals, Visigoths, Jutes or Saxons. The thought of even more primitive Steppe Barbarians would have blown my mind.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "he’d yammer on endlessly about those civilized, toga-wearing Ancient Greeks and Romans. All the while barely mentioning Vandals, Visigoths, Jutes or Saxons."
     
    Those ancient toga-wearing Greeks and Romans were supremely effective warriors too. Indeed, they cannot be understood without this.

    It's a shame all the great history that gets bleached out by political correctness.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s like Douglas Murray agreeing with the Right but also attacking the Right because of its baggage.

    Reich wants to have the cake and eat it too. Be a real scientist but also respectable by PC.

    Much of the discourse is about needles vs bubbles. When bubbles meet needles, needles win by pricking the bubbles. So, bubbles need safe space from needles.

    It’s like when paper meets scissors, scissors win. So, the PC has to use the hammer against the scissor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    It’s like Douglas Murray agreeing with the Right but also attacking the Right because of its baggage.

    This is a widespread phenomenon, isn't it? Murray will rail against the effects of Islamic immigration, but don't get him started on that imbecile Trump!

    Peter Hitchens will decry mass Third World immigration into Britain, then denounce Enoch Powell for noticing it too soon. According to Peter, Powell made it impossible to do anything about it because he upset the liberals too much.

    Steven Pinker plays this game as well. He tells his audience that the alt-right attracts young converts because it exposes them to truths that those on the left deny. But it's not a problem, according to Pinker, because the left just has to get the young people to accept its convoluted and unconvincing arguments against those truths.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @Samuel Skinner

    In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it.
     
    Slavery wasn't abandoned- it was eliminated by military force which was advocated and spearheaded by people who didn't own slaves. Taking away a competitors economic foundation happens today (see environmentalism) and is not motivated by benevolence as much as envy cloaked in self-righteousness.

    It is also questionable how much it was an improvement- in the US most blacks became sharecroppers and instead of whipping them restriction of food was used to get them to work.

    Slavery wasn’t abandoned-.

    It was abandoned in the North.

    it was eliminated by military force which was advocated and spearheaded by people who didn’t own slaves. Taking away a competitors economic foundation happens today (see environmentalism) and is not motivated by benevolence as much as envy cloaked in self-righteousness.

    it was eliminated by military force which was advocated and spearheaded by people who didn’t own slaves. Taking away a competitors economic foundation happens today (see environmentalism) and is not motivated by benevolence as much as envy cloaked in self-righteousness.

    Rival systems. As Lincoln noted in his “House Divided” speech, to survive, the USA had to be either all slave or all free.

    It is also questionable how much it was an improvement- in the US most blacks became sharecroppers and instead of whipping them restriction of food was used to get them to work.

    Most Blacks didn’t seem eager to bring back slavery…..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Dieter Kief
    The last stretch of posts from ca. Monday on is - overwhelming. (I have to admit, I'm no professional iSteve reader, I even have a job and stuff (plus I eat 'n' ride the bike and take some photographs here and there - I even spoke to my wife, recently, if nort for long, but anyhow...).

    - GREAT! (Unparalleled - no other writer in sight on the english (german, french)-speakig part of the web, at least none that I'd know of).

    Steve has always been spectacular in an unobtrusive sort of way. And only Henry James and Iris Murdoch were funnier.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri

    "Steve has always been spectacular in an unobtrusive sort of way."
     
    That might be the best single sentence summary of the iSteve phenomenon I've ever read.

    That should be the endorsement quote on Steve's faux bookcover in the right hand column.

    Also, I think Steve is funnier than James. I've never read Murdoch.
    , @syonredux

    And only Henry James and Iris Murdoch were funnier.
     
    Henry James had a real gift for suggestive nomenclature: Ralph Touchett, Fanny Assingham, Mrs. Condrip, .....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Off topic? Tangential? Synchronicity? Immediately after reading the book review I see this:

    http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/petition-calls-for-end-of-birth-tourism-in-canada

    Who are we and how we got here indeed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  93. @dearieme
    "To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up." That's only half of it. The farmers in turn are in trouble when fiercer or better-armed farmers or cowboys turn up.

    Vikings and Mongols invade from the cold north…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @syonredux

    I know you’re just trying to be humorous, as there’s no evidence of any conflict between the WHG’s and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG’s thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture.
     
    Dunno. HGs typically don't take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists.

    “Dunno. HGs typically don’t take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists.” You mean, like, American Injuns?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    “Dunno. HGs typically don’t take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists.” You mean, like, American Injuns?
     
    Probably.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. The irony of Reich’s emphasis on how modern day peoples are “mergers” of more ancient peoples is that it actually reinforces the homogeneity of races.

    We should expect to see more similarity among, say, continental races rather than less if each race has been created by “migration” or “merger”. If, generally, one founder stock mostly has displaced other adjacent peoples, or if it blends through concubines the gene pool of both conquered and conquerors, then the remaining population will mostly have the same set of gene frequencies for all traits of importance.

    A priori we might not have expected to see this. If many populations across a continent remained genetically distinct from time immemorial, we would expect to find far greater differences among those peoples.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  96. I don’t think Sailor does the tabloid stuff, but this news story might interest him:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/elon-musk-father-baby-stepdaughter-article-1.3895364

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  97. @JackOH
    Thanks, AM. You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: "Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds."?

    “You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.”

    According to Islam, immediately. According to blacks, more or less the same thing. (See Steve’s coverage of the never ending appeasement of the #OscarsSoWhite crowd. With real estate, though, it turns out blacks can be relatively easily bought off the land with gibs. Mexicans not so much.)

    ” how do you respond to someone who says: ‘Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.’?”

    The overwhelming majority of Muslims entering the US (and even Europe) were never attacked by the US (or even Europe), but they know well the West’s strange guilt fetish and have no qualms about exploiting it. Even in the rare instance that “we” did blow up their house, how about we rebuild their house in their own country among their own people, wouldn’t that be better for everyone? Oh wait, we’re already doing that to the tune of $trillions!

    Read More
    • Agree: snorlax
    • Replies: @snorlax
    The Muzzies do a pretty good job of blowing apart each other's shacks and hovels (and, each other) without us.

    Suppose that the Nazis attacked from their secret moon base, destroying the US federal government and military in a lightning decapitation strike. Would we Americans then commence suicide bombing and machine-gunning each other en masse?

    Sadly, I'm not wholly confident in my answer to that question nowadays, but I can say it's certainly not what would've happened in the America of 20 years ago.
    , @JackOH
    " . . . [T]hey know well the West’s strange guilt fetish . . .".

    Yeah, AM, maybe there ought to be a statute of limitations on the West's self-mortification after the 1914-1945 War, which may be giving the casual barbarities of Africans, Middle Easterners, and non-Japanese Asians a pass.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. @AndrewR
    Reich hopes to avoid getting the Watson/Summers/Murray/Richwine/Damore treatment. Given his needless hostility to "Watson, Wade, and their forebears," I can't say I'd care if he does.

    Seems a tad ungracious to say the least, but he’s early 40s and presumably wants another 20 years in post.

    I must say Steven Pinker walks close to the frame of the Overton Window and even shifts it, with only a selection of various GoodThinker platitudes that few would disagree with, and without feeling the urge to badmouth others.

    Given that Watson is one of the modern founders of his discipline, it’s particularly uncouth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. @RebelWriter
    Oh, and no comments allowed on Taki's for this article?

    That was a surprise. I don’t remember ever seeing no comments allowed on an iSteve Taki’s article before. What is up?

    Read More
    • Replies: @jim jones
    I assume Unz wants the traffic here
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. @dearieme
    "To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up." That's only half of it. The farmers in turn are in trouble when fiercer or better-armed farmers or cowboys turn up.

    The Farmers always seem to lose against migratory herdsmen who can hit and run…It’s bad to be a fixed target.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. @Kylie
    Steve has always been spectacular in an unobtrusive sort of way. And only Henry James and Iris Murdoch were funnier.

    “Steve has always been spectacular in an unobtrusive sort of way.”

    That might be the best single sentence summary of the iSteve phenomenon I’ve ever read.

    That should be the endorsement quote on Steve’s faux bookcover in the right hand column.

    Also, I think Steve is funnier than James. I’ve never read Murdoch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.

    The Blonde Beasts Went Into The Globalized Pop Culture Business:

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  103. @syonredux

    True. Likewise, many suspect that the Ancient (Doric/Aryan) Greek legends of the Minotaur and the Python were derived from the pre-historic religions of the Minoan and Mycaenian Greeks, who were of Semitic stock.
     
    The Mycenaeans were not Semitic:

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

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

    As for the Minoans, there's quite a bit of uncertainty as to what linguistic family they belonged to, but the notion that they spoke a Semitic language does not have priority

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

    It also known that the Iliad was based on a traditional epic poem first composed by the Hittites, describing their own historic war in ‘Asia Minor’ (modern Turkey).
     
    Which Hittite epic poem is that?

    It looks like I may have oversold the Hittite theory. Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Homer#Hittite_evidence

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Did I read that right? Some guy actually believed the Indian caste system was created by the British?

    That one is a howler on par with the Belgians creating the Hutus and Tutsis out of the firmament.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  105. @Almost Missouri

    "You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy."
     
    According to Islam, immediately. According to blacks, more or less the same thing. (See Steve's coverage of the never ending appeasement of the #OscarsSoWhite crowd. With real estate, though, it turns out blacks can be relatively easily bought off the land with gibs. Mexicans not so much.)

    " how do you respond to someone who says: 'Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.'?"
     
    The overwhelming majority of Muslims entering the US (and even Europe) were never attacked by the US (or even Europe), but they know well the West's strange guilt fetish and have no qualms about exploiting it. Even in the rare instance that "we" did blow up their house, how about we rebuild their house in their own country among their own people, wouldn't that be better for everyone? Oh wait, we're already doing that to the tune of $trillions!

    The Muzzies do a pretty good job of blowing apart each other’s shacks and hovels (and, each other) without us.

    Suppose that the Nazis attacked from their secret moon base, destroying the US federal government and military in a lightning decapitation strike. Would we Americans then commence suicide bombing and machine-gunning each other en masse?

    Sadly, I’m not wholly confident in my answer to that question nowadays, but I can say it’s certainly not what would’ve happened in the America of 20 years ago.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @ThreeCranes
    "Reich lists numerous examples from around the world where genetic data show that newcomers enslaved or murdered the local men and turned their women into concubines."

    It can't be an accident that the drama in The Iliad begins with the head OverLord-Dude Agamemnon taking away Achilles prize of war, his concubine Briseus.

    Achilles' resists furiously and complains, saying in effect, "Sure, he's the head Dude and all that, but that's by agreement not Divine Mandate. I too come from Royalty and among us, we Royalty, we are all equals. Agamemnon has no Right to take away from me my lawfully-earned-by-valor-in-combat concubine. She's my property by Right, by long established custom of our people."

    And the rest, as they say, is history.

    Why did Homer use this particular incident as the catalyst for what follows?

    “It can’t be an accident that the drama in The Iliad begins with the head OverLord-Dude Agamemnon taking away Achilles prize of war, his concubine Briseus.”

    Not to mention that the whole war is based on Paris’ seduction/abduction of Helen – an irony not lost on Achilles, in his great speech in Book 9.

    Both the particular incident that triggers The Iliad and the larger context are all about the central importance of female fidelity, and the honoring of that fidelity by other men. This is the central pillar of civilization, Western division. Violate it, and one opens the door to fire and the sword.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flip
    You can see why daughters were married off at 19 in a world without reliable contraception or abortion, especially since women were not economically self-sufficient and there was no government welfare.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Kylie
    Steve has always been spectacular in an unobtrusive sort of way. And only Henry James and Iris Murdoch were funnier.

    And only Henry James and Iris Murdoch were funnier.

    Henry James had a real gift for suggestive nomenclature: Ralph Touchett, Fanny Assingham, Mrs. Condrip, …..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The most recent version of the Penguin Portable has an appendix listing funny James Names
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. I hereby announce my new reverse-Turing-Test-variant prize: The first person who writes an authentic sardonic-dry-wit-humor iSteve-like blog entry in reaction to an _The Atlantic_ article BEFORE iSTEVE DOES….. will receive a free dinner at Presidential Falafel in Afula

    has Ron Unz given refuge to any White south African farmers yet? Hurry up, Ron – they might end up in Afula.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  109. @Whiskey
    Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models

    “Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women.”

    As we say in the UK, bollocks. While I’m sure you could make an argument that a reptilian hindbrain somehow sees anyone who can kill their man as “fitter”, how did that work out for German women as the Red Army rolled over Saxony? I’m pretty sure they weren’t too happy.

    It’s just not the total disaster for women – who may get killed, but who may get taken and impregnated – that it is for the men, who get killed. And this has been true for all cultures and races across time, not just white people.

    Some cultures – like the Jews at Masada and York, and Sikhs during Partition in 1947 – kill their women rather than let them fall into enemy hands. But more commonplace are the examples of Iceland, where about half the female population have Scottish or Irish mtDNA, while the male yDNA is almost 100% Scandinavian, or Medellin, Colombia, where mtDNA is almost wholly Amerindian while yDNA is almost wholly European.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. @Luke Lea
    Well said, Almost Missouri. The miracle is that the right of conquest is no longer recognized. Let us work to keep it that way and be thankful. To live where we do is reparations enough.


    Nobody is innocent if you go back very far. Everybody was exploiting and being exploited by everybody else. Only the newborn were innocent.

    “Only the newborn were innocent.”

    The concept of original sin gets a lot of hate from Progressives, but–as usual–they forget that prior to Christianity, pagan cultures had all sorts of notions of heritable guilt, tainted ancestry, corruption of blood, etc.

    As is so often the case, it was denatured Christianity that paved the way for the subjective atomism that prevails in The Current Year.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only “might makes right”? I don’t think so. Stalin “won” but this did not win the “argument” in his favor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    Stalin's historical villain score moved up several notches in the popular imagination in 1989-92. (And many more than several in selected countries). If Stalin had won even more than he did (easy to imagine with Roosevelt living a little longer or being succeeded by Wallace, or Stalin's not purging so many good officers or otherwise faring better in the early going of Barbarossa) we might well worship him as a hero.

    This should be plainly obvious. The Chinese may fearlessly plunge into the study of eugenics, but I can quite confidently say their conceptions of Chairman Mao and Chiang Kai-Shek will remain 180 degrees the opposite of reality from now until the end of my days.
    , @RebelWriter
    The winners write the histories.
    , @Johann Ricke

    Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only “might makes right”?
     
    I think the Chinese formulation runs along the lines of "(among adventurers, history records) the victors as kings, the vanquished as brigands". It's not so much that might is virtuous so much as might is usually recorded as being virtuous. In other words, the winners usually get to write their version of history. It's only in the West that the winners have started writing history from the losers' standpoint. That's progressed all the way to the West letting the losers write the history. For instance, the Anglo-Chinese Wars are now the Opium Wars, even in Western history books.
    , @Anonym
    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only “might makes right”? I don’t think so. Stalin “won” but this did not win the “argument” in his favor.

    Of course, you are Jewish, I don't expect you to ever see Hitler as a good or even as a neutral guy. That's natural, wrt you and your tribe personally. As far as adopting your tribe's morality re: Hitler... what's in it for me? Is it good for the Whites? What's your pitch?

    So far I have heard from you in response to AnotherDad's comment here:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/david-brooks-denounces-tribalism-and-also-is-stoked-to-learn-hes-steven-pinkers-3rd-cousin/#comment-2216819

    AnotherDad

    Cut through all the b.s. and Brooksian\Wilkinsonian ideology as just parasitism on white nations. The evil here–and yes it is evil–is not their (stupid) utopian dreams. (Stupid utopianism seems to be a common human failing.) If they want it and want to build it–great. No, the evil is that they insist on having their utopia in *other people’s nations*. The evil is insisting that the rest of us–we normies–are not allowed to have our lives in our nations, but must be part of their glorious experiment.
     
    Jack D

    If you want your nation “back” then win at the ballot box, take back all the institutions – the courts, the universities, the media and the permanent government and it’s yours. Better hurry ’cause the demographics look worse every day. The globalists had a 50 year head start while you were snoozing so you had better rush to catch up.
     
    Not a great deal of reciprocated empathy there. But you wish me to feel empathy for your special case that for me is not much different than Hutu vs Tutsi, Israelite vs Canaanite, Turk vs Armenian, Mongols vs everyone who was left in their wake.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. OT: Was at a presentation the other day and saw an interesting graph. Wages as a percent of GDP have fallen steadily since ~1970 from ~50% of GDP to 43%. Meanwhile, since the early 2000s, corporate profits have increased from ~5% to ~9% of GDP.

    Now, corporate profits/GDP didn’t increase from 1970 to early 2000s so they can’t be blamed completely. Still, it’s interesting.

    But it’s obvious that US workers have been getting the shaft for 45 years. Hard to say what the causes are, here’s a couple of guesses:

    1. Move to service economy
    2. Immigration
    3. Women entering the work force
    4. Automation
    5. Higher corporate profits (last 15 years)

    These are truly uninformed guesses, so if others have better ideas, have at it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The Milken Revolution did a lot to encourage corporations to try harder to make higher profits.
    , @Luke Lea
    Add trade with third world to the list, especially letting China into WTO with most favored nation status, which means they can't be treated any differently tariff-wise than high-wage countries in Europe, which forced Western corporations to invest and produce there or else go out of business, especially in labor-intensive forms of manufacture. In other words, it caused a decline in the relative demand for labor, and hence wages were drawn down.
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Another factor is the decline in the number of workplaces that are organized by a union. Although the factors that you have listed have contributed to the increasing number of "unorganized" workplaces, management has become quite skilled at resisting organization and willing to use lockouts and non-union workers to break union influence. Individual workers have very little leverage when confronted by management.
    , @hyperbola
    Ronald Reagan was the president who started the practice of subsidizing American companies with tax dollars to increase their foreign manufacturing activities. Every president since has continued the programs. Part of the "rule the world" for the benefit of "our" elite that runs both our main political parties.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    It’s hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate.

    Invasion is natural. It’s the way of all organisms. Bacteria, weeds, wolves, rats, weasels, wild pigs, lions, hyenas, etc.

    For much of human existence, there was no morality. Just the way of nature with everyone invading everyone. The Zulus, Mongols, Macedonians, Romans, Turks, Russians, Polish-Lithuanian Empire, Vikings, and etc.

    But as nations developed, they began to put down roots and develop a deep bond with their land as homeland. Thus, the idea developed that further invasions must be ended. But even as people defended their own lands, they still wanted to invade other lands. This was more doable against primitive areas sparsely inhabited… like Siberia for Russians and North America for Anglos. The primitives were too few in number and too backward to mount any defense.

    But in parts of the world with sufficient native population, the invaders were pushed out… like in Algeria and Vietnam and India.
    So, we arrived at the New Order after WWII where nations would be sovereign and independent… but communicate and trade with one another. It became the Golden Rule.

    So…

    1. World was once open to constant invasions by everyone. Humans acted like animals.

    2. World saw the rise of kingdoms and states that could defend their own territories as homelands. But even as they defended their own lands, they sought to invade and dominate other lands.

    3. World finally rejected imperialism and arrived at the Golden Rule where all the world would be organized into defensible nations and all nations would respect the right of other nations NOT to be invaded. But there would be exchange of ideas and goods.

    But this Golden Rule is being destroyed by Globalism that is unleashing something like the Second Golden Horde, this time mostly from Africa. I’ll take Golden Rule over Golden Horde. Just ask the Russians.

    Imperialism did a lot of good by opening up all the world to the advancement of the West. But it is ultimately problematic because peoples don’t want to be ruled by foreigners forever. So, in the end, the ideas remain but the invaders return.

    Anyway, every inch of the world has been claimed at this point. There is nothing more to explore and discover. So, the way of nature — the desire for invasion — should be put to rest, and the world can now exchange goods and ideas. That way, all the world can have best of both worlds. National independence and international exchange of ideas.

    But globalism made mass invasion a ‘human right’, which is crazy. Granted, Israel gets pass-over rights to this toxic idea. I wonder why.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnotherDad

    Invasion is natural. It’s the way of all organisms. Bacteria, weeds, wolves, rats, weasels, wild pigs, lions, hyenas, etc.
    For much of human existence, there was no morality. Just the way of nature with everyone invading everyone. The Zulus, Mongols, Macedonians, Romans, Turks, Russians, Polish-Lithuanian Empire, Vikings, and etc.
    But as nations developed, they began to put down roots and develop a deep bond with their land as homeland. Thus, the idea developed that further invasions must be ended. But even as people defended their own lands, they still wanted to invade other lands. This was more doable against primitive areas sparsely inhabited… like Siberia for Russians and North America for Anglos. The primitives were too few in number and too backward to mount any defense.
    But in parts of the world with sufficient native population, the invaders were pushed out… like in Algeria and Vietnam and India.
    So, we arrived at the New Order after WWII where nations would be sovereign and independent… but communicate and trade with one another. It became the Golden Rule.
    So…
    1. World was once open to constant invasions by everyone. Humans acted like animals.
    2. World saw the rise of kingdoms and states that could defend their own territories as homelands. But even as they defended their own lands, they sought to invade and dominate other lands.
    3. World finally rejected imperialism and arrived at the Golden Rule where all the world would be organized into defensible nations and all nations would respect the right of other nations NOT to be invaded. But there would be exchange of ideas and goods.
    But this Golden Rule is being destroyed by Globalism that is unleashing something like the Second Golden Horde, this time mostly from Africa. I’ll take Golden Rule over Golden Horde. Just ask the Russians.
    Imperialism did a lot of good by opening up all the world to the advancement of the West. But it is ultimately problematic because peoples don’t want to be ruled by foreigners forever. So, in the end, the ideas remain but the invaders return.
    Anyway, every inch of the world has been claimed at this point. There is nothing more to explore and discover. So, the way of nature — the desire for invasion — should be put to rest, and the world can now exchange goods and ideas. That way, all the world can have best of both worlds. National independence and international exchange of ideas.
    But globalism made mass invasion a ‘human right’, which is crazy. Granted, Israel gets pass-over rights to this toxic idea. I wonder why.
     
    Anon[425] this is a *great* comment. I wanted to write up a bunch of these points, but you did a better job so i'm just restating again so a few more folks might read it.

    The nation state is *the* greatest human social achievement/improvement. (Ok, after marriage, which let's men stop incessant fighting and mate guarding, allowing them to channel male energy to building stuff, like civilization and providing child raising necessary for creating productive and responsible citizens.)

    One people nations with defined borders is the *only way* humans have devised to live in peace with--potentially--republican freedom. These "globalists"--commies, big-staters, Jews, utopian academics, cheap-labor capitalists--attempting to push us back to multi-cultural empires--are evil people. The multi-cultural empire is inevitably full of ethnic contention, and inevitably ruled by thuggish bullying, extractive elites--which of course the folks pushing it aspire to be.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Gunnar von Cowtown
    Yeah, that passage hit close to home.

    (So did battle axes; indeed, early scientists called this the Battle Axe Culture. But that sounded too awesome. Hence, more recent academics renamed it after its pottery style to make these brutal barbarians sound dweebier and thus less interesting to boys.)

     

    I can remember being furious with my 9th grade world history teacher, because he'd yammer on endlessly about those civilized, toga-wearing Ancient Greeks and Romans. All the while barely mentioning Vandals, Visigoths, Jutes or Saxons. The thought of even more primitive Steppe Barbarians would have blown my mind.

    “he’d yammer on endlessly about those civilized, toga-wearing Ancient Greeks and Romans. All the while barely mentioning Vandals, Visigoths, Jutes or Saxons.”

    Those ancient toga-wearing Greeks and Romans were supremely effective warriors too. Indeed, they cannot be understood without this.

    It’s a shame all the great history that gets bleached out by political correctness.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gunnar von Cowtown
    Indeed they were. However, Mr. 9th Grade World History Teacher spent a lot more time discussing bath houses and poetry than phalanx formations or......... And 30 years later I just realized he was totally gay. Well, shit.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @ThreeCranes
    Hey, clever review, Steve. Tongue-in-cheek witty as usual.

    You say, "Conan the Barbarian-like warriors with their horse-drawn wagons came charging off the Eurasian steppe and overran much of Europe and India."

    My own $0.02. When I was walking through the museums of China I studied the chariots--or what was left of them--intensely. Reconstructions were on display that combined the wooden parts, the shape of which had to be drawn from surviving illustrations and paintings on vases and such, with the still existing bronze parts which were even today in very good shape.

    What gave me cause to pause is that a high speed wheel requires a bronze bearing surface. The creaky old wooden axle/wheel hub will turn if kept well greased, but it won't ROLL as in "Let's rock and roll!"

    It seems implausible that an invader's chariot wheel could have been based on wood to wood contact. Such a setup wouldn't have turned fast enough to outrun a man on foot. So, for the invaders to have been "charging off the Eurasian steppe" they must have had smooth running wheels which means that all this steppe invader stuff is predicated upon sophisticated bronze casting for creating wheels/hubs and the other high stress connectors needed to keep the light-weight chariots together.

    So is there evidence from tombs for this kind of metal working this early?

    And finally, this past history dovetails nicely with European man's love affair with his car, which even today, he calls his chariot.

    45 ThreeCranes > So is there evidence from tombs for this kind of metal working this early?

    you can go and touch with your own hands, King Solomon’s copper mines at Timna

    Copper mining is a LOT of work = much labor – a big payroll.

    You wouldn’t do that to have copper. For cooking, pottery works as well as copper pots and pans.

    you’d do it to make bronze. Weapons-grade bronze.

    some people claim that they see evidence of trade-office representation by the Jerusalem Throne in (the now) UK, which is the nearest place with really cheap-to-buy tin

    And of course, a thousand years before anyone knew HOW to make bronze, the Lebanese (“Phoenicians”) on our northern border were already running scheduled vessel service to most parts of the known world. They even had “bottomage” – marine insurance – offered by speculators.

    My dream and prayer is that one of my ancestors was one of those speculators.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @JackOH
    Thanks, AM. You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: "Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds."?

    There are over 50 Muslim majority countries. The vast majority are not at war. The “refugees” can go to any one of them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JackOH
    wrd9, that sounds like a pretty good reply to me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Maybe most iSteve readers know this already, but Greg Cochran is going to review this book.

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/03/21/who-we-are/

    It’ll be interesting to see how Greg reacts to Reich spewing irrational rage against him and his late friend Henry Harpending.

    It sounds like Reich did not spew irrational rage against Steve, but I’ll bet he would if someone were to ask his opinion about Steve.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Luke Lea

    It sounds like Reich did not spew irrational rage against Steve, but I’ll bet he would if someone were to ask his opinion about Steve.
     
    Maybe not, because Steve can fight back with wit, and has a lot of secret fans in elite circles. Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Hubbub

    Suddenly, steppe barbarians, bearing the Bell Beaker culture, arrived, and almost immediately most of the old Britons died off.
     
    Don't you mean 'Ball Breaker' culture?

    Honestly, I did a double take at that point in the article, because ball breaker is what I thought it said at first. Hey, I thought, awesome names are making a comeback!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @anonymous
    Reich (great name, by the way) has the same nasty habit as the rest of us members of homo sap--he needs to eat. As the saying goes he won't bite the hand that feeds him, hence the circumspection. As to Watson and Murray, Watson is an old, old man who made his bones back in the day and probably doesn't give a rat's ass what others think and Murray was essentially excommunicated by High Church Liberalism (assuming he was even a member) with "The Bell Curve." I guess you can credit Reich with having at least one eye open to reality--which is a lot more than you can say about his peers.

    Like other commenters here, I can’t regard Reich’s gratuitous slandering of the giants on whose shoulders he stands as a mere technical glitch of no larger significance. That the victims of his slander are old or were already character-assassinated in prior pogroms are not mitigating factors.

    I won’t be buying his book.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    Of course, Murray in turn spends all day every day virtue-signaling against Trump. I can only assume his thought process is something similar to Reich's, otherwise I'm like "dude, you're supporting people who will literally imprison you when and if they regain power."
    , @Calvin X Hobbes
    You'll probably learn as much (or more) from Greg's Cochran's forthcoming review of this book as you you would from the book.

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/03/21/who-we-are/
    , @Anonymous
    I do recommend the book. It's written in quite a clear style, no Steven Pinker words. It has a bit of a mystery novel aspect to it, with time machine sci fi thrown in. And it's pretty detailed about how exactly, technically, they get the data they get, the machines, the procedures, the math. It's not easy, and it's subject to a certain amount of interpretation, so anthropologists are not out of work just yet.In fact it's a very interdisciplinary job, starting with they have to get their hands on old bones.

    You can take a bit of pride in how Reich apprenticed in Europe, then came back tho the US and duplicated the set up, but with Henry Ford style mass production as the goal.

    But, yeah, Reich does seem reticent at times to make explicit some of the things suggested in the book. For instant, population replacement meant rape and pillage, right? Just say that. Although you do have to get your head around the enormous time spans involved, so maybe other explanations fit.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @Jack D

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
     
    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only "might makes right"? I don't think so. Stalin "won" but this did not win the "argument" in his favor.

    Stalin’s historical villain score moved up several notches in the popular imagination in 1989-92. (And many more than several in selected countries). If Stalin had won even more than he did (easy to imagine with Roosevelt living a little longer or being succeeded by Wallace, or Stalin’s not purging so many good officers or otherwise faring better in the early going of Barbarossa) we might well worship him as a hero.

    This should be plainly obvious. The Chinese may fearlessly plunge into the study of eugenics, but I can quite confidently say their conceptions of Chairman Mao and Chiang Kai-Shek will remain 180 degrees the opposite of reality from now until the end of my days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    When you win, you become a great leader who made mistakes, as we all do. Napoleon, Caesar, Lincoln. Stalin in Russia, Mao in China.

    If you lose, you're a monster blamed from all problems: Hitler

    Until recently, the South was accorded "noble foe" status, but as the Left consolidates power they exercise their muscle by forcing the South into the second category. That's what's at stake in the war on statues: who won, America or the Left.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @syonredux

    And only Henry James and Iris Murdoch were funnier.
     
    Henry James had a real gift for suggestive nomenclature: Ralph Touchett, Fanny Assingham, Mrs. Condrip, .....

    The most recent version of the Penguin Portable has an appendix listing funny James Names

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. @Almost Missouri
    Like other commenters here, I can't regard Reich's gratuitous slandering of the giants on whose shoulders he stands as a mere technical glitch of no larger significance. That the victims of his slander are old or were already character-assassinated in prior pogroms are not mitigating factors.

    I won't be buying his book.

    Of course, Murray in turn spends all day every day virtue-signaling against Trump. I can only assume his thought process is something similar to Reich’s, otherwise I’m like “dude, you’re supporting people who will literally imprison you when and if they regain power.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. @Anonymous
    Look up 'Beefman's Law' on iSteve.

    I did and got:
    No results found.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. @Luke Lea
    Just finished Steve's whole piece. A great review, as only he can do. Two questions though: why do Slavs seem so different from Teutons? Or are they? And France: there is a mixed state if ever there was one. Why do the Gauls seem that way?

    That’s a good question. All I know for sure is any attempted invasion by the Indo Europeans into Eastern Europe was not as successful as the Western expansion, and the admixtures there have a much larger percentage of WHG and ANE than Western Europe. Romania, I believe, has the greatest number of old WHG male bloodlines of any country. The Balkans were an Ice Age Refuge, and probably most of the WHGs stayed put.

    As for the French, they are a mix of Gauls (Celts) and Franks (Germans).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. @Jack D

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
     
    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only "might makes right"? I don't think so. Stalin "won" but this did not win the "argument" in his favor.

    The winners write the histories.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. Anon[277] • Disclaimer says:
    @snorlax
    Stalin's historical villain score moved up several notches in the popular imagination in 1989-92. (And many more than several in selected countries). If Stalin had won even more than he did (easy to imagine with Roosevelt living a little longer or being succeeded by Wallace, or Stalin's not purging so many good officers or otherwise faring better in the early going of Barbarossa) we might well worship him as a hero.

    This should be plainly obvious. The Chinese may fearlessly plunge into the study of eugenics, but I can quite confidently say their conceptions of Chairman Mao and Chiang Kai-Shek will remain 180 degrees the opposite of reality from now until the end of my days.

    When you win, you become a great leader who made mistakes, as we all do. Napoleon, Caesar, Lincoln. Stalin in Russia, Mao in China.

    If you lose, you’re a monster blamed from all problems: Hitler

    Until recently, the South was accorded “noble foe” status, but as the Left consolidates power they exercise their muscle by forcing the South into the second category. That’s what’s at stake in the war on statues: who won, America or the Left.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. @Almost Missouri
    Like other commenters here, I can't regard Reich's gratuitous slandering of the giants on whose shoulders he stands as a mere technical glitch of no larger significance. That the victims of his slander are old or were already character-assassinated in prior pogroms are not mitigating factors.

    I won't be buying his book.

    You’ll probably learn as much (or more) from Greg’s Cochran’s forthcoming review of this book as you you would from the book.

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/03/21/who-we-are/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  128. @Almost Missouri

    "he’d yammer on endlessly about those civilized, toga-wearing Ancient Greeks and Romans. All the while barely mentioning Vandals, Visigoths, Jutes or Saxons."
     
    Those ancient toga-wearing Greeks and Romans were supremely effective warriors too. Indeed, they cannot be understood without this.

    It's a shame all the great history that gets bleached out by political correctness.

    Indeed they were. However, Mr. 9th Grade World History Teacher spent a lot more time discussing bath houses and poetry than phalanx formations or……… And 30 years later I just realized he was totally gay. Well, shit.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    The phalanx formations were the gayest part of the whole thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Interesting you had cited over at Taki’s that hotshot “anthropology of colonialism” specialist Prof. Nicholas B. Dirks, first put forward the conveniently PC concept that it wuz the British Raj which —for its own evil purposes— strengthened and enshrined the Hindu caste system. Dr. Dirks, it should be mentioned, moved up to become the Chancellor of U. Calif. Berkeley, and who displayed astonishing irresponsibility and abject cowardice during the Milo riots in Berserkeley a year ago… when the Antifa crazies —essentially unhindered by either the UC campus cops (under Dirk’s command); or by the Berkeley City cops (under the command of Prog-Latinx mayor Jesse Arreguín)— almost succeeded in burning down Zellerbach Auditorium (Milo’s speaking venue) and the adjacent Telegraph Ave. shopping district. Dirks subsequently resigned (in shame, one would hope, but probably not) from the Cal Chancellorship, and seems to have since found a rather downscale academic niche for himself somewhere in the sh*thole universe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  130. Reich’s attempt to deconstruct away the English is patently absurd. At the end of the day, everyone knows who the English are, they know if they aren’t English and everyone basically agrees with who is or isn’t English.

    And yes, as Steve notes, I must have missed the part of the Bayeux tapestry that documents the Normans coming over to do off the books construction work and work as cashiers in shops as the Romans, Saxons and Vikings did before them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  131. @Gunnar von Cowtown
    Indeed they were. However, Mr. 9th Grade World History Teacher spent a lot more time discussing bath houses and poetry than phalanx formations or......... And 30 years later I just realized he was totally gay. Well, shit.

    The phalanx formations were the gayest part of the whole thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TelfoedJohn
    The problem with gays in the US military is that they don’t have their own battalions. I’m sure there are plenty of enemies who would be freaked out by homo-troops. Put them on the frontline I say. The trannies too: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_gist/2003/08/scare_tactics.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. @S. Anonyia
    I think it's more likely blonde hair evolved around the Baltic and spread from there rather than coming in with a wave of invaders from the Eastern steppes (Yamnaya). Populations around the Baltic also happen to have the highest amount of "hunter-gatherer" ancestry in Europeans.

    Yes.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.

    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.
     
    Of course, Conan (and his people, the Cimmerians) had black hair......
    , @Anonymous
    That's controversial.

    If by 'corded ware' you mean later PIE groups - such as the peoples who migrated from *Europe* to the plains of central Asia to become known as the 'Iranians', before their descent into Iran proper, that bridge of land between the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea, some authorities, on the basis of genetic evidence state that the original unadmixed Iranian groups, before their descent into Iran, were, phenotypically fully European in terms of the alleles known to be associated with light skin, light eyes and light hair, not to mention autosomal clustering.
    , @gcochran
    They weren't all blond, but they're the ones hat brought the blonde alleles in. KITLG mutations has been traced back to ancient siberians.
    , @Lars Porsena
    Do you have any evidence of that?

    Blonde hair had to come from somewhere. I don't know where but by the current theories there were 3 suspects, the aryans, the middle eastern farmers, and some indigenous hunter gatherer groups. Did one of these other 2 groups have it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. OT.

    Corey Feldman was stabbed today. Whatever became of his promise to expose all those Hollywood pedos? Could this be connected somehow?

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/corey-feldman-claims-he-was-stabbed-police-investigating/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  134. @Kirt
    "… Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions."

    Apparently none of this made it down to the level of history teaching from elementary school to college level. I was educated in the 50's and early 60's, graduating with a major in history in 1964 and was taught more about ancient wars than pots by two or three orders of magnitude. The Aryan invasions were taught about as an accepted fact and the Indian caste system was attributed to the ancient Aryans, not the late-coming British. These days, the main denier of Aryan invasions is Indian PM Modi and his Hindu nationalist party. They contend that India was always Aryan.

    “I was educated in the 50′s and early 60′s, graduating with a major in history in 1964 and was taught more about ancient wars than pots by two or three orders of magnitude. The Aryan invasions were taught about as an accepted fact and the Indian caste system was attributed to the ancient Aryans, not the late-coming British.”

    I can assure you it was already very different by the 70′s and 80′s.

    Today, it’ simply delusional. “[A] new secular religion that reject[s] observable reality,” as the Z Blog commenter put it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @vinteuil
    "...it was already very different by the 70′s and 80′s."

    Yes. Already, by about 1969, everything had changed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. @Twinkie
    Yes.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.

    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.

    Of course, Conan (and his people, the Cimmerians) had black hair……

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @Alfa158
    I think there are increasing numbers of the Left who are now emboldened to state baldly a fundamental principle of the Left: Equality means equal outcomes. Equality of opportunity is worthless unless it means everyone comes out the same. You have to apply quotas, financial subsidies and differential laws until you get that. They don’t want a level playing field, they are demanding a level scoreboard. The attempt to make school discipline cases racially balanced is a perfect example. Ultimately, they don’t care about picking out exceptional kids from “disadvantaged” backgrounds and helping them flourish. They make good examples, but they are examples of “see kids are all the same, this shows how we can rescue all these kids from the oppression of racism if we just give them a chance”. Ultimately all kids from all races have to have the same average performance otherwise; racism!

    Definitely – whenever you see the term ‘equity’ what they mean is anything other than perfect proportional representation in outcomes, interests, careers, and so on between different racial groups or men and women is evidence of systemic oppression…which must be fought by destroying our culture and building up a structure of lies/religious beliefs to explain away the bald fact that not everyone has the same capabilities and there are persistent and measurable differences in different groups in our country.

    This crap has seeped from the universities and down to elementary schools in some cases, in which ‘marginalized’ people are supposed to be able to hold forth at will and be given special consideration when it comes to their wishes while those who are members of the oppressor class are not supposed to express themselves at all. It’s completely totalitarian but dressed up as the most caring and empathetic point of view.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. @Calvin X Hobbes
    "There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder."

    Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world.

    Among our young black American citizens, there are a few who are "high-ability", though most of those are already in decent schools, not in typical "majority minority" dysfunctional schools. But even in the worst schools there are black students who are at least average in ability and willing to work and behave themselves. The low-hanging fruit in improving the education of those students is to not let disruptive students sabotage their education, but of course the effect of the "school-to-prison pipeline" nonsense is to promote that sabotage.

    And of course there are millions of "low-ability" Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let's do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.

    Unfortunately for all of us, we have a political party whose electoral fortunes rely on sidelining as many traditional Americans as possible in favor of huge numbers of low-education immigrants who vote for more socialized/centralized government. And the nominal opposition has done absolutely nothing to stop this because the flood of cheap labor helps out the companies who write campaign checks, and because they have balls the size of a flea when it comes to standing up to leftists on issues of diversity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Flip
    Tru dat
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @RebelWriter
    "To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up."

    I know you're just trying to be humorous, as there's no evidence of any conflict between the WHG's and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG's thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture. Now as to Africa, that might be a different story, but how many places still have HG's and farmers living near each other?

    As an aside, my autosomal DNA is just slightly more WHG than ANE, with around 10% Indo European Invader ancestry. My Y DNA is WHG, and so is 47% of my autosomal DNA. How far outside the norm is this, I wonder?

    This is completely normal and I think typical of mixed western euro populations like Americans or maybe south Dutch/Belgians/Swiss. Mine is slightly more ANE than WHG, with 13 percent invader ancestry. Husband did same test with virtually identical results.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RebelWriter
    Interesting. Thank you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Since then, 90 percent of subsequent skeletons in England reflect the DNA of the steppe invaders.

    That is not true. Of the DNA of every subsequent skeletons in England 90% is steppe invader, on avarage. Hence every one of these bones contains a small part of Neolithic Britain.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  140. @Jack D

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
     
    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only "might makes right"? I don't think so. Stalin "won" but this did not win the "argument" in his favor.

    Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only “might makes right”?

    I think the Chinese formulation runs along the lines of “(among adventurers, history records) the victors as kings, the vanquished as brigands”. It’s not so much that might is virtuous so much as might is usually recorded as being virtuous. In other words, the winners usually get to write their version of history. It’s only in the West that the winners have started writing history from the losers’ standpoint. That’s progressed all the way to the West letting the losers write the history. For instance, the Anglo-Chinese Wars are now the Opium Wars, even in Western history books.

    Read More
    • Agree: snorlax
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. It’s hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I’d rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Only if it invalidates the gains from the Jewish invasion of Palestine. In other words, not.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  142. @Sunbeam
    "Before the Bronze Age there were several quite distinct races in Europe. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes."

    Okay, I follow this. Seen bits and pieces of this in other places the past few years.

    But what about the Neanderthals? What complexion did they have? They spent what, at least ten times longer or so living in Europe and parts of Asia than however many years ago we are talking about the genes for lighter skin arising (around the time of agriculture in Middle East, whatever time it was for the Steppe dwellers).

    Were the Neanderthals dark skinned? I've always thought of them as white. Surely even the limited DNA we've found from them should answer this?

    Keep in mind that the neanderthals come into picture thousands of years before this, the last neanderthal live maybe 40,000 years ago and these invasions are all well after the last ice age (10,000 BC)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. @Kirt
    "… Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions."

    Apparently none of this made it down to the level of history teaching from elementary school to college level. I was educated in the 50's and early 60's, graduating with a major in history in 1964 and was taught more about ancient wars than pots by two or three orders of magnitude. The Aryan invasions were taught about as an accepted fact and the Indian caste system was attributed to the ancient Aryans, not the late-coming British. These days, the main denier of Aryan invasions is Indian PM Modi and his Hindu nationalist party. They contend that India was always Aryan.

    India was invaded by ancient Iranians/Aryans who looked like the Kardashians (Armenians have a claim to being the ‘original Aryans’). Genetics tells us they remained distinct as the Brahmin caste.

    First, note that the Iranians have no ‘untouchability’. That seems to be an indigenous thing which the Brahmins made use of to enforce their power (pre-Hindu Indian priests may have been ‘untouchable’ because they had dangerous magic. Clever move by the Brahmins to marginalise the competition with their own beliefs).

    Then, Brahmins were never dominant among the Indian tribes (except in remote elite circles) until the British made Brahmin laws the basis of modern India’s ‘rule of law’ (because the shrewd Brahmins saw which way the wind was blowing, and had many books of ‘law’ which few had even seen because Brahimn law said non-Brahmins weren’t allowed to read them!) . So, by imposing modernity and systematising a previously ad hoc set of negotatiations, ‘the British created (what we know as) the caste system’. Before the first British census during Victoria’s rule, many Indians didn’t even realise they were distinct as Muslims. Just as Saudi money recently had similar effect in other places.

    Buddha led a mass movement against the Brahmins which took over much of India. It took 2000 years for the Brahmins to quash the Buddhists, and again it was the British who unwittingly sealed Brahmin dominance over Buddhists. A group called the Lingayats who everyone thinks are Hindu have just got Supreme Court recognition that they’re outside the Brahmin system. Before the British this was not an issue. Most accept the British innovations now, but it’s complex. The problem is when outsiders like Americans want to use India as a football in their domestic struggles, and the American left is most guilty of this. In MLK’s 1960s struggle, Indians are all over the place and not clear support for either side in your black and white politics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Armenians cluster more with the distinctly 'un-Aryan' Assyrians than they do with any other ethnicity.
    , @Anonymous
    If the term 'Aryan' is taken to mean the Corded Ware descended groups, typified by the Sintashta/Andronovo horizon - that is the later PIE groups, believed by some to be the ancestors of the Indo-Iranian Steppic groups, then the answer is that they were phenotypically north/eastern European.

    For various reasons, this finding seems to be very hard for certain 'swarthy' west/south modern Indo European speakers to accept.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @Pat Boyle
    Hitler suffered from an unlikely run of good luck. That terrible fate cost him his life and his nation.

    Hitler was seduced by his run of initial good luck. He thought he could bully everyone diplomatically because the US was isolationist, and Britain was led by Chamberlain. He thought he could gobble up the surrounding territories unopposed. But eventually the US entered the war and Churchill took over - his luck had run out. His last piece of good luck was that the war ended before the Jews could deploy the bomb they had invented. No point. Germany was already rubble from conventional bombing.

    He like everyone else expected a long war in France. But he stumbled into blitzkrieg victory. The French had more tanks and they had better tanks. But the quick victory over a more powerful opponent led him to try his luck against the Soviet Union. Germany relied on horses for transport. They had no petroleum. Russian tanks were also better and more numerous but again Hitler suffered the misfortune of initial success. He was lured into death struggle with a nation that overmatched his and his people were decimated and occupied.

    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    Hitler got 60 miles from Moscow in 1941, before the US entered the war. If the German Army had gotten some milder weather or some better logistics, Eurasia might be speaking German today.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Hitler got 60 miles from Moscow in 1941, before the US entered the war. If the German Army had gotten some milder weather or some better logistics, Eurasia might be speaking German today.
     
    Definitely a dark timeline....


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

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost
    , @Diversity Heretic
    The Wehrmacht got closer than that. The "Hedgehog Memorial" in Khimki (a Moscow suburb) is at kilometer 23 on the Leningrad Highway. It marks the spot that is generally accepted as the closest German troops came to Moscow--23 kilometers from the center of Moscow (Red Square). At this point, however, the Wehrmacht was at the end of its rope and was driven back by Red Army offensives beginning December 6, 1941.
    , @Pat Boyle
    Hitler getting so close to Moscow is yet another example of how he and Germany suffered from initial good luck only to be crushed when normal luck returned. The Nazis paid for their good fortune early in Barbarossa at Stalingrad and then at Berlin.

    Hitler shouldn't have been able to advance that quickly in Barbarossa. Stalin had recently destroyed most of the Soviet officer corps and was suspicious of the remainder. The Soviets against the invading Nazis, like in France, had more tanks and better tanks than the Germans. The Soviets had a much bigger population and a vastly greater industrial base. The Soviets has petroleum and Germany had to cobble together mediocre (87 octane) aviation gas while the allies had Texas gas which was ultimately as much as 150 octane.

    The DB109 was probably a better fighter than the Spitfire but not on lousy coal derived gas. The Soviets had an ally in the US which was the great oil producing nation at that time.

    Germany on paper, like the South in our Civil War, seemed to be doomed in a struggle with more populous and more industrialized opponents. The South with a number of great generals like Nazi Germany could win a few battles, until their bigger and stronger opponents got organized. But in the long run luck averages out for both sides and the winner was the side with the most industrial infrastructure and biggest population.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Anonymous[160] • Disclaimer says:
    @James Bowery
    Reich has to spew rage at his betters for the same reason the "nation of immigrants" has to spew rage at the nation of settlers: Kill the creditors and you don't have to pay the debt.

    Sailer has a habit of overpraising relatively mediocre Jewish figures like Reich and Pinker who end up taking credit for stuff pioneered by others.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. I am just a lay person reading the news and few technical articles on the subject of racial differences. Wouldn’t it be just astounding that humans who migrated away from each other in groups 40k years ago end up with different skin colors, different average heights and builds, different hair, different muscle makeup, and different susceptibility to diseases end up scoring exactly the same on IQ tests?

    When I watch sports like basketball and football I notice that the black athletes exhibit a level of realtime intelligence and alertness, beyond their physical ability, that athletes of other races do not. What a terrible thing to say.

    Indians are winning all the spelling contests and East Asians are killing on the math. The horror!

    The professional baseball season is starting. Why are there so many Mestizos on the rosters?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "Why are there so many Mestizos on the rosters?"

    There aren't that many plain mestizos in major league baseball although there are some. There are more triracial pardos and biracial mulattos.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. Egalitarianism is a Social Construct

    and

    Race is a Social Circus

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    I disapprove of white people calling black people monkeys. But what can I do? He certainly looks like Cheetah raising mischief in an old Tarzan movie.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. @Whiskey
    Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models

    Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models.

    You still haven’t answered my questions, Whiskey?

    (1) If White women want work-shy brutes, why are White men not work-shy brutes? Put another way, would harsh Northern living conditions not select for an attraction to men with foresight, problem-solving ability, and task persistence?

    (2) Who brought black slaves to the Americas and why did they do it? Do you think that motivation continues to be a factor in the immigration issue today?

    (3) If White women want foreigners to come and kill our men, why did White women vote for Trump? In Georgia, for example, 70% of White women voted for Trump. Is there something fundamentally different about White women in Georgia that makes them not actually want foreigners to come and kill their fathers, uncles, brothers, husbands, nephews, and sons?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/ga

    (4) How do you explain women’s desire for talented musicians as short-term sexual partners if dominance is the preferred trait?

    https://mic.com/articles/104964/science-finally-explains-why-talented-musicians-are-so-damn-sexy#.Bg866XcGI

    (5) Do you actually have any evidence at all for your theory of women as sadistic voyeurs of death and destruction?

    (6) If the answer to #5 is yes, do you think male infanticide of rivals’ offspring might have contributed to any selection pressure for a preference for dominant males? (The lioness, for example, must mate with the strongest, who will otherwise come and kill her cubs by a weaker mate.). In other words, if our mating preferences are as you say, what does that say about men and their fitness to rule?

    (7) Would cuckolding as a female reproductive strategy not necessarily be limited to undetectable cuckoldry, that is, mating with genetically similar strangers?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie
    BTW Whiskey, regarding #2

    A couple of interesting links.

    From Apple to Koch, big businesses say Trump is wrong on immigration
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/

    Who runs big business?

    As of 2014, there were 51 women CEOs in the Forbes top 1000 highest-earning US companies. There were only 3 women CEOs in the top 50.

    Now I am not a feminist, so I'm not in the least bothered by these disparities, but I won't take the blame for their actions. That would be much to convenient for these traitors.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. They seem to be very scared of this article at Taki’s. I wonder if Reich has a father and grandfather named David then he’d be David Reich the 3rd, wouldn’t he?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  150. @Anon
    I find it fascinating that Fitzgerald was parodying his own views through Tom.


    So, the Nazis were right and the Boasians were wrong? I can see why Reich (Reich!) feels the need to counter-signal all the evil racists in his field.

    Or, maybe not. You see: the Aryan steppe master race was formed through the amalgamation of two other supreme master races. A "northern" race (from Ukraine) and a "Caucasian" race. Well, that debunks all of Hitler's racist notions.

    Europe was presumably as overcast then (if not more) as it is now. So, I'm skeptical of the claim that the natives of Europe had "dark skin" (and blue eyes). The diet would have been different though, being more animal based would have facilitated vitamin D consumption, and not necessitated a pale complexion, so it's hard to say. We may just be looking at the wrong skin tone genes, and be unaware that these natives had unique mutations for pale complexion, like exist in North East Asian populations.

    Similarly, I'm skeptical of claims saying: "once we find the genes for IQ, the genetic basis of the differences will be undeniable." No. The genes that enable a bat to fly are not the same as enable a hawk to fly. The absence of those genes in the one, does not imply the flightlessness of the other. The same arguments will be made, probably with some legitimacy, for intelligence.

    So, the Nazis were right and the Boasians were wrong?

    As the centerpiece of Nazi ideology is that war purifies a people and brings about it heroism we can safely say that the course of WW2 proved the Nazi’s wrong. There is not a shred of doubt there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. @Harry Baldwin
    But he’s tiptoeing up to the same conclusion that more and more people have reached, namely that there is a limit to what social interventions can do when it comes to the behaviors and associated outcomes with groups of people whose ancestors were under very different selective pressures.

    Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them.

    Also, the weighty journal Nature has just been merged with Springer; you can be sure that the higher-ups already intend to be the gatekeepers of the truth as the genomic evidence continues to come out. And the New York Times and other MSM outlets will make sure that the people hear what they need to know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. After the last Ice Age, Europe was inhabited by an ancient race of hunter-gatherers with blue eyes and dark skin. They were then largely overwhelmed by lighter-skinned, brown-haired farmers from the Middle East.
    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.

    Yes, no, and no. Blond hair and pale skin were common in northern Europeans long before all of that. The modern European phenotype is attested in the DNA of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers from Motala in Sweden (8,000 BP), from Karelia in Russia (7500-7000 BP), and from Samara in Russia (7,500-7000 BP). Genetic analysis reveals a fully modern European phenotype: pale skin with diverse hair colors (red, blond, black) and diverse eye colors (blue/green, brown) . The combination of blue eyes and dark skin was limited to Western European hunter-gatherers.

    The modern European phenotype most likely emerged during the last ice age of the Upper Paleolithic within an area stretching from the Baltic to mid-Siberia. To date, the earliest known individual with the derived allele for blond hair is from Afontova Gora (c. 18,000 BP).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  153. @Rosie

    Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models.

     

    You still haven't answered my questions, Whiskey?

    (1) If White women want work-shy brutes, why are White men not work-shy brutes? Put another way, would harsh Northern living conditions not select for an attraction to men with foresight, problem-solving ability, and task persistence?

    (2) Who brought black slaves to the Americas and why did they do it? Do you think that motivation continues to be a factor in the immigration issue today?

    (3) If White women want foreigners to come and kill our men, why did White women vote for Trump? In Georgia, for example, 70% of White women voted for Trump. Is there something fundamentally different about White women in Georgia that makes them not actually want foreigners to come and kill their fathers, uncles, brothers, husbands, nephews, and sons?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/ga

    (4) How do you explain women's desire for talented musicians as short-term sexual partners if dominance is the preferred trait?

    https://mic.com/articles/104964/science-finally-explains-why-talented-musicians-are-so-damn-sexy#.Bg866XcGI

    (5) Do you actually have any evidence at all for your theory of women as sadistic voyeurs of death and destruction?

    (6) If the answer to #5 is yes, do you think male infanticide of rivals' offspring might have contributed to any selection pressure for a preference for dominant males? (The lioness, for example, must mate with the strongest, who will otherwise come and kill her cubs by a weaker mate.). In other words, if our mating preferences are as you say, what does that say about men and their fitness to rule?

    (7) Would cuckolding as a female reproductive strategy not necessarily be limited to undetectable cuckoldry, that is, mating with genetically similar strangers?

    BTW Whiskey, regarding #2

    A couple of interesting links.

    From Apple to Koch, big businesses say Trump is wrong on immigration

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/

    Who runs big business?

    As of 2014, there were 51 women CEOs in the Forbes top 1000 highest-earning US companies. There were only 3 women CEOs in the top 50.

    Now I am not a feminist, so I’m not in the least bothered by these disparities, but I won’t take the blame for their actions. That would be much to convenient for these traitors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosie
    Forgot the link.

    http://www.information-age.com/men-women-ceos-fortune-1000-123465514/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. @S. Anonyia
    I think it's more likely blonde hair evolved around the Baltic and spread from there rather than coming in with a wave of invaders from the Eastern steppes (Yamnaya). Populations around the Baltic also happen to have the highest amount of "hunter-gatherer" ancestry in Europeans.

    The earliest individual with the derived allele for blond hair was found in Siberia. She is dated to about 16,000 BC. At the time, Baltic Sea hasn’t even existed yet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. @snorlax
    The phalanx formations were the gayest part of the whole thing.

    The problem with gays in the US military is that they don’t have their own battalions. I’m sure there are plenty of enemies who would be freaked out by homo-troops. Put them on the frontline I say. The trannies too: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_gist/2003/08/scare_tactics.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Hey Steve, was wondering if you’re aware that the Comments are disabled for this piece over at Taki’s. I really enjoy contrasting the comments of your Unz readership with those of the “Takirati.” Thought you might want to know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  157. The articles about Cheddar Man claim he was dark skinned, blue eyed, and lactose intolerant. So maybe lactose tolerance explains the pots, used to store milk, and the axes, used to clear land for pasture. The axes were likely not battle axes. Or at least used much for battle. If the axes were used for battle it was probably against other pastoral people.

    “blond beast pastoralists from the steppes” Hair color genetics is beyond my ability to understand, but from what I read European blonds appear as a result of a mutation that occurred in the Baltic area. The mutation spread because blond chicks are hot.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  158. @27 year old

    honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.”?
     
    "Shut the fuck up nerd."

    Your signal to noise ratio is very low.

    Read More
    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
    Not just that but he's been a "27 year old" for the past 4-7 years. Must be 32 or 33 by now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Anonymous[566] • Disclaimer says:

    What a jerk this guy is. I was going to buy the book but unless it is absolutely crucial, I’ll rely on others to summarize it for me.

    He has hurt himself going forward. The liberal crowd was never going to buy his material. People like us were the most likely buying audience. And he basically attacked all of us.

    Read More
    • Agree: AndrewR
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  160. @Rosie
    BTW Whiskey, regarding #2

    A couple of interesting links.

    From Apple to Koch, big businesses say Trump is wrong on immigration
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/

    Who runs big business?

    As of 2014, there were 51 women CEOs in the Forbes top 1000 highest-earning US companies. There were only 3 women CEOs in the top 50.

    Now I am not a feminist, so I'm not in the least bothered by these disparities, but I won't take the blame for their actions. That would be much to convenient for these traitors.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Almost Missouri

    "I was educated in the 50′s and early 60′s, graduating with a major in history in 1964 and was taught more about ancient wars than pots by two or three orders of magnitude. The Aryan invasions were taught about as an accepted fact and the Indian caste system was attributed to the ancient Aryans, not the late-coming British."
     
    I can assure you it was already very different by the 70's and 80's.

    Today, it' simply delusional. "[A] new secular religion that reject[s] observable reality," as the Z Blog commenter put it.

    “…it was already very different by the 70′s and 80′s.”

    Yes. Already, by about 1969, everything had changed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. @Almost Missouri

    "You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy."
     
    According to Islam, immediately. According to blacks, more or less the same thing. (See Steve's coverage of the never ending appeasement of the #OscarsSoWhite crowd. With real estate, though, it turns out blacks can be relatively easily bought off the land with gibs. Mexicans not so much.)

    " how do you respond to someone who says: 'Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.'?"
     
    The overwhelming majority of Muslims entering the US (and even Europe) were never attacked by the US (or even Europe), but they know well the West's strange guilt fetish and have no qualms about exploiting it. Even in the rare instance that "we" did blow up their house, how about we rebuild their house in their own country among their own people, wouldn't that be better for everyone? Oh wait, we're already doing that to the tune of $trillions!

    ” . . . [T]hey know well the West’s strange guilt fetish . . .”.

    Yeah, AM, maybe there ought to be a statute of limitations on the West’s self-mortification after the 1914-1945 War, which may be giving the casual barbarities of Africans, Middle Easterners, and non-Japanese Asians a pass.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. @bartok

    It’s hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on ... if invasion is wrong.
     
    The mark of an adolescent worldview is to place avoiding hypocrisy at the top of one's moral/political priority list.

    Instead, consider Moldbug (citing Filmer's Patriarchia):


    ... [I]f you want stable government, accept the status quo as the verdict of history. There is no reason at all to inquire as to why the Bourbons are the Kings of France. The rule is arbitrary. Nonetheless, it is to the benefit of all that this arbitrary rule exists, because obedience to the rightful king is a Schelling point of nonviolent agreement. ...
     
    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/11/patchwork-positive-vision-part-1.html

    The mark of an adolescent worldview is to place avoiding hypocrisy at the top of one’s moral/political priority list.

    What is adolescent is to never advance beyond the purple prose period of junior high. Your link… are they attempting to convey a point or to spam paragraphs in case one might hit the target? He jokes about “always be closing” – he was indeed joking.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. @Anonym

    A better argument against Hitler than Reich’s is this:

    Invasion is wrong.
     
    It's hypocritical to say that and accept the land that we live on now in the colonies of the Anglosphere if invasion is wrong. It invalidates those gains from invasion, making them illegitimate. And it is not like the many invasions throughout history were limited to Europe or Europeans.

    It is best to avoid being invaded. Given a choice between the two, I'd rather be the hammer than the nail. I agree that if we can have very limited to no immigration and no invasions, that would be a lot better.

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.

    Invasion is morally acceptable if your choices are “expand” or “be extinguished”. Given the primacy of population w.r.t power in past years, and the limited ability to extract food from the land, I suspect that there was a degree of truth in “expand” or “die.”

    Now, however, power is more a function of technology, productivity, and infrastructure — all of which are related. And so there is no need to expand, and therefore it would be immoral to do so.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Now, however, power is more a function of technology, productivity, and infrastructure — all of which are related. And so there is no need to expand, and therefore it would be immoral to do so.

    That's not particularly forward thinking because eventually you hit Malthusian limits. They can be postponed somewhat but eventually you will hit levels of how much food can be created and how much waste can be treated, amongst other uses of energy, by watts per square meter of solar flux.

    If you can defend territory until it is fleshed out enough with your population to grow at a more orderly pace, you can ultimately build a larger population with more resources and more ability to defend and project force. If the founders of the USA had thought along your lines they would still be stuck with the 13 colonies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. @JackOH
    Thanks, AM. You and Steve have me wondering when, if ever, invasion (or expulsions, resettlements, displacements, and so on) and its consequences ever gain the character of permanent, unchallengeable legitimacy.

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: "Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds."?

    We, many of us, on this site kvetch about all those Muslims invited to settle in Europe and the States, bemoan honor killings, grooming, and mass killings, but how do you respond to someone who says: “Those people (Muslims) did have a home until we blew it to shreds.”?

    I respond that “we” didn’t do jack shit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. One of your best columns ever, Steve! If Taki’s ever goes dark, I hope Unz will archive all the work you’ve done there.

    Along with some others here, I have one quibble about your conclusion: I understand your greater point vis-à-vis the Zeroth Amendment and Merkel’s Mangy Mufti Merkin, but the question of any given invasion and its result is more of a who/whom matter rather than one of absolute morality: No Manifest Destiny, no golden age Beach Boys California.

    History is made
    History is made to seem unfair

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    I hope so too. It does look like the Internet Archive saves Taki's pages: https://web.archive.org/web/20180328143147/http://takimag.com/article/reichs_laboratory_steve_sailer
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. @Anonymous
    The book says that Neanderthal genes are not present in blacks, present in whites, and more so in Asians. The genes are associated with infertility (related to hybridization).

    Shades of Rushton's r/K theory?

    You are misunderstanding the claim. It doesn’t mean “more Neanderthal” = less fecund. Read about Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @syonredux
    RE: The Aesir-Vanir War*,

    Some have speculated that the IE "War of the Functions" ("sovereigny" and "warrior" functions vs farming-herding) might have a quasi-historical basis, which makes a passage like this rather interesting:


    You see, the Yamnaya steppe nomads who were the predecessors of the Aryans who invaded India were actually a hybrid of two even more ancient peoples: a northern steppe race and a southern race from Armenia or Iran.

     

    *From Henry Adams Bellows translation of the Völuspá

    On the host his spear | did Othin hurl,
    Then in the world | did war first come;
    The wall that girdled | the gods was broken,
    And the field by the warlike | Wanes was trodden.

     

    Don’t forget the modern verse of Page & Plant. ;)

    How soft your fields so green
    Can whisper tales of gore
    Of how we calmed the tides of war
    We are your overlords

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. @Luke Lea
    Steve writes: "But a close reader of his book can enjoy his prodigious research without taking terribly seriously Reich’s prejudices."

    Those aren't prejudices. They are insecurities. If you watch his lectures and look at the body language it is clear that he is a timid man. Also pretty egocentric and proud. What do you call timid nerdish proudness? Scared boldness? Something like that.

    The mannerisms of someone who knows he’s handling dynamite and better be really careful?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. @Vinay
    Racial theories of history have as about as problematic a record as, say, subprime mortgages. In both cases, proponents may feel pretty confident that they’re still more or less right but the rest of us tend to be rather skeptical.

    Point being, you’d want honest genetics researchers to do what David Reich is doing and avoid immediately jumping to racial explanations for the data, as much as possible.

    For example, I’ve never really understood why historical correlation of last names with social status implies anything much about mobility. If you find that people with the last name Blacksmith 1000 years ago were....uhh, blacksmiths, and that holds true today, would you conclude that there has been no social mobility at all in the descendants of those ancient Blacksmiths? Or would you think that, maybe, they changed their last name some time after they changed occupations?

    So look at the surnames of nobles who are preoccupied with their lineages and police each other assiduously. Sweden is instructive here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vinay
    “Sweden is instructive here”

    Possibly but Steve basically used the same rationale for inferring that India had ZERO mobility for a millenia! But Indian last names seem like a poor way to infer that, since many seem to be mostly descriptive stuff, like occupation or village, rather than clan or ancestry. Not the kind of thing passed down over centuries!

    Maybe there’s some more rigorous methodology used in the book but Steve hasn’t given any indication of that in the half dozen times he’s brought up the topic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @jJay
    I am just a lay person reading the news and few technical articles on the subject of racial differences. Wouldn't it be just astounding that humans who migrated away from each other in groups 40k years ago end up with different skin colors, different average heights and builds, different hair, different muscle makeup, and different susceptibility to diseases end up scoring exactly the same on IQ tests?

    When I watch sports like basketball and football I notice that the black athletes exhibit a level of realtime intelligence and alertness, beyond their physical ability, that athletes of other races do not. What a terrible thing to say.

    Indians are winning all the spelling contests and East Asians are killing on the math. The horror!

    The professional baseball season is starting. Why are there so many Mestizos on the rosters?

    “Why are there so many Mestizos on the rosters?”

    There aren’t that many plain mestizos in major league baseball although there are some. There are more triracial pardos and biracial mulattos.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @AndrewR
    Your signal to noise ratio is very low.

    Not just that but he’s been a “27 year old” for the past 4-7 years. Must be 32 or 33 by now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    OT: Was at a presentation the other day and saw an interesting graph. Wages as a percent of GDP have fallen steadily since ~1970 from ~50% of GDP to 43%. Meanwhile, since the early 2000s, corporate profits have increased from ~5% to ~9% of GDP.

    Now, corporate profits/GDP didn't increase from 1970 to early 2000s so they can't be blamed completely. Still, it's interesting.

    But it's obvious that US workers have been getting the shaft for 45 years. Hard to say what the causes are, here's a couple of guesses:

    1. Move to service economy
    2. Immigration
    3. Women entering the work force
    4. Automation
    5. Higher corporate profits (last 15 years)

    These are truly uninformed guesses, so if others have better ideas, have at it.

    The Milken Revolution did a lot to encourage corporations to try harder to make higher profits.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yeah, but Milken was around in the late 80s (I think), but corporate profits as a % of GDP didn't take off until early 2000s.

    Wages as a % of GDP had been steadily falling since early 1970s.

    But there seems to be no doubt that there's a steady reduction in worker wages since the early 1970s. Could be that women entering the workforce, automation and immigration started it but corporate profits have exacerbated the trend for the past 15 years.

    Who knows.

    But no doubt that Americans workers are now getting a lot less of the pie.
    , @Brutusale
    Milken more than buyout kings like Icahn and KKR?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @Numinous

    Since 1929, anthropologists have assured us that race is just a social construct, that ancient peoples made pots not war, that Aryan conquests in India and Europe were Nazi delusions, that the caste system was imposed on the egalitarian Indians by British colonialists, and many other agreeable suppositions.
     
    Once again, you let exaggeration get the better of you. The Aryan invasion theory of India hadn't even been propounded by that time. The Indus Valley Civilization excavations were just getting started in the 1920s, and historical theories weren't former until later.

    And in articles like these, why do you keep harping on the hypothetical (though highly plausible) Aryan conquest of India instead of, say the well-known Saxon or Normal conquests of Britain? Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner's boot, is, eh?

    There is literally no one who claims that the British created or imposed a caste system on India; that's something you've just plucked out of thin air. What some people have claimed is that the British codified caste into law and tied it to the political rewards system, which made it rigid and inflexible in a way it wasn't before (though it could be plenty bad for the lower castes.) If anything, the latest genetic evidence reveals that there must have been large scale mixing of different castes until not too long ago. It was likely the invasions (Muslims and then British) that forced the creation of multiple tiers of subaltern castes that then severely proscribed intermarriage.

    Painting white Englishmen as conquered people is not cool, but dark-skinned Indians, forever conditioned to be under a foreigner’s boot, is, eh?

    To paraphrase Trump: Somebody’s doing the paintings.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Anonymous[382] • Disclaimer says:
    @Almost Missouri
    Like other commenters here, I can't regard Reich's gratuitous slandering of the giants on whose shoulders he stands as a mere technical glitch of no larger significance. That the victims of his slander are old or were already character-assassinated in prior pogroms are not mitigating factors.

    I won't be buying his book.

    I do recommend the book. It’s written in quite a clear style, no Steven Pinker words. It has a bit of a mystery novel aspect to it, with time machine sci fi thrown in. And it’s pretty detailed about how exactly, technically, they get the data they get, the machines, the procedures, the math. It’s not easy, and it’s subject to a certain amount of interpretation, so anthropologists are not out of work just yet.In fact it’s a very interdisciplinary job, starting with they have to get their hands on old bones.

    You can take a bit of pride in how Reich apprenticed in Europe, then came back tho the US and duplicated the set up, but with Henry Ford style mass production as the goal.

    But, yeah, Reich does seem reticent at times to make explicit some of the things suggested in the book. For instant, population replacement meant rape and pillage, right? Just say that. Although you do have to get your head around the enormous time spans involved, so maybe other explanations fit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @Steve Sailer
    The Milken Revolution did a lot to encourage corporations to try harder to make higher profits.

    Yeah, but Milken was around in the late 80s (I think), but corporate profits as a % of GDP didn’t take off until early 2000s.

    Wages as a % of GDP had been steadily falling since early 1970s.

    But there seems to be no doubt that there’s a steady reduction in worker wages since the early 1970s. Could be that women entering the workforce, automation and immigration started it but corporate profits have exacerbated the trend for the past 15 years.

    Who knows.

    But no doubt that Americans workers are now getting a lot less of the pie.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Part of the take off in the early 2000s was the rise of high margin, small workforce companies like Apple (post-iPod), Facebook, and Google.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. @Pat Boyle
    Hitler suffered from an unlikely run of good luck. That terrible fate cost him his life and his nation.

    Hitler was seduced by his run of initial good luck. He thought he could bully everyone diplomatically because the US was isolationist, and Britain was led by Chamberlain. He thought he could gobble up the surrounding territories unopposed. But eventually the US entered the war and Churchill took over - his luck had run out. His last piece of good luck was that the war ended before the Jews could deploy the bomb they had invented. No point. Germany was already rubble from conventional bombing.

    He like everyone else expected a long war in France. But he stumbled into blitzkrieg victory. The French had more tanks and they had better tanks. But the quick victory over a more powerful opponent led him to try his luck against the Soviet Union. Germany relied on horses for transport. They had no petroleum. Russian tanks were also better and more numerous but again Hitler suffered the misfortune of initial success. He was lured into death struggle with a nation that overmatched his and his people were decimated and occupied.

    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    It was basically triumph of the GDP. USA + Russia > Greater Germany.

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

    I wonder if Hitler had let the USSR invade, would the results have been different? Russia is a horrible place to try to invade. An invading USSR would tend to galvanize support for Hitler and against Stalin, one would think. I am not sure that the amount of territory that Hitler conquered prior to Barbarossa was favorable for this. Stopping at some point earlier might have been advisable.

    That error was committed back in the MK days though. Who would have thought that Russia would have been able to throw off the communist shackles? If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.
     
    Nobody takes that seriously.
    , @Thirdeye

    If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.
     
    Hitler regarded the Slavic Russians as Untermenschen with or without communism. Anti-communism was just the cherry on top of his anti-Russian ideology and a point for rallying support in the rest of Europe (and a successful one at that, until he stepped on the wrong toes).
    , @Diversity Heretic
    Given the excellent defensive skills showed by German troops and formations, even defending long fronts with extended lines of communication in WWII, a Soviet invasion of German-occupied Poland circa 1942 or 1943 would most likely have been an unmitigated disaster for the invaders. Lots of battles like the WWI battles of Tannenburg and Masurian Lakes. Everyone overestimated the advantage attackers had in World War II. Defenders usually did better if adequately supplied and commanded. But everyone remembers Erwin Rommel, not Gotthard Heinrici.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. Anonymous[382] • Disclaimer says:

    You’ll probably learn as much (or more) from Greg’s Cochran’s forthcoming review of this book as you you would from the book.

    No way. His three posts and a podcast about Bryan Caplan’s Case Against Education contained hardly anything about the book. Cochran only mentions stuff he agrees with or against which he has some contrarian opinion. But he mainly just goes off on tangents where he can write about himself or some pet peeve. He can be fun to read, but not as a replacement for a book.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  179. “Reich wants us to comprehend, no race is wholly unmixed if you look enough millennia back into the past:”

    Please share this article by using the link below. When you cut and paste an article, Taki’s Magazine misses out on traffic, and our writers don’t get paid for their work. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. http://takimag.com/article/reichs_laboratory_steve_sailer/print#ixzz5B6G9rVkm

    When race scientists referred to pure races, I doubt they ever thought they were unmixed. More likely is that they were referring to purity in their present forms or some snapshot in time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  180. @Jenner Ickham Errican
    One of your best columns ever, Steve! If Taki’s ever goes dark, I hope Unz will archive all the work you’ve done there.

    Along with some others here, I have one quibble about your conclusion: I understand your greater point vis-à-vis the Zeroth Amendment and Merkel’s Mangy Mufti Merkin, but the question of any given invasion and its result is more of a who/whom matter rather than one of absolute morality: No Manifest Destiny, no golden age Beach Boys California.

    History is made
    History is made to seem unfair


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPFNdaxraF8

    I hope so too. It does look like the Internet Archive saves Taki’s pages: https://web.archive.org/web/20180328143147/http://takimag.com/article/reichs_laboratory_steve_sailer

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @james wilson
    "Dunno. HGs typically don’t take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists." You mean, like, American Injuns?

    “Dunno. HGs typically don’t take to agriculture very well. For example, the HGs in Britain were largely displaced by the incoming Neolithic agriculturalists.” You mean, like, American Injuns?

    Probably.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @Tulip
    Hitler got 60 miles from Moscow in 1941, before the US entered the war. If the German Army had gotten some milder weather or some better logistics, Eurasia might be speaking German today.

    Hitler got 60 miles from Moscow in 1941, before the US entered the war. If the German Army had gotten some milder weather or some better logistics, Eurasia might be speaking German today.

    Definitely a dark timeline….

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

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

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @megabar
    Invasion is morally acceptable if your choices are "expand" or "be extinguished". Given the primacy of population w.r.t power in past years, and the limited ability to extract food from the land, I suspect that there was a degree of truth in "expand" or "die."

    Now, however, power is more a function of technology, productivity, and infrastructure -- all of which are related. And so there is no need to expand, and therefore it would be immoral to do so.

    Now, however, power is more a function of technology, productivity, and infrastructure — all of which are related. And so there is no need to expand, and therefore it would be immoral to do so.

    That’s not particularly forward thinking because eventually you hit Malthusian limits. They can be postponed somewhat but eventually you will hit levels of how much food can be created and how much waste can be treated, amongst other uses of energy, by watts per square meter of solar flux.

    If you can defend territory until it is fleshed out enough with your population to grow at a more orderly pace, you can ultimately build a larger population with more resources and more ability to defend and project force. If the founders of the USA had thought along your lines they would still be stuck with the 13 colonies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @wrd9
    There are over 50 Muslim majority countries. The vast majority are not at war. The "refugees" can go to any one of them.

    wrd9, that sounds like a pretty good reply to me.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    OT: Was at a presentation the other day and saw an interesting graph. Wages as a percent of GDP have fallen steadily since ~1970 from ~50% of GDP to 43%. Meanwhile, since the early 2000s, corporate profits have increased from ~5% to ~9% of GDP.

    Now, corporate profits/GDP didn't increase from 1970 to early 2000s so they can't be blamed completely. Still, it's interesting.

    But it's obvious that US workers have been getting the shaft for 45 years. Hard to say what the causes are, here's a couple of guesses:

    1. Move to service economy
    2. Immigration
    3. Women entering the work force
    4. Automation
    5. Higher corporate profits (last 15 years)

    These are truly uninformed guesses, so if others have better ideas, have at it.

    Add trade with third world to the list, especially letting China into WTO with most favored nation status, which means they can’t be treated any differently tariff-wise than high-wage countries in Europe, which forced Western corporations to invest and produce there or else go out of business, especially in labor-intensive forms of manufacture. In other words, it caused a decline in the relative demand for labor, and hence wages were drawn down.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. @Seamus Padraig
    You must have missed the end of the article:

    Unlike in the days of barbaric nomads, we now have territorial states with internationally recognized borders, countries that are the joint property of their citizens and thus are not the property of noncitizens.
     
    Did the Indians fall under the Peace of Westphalia? Well, no. They were much closer to being "barbarous nomads" - i.e., Paleo/Neolithic peoples without permanent dwellings and (relatively) fixed borders. The only exceptions I can think of in N. America (that is, not Mexico or S. America) were the Pueblo-type Indians of the Southwest.

    Some were, some weren’t. Northern coastal tribes had permanent settlements somewhat like Jomon settlements in ancient Japan. The Chumash had long-established settlement in the Channel Islands. The Iroquois had a relatively advanced economy and even a political system. But there is substantial evidence for major demographic replacement with the Athabaskan migration through the Great Plains and points beyond. Those on the receiving end would have been fortunate to face a result more like that of the European migration through North America.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @Anonym
    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    It was basically triumph of the GDP. USA + Russia > Greater Germany.

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

    I wonder if Hitler had let the USSR invade, would the results have been different? Russia is a horrible place to try to invade. An invading USSR would tend to galvanize support for Hitler and against Stalin, one would think. I am not sure that the amount of territory that Hitler conquered prior to Barbarossa was favorable for this. Stopping at some point earlier might have been advisable.

    That error was committed back in the MK days though. Who would have thought that Russia would have been able to throw off the communist shackles? If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

    Nobody takes that seriously.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    It is generally discounted but that doesn't mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case. There has been an immense amount of propaganda towards creating a cartoon view of WW2, where the evil beast Hitler was champing at the bit to enslave and genocide everyone in the entire world, Western Europe, Britain, even the USA, some time after he taught everyone German. So it's only natural for the majority of people and historians to take the established view.

    It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet - he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa. And there was a large military buildup prior to the event. Governments don't telegraph their invasions in terms of announcements, that's for sure.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy#/media/File%3ASecond_World_War_Europe_05_1941_de.svg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @Jack D

    Maybe the biggest argument against Hitler is that he lost.
     
    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only "might makes right"? I don't think so. Stalin "won" but this did not win the "argument" in his favor.

    Is that true? Is that it? Is there really no such thing as morality, only “might makes right”? I don’t think so. Stalin “won” but this did not win the “argument” in his favor.

    Of course, you are Jewish, I don’t expect you to ever see Hitler as a good or even as a neutral guy. That’s natural, wrt you and your tribe personally. As far as adopting your tribe’s morality re: Hitler… what’s in it for me? Is it good for the Whites? What’s your pitch?

    So far I have heard from you in response to AnotherDad’s comment here:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/david-brooks-denounces-tribalism-and-also-is-stoked-to-learn-hes-steven-pinkers-3rd-cousin/#comment-2216819

    AnotherDad

    Cut through all the b.s. and Brooksian\Wilkinsonian ideology as just parasitism on white nations. The evil here–and yes it is evil–is not their (stupid) utopian dreams. (Stupid utopianism seems to be a common human failing.) If they want it and want to build it–great. No, the evil is that they insist on having their utopia in *other people’s nations*. The evil is insisting that the rest of us–we normies–are not allowed to have our lives in our nations, but must be part of their glorious experiment.

    Jack D

    If you want your nation “back” then win at the ballot box, take back all the institutions – the courts, the universities, the media and the permanent government and it’s yours. Better hurry ’cause the demographics look worse every day. The globalists had a 50 year head start while you were snoozing so you had better rush to catch up.

    Not a great deal of reciprocated empathy there. But you wish me to feel empathy for your special case that for me is not much different than Hutu vs Tutsi, Israelite vs Canaanite, Turk vs Armenian, Mongols vs everyone who was left in their wake.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. @Calvin X Hobbes
    Maybe most iSteve readers know this already, but Greg Cochran is going to review this book.

    https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2018/03/21/who-we-are/

    It'll be interesting to see how Greg reacts to Reich spewing irrational rage against him and his late friend Henry Harpending.

    It sounds like Reich did not spew irrational rage against Steve, but I'll bet he would if someone were to ask his opinion about Steve.

    It sounds like Reich did not spew irrational rage against Steve, but I’ll bet he would if someone were to ask his opinion about Steve.

    Maybe not, because Steve can fight back with wit, and has a lot of secret fans in elite circles. Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Razib and Dienekes are briefly mentioned in Reich's book.
    , @Anonymous
    Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?

    That here in flyover country is not a terribly common reply, but out East you hear that a lot. "Never heard of him".

    In some cases it's obviously humorous, but a lot of the time people say that when they know damn well who someone or something is and further know that you know they do too. Do they think that if they say it enough the person in question will be unpersoned?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Anonymous
    Apparently, according to the work of Messrs. Ralph & Coop, any random typical German is a closer genetic relation to any random typical Pole than to another random German.

    Poles, and other groups throughout the Baltic region, have a mixed Germanic-Slavic heritage. The only distinctively Slavic thing about the Poles is their language.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lars Porsena
    So do the Russians and all the other slavs and the Germans. The Vikings went east and west, though the ones that went east are sometimes called Varangians rather than Vikings. The slavs of all types and the germanics have been occupying neighboring lands (or the same land) and mixing it up for at least a millennia.

    The semi-official 'last Viking king', Norwegian Harald Sigurdsson, spent part of his life in exile under Yaroslav the Wise (norse name is Jarlsleif) in Ukraine, after he lost the throne of the North Sea Viking empire to King Canute, and then in Byzantium as a captain of the Varangian guard.

    The Rurik dynasty of Russian czars were Varangian scandinavians and the founders of Kievan Rus. Veliky Novgorod is in the Norse chronicles as Holmgard.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harald_Hardrada
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaroslav_the_Wise
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_of_Novgorod

    Poles are "lechitic", western slavic, along with the Czechs and Slovaks. Roman alphabet and Roman religion. Czechs are probably the most germanized of all the slavs, although I doubt that is a good thing. They even invented German beer (in the city of Pilsen, or Plzen, hence 'pilsner' lager).
    , @Lex
    And genetics(r1a1).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. @Luke Lea

    It sounds like Reich did not spew irrational rage against Steve, but I’ll bet he would if someone were to ask his opinion about Steve.
     
    Maybe not, because Steve can fight back with wit, and has a lot of secret fans in elite circles. Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?

    Razib and Dienekes are briefly mentioned in Reich’s book.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. @syonredux

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.
     
    Nobody takes that seriously.

    It is generally discounted but that doesn’t mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case. There has been an immense amount of propaganda towards creating a cartoon view of WW2, where the evil beast Hitler was champing at the bit to enslave and genocide everyone in the entire world, Western Europe, Britain, even the USA, some time after he taught everyone German. So it’s only natural for the majority of people and historians to take the established view.

    It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet – he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa. And there was a large military buildup prior to the event. Governments don’t telegraph their invasions in terms of announcements, that’s for sure.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy#/media/File%3ASecond_World_War_Europe_05_1941_de.svg

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    It is generally discounted but that doesn’t mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case.
     
    I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don't hold up.

    It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet – he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa.
     
    Courtesy of the Hitler-Stalin Pact.....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @Anonym
    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    It was basically triumph of the GDP. USA + Russia > Greater Germany.

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

    I wonder if Hitler had let the USSR invade, would the results have been different? Russia is a horrible place to try to invade. An invading USSR would tend to galvanize support for Hitler and against Stalin, one would think. I am not sure that the amount of territory that Hitler conquered prior to Barbarossa was favorable for this. Stopping at some point earlier might have been advisable.

    That error was committed back in the MK days though. Who would have thought that Russia would have been able to throw off the communist shackles? If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.

    If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.

    Hitler regarded the Slavic Russians as Untermenschen with or without communism. Anti-communism was just the cherry on top of his anti-Russian ideology and a point for rallying support in the rest of Europe (and a successful one at that, until he stepped on the wrong toes).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Hitler regarded the Slavic Russians as Untermenschen with or without communism. Anti-communism was just the cherry on top of his anti-Russian ideology and a point for rallying support in the rest of Europe (and a successful one at that, until he stepped on the wrong toes).

    In hindsight with genomic maps of the world, world maps of IQ etc. it's pretty easy to point out how dumb an idea it was that Russians were in the same league of spear/bow wielding easy targets that say, Amerinds or Australian aborigines were in terms of yielding their territory. I think the British with their island maritime experience would have had significantly better knowledge of what peoples are like compared to Germans, and warring in Europe was a pretty common thing over the centuries.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @Calvin X Hobbes
    "Our masters have already foreseen this and neutralized it by the strategy of flooding Western nations with so many unassimilable immigrants that whatever conclusions people finally reach, it will be too late to act upon them."

    Do our masters think they'll benefit from this somehow? Or are they so malevolent that they're willing to do harm to themselves so as to do even more harm to the rest of us? Or are they mentally ill? It's a mystery to me.

    It’s a mystery to me, too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @joklo
    So look at the surnames of nobles who are preoccupied with their lineages and police each other assiduously. Sweden is instructive here.

    “Sweden is instructive here”

    Possibly but Steve basically used the same rationale for inferring that India had ZERO mobility for a millenia! But Indian last names seem like a poor way to infer that, since many seem to be mostly descriptive stuff, like occupation or village, rather than clan or ancestry. Not the kind of thing passed down over centuries!

    Maybe there’s some more rigorous methodology used in the book but Steve hasn’t given any indication of that in the half dozen times he’s brought up the topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gcochran
    The typical jati has been very, very endogamous for two or three thousand years.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @anonymous
    Reich (great name, by the way) has the same nasty habit as the rest of us members of homo sap--he needs to eat. As the saying goes he won't bite the hand that feeds him, hence the circumspection. As to Watson and Murray, Watson is an old, old man who made his bones back in the day and probably doesn't give a rat's ass what others think and Murray was essentially excommunicated by High Church Liberalism (assuming he was even a member) with "The Bell Curve." I guess you can credit Reich with having at least one eye open to reality--which is a lot more than you can say about his peers.

    Watson is an old, old man who … probably doesn’t give a rat’s ass what others think

    Not so sure (from 28 Nov 2014):

    James Watson, the world-famous biologist who was shunned by the scientific community after linking intelligence to race, said he is selling his Nobel Prize because he is short of money after being made a pariah.

    Mr Watson said he is auctioning the Nobel Prize medal he won in 1962 for discovering the structure of DNA, because “no-one really wants to admit I exist”….

    Mr Watson told the Financial Times he had become an “unperson” after he “was outed as believing in IQ” in 2007 and said he would like to use money from the sale to buy a David Hockney painting.

    Mr Watson, who shared the 1962 Nobel Prize for uncovering the double helix structure of DNA, sparked an outcry in 2007 when he suggested that people of African descent were inherently less intelligent than white people….

    Mr Watson said his income had plummeted following his controversial remarks in 2007, which forced him to retire from the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on Long Island, New York. He still holds the position of chancellor emeritus there.

    “Because I was an ‘unperson’ I was fired from the boards of companies, so I have no income, apart from my academic income,” he said.

    The Russian billionaire who bought the medal returned it to Watson out of respect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brutusale
    The Chinese don't give a rat's ass. They want his brain.

    https://www.chinamoneynetwork.com/2018/03/19/nobel-laureate-james-watson-lead-international-life-science-research-center-shenzhen
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. Anonymous[326] • Disclaimer says:
    @Luke Lea

    It sounds like Reich did not spew irrational rage against Steve, but I’ll bet he would if someone were to ask his opinion about Steve.
     
    Maybe not, because Steve can fight back with wit, and has a lot of secret fans in elite circles. Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?

    Reich would probably say he never heard of him. Steve who?

    That here in flyover country is not a terribly common reply, but out East you hear that a lot. “Never heard of him”.

    In some cases it’s obviously humorous, but a lot of the time people say that when they know damn well who someone or something is and further know that you know they do too. Do they think that if they say it enough the person in question will be unpersoned?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @Luke Lea
    Steve writes: "But a close reader of his book can enjoy his prodigious research without taking terribly seriously Reich’s prejudices."

    Those aren't prejudices. They are insecurities. If you watch his lectures and look at the body language it is clear that he is a timid man. Also pretty egocentric and proud. What do you call timid nerdish proudness? Scared boldness? Something like that.

    Nicholas Wade is very mild-mannered also. He was the featured guest at a dinner group I used to attend.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @Whiskey
    Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models

    Whiskey, you should write a version of this called “Let’s Generalize About Women.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @Thirdeye

    If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.
     
    Hitler regarded the Slavic Russians as Untermenschen with or without communism. Anti-communism was just the cherry on top of his anti-Russian ideology and a point for rallying support in the rest of Europe (and a successful one at that, until he stepped on the wrong toes).

    Hitler regarded the Slavic Russians as Untermenschen with or without communism. Anti-communism was just the cherry on top of his anti-Russian ideology and a point for rallying support in the rest of Europe (and a successful one at that, until he stepped on the wrong toes).

    In hindsight with genomic maps of the world, world maps of IQ etc. it’s pretty easy to point out how dumb an idea it was that Russians were in the same league of spear/bow wielding easy targets that say, Amerinds or Australian aborigines were in terms of yielding their territory. I think the British with their island maritime experience would have had significantly better knowledge of what peoples are like compared to Germans, and warring in Europe was a pretty common thing over the centuries.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. @Anon
    It's like Douglas Murray agreeing with the Right but also attacking the Right because of its baggage.

    Reich wants to have the cake and eat it too. Be a real scientist but also respectable by PC.

    Much of the discourse is about needles vs bubbles. When bubbles meet needles, needles win by pricking the bubbles. So, bubbles need safe space from needles.

    It's like when paper meets scissors, scissors win. So, the PC has to use the hammer against the scissor.

    It’s like Douglas Murray agreeing with the Right but also attacking the Right because of its baggage.

    This is a widespread phenomenon, isn’t it? Murray will rail against the effects of Islamic immigration, but don’t get him started on that imbecile Trump!

    Peter Hitchens will decry mass Third World immigration into Britain, then denounce Enoch Powell for noticing it too soon. According to Peter, Powell made it impossible to do anything about it because he upset the liberals too much.

    Steven Pinker plays this game as well. He tells his audience that the alt-right attracts young converts because it exposes them to truths that those on the left deny. But it’s not a problem, according to Pinker, because the left just has to get the young people to accept its convoluted and unconvincing arguments against those truths.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    What's so difficult to grasp about people considering issues on their own merits, while not holding the other opinions of those who agree with them on some issues? Are we all required to engage in groupthink?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. @RebelWriter
    All I find shocking in the least is that a prominent anthropologist has taken the trouble to write a book categorizing what pretty much everyone who follows this science at all already knows. His preaching aside, Reich has nailed what I've read through other sources, if Steve accurately reflects what's written in the book, which I've no reason to doubt.
    All they have left is a battle over terminology, it seems; ancestry rather than race, and what to call the ancient Aryan peoples.
    The biggest battles of modern science are all about the feelz, and not about the results, or actual science. Has Reich's career been "Bell Curved" with this book? Will his speeches be protested, as Murray's have been? Maybe as only Nixon could have gone to China, only a tribesman could write this book.

    All they have left is a battle over terminology, it seems; ancestry rather than race, and what to call the ancient Aryan peoples.

    “Race” originally meant ancestry: the term has its origins in horse racing. Somehow the meaning changed to something like “visible phenotypic differences shared by a group”. Hence it was possible for 18th Century writers to talk about “the German race” or “the French race”, although nowadays we would think of the two as belonging to the same race.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Shakespeare used "race" to mean lineage (human or equine), horse race, breed of race horses, a root (like a radish), and rapidly running water. To the playful Shakespearean mind, they all seemed to overlap to some degree in meaning.

    Among thoroughbred race horses, color is unimportant since they know the full ancestry of each horse back 15 or 20 generations. It's less important whether a horse is black, bay, or white than how many times Northern Dancer is in its pedigree.

    With humans, it's hard to know pedigrees, so we pay attention to things like color as a clue.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @James N. Kennett

    All they have left is a battle over terminology, it seems; ancestry rather than race, and what to call the ancient Aryan peoples.
     
    "Race" originally meant ancestry: the term has its origins in horse racing. Somehow the meaning changed to something like "visible phenotypic differences shared by a group". Hence it was possible for 18th Century writers to talk about "the German race" or "the French race", although nowadays we would think of the two as belonging to the same race.

    Shakespeare used “race” to mean lineage (human or equine), horse race, breed of race horses, a root (like a radish), and rapidly running water. To the playful Shakespearean mind, they all seemed to overlap to some degree in meaning.

    Among thoroughbred race horses, color is unimportant since they know the full ancestry of each horse back 15 or 20 generations. It’s less important whether a horse is black, bay, or white than how many times Northern Dancer is in its pedigree.

    With humans, it’s hard to know pedigrees, so we pay attention to things like color as a clue.

    Read More
    • Replies: @res
    It is interesting that color seems to have such limited meaning for horses (also dogs and cats) compared to humans. Any thoughts on why that might be? Is the skin/hair difference a part of it? Or is it an artifact of people (historically) breeding domestic animals for behavior rather than appearance? Are there any good phenotypic correlations with color for those animal species?
    , @Brutusale
    My mom just got her results from 23&me. She thought she was French and Portuguese with a smattering of German. It turns out she's English, French and German with a smattering of Portuguese.

    She's still processing the results. It's hard to rethink your ethnic identity at 81.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. @Harry Baldwin
    It’s like Douglas Murray agreeing with the Right but also attacking the Right because of its baggage.

    This is a widespread phenomenon, isn't it? Murray will rail against the effects of Islamic immigration, but don't get him started on that imbecile Trump!

    Peter Hitchens will decry mass Third World immigration into Britain, then denounce Enoch Powell for noticing it too soon. According to Peter, Powell made it impossible to do anything about it because he upset the liberals too much.

    Steven Pinker plays this game as well. He tells his audience that the alt-right attracts young converts because it exposes them to truths that those on the left deny. But it's not a problem, according to Pinker, because the left just has to get the young people to accept its convoluted and unconvincing arguments against those truths.

    What’s so difficult to grasp about people considering issues on their own merits, while not holding the other opinions of those who agree with them on some issues? Are we all required to engage in groupthink?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. @Anonym
    It is generally discounted but that doesn't mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case. There has been an immense amount of propaganda towards creating a cartoon view of WW2, where the evil beast Hitler was champing at the bit to enslave and genocide everyone in the entire world, Western Europe, Britain, even the USA, some time after he taught everyone German. So it's only natural for the majority of people and historians to take the established view.

    It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet - he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa. And there was a large military buildup prior to the event. Governments don't telegraph their invasions in terms of announcements, that's for sure.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy#/media/File%3ASecond_World_War_Europe_05_1941_de.svg

    It is generally discounted but that doesn’t mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case.

    I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don’t hold up.

    It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet – he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa.

    Courtesy of the Hitler-Stalin Pact…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don’t hold up.

    Which arguments do you find most compelling?

    Btw I found a pdf of the book.

    http://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/icebreaker.pdf

    Also a video presentation.

    https://youtu.be/SbBnRZoTHFs

    Interestingly although the early book only gets 3 stars on Amazon (lotta 5s some 1s not much in between) a current book of his gets 4.6. "The Chief Culprit: Stalin's Grand Design to Start World War II". Maybe nobody told the ADL ;) Or now you have to buy books to rate things, giving that many shekels(!) to such viewpoints(!!) is too painful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. @res
    That was a surprise. I don't remember ever seeing no comments allowed on an iSteve Taki's article before. What is up?

    I assume Unz wants the traffic here

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @Twinkie
    Yes.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.

    That’s controversial.

    If by ‘corded ware’ you mean later PIE groups – such as the peoples who migrated from *Europe* to the plains of central Asia to become known as the ‘Iranians’, before their descent into Iran proper, that bridge of land between the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea, some authorities, on the basis of genetic evidence state that the original unadmixed Iranian groups, before their descent into Iran, were, phenotypically fully European in terms of the alleles known to be associated with light skin, light eyes and light hair, not to mention autosomal clustering.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @whereto beguine
    India was invaded by ancient Iranians/Aryans who looked like the Kardashians (Armenians have a claim to being the 'original Aryans'). Genetics tells us they remained distinct as the Brahmin caste.

    First, note that the Iranians have no 'untouchability'. That seems to be an indigenous thing which the Brahmins made use of to enforce their power (pre-Hindu Indian priests may have been 'untouchable' because they had dangerous magic. Clever move by the Brahmins to marginalise the competition with their own beliefs).

    Then, Brahmins were never dominant among the Indian tribes (except in remote elite circles) until the British made Brahmin laws the basis of modern India's 'rule of law' (because the shrewd Brahmins saw which way the wind was blowing, and had many books of 'law' which few had even seen because Brahimn law said non-Brahmins weren't allowed to read them!) . So, by imposing modernity and systematising a previously ad hoc set of negotatiations, 'the British created (what we know as) the caste system'. Before the first British census during Victoria's rule, many Indians didn't even realise they were distinct as Muslims. Just as Saudi money recently had similar effect in other places.

    Buddha led a mass movement against the Brahmins which took over much of India. It took 2000 years for the Brahmins to quash the Buddhists, and again it was the British who unwittingly sealed Brahmin dominance over Buddhists. A group called the Lingayats who everyone thinks are Hindu have just got Supreme Court recognition that they're outside the Brahmin system. Before the British this was not an issue. Most accept the British innovations now, but it's complex. The problem is when outsiders like Americans want to use India as a football in their domestic struggles, and the American left is most guilty of this. In MLK's 1960s struggle, Indians are all over the place and not clear support for either side in your black and white politics.

    Armenians cluster more with the distinctly ‘un-Aryan’ Assyrians than they do with any other ethnicity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. Anonymous[382] • Disclaimer says:

    One effect that the book has had on me is that my time travel fantasies now include visiting a group of my ancestors from 100,000 years ago or more. The detail that they have now about population movements make me wonder more about what they were like, in the flesh.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  210. @RebelWriter
    "To put it another way, the hunter-gatherers are always in trouble when the farmers show up, and the farmers always show up."

    I know you're just trying to be humorous, as there's no evidence of any conflict between the WHG's and the Anatolian Farmers who showed up later in greater numbers. The most likely thing to have happened was the WHG's thought what the farmers were doing looked pretty neat, and assimilated to farmer culture. Now as to Africa, that might be a different story, but how many places still have HG's and farmers living near each other?

    As an aside, my autosomal DNA is just slightly more WHG than ANE, with around 10% Indo European Invader ancestry. My Y DNA is WHG, and so is 47% of my autosomal DNA. How far outside the norm is this, I wonder?

    “there’s no evidence of any conflict”

    Sure there is. Read War Before Civilization.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat Boyle
    Thanks for the tip Greg. I just ordered my copy on Amazon. I have read most of your Christmas book suggestions. Any other book recommendations are very welcome.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. @Twinkie
    Yes.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.

    They weren’t all blond, but they’re the ones hat brought the blonde alleles in. KITLG mutations has been traced back to ancient siberians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. @Vinay
    “Sweden is instructive here”

    Possibly but Steve basically used the same rationale for inferring that India had ZERO mobility for a millenia! But Indian last names seem like a poor way to infer that, since many seem to be mostly descriptive stuff, like occupation or village, rather than clan or ancestry. Not the kind of thing passed down over centuries!

    Maybe there’s some more rigorous methodology used in the book but Steve hasn’t given any indication of that in the half dozen times he’s brought up the topic.

    The typical jati has been very, very endogamous for two or three thousand years.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    OT: Was at a presentation the other day and saw an interesting graph. Wages as a percent of GDP have fallen steadily since ~1970 from ~50% of GDP to 43%. Meanwhile, since the early 2000s, corporate profits have increased from ~5% to ~9% of GDP.

    Now, corporate profits/GDP didn't increase from 1970 to early 2000s so they can't be blamed completely. Still, it's interesting.

    But it's obvious that US workers have been getting the shaft for 45 years. Hard to say what the causes are, here's a couple of guesses:

    1. Move to service economy
    2. Immigration
    3. Women entering the work force
    4. Automation
    5. Higher corporate profits (last 15 years)

    These are truly uninformed guesses, so if others have better ideas, have at it.

    Another factor is the decline in the number of workplaces that are organized by a union. Although the factors that you have listed have contributed to the increasing number of “unorganized” workplaces, management has become quite skilled at resisting organization and willing to use lockouts and non-union workers to break union influence. Individual workers have very little leverage when confronted by management.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @S. Anonyia
    This is completely normal and I think typical of mixed western euro populations like Americans or maybe south Dutch/Belgians/Swiss. Mine is slightly more ANE than WHG, with 13 percent invader ancestry. Husband did same test with virtually identical results.

    Interesting. Thank you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @Tulip
    Hitler got 60 miles from Moscow in 1941, before the US entered the war. If the German Army had gotten some milder weather or some better logistics, Eurasia might be speaking German today.

    The Wehrmacht got closer than that. The “Hedgehog Memorial” in Khimki (a Moscow suburb) is at kilometer 23 on the Leningrad Highway. It marks the spot that is generally accepted as the closest German troops came to Moscow–23 kilometers from the center of Moscow (Red Square). At this point, however, the Wehrmacht was at the end of its rope and was driven back by Red Army offensives beginning December 6, 1941.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. @Anonym
    Triumph of the Will was trumped by Triumph of Heavy Industry.

    It was basically triumph of the GDP. USA + Russia > Greater Germany.

    There is evidence that the USSR was poised to invade Europe.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

    I wonder if Hitler had let the USSR invade, would the results have been different? Russia is a horrible place to try to invade. An invading USSR would tend to galvanize support for Hitler and against Stalin, one would think. I am not sure that the amount of territory that Hitler conquered prior to Barbarossa was favorable for this. Stopping at some point earlier might have been advisable.

    That error was committed back in the MK days though. Who would have thought that Russia would have been able to throw off the communist shackles? If Hitler had realized that the communism was not going to see out a century it likely would have changed the calculus.

    Given the excellent defensive skills showed by German troops and formations, even defending long fronts with extended lines of communication in WWII, a Soviet invasion of German-occupied Poland circa 1942 or 1943 would most likely have been an unmitigated disaster for the invaders. Lots of battles like the WWI battles of Tannenburg and Masurian Lakes. Everyone overestimated the advantage attackers had in World War II. Defenders usually did better if adequately supplied and commanded. But everyone remembers Erwin Rommel, not Gotthard Heinrici.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    Given the excellent defensive skills showed by German troops and formations, even defending long fronts with extended lines of communication in WWII, a Soviet invasion of German-occupied Poland circa 1942 or 1943 would most likely have been an unmitigated disaster for the invaders. Lots of battles like the WWI battles of Tannenburg and Masurian Lakes. Everyone overestimated the advantage attackers had in World War II. Defenders usually did better if adequately supplied and commanded. But everyone remembers Erwin Rommel, not Gotthard Heinrici.

    Finally someone who answered the question I posed. I will have to read up on Heinrici.

    Btw the above video is really good and really watchable. Suvorov is very funny. Hitler got played, big time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. Steppe/Aryan people were not “blond beasts”. Genetic pigmentation data shows they were mostly brunet. Makes sense considering they were half Caucasus Hunter-Gatherer (related to the Neolithic farmers and other Levantines) and half Eastern Hunter-Gatherer (a mix of those dark-skinned Western Hunter-Gatherers and a Siberian component related to Native Americans). Depigmentation was heavily selected for later in the Northern European climate.

    The Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean categories don’t trace a transition from “Steppe” to “Levantine” since Alpines are not a mixture of the other two (they’re a Paleolithic survivor type), and Nordics are depigmented Mediterraneans. It would be more correct to say that both Nordics and Mediterraneans (and Dinarics) represent Levantine/Caucasus morphology while Alpines (and Borrebys, East Baltics, Ladogans) represent indigenous Steppe/Siberian morphology.

    And I don’t know why you bring up the ridiculous racialist ideas of Tom Buchanan/Fitzgerald. They’re still wrong. Europe has no creeping “negroid streak”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  218. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @whereto beguine
    India was invaded by ancient Iranians/Aryans who looked like the Kardashians (Armenians have a claim to being the 'original Aryans'). Genetics tells us they remained distinct as the Brahmin caste.

    First, note that the Iranians have no 'untouchability'. That seems to be an indigenous thing which the Brahmins made use of to enforce their power (pre-Hindu Indian priests may have been 'untouchable' because they had dangerous magic. Clever move by the Brahmins to marginalise the competition with their own beliefs).

    Then, Brahmins were never dominant among the Indian tribes (except in remote elite circles) until the British made Brahmin laws the basis of modern India's 'rule of law' (because the shrewd Brahmins saw which way the wind was blowing, and had many books of 'law' which few had even seen because Brahimn law said non-Brahmins weren't allowed to read them!) . So, by imposing modernity and systematising a previously ad hoc set of negotatiations, 'the British created (what we know as) the caste system'. Before the first British census during Victoria's rule, many Indians didn't even realise they were distinct as Muslims. Just as Saudi money recently had similar effect in other places.

    Buddha led a mass movement against the Brahmins which took over much of India. It took 2000 years for the Brahmins to quash the Buddhists, and again it was the British who unwittingly sealed Brahmin dominance over Buddhists. A group called the Lingayats who everyone thinks are Hindu have just got Supreme Court recognition that they're outside the Brahmin system. Before the British this was not an issue. Most accept the British innovations now, but it's complex. The problem is when outsiders like Americans want to use India as a football in their domestic struggles, and the American left is most guilty of this. In MLK's 1960s struggle, Indians are all over the place and not clear support for either side in your black and white politics.

    If the term ‘Aryan’ is taken to mean the Corded Ware descended groups, typified by the Sintashta/Andronovo horizon – that is the later PIE groups, believed by some to be the ancestors of the Indo-Iranian Steppic groups, then the answer is that they were phenotypically north/eastern European.

    For various reasons, this finding seems to be very hard for certain ‘swarthy’ west/south modern Indo European speakers to accept.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. @syonredux

    It is generally discounted but that doesn’t mean it is wrong. If you read the article there are a few others who have made the case.
     
    I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don't hold up.

    It was not like Stalin was a shrinking violet – he conquered some territory too prior to Barbarossa.
     
    Courtesy of the Hitler-Stalin Pact.....

    I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don’t hold up.

    Which arguments do you find most compelling?

    Btw I found a pdf of the book.

    http://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/icebreaker.pdf

    Also a video presentation.

    Interestingly although the early book only gets 3 stars on Amazon (lotta 5s some 1s not much in between) a current book of his gets 4.6. “The Chief Culprit: Stalin’s Grand Design to Start World War II”. Maybe nobody told the ADL ;) Or now you have to buy books to rate things, giving that many shekels(!) to such viewpoints(!!) is too painful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    I know the arguments (Icebreaker, etc); they don’t hold up.

    Which arguments do you find most compelling?
     
    Of the Stalin was planning on invading Western Europe in 1941 school? None of them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. @Calvin X Hobbes
    "There is a good case to be made that in our modern society we should do a lot to identify higher-ability kids from backgrounds where they might be looked over and try to give them the education and tools that will help them reach whatever potential they have, which includes jumping up several rungs on the economic ladder."

    Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world.

    Among our young black American citizens, there are a few who are "high-ability", though most of those are already in decent schools, not in typical "majority minority" dysfunctional schools. But even in the worst schools there are black students who are at least average in ability and willing to work and behave themselves. The low-hanging fruit in improving the education of those students is to not let disruptive students sabotage their education, but of course the effect of the "school-to-prison pipeline" nonsense is to promote that sabotage.

    And of course there are millions of "low-ability" Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let's do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.

    Our education system, and our government in general, should try to make life better for American citizens. The American citizens in question are the American citizens who actually exist, and not the American citizens of some fantasy world. …

    And of course there are millions of “low-ability” Americans, and the best way to improve their prospects is to reserve the sorts of jobs they can do for American citizens. Let’s do what we can to make life better for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder, rather than telling them they should go to college or should have gone to college.

    Very good comment end-to-end Calvin.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. @Twinkie
    Yes.

    These farmers in turn were inundated, especially in northern Europe, by the blond beast pastoralists from the steppes.
     
    That’s a complete nonsense that Mr. Sailer is pushing to make his “Conan the Barbarian” comparison stick while perhaps also winking to the Nordicist crowd.

    Yamnaya/Corded Ceramic Ware/Proto-Aryans were not blond. They likely looked more like northern Iranians of today.

    Do you have any evidence of that?

    Blonde hair had to come from somewhere. I don’t know where but by the current theories there were 3 suspects, the aryans, the middle eastern farmers, and some indigenous hunter gatherer groups. Did one of these other 2 groups have it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lars Porsena
    Got kicked out of an edit too late.

    My understanding is that bronze age cultures like the ancient Egyptians and the Minoans always depicted themselves with dark hair, although sometimes very light skin. Blond hair did not start appearing in murals until indo-european culture and languages started showing up, like the Hellenic Greeks, who came with a bunch of blond gods.

    Supposedly archaeologists have found sites they identify with Hellenic culture dating back to 3000BC or earlier, bronze age period when the Mycenaeans and Minoans were in Greece, the indo-european Hellenes were in Ukraine between Greece and the steppe where the Yamnaya came from. By 1100BC or so they were in Greece and had blond hair, and I believe the first ever depicted blond hair.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. @Lars Porsena
    Do you have any evidence of that?

    Blonde hair had to come from somewhere. I don't know where but by the current theories there were 3 suspects, the aryans, the middle eastern farmers, and some indigenous hunter gatherer groups. Did one of these other 2 groups have it?

    Got kicked out of an edit too late.

    My understanding is that bronze age cultures like the ancient Egyptians and the Minoans always depicted themselves with dark hair, although sometimes very light skin. Blond hair did not start appearing in murals until indo-european culture and languages started showing up, like the Hellenic Greeks, who came with a bunch of blond gods.

    Supposedly archaeologists have found sites they identify with Hellenic culture dating back to 3000BC or earlier, bronze age period when the Mycenaeans and Minoans were in Greece, the indo-european Hellenes were in Ukraine between Greece and the steppe where the Yamnaya came from. By 1100BC or so they were in Greece and had blond hair, and I believe the first ever depicted blond hair.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. @ThreeCranes
    "In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it."

    Well, I beg to differ. Slavery was abandoned because of the invention of the steam engine, which rendered animal power obsolete. Slavery was as doomed as the horse and buggy would eventually be and for the same reason. Ethics, higher morality etc. had little or nothing to do with it.

    North American Slavery was neither as cruel nor inhuman as today's critics argue. Slaves' life expectancy far exceeded that of Africans in their pre-European contact civilization and still does today if by "slave" you mean what Jesse Jackson does when he opines about the status of black NFL players.

    Had the steam engine and its equivalent not been invented, slavery would be found all over the world to this day--as indeed it still is in unindustrialized parts of the world.

    “In fact, slavery wasn’t abandoned because we suddenly realized blacks were genetically equivalent to us in every important way. It was rejected because we saw the cruelty and inhumanity of it.”

    Well, I beg to differ. Slavery was abandoned because of the invention of the steam engine, which rendered animal power obsolete. …

    Had the steam engine and its equivalent not been invented, slavery would be found all over the world to this day–as indeed it still is in unindustrialized parts of the world.

    Three Cranes, you’re hitting on a useful point–these nominally “moral” concepts take place in a social, economic and technological context.

    However, i don’t think this answers what was going on. Steam power which had been around 100 years still wasn’t dominating the economy–mining industry? some textile mills?–when the British outlawed the slave trade. High pressure steam engines were really just getting going. Locomotives and steam ships didn’t exist. Most useful work was done directly by human or animal power.

    I think you’re basically right about “the world”–and ironically, especially Africa. It would still be full of slaves today but for the white man.

    But there was a long process of social and moral development in Europe–seen in the early aboltion of serfdom in the West and much later in the East. Moral sentiments driven by both Christianity and precisely the detribalization and creation of coherent–”we’re all in this together” “one people”– nations that so enrage Jews, but are a great thing for humanity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. @Thirdeye
    Poles, and other groups throughout the Baltic region, have a mixed Germanic-Slavic heritage. The only distinctively Slavic thing about the Poles is their language.

    So do the Russians and all the other slavs and the Germans. The Vikings went east and west, though the ones that went east are sometimes called Varangians rather than Vikings. The slavs of all types and the germanics have been occupying neighboring lands (or the same land) and mixing it up for at least a millennia.

    The semi-official ‘last Viking king’, Norwegian Harald Sigurdsson, spent part of his life in exile under Yaroslav the Wise (norse name is Jarlsleif) in Ukraine, after he lost the throne of the North Sea Viking empire to King Canute, and then in Byzantium as a captain of the Varangian guard.

    The Rurik dynasty of Russian czars were Varangian scandinavians and the founders of Kievan Rus. Veliky Novgorod is in the Norse chronicles as Holmgard.

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

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

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

    Poles are “lechitic”, western slavic, along with the Czechs and Slovaks. Roman alphabet and Roman religion. Czechs are probably the most germanized of all the slavs, although I doubt that is a good thing. They even invented German beer (in the city of Pilsen, or Plzen, hence ‘pilsner’ lager).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. @Whiskey
    Killing all the White males and making the White women concubines of the invaders is a plus for most White women. So given female power that is what is happening.

    Unless the men oif a race reach African levels if work avoidance and personal dominance, the two are related, their women will always be their natural and eternal enemy seeking to replace them asap with more dominant models

    Whiskey is like an old time Marxist – one who sees all phenomenon as yet another expression of something Marx once wrote – like Labor Theory of Value. Except Whiskey is stuck on the concept of beta males and sexual dominance as his explanation for everything.

    Obviously social/sexual dominance is a factor in human affaires but it isn’t the only factor. People who have found “the one great truth” suffer from a kind of blindness.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. @vinteuil
    "It can’t be an accident that the drama in The Iliad begins with the head OverLord-Dude Agamemnon taking away Achilles prize of war, his concubine Briseus."

    Not to mention that the whole war is based on Paris' seduction/abduction of Helen - an irony not lost on Achilles, in his great speech in Book 9.

    Both the particular incident that triggers The Iliad and the larger context are all about the central importance of female fidelity, and the honoring of that fidelity by other men. This is the central pillar of civilization, Western division. Violate it, and one opens the door to fire and the sword.

    You can see why daughters were married off at 19 in a world without reliable contraception or abortion, especially since women were not economically self-sufficient and there was no government welfare.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Speaking of Steppe people, perhaps it's relevant to mention the English word 'daughter' and its various cognates in other I.E. languages, literally means 'milker', in that the female child was defined by her assigned domestic role.

    'Son' on the other hand, means 'the begotten one'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. <