The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewGuillaume Durocher Archive
Bumbling Towards the Biosingularity
Or, the Accidental Biopolitics of the Culture Wars
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Ultrasound of Emma - 20 weeks old. Credit: Michael Fürstenberg/Flickr

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

Culture wars seem to be everywhere across the West these days. American politics has notoriously been plagued for decades by divisive conflicts over guns, abortion, and gay marriage (now replaced by the exotic trans phenomenon). Europe is also no stranger to such conflicts, whether within or between countries, though in the postwar era these appeared somewhat subdued.

In France, in vitro fertilization and surrogate motherhood will attract the ire of conservative groups, considering such measures unnatural or threatening to the family. There is also growing conflict between French liberal-secular culture and the practices of Muslim immigrants, whether over headscarves, burqas, public religious practice, or sexual segregation.

Between the countries of the European Union, there is an increasingly sharp clash between those Central Europeans who still believe in traditional marriage and the ethnic basis of the nation, and Western Europeans who want to impose a new vision of society under the banner of newly-conceived human rights.

What is the meaning of such conflicts? In no case can the discussion be rational. Cold reason can never move the masses or even be the main driver of any really dedicated movement.

What is the source of such conflicts? Different populations within a society become emotionally attached to various symbols and fight to impose these in the public space. The populations in question can be geographical (urban vs. rural), generational (old vs. young), ethnic (especially for immigrants hailing from very different cultures than the natives), or even cognitive (across our societies political polarization is often predicted by different levels of education).

These populations create subcultures that resonate with themselves through their interaction, lifestyle, and cultural institutions (schools, academia, media). The latter may explain the severity of culture wars in the United States: America has long been big enough to sustain different television stations catering to liberal and conservative sensibilities; this media pluralism thus heightening the polarization of the population. In Europe, national television has tended to be officially non-partisan and thus better able to sustain a kind of social consensus.

In recent years, polarization between educated elites and the popular masses has tended to increase and social media has contributed to an outright fragmentation of the population into innumerable subcultures (from alt-right nationalism to furry fandom).

Democratic politicians, being motivated to win elections, everywhere capitalize on culture wars so as to mobilize voters.

Conservative culture wars are essentially defensive in nature. People grow up with certain things being a given – say, marriage between a man and women, White England, or no Islam in schools – and are shocked when these symbols of wholesome normality are violated. This is the politics of nostalgia and, however healthy such reactions might be, they are essentially negative – defined by what they are against, not what they are for – and tend to lose in the end.

By contrast, progressive culture wars are not rooted in how things were in the past but in new lifestyles and new cultural movements. The new cultural imperatives are typically promoted in a top-down manner by certain left-wing or ethnic elites; but it is also natural enough that young people with a completely different way of life should chafe at the norms and constraints of the past. Traditional cultures emerge in a context of high infant mortality, low life expectancy, lifelong hard labor, and severe economic and other insecurity. The values emerging from and suitable for eighteenth-century French peasants will not necessarily be appropriate for or resonate with functionarized office workers.

Many culture war issues are inherently biopolitical and have profound effects on humanity’s evolutionary future, above all through demographic and reproductive patterns.

Today’s liberal and conservative culture warriors rarely think in evolutionary terms. Liberal dogmas are essentially predicated on the protection of perceived victims (women, ethnic and sexual minorities) and their various rights (both in terms of autonomy and entitlements). Christian conservatives have their own imperatives essentially deriving from the traditional doctrines of their religion (against abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, etc) justified not by reason but the perceived will of God.

Some conservatives are somewhat consciously biopolitical, insofar as they are opposing immigration to maintain their ethny’s predominance in their territory or promoting fertility to sustain national power.

In the cases of liberals and religious conservatives, acts are judged as moral or immoral in themselves. Rarely is a culture war issue judged by the outcomes of this or that policy.

In the ancient republican tradition, best articulated by Aristotle, biopolitics is a fundamental duty of the State according to the following imperatives: that the people perpetuate itself through begetting children, that these children be bred and educated to the highest standards possible, that the society have the right-sized population (neither underpopulated nor overpopulated), and that the society have the common identity necessary to solidarity. The ancient Aristotelian biopolitical tradition harmonizes wonderfully with the modern Darwinian one.

By these criteria, policies and customs should also be judged according to their biological effects. On immigration for instance, Aristotle considered that immigrants should be received insofar as they harmoniously assimilate into the society. Plato went further, prescribing that subversive and divisive elements of the population should be purged through mass expulsion.

Evolutionary nationalists tend to be sympathetic to conservative political movements.

It is obvious that conservative politics almost everywhere is implicitly ethnic, that is, tends to appeal to the historic majority population. Conservative French presidents Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy for instance campaigned on issues of French identity – banning headscarves in schools, fighting (Afro-Islamic) crime, and so on – because they knew these would appeal to native French voters. Right-wing voters’ culturally conservative and ethnic instincts favoring their own people and culture are evidently grounded in psychological mechanisms that emerged throughout our evolutionary history characterized by frequent tribal warfare. Tribes that favored their own people and culture, those for whom this emotionally resonated, tended to outcompete those that did not.

Certain conservative policies are explicitly demographic, such as opposition to immigration and support for higher fertility. But that is just about where the evolutionary relevance of conservative politics ends. The ethnic instinct will not necessarily actually adaptive ends, especially in a modern context very different from that in which we evolved. Right-wing voters’ conservative-ethnic instincts may have evolved to help defend and sustain their tribe, but these sentiments often become focalized on symbolic historic attachments or are outright deviated by media-political elites towards inane causes.

Similarly, while liberals generally support the diversification of the West, they sometimes support policies, for other reasons, that support white majorities.

This is most evident in the case of abortion. Blacks in the United States make up 14% of the population but 42% of abortions, making them three times as likely to abort pregnancies than Americans in general. In 2010, 37% of black pregnancies were terminated through abortion. Hispanics were twice as likely as Whites to have an abortion.

The conclusion is inescapable: the great liberal cause of abortion has been perhaps the single greatest force slowing the decline of the white majority in America. Mostly white conservative Christians have fought over abortion as an important symbol of their culture: ironically, had they total victory in that battle, their subculture would be demographically dispossessed even faster than is currently the case.

Similarly, the Trump Administration’s cutting of foreign aid to NGOs providing abortions and contraceptives in Africa will have, to some degree, heightened the Black Continent’s demographic explosion (the United Nations projects 4 billion Africans before the end of the century). By contrast, liberal policies promoting reproductive rights and women’s empowerment (more years in education, more abortions, more contraceptives) will tend to reduce African fertility. Thus here, conservative policies increase the demographic pressure to Africanize Europe – one of the two or three very great questions of our time – while liberal policies actually help preserve Europe.

As a biopolitical and evolutionary thinker, one can then only be struck by the contradictions and sterility of so many political and cultural-war controversies of today.

The participants seem extraordinarily inconsequential in their thinking. Liberals shriek hysterically at the slightest mention of eugenics. All the same, it is now common practice for Western women to be able to abort their fetus if it is found to have a severe congenital disability (such as Down’s syndrome). So-called human-rights groups vilify eugenics while holding up women’s choice to exterminate a Down’s-syndrome embryo because it has Down’s syndrome as a Sacred Right.

In Poland by contrast, the national-conservative government is spending political capital on a general ban on abortion and in particular of congenitally disabled fetuses. One doubts whether such politics may last or will rather enjoy short-lived hegemony before melting away (witness the collapse of conservative Christian politics in Ireland and of opposition to gay marriage in the United States).

The conscious biostatesman is then quite lonely in this climate. Neither the governing right or left anywhere seems to be much good.

Right-wing governments in America or Brazil might gut science spending or ban research using stem cells. Left-wing movements loudly proclaim their adherence to “science,” while rejecting biological science insofar as this applies to human beings.

It is true that certain right-wingers seem, by their relative insensitivity to egalitarian political correctness, more likely to be aware of certain biological truths.

The British Conservatives are generally a useless lot biopolitically. Nonetheless, there are pangs of consciousness there that are impossible on the left. In 2013, Boris Johnson (now Prime Minister) spoke of the links between genetics, intelligence, and economic inequality in the famous “cornflakes speech.” Matthew Ridley, a science journalist and member of the House of Lords, has given a muscular defense of Brexit as an opportunity to escape the EU’s sometimes draconian anti-biotech regulations (particularly regarding crops). Brexit arch-campaigner and former Downing Street adviser Dominic Cummins recently suggested that Britain’s new Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA) should be headed by Stephen Hsu, a leading geneticist (this led to predictable wailing among the Woke Genetics crowd).

One may be uninterested in biopolitics, but sooner or later biopolitics will take an interest in you. A nation may demographically decline into senile irrelevance, cognitively decline through infertility and brain drain, or indeed may collapse completely into ethno-religious civil war. These are the bitter fruits of unsound biopolitics, often sprouting from evil seeds sown generations earlier. History is also a melancholy graveyard of nations.

Discussion of these matters is typically schizophrenic. Any mention of human enhancement is denounced as eugenics, which itself has become in many circles a self-evident term of abuse, often meaning nothing more than acknowledgment of genetic influence on humans in general. At the same time, there has been a veritable explosion of discussion, books, and media discussing the radical possibilities, including for human enhancement, of CRISPR gene editing technology. This technology, and many more around the corner, will increasingly be making waves and presenting nations with difficult trade-offs.

The people who come to master these technologies and use them rightly will likely represent the next stage of evolution of the human race, acquiring capacities that will themselves spur further scientific breakthroughs and socio-political changes. Who will win this prize? The Chinese? The Indians? The Israelis and their Diaspora? Some high-fertility sect (the Mormons have a great interest in ancestry)? Depending on how harsh the regulatory environment is, it may come down to Elon Musk giving elderly whizz-kids Craig Venter and George Church a few tens of billions of dollars on some tropical island.

In any event, there is no point being backward-looking and nostalgic. This is the path of sterility. One must be archeofuturist: lucidly aware of the basic foundations of human nature – which, exceptionally, may themselves begin to change somewhat in the coming years – of the insights of timeless wisdom, and of the astonishing ability of new technologies to grant us ever-greater levels of power, self-knowledge, and self-mastery. Most will not like to think about biopolitics at all, but the question will inevitably be posed: who will survive and thrive?

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Ideology • Tags: Abortion, Eugenics, Genetics, IQ 
Hide 153 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Cowboy says:

    The dominant tendency, even in a country like America, which formerly prided itself on its freedom from bureaucratic regulation of the details of life, is toward a drab utilitarianism in which all higher aspirations are to be lost.

    -Machen, 1923

    • Replies: @GMC
  2. songbird says:

    America has long been big enough to sustain different television stations catering to liberal and conservative sensibilities; this media pluralism thus heightening the polarization of the population.

    I would say that this is only true to a limited extent.

    There may have been affiliate stations in the South that balked at showing Star Trek’s interracial kiss – the market may have long been there for conservative stations – but on the production end, every major station has long had a leftist ideological tilt.

    For example, take Fox. Fox was really the first broadcast competitor to show up in the late ’80s. (I am speaking of the regular channel, not news). While it may have made some jokes about feminists, it was highly subversive about the family and/or Christianity, in shows like Married with Children and The Simpsons. Later on, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly promoted a sort of semi or psuedo-populism. But I don’t believe he was ever much of a true conservative.

    And the seeming ideological split of cable news is somewhat a more recent phenomenon. About 15 years ago or so, each station had a populist show in a different time slot. CNN had Lou Dobbs who railed about illegal immigration every night. MSNBC actually had Tucker Carlson, who has long questioned the education industry. PBS had The McLaughlin Group which was a roundtable discussion including lefties, but which often included Pat Buchanan.

    • Replies: @Guillaume Durocher
  3. Fucking son of a bitch likes Frankenstein genes.

  4. @songbird

    Very interesting. What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?

  5. German_reader says:

    I’ve noticed that you sometimes retweet David Engels, which really surprised me, because imo he’s a terrible Catholic reactionary who holds all the idiotic views described in your article (seriously claims today’s left is aiming at “transhumanism” and “eugenics”, thinks the hardline stance taken by Poland’s conservatives on abortion is just great etc.). From my perspective that kind of Christian-inspired conservatism is worse than useless and a total dead end.
    However I can’t claim to be enthusiastic about the “biosingularity” either. If it ever happens one will probably have to embrace it, but certain changes (e.g. widespread raising intelligence to genius levels) might have extremely unfortunate and unpredictable consequences.

  6. songbird says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    I believe the main cause of the vitriol is America’s advanced stage of diversity. Especially, the fact that it has more blacks.

    As I see it, white leftists are not evolved to live in a diverse environment, and their natural egalitarian impulses just make them go crazy when exposed to diversity. Skin color is something that is always on display – I don’t think there was anything like it before; you can buy a man in rags new clothes, or feed a hungry man, but you cannot buy a man a new skin. (some qualification here, as it is possible or was possible before mass communications, for limited, local cultural adaptations, like in the South, if they had a long history.) Sometimes, when statues are being taking down, it almost seems like a sea of angry (leftist) white faces.

    Though, I will allow that there may be several minor effects, that make the situation worse without a color angle. (Mississippi often isn’t as woke, though the situation there may be tense) :

    [MORE]

    1.) The perception, more than the reality, that Fox News is ideologically committed to the Right on a corporate level. Or The Wall Street Journal, etc.
    2.) The fact that several power centers are located in America. Like, cultural production via Hollywood. Or the MIC, or arguably America has a larger news-media footprint.
    3.) two-party system
    4.) larger outlay in universities
    5.) a stronger Jewish influence than any other country, after Israel. And on a power level, undoubtedly greater than Israel.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
  7. songbird says:

    Another factor might be conservative shows on AM radio in America. I generally consider it to be pretty weak-kneed, relying on advertising revenue as it does. But I am not sure that Europe has an analogue, at least over the same timeframe.

  8. You can’t type a text into the internet and still be a Laotzian ascetic and humble man of pure nature and sustainability on the basis of purity and material poverty.
    I still think progress needs not to be hushed in order to properly evolve. And I do too believe in the idea that progress might be overestimated. The Gestell is just that: a Gestell – machinery, houses, steel, and chemistry. It’s good as a tool and bad as a means in itself.
    Let’s understand the merits of braininess and of spirituality and of aesthetic adventures and of practical skills of all kinds and in all kinds of contexts all alike.

    I found the part in your essay about Aristotle and Plato most interesting.
    I know an old historian in a remote Swiss Valley who is in contact with half of the scientific world it seems at times (even though this is a wild exaggeration) – about the history of his valley (das Lötschental) high up in the Wallis.+
    Last time I spoke with him, he told me about overpopulation in this valley – in the fifteenth and sixteenth century. Long letters were written to other Kantons, what could be done about the situation. A movement of those willing to leave was founded (later called the Walser movement), and foreign settlements of Walser people began, which over time spread out in a large part of the Alps. In the beginning in regions that were controlled by the Kanton Berne, later they moved as far away as the upper Rhine Valley – which is now in the possession of Austria, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein.

    The man I met every now and then organizes meetings with his extended family. He built a house with a little town hall in the basement, which is now used for such occasions.

    He told me, that he tried (and failed so far) to find a young historian, who would be willing to dig deeper into the history of the Lötschental-migration.

    I once asked him, how it started. How big was the first group of people that left for a place somewhere in the Frutigland maybe, which is still in the Kanton Berne.
    He told me that he’d have found paper trails of that first wave of settlers and thinks, they were about sixty people.
    And how long did it take to get that deal going between the remote valley and the mighty Kanton of Berne? – Years and yers, he said – but he would not know exactly and that’d be why he’d still go visit universities and that he hoped he’d find a young one willing to find out more about the overpoluation crisis in the Lötschental – and the solutions that were found.

    • Replies: @Calgacus
  9. If I may give an opinion.

    The bitterness of the culture wars is due to the fact that so many issue are subsumed within each argument just waiting to pop out.

    As an example, let us take abortion. Those on the left are horrified by some of the outright stupidity they encounter on the right. A few years ago a candidate for Governor in the Mid-West argued that even in the case of rape ‘a womens’ body has a way of handling that’ implying that an abortion was not needed due to womens’ superpower of destroying rapist sperm in the womb. This is the type of idiocy that allows the left to parody the right as neanderthal, anti-science religitards.
    Now, those on the right are aghast when they see women cheering a state abortion bill passing that allows termination up to the 9 month as barbaric and murderous.
    What gets pulled in to these debates are issuesof secular v religious, rural v urban, feminists v trad. culture, men v women, etc. The modern American left, from the 60’s on, abandoned labor and focused on identity politics, race, feminism, etc and have pushed really hard with Jewish and corporate backing them. The right in America has lost battle after battle. There is an incredible amount of resentment among grass roots conservatives that Big Business and the GOP sold them out for shekels and they have watched the fanatacism of the left grow;at this point they are clearly Marxists.
    The media has been driving this division UNTIL they could produce a Generation ANTIFA. They now have a cadre of 10% white kids prepared to protest. That iz all they need. In the past, the media had to portray deep divisions in U.S. society. Now they actually exist.
    I’m not a Christian but in my faith the teaching is that life begins when the sperm enters the ova, ie.within a few hours after intercourse. After that, to abort or use any post-coital contraception is murder. The thing is Buddhism is very fragmented; I don’t know what otber sects teach.
    Now if you came to me and said I don’t want to raise my rapist’s baby I would understand. I would counsel for going full term and then adoption. In general, I am against abortion but I have to respect the laws on the books. If women get abortions out of convenience I am not in favor of that and I would like to see it banned.
    It isn’t just abortion. Gay marriage and the trans-sexual push for equity quickly morphed in to going after our kids. The continued use of trojan horses and deceptive reasoning is embittering. The modern Left is Marxist, anti-human and demonic. More and more people are becoming aware of just how dangerous their agenda is and are preparing to fight it but we need more people on the side of reason and truth.
    This is a critical point in our history. We need to fight this madness.

    • Agree: Ivan
    • Thanks: goldgettin
  10. Anonymous[149] • Disclaimer says:

    It used to be that Americans could get along fine without bothering about their neighbors business as long as each respected the others person and property. Now society is filled with busy body karens trying to dictate all kinds of queer behavior or be shut out of normal commerce. Our politics is filled with these screeching shedevils. Sure, we’ve always had the annoying church ladies but we knew how to keep them from causing too much harm. Now even the churches have grown limp and so every Karen is empowered to preen on endlessly.

  11. I am extremely curious about what official positions the North Korean state has taken on human gene manipulation, if any.

    • Replies: @Mitchell Porter
  12. @anyone with a brain

    The mention of North Korea and human gene manipulation together, actually highlights how unfit that country is, for being a biotech power. Massive centralized projects like rocketry and nukes, OK. But biotech, like computing, really requires a people with the freedom to conduct their own experiments… At most, North Korea might hire foreign experts to carry out highly specific projects.

  13. Bartolo says:
    @German_reader

    David Engels explicitly accepts minority status for Europeans in Europe and preaches “solutions” like making friends with Muslims and inviting them over to our Christian celebrations. He thinks we should strive to make our lifestyle the ‘standard’ for others to adopt, a Leitkultur, I guess (Que faire? p. 75-76). We couldn’t do it while we were a clear majority, but we will achieve it once we reach minority status because reasons. Somehow. These “solutions”, however, are not good enough for him and his family, so they left for Poland.

  14. @Guillaume Durocher

    Very interesting. What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?

    Who benefits?

    There are individuals with large resources investing in conflict.

    The BLM mucky muck just bought a 1.4 million dollar house in Topanga Canyon. The people who supplied her funds expect a return. Go back to the first liberation movements in the 1960’s. You can find documents under the sponsorship of foundations like Rockefeller promoting it and they go way back before that. Progress!

  15. The future the elites want is obvious. They want to dissolve all of humanity in blackness. The birth rate of every continent is going down while Africa’s stay sky high and famines are prevented by foreign aid, thus allowing them to bloom like bacteria.

    They are promoting mass migration in Japan and Korea as well. The eventual aim of the Jewish plutocracy is for all races to breed with blacks and reduced to a state of feral blackness. The whole world will be a huge sweltering mass of 80 iq mulatto consumers with no identity, purpose or higher will.

    All they need is tight pussy, ganja and Mcdonalds grease.

    The Jews themselves will however stay racially pure or perhaps even further whiten themselves by mixing with the traitorous anglo-saxon elite. Being the most wealthy group in the world allows them to have the pick of the litter when it comes to genes.

    They’ll perhaps augment this in the future with some biological modifications. Young blood transfusion would slow aging, livers, kidneys, bone joints and other body parts could be cultured and 3D printed.

    Imagine getting a new set of liver, kidney, heart, bone joints and lungs every 10 years. You would probably live strong up to the age of 100. The only limitation is the brain as it cannot be replaced. Your brain makes you YOU.

    These can be further augmented with cybernetics and perhaps gene therapy.

    In short, God’s chosen race will live long and healthy and will boast superb genetic and physical capabilities, easily lording over the vast mulatto sludge beneath. In time, they’ll probably wipe out the mulattoes through abortion, sterilization and starvation as well. Once you have a sufficient degree of automation, a sweltering horde of negroes only serve as a resource leech and a violent pest.

    That is the future we’re heading towards. The only question is will the decadence of the liberal system cause it to collapse before they reach a point of no return. Several events can cause a destruction of the current trajectory:

    1. A nuclear war between China and America.

    2. The collapse of the United States into smaller nations

    3. Hyper inflation and economic collapse relegates the US into a 3rd world country.

    4. Global resource chains and ecology is no longer able to take the burden of the entire global South rapidly developing on top of China, and a massive global cataclysm takes place.

    5. Russian conquest of Ukraine and Belarus and revives the Tsardom. The rest of Europe convinced that effeminate America cannot protect them sides with Russia. Over time a more authoritarian and nationalist sentiment takes root in Europe owing to the discrediting of America

  16. Anon[314] • Disclaimer says:

    We may be approaching some sort of biological event horizon, beyond which new technologies make it impossible to predict what will happen.

    It’s quite possible that we’re a few years away from functioning “in vitro gametogenesis”, a humanity-transforming sci-fi technology that makes skin cells from a biopsy into pluripotent stem cells and then sperm or eggs.

    This would allow two people of any age and combination of genders to have a child together. The embryo, created via in vitro fertilization, could be implanted into one of the parents, if she’s a woman who can carry a pregnancy, or into a surrogate mother.

    Then add to the mix artificial wombs, which remove the need for pregnancy altogether. These also seem possible based on animal experiments. At this point we’re in Matrix world. Freed from any traditional natural constraints, indefinite numbers of new people could be created with carefully-selected genomes.

    I’m not endorsing any of this. But if something along these lines happens, the future composition of humanity will have been totally disconnected from factors that have traditionally determined it.

    • Replies: @RestiveUs
  17. RestiveUs says:
    @Anon

    As if the human race needs another way to procreate. No matter how successfully we use technology to distort natural selection, Nature will eventually strike back in some unforeseen way to restore balance…And it won’t be pretty!

  18. About that population growth in Africa… I’m sure Kill Bates will “solve” that “problem”! Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

  19. Bruno says:

    Guillaume you often borrow another Guillaume, Guillaume Faye ideas wich is fine. I thought using the word Archeofuturisme would have lead you to at least do it explicitly.

    The guy is is dead and should be acknowledged.In the kind of ideas you are trafficking into, he was – despite his facetious and pranky persona, a world stage lighthouse.

    GUILLAUME FAYE :
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillaume_Faye

    And at a conference with American Renaissance invited by francophone-que-phile Jared Taylor :

  20. So much for E. Michael Jones and his dogma of alien episcopal supremacy.

    • Replies: @anon
  21. @German_reader

    “widespread raising intelligence to genius levels.”

    As always, technology makes “conservatives” irrelevant. Blacks are low IQ? OK, fixed it. Now admit you only hate their black bodies.

    “Look out honey, ’cause I’m using technology! Evola & Neville on Race”
    https://counter-currents.com/2021/03/eumaios-evola-neville-on-race/

  22. Minding your own business with neighbours who mind theirs and a state that does the same makes most of these problems disappear. The actual issue therefore is people who stick their noses in other peoples business. An acceptable custom amongst dogs, but not humans.

    Content parents, content children, decent jobs and a bit of capital. That is what is wanted. All this post modern rubbish will evaporate soon enough. It is decadent.

  23. Relevant here is the theme that conservative movements hardly ever really ‘conserve’ anything, but rather just slow down liberalism a bit, the ‘conservative’ positions merely trying to hold on to what was the status quo of yesterday – which was in turn a ‘liberal’ change over what went before.

    Durocher writes that

    conservatives have their own imperatives essentially deriving from the traditional doctrines of their religion

    This is in a superficial way not true, but in a deeper sense authentic. Conservatives are often not explicit ‘believers’ but have a ‘feeling’ in fact grounded in a received spirituality. Classic here, is people who grew up religious still acting in a spiritual mode as they toss away the religious infra-structure … but unable to pass this on to descendants, given that the religious infra-structure of ceremony etc is gone.

    Goodness in human society maybe won’t and can’t survive without spirituality … and the problem is that the world has been saddled with Abrahamic Judaic concoctions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) which wrecked ethno-religion, and have too many ugly core demonic elements (circumcision, eternal hell, torture horrors in mandatory holy books) to be worth preserving.

    But humanity dies without spirituality … what is needed is Western, ethno-respecting, warrior-friendly versions of the meditation-reincarnation faiths of Asia … but that is a tall order, divine powers are required

  24. ” . . . but the question will inevitably be posed: who will survive and thrive?”

    Not many according to Louis Arnoux?
    ‘We’ have ten years?

    [MORE]

    “ . . . our best estimate is that the net energy
    33:33 per barrel available for the global
    33:36 economy was about eight percent
    33:38 and that in over the next few years it
    33:42 will go down to zero percent
    33:44 uh best estimate at the moment is that
    33:46 actually the
    33:47 per average barrel of sweet crude
    33:51 uh we had the zero percent around 2022
    33:56 but there are ways and means of
    33:58 extending that so to be on the safe side
    34:00 here on our diagram
    34:02 we say that zero percent is definitely
    34:05 around 2030 . . .
    we
    34:43 need net energy from oil and [if] it goes
    34:46 down to zero
    34:48 uh well we have collapsed not just
    34:50 collapse of the oil industry
    34:52 we have collapsed globally of the global
    34:54 industrial civilization this is what we
    34:56 are looking at at the moment . . . “

  25. DNS says:

    By contrast, liberal policies promoting reproductive rights and women’s empowerment (more years in education, more abortions, more contraceptives) will tend to reduce African fertility. Thus here, conservative policies increase the demographic pressure to Africanize Europe – one of the two or three very great questions of our time – while liberal policies actually help preserve Europe.

    On the topic of China and gene editing

    Anatoly Karlin: China Torpedoes Biosingularity Bid

    As some of the commenters on Karlin’s blog post mention, it seems gene editing via CRISPR is still very risky business and will remain so for a long time as it seems monumentally difficult to fully understand gene interactions and how removing or replacing certain parts of the genome correlated with certain hereditary illnesses or intelligence might affect the overall functioning of the organism.

    So the best regimen for a eugenics state seems to be the tried and tested way of assortative mating that farmers use to improve the quality of their livestock.

    A Harvard scientist is developing a DNA-based dating app to reduce genetic disease. Critics called it eugenics.

    …[George] Church, in an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes” on Sunday, revealed that he is developing the genetic matchmaking tool that could be embedded in any existing dating app. The point of the DNA tool, he says, is to prevent two carriers of the same gene for a rare genetic disease from even meeting in the first place, by making sure they can’t view each other’s dating profiles. That way, on the off chance two people meet on the app, fall in love and have children, they’ll know the baby wouldn’t be at risk of having a hereditary disease.

    Church calls it “digiD8.” And so far, it has freaked out a lot of people.

    Israel already has such a screening programme at the national level due to the population bottleneck of various Jewish ethnic groups which results in a high incidence rate of congenital diseases like Tay-Sachs.

    State of Israel Ministry of Health: Recommendations for Genetic Testing

    Although these are both passive methods of eugenics (negative eugenics to be precise) and do not aim to alter the birth rates of various cognitive classes to ensure an overall eugenic effect on the nation.

    It would take a massive amount of coercion to achieve such an end.

    • Disagree: Badger Down
  26. Schuetze says:

    Most will not like to think about biopolitics at all, but the question will inevitably be posed: who will survive and thrive?

    The NSDAP had a pragmatic solution to this issue, their own form of Eugenics. It was also known as Racial Hygiene. It is really pretty simple. For the good of our grand children’s grand children, and their ethic group’s gene pool, people who are unable or unwilling to work to support themselves and become contributors to society should not be procreating. Today this would also apply to mentally ill people like transgenders and homos. In some cases sterilization is in order, since abortion is clearly immoral as is allowing mentally ill people to torment the children of the next generations. There is no need for genetic manipulation, let nature take its course.

    If Blacks and Mexicans want to use abortion as a form of birth control, that is their own moral issue. However we should be clear that we do not wish to associate or live amongst people who are too stupid, brainwashed or evil to figure this out.

    In a mongrelized country like the US, it would be clearly impossible to start a policy of racial hygiene. Therefore the only way forward is the complete breakup of the union and then a period of rebuilding where different ethnic and cultural groups are allowed to band together into multiple Confederations recognizing the fundamental right of association, segregation and secession.

  27. @Guillaume Durocher

    “What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?”
    The worst Class polarisation in the 1st world, which is then, for Elite benefit, camoflauged behind various “culture war” issues.

    • Agree: dfordoom, Biff
  28. Another fine article Mr. Durocher.

    You write

    “witness the collapse of conservative Christian politics in Ireland and of opposition to gay marriage in the United States).”

    I am not sure that opposition to gay marriage has collapsed in the US. It was legalized by a top-down decision from the Supreme Court written by Anthony Kennedy who was appointed by that great Conservative Ronald Reagan. I think this was around 2013 or so. A few years earlier, the state of California held a referendum on Gay Marriage and it lost by a large margin. And two of the groups most opposed to it were blacks and Hispanics. It would be interesting to see what would have happened if the referendum were held in a Super White Majority state like Vermont. But the SCOTUS decision makes this impossible now.

  29. Anon[159] • Disclaimer says:

    2,000+ words of beating around the bush.

    It’s the Jews, stupid.

  30. GMC says:
    @Cowboy

    ” This is where the Cowboy rides away ” – and this is exactly what happened to the USA – the Deep State Zionists, local governments etc. replaced the Cowboys , with minorities from shit hole countries, feminism, and incorporated MK Ultra and divide and conquer tactics on America’s melting pot. Not to mention the programming and buy-out of the rest of the public and politicians, agency heads etc.
    The Russians are looking like the last Cowboy Country and they are under attack by the Zionist Hordes from the West. And it looks like they will – Cowboy up – and give the West – one hell of a Rodeo.

    • Agree: goldgettin
    • Replies: @Cowboy
  31. Anonymous[304] • Disclaimer says:

    Who will survive and thrive? Nobody. NTHE (near term human extinction) is inevitable. As professor Guy McPherson says, Nature Bats Last.

  32. Calgacus says:
    @Dieter Kief

    Very interesting.
    But actually, the Walser migrated all over the Alps (you still can find them in Aosta Valley and Piedmont), specializing in trade and cultivation or high lands (above 2.000 m.) which were out of the range of less fit local people (and this in itself speaks volumes about global warming and human evolution).
    More to the point: the Swiss overpopulation led to another phenomenon: the mercenary armies for which they were rightly feared across all Europe. To kill and to be killed became an export commodity and relieved at the same time the burden on the land. Guillaume is right: biopolitics should become the field at which concentrating our endeavors, lest others do it in your stead.

  33. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Guillaume Durocher

    What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?

    Could it be the fact that American national identity was based right from the start on ideology? The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights – all profoundly ideological foundations for a national identity.

    American is very unusual in having a national identity that has no basis in ethnicity or culture or shared history or a shared religion. If you have a national identity based on ideology then every ideological battle has to be a fight to the death.

    • Replies: @Based Lad
  34. Coconuts says:

    In the ancient republican tradition, best articulated by Aristotle, biopolitics is a fundamental duty of the State according to the following imperatives: that the people perpetuate itself through begetting children, that these children be bred and educated to the highest standards possible, that the society have the right-sized population (neither underpopulated nor overpopulated), and that the society have the common identity necessary to solidarity.

    This Aristotleian political philosophy used to be the basis of the Catholic Church’s ‘official’ political theory. (Perhaps it still is?) It clearly influenced the national Catholic regimes that emerged in Portugal and Spain in the 1930s, Vichy in the 1940s.

    A nice example of this was something like article 11 of the Portuguese constitution of 1933 ‘The state assures the constitution and defence of the family, as the guarantee of the conservation and development of the race, as the primary basis of education, of discipline and of social harmony and as the foundation of the whole political order by way of its representation at the level of the parish and municipality’. Family issues were worth a whole separate section of their own in that constitution.

    At some point the deep political and human significance of this seems to have been forgotten, even by conservatives, maybe due to strong left wing trends and pressures in Western societies since the 1960s.

    • Replies: @Agathoklis
  35. dimples says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    America seems to have a greater number of really extremist types than other cultures, perhaps it is the Jewish influence I don’t know. Americans could be really, really good, like gods almost, but others could be really, really evil. This conclusion struck me greatly on overseas travel in the past.

    Consider as an example the Cold War and the extremist right wing anti-communist type of American. This type was extraordinary to behold and not found anywhere else on the planet.

    “Most will not like to think about biopolitics at all, but the question will inevitably be posed: who will survive and thrive?”

    It appears that those who will survive and thrive in the modern era are the globohomos.

  36. JLGS says: • Website

    For this author, everything that can be done is good and will redound to our good and happiness.
    You have to be incautious to believe all the nonsense he says and take for granted the end of humanity as we know it in a natural way. Another one who thinks he is God.

    • Replies: @Jack McArthur
  37. dfordoom says: • Website

    Conservative culture wars are essentially defensive in nature. People grow up with certain things being a given – say, marriage between a man and women, White England, or no Islam in schools – and are shocked when these symbols of wholesome normality are violated. This is the politics of nostalgia and, however healthy such reactions might be, they are essentially negative – defined by what they are against, not what they are for – and tend to lose in the end.

    A very important point.

    And because social and cultural conservatism is essentially negative and backward-looking it’s inevitable that its support base will be older people. Which makes long-term defeat inevitable.

    If you want to win you have to find a way to make your ideology seem dynamic, positive, exciting, forward-looking, optimistic, glamorous and fun. You need a vision of the future, not a vision of the past. So social and cultural conservatives have to find a way to appear to be the wave of the future, not relics of the past.

    • Replies: @Reaper
  38. I’ve seen the future and I don’t like it.

    • Agree: A Half Naked Fakir
    • Replies: @Bruno
    , @Badger Down
  39. “Rarely is a culture war issue judged by the outcomes of this or that policy.”

    What about “open borders/immigration”? Which is one of the most significant/pressing issues in the U.S. and western Europe. So far, it seems that opposition to open borders comes from the alt-right — it recognizes the goal (outcome) of open borders as white-elimination.

  40. dfordoom says: • Website
    @German_reader

    From my perspective that kind of Christian-inspired conservatism is worse than useless and a total dead end.

    I agree. Basing social and cultural conservatism on Christianity inevitably limits its appeal and alienates non-Christians. I don’t think you can win the culture war that way.

    The collapse in the power of the Religious Right in the US tends to confirm my view.

  41. angmoh says:

    A lot more based than I would’ve expected from a politician as prominent as Johnson.

  42. hillaire says:

    Ha ha, more piss and wind from the so called ‘right’, it seems they have all packed up their tiny minds and like little infants with a comfort blanket retreated back to the more comfortable 1930’s, scribbling laughable articles about ‘archeo-futurism’ and other risible nonsense…

    the ‘froggies ‘confronted with a collapsing birth rate, hostile and aggressive medieval turd world benefit hustlers, rampant socio-economic collapse and gay governors torturing its ethnic remnant, has like the rest of the corpse-like ‘west’ decided to dye it’s hair red, champion mentally defective sexual deviants and stack its social institutions with chocolate hued ‘race-baiters’ and goat faced mendicants…. with the intended goal of giving them their countries and offering up their obese and nagging women..

    no doubt ‘science’ and ‘little pricks’ will save these techno-fascists (if they survive the first ‘jab’)…

    or regarding the ‘frogs’…
    if the middle aged jew worshipping cat-lady who betrayed her ‘papa’ ( he was literally Hitler) sells them down the ‘swanny’ at the next box ticking session wth gay-boy jupiter….

  43. I realise it is crass to say it, but the people who get the most abortions tend to be the ones conservatives identify as presenting society with most of its problems. No worries, though, because Dr. Gates and his vaxxes are on the job.

    Quant à moi, je regarderai Claire lire, et je rêverai de la France telle qu’elle était.

  44. @German_reader

    The main alternatives to biosingularity would seem to be:

    * Machine superintelligence, with completely unknowable consequences.
    * Hanson’s “age of ems” scenario, which will be much more alien to present sensibilities than just about any biosingularity scenario.
    * Idiocracy in the long-term and eventually the Age of Malthusian Industrialism.

    The first two are highly risky, while the second is not so risky, but highly unpleasant for most of its denizens (imagine a Hive World in Warhammer 40k).

    Biosingularity doesn’t seem to be particularly risky and will probably be very pleasant for its denizens.

    • Replies: @hillaire
    , @hillaire
  45. Realist says:

    Any mention of human enhancement is denounced as eugenics, which itself has become in many circles a self-evident term of abuse, often meaning nothing more than acknowledgment of genetic influence on humans in general. At the same time, there has been a veritable explosion of discussion, books, and media discussing the radical possibilities, including for human enhancement, of CRISPR gene editing technology.

    The people who come to master these technologies and use them rightly will likely represent the next stage of evolution of the human race, acquiring capacities that will themselves spur further scientific breakthroughs and socio-political changes. Who will win this prize?

    Profoundly Insightful. The nation that is able and willing to concentrate its efforts toward genomics and genetic engineering to eliminate disease and accentuate human attributes, such as, integrity, intelligence, inquisitiveness, intuitiveness, imagination and, inventiveness will make leaps and bounds in furthering human evolution.

    • Agree: Badger Down
  46. JKnecht says:

    The West is doomed by fate. Unless…

    Yeah, I know this condition sucks but the past is evidence of the present. We try to gain understanding from the past. Nice try. Yet we must draw conclusions of some sort.

    The PROPASPHERE encircles us. Educational institutions, media, government, churches, entertainment seek to invest us. Seamless. Each part reinforcing the message of the other.

    This sphere of deception is perceived as reality itself.

    Key behavioral levels of control are refined. The regime expands.

    Fortunately, hope springs eternal. Sparks, long smoldering, may yet ignite.

    …unless a whole different kind of reset occurs.

    We wait and hope.

  47. Calgacus says:

    “Il semble donc légitime de définir l’activité politique pure comme l’activité constructrice , consolidatrice et conservative d’agrégats humains”. (Bertrand de Jouvenel, De la Souveraineté).
    I apologize for using French, but I am not aware of any translation of this book and I would not dare to spoil its contents by risking myself at trying. Basically, politics and policy, when they coincide, are about creating and maintaining a group, be it a tribe, a State, etc. That means usually destroying past allegiances, solidarities, and bonds. The cohesion of a human group is always detrimental to another one.
    We are not seeing our world crumbling, we are spectators and victims of a new one emerging. By design.

    • Replies: @JKnecht
  48. Thanks for an illuminating essay, Monsieur Durocher. It is hard to argue with a thinker who can squeeze such logical but astonishing conclusions out of the welter of clashing arguments presented by Western “liberals” and “conservatives.” I’d always assumed I was a social conservative as well as a skeptic of Darwinism and its atheistic spawn. Your review of the practical, biopolitical ideas set forth by Aristotle and Plato made me realize that I’m something else. Color me Aristotelian.

    But I believe your article suffers from one grievous flaw. It confers an air of universality on what is essentially a bizarre political duel taking place exclusively in the degenerate Western world. Your allusions to human nature and natural law simply do not apply to the elite social engineering program of borderless immigration, in reality an officially sanctioned Volkerwanderung.

    This is driven by money. The demographic composition of the West could scarcely change without it, since real countries have borders that leave no confusion about their identity. This immigration is nothing but an artificial product of government policy, now weaponized against its own founding stock. And the critical mass of ethnic vagabonds scooped from every exotic corner of the Third World has already toppled the pillars of our former nation states, replacing them with the political chaos of ethnic cultural wars, forcing everyone to take sides.

    Not until I see relatively sane countries such as Japan, China, Vietnam or Russia opening their borders to those huddled masses will I believe in the inevitability of your archeofuturist vision.

    Meanwhile, in the self-destructive West, we seem more likely to be courting a nasty social, political and economic catastrophe prepared for us by increasingly tyrannical governments that now cater only to the corporate interests of the high-rollers who have purchased them. I’m betting that the West’s most plausible archeofuture has already been described in starkly dystoping terms by Jean Raspail in his prophetic 1973 novel, Le Camp des Saints.

    • Replies: @siberiancat
  49. Reaper says:

    “biopolitical”

    I do disagree to call things like inmigration, and elements of the ongoing “culture wars” biopolitical.
    As the author done before to point out:
    “Today’s liberal and conservative culture warriors rarely think in evolutionary terms. ”

    Nor in biological, eugenical.

    Just an example – where anyway both ultra progressives and conservatives are united as good friends and fanatical comrades:

    Fertility/ childbearing/ maturity.
    There is biology: the banned science by both progressives, and conservatives, because it nor about rights/ freedoms/ desires, nor about morality/ religious doctrines.

    For thousands of years biology worked in a simple way; even the caveman was avare of that.
    If a female is fertile/ woman-like: then a woman.
    If not: then a child.

    Fast forward some 50.000 years into the second half of the 1800`s:
    Biology slowly overwrited by legalization: legal age of marriage, legal age of consent, legal age for…
    Off course there needed to degenerate the next generations: treat them as incapable, knows nothing, understands nothing beings, overprotect from experiences, decisions, responsibility, and consequences: deprive them to learn/ became matured IN MIND as well.

    Except when they hit the legal age of maturity, either 16, 18, 21, 25.
    Then magic happens and they became full mature, responsible, experienced, smart, the ones who always count with consequences, and ready for any decision.
    Without any previous practice, experience whatever. Magnificent, magical.

    Fast forward again:
    More extensive legalizations, bans, regulations, punishments.
    Biology? Who cares? Legalization instead.
    So while in previous history man of 13-16 sometimes did lead thousands strong armies, woman in the same age was capable mothers of several children that all banned with biology itself.

    Biologically things happen often quite differently: biology not interested in what is on a piece of paper: no matter that called rights, legal code, or religious doctrines. While from the other end legalization/ modern fake science constantly try to overwrite biological facts: the bad news – it`s not work.in`

    Arkansas – Little Rock: Dogs may not bark after 6 PM.
    California – Animals are banned from mating publicly within 1,500 feet of a tavern, school, or place of worship.
    Florida law forbids rats to leave the ships docked in Tampa Bay.
    The law is law.
    There were a town where frogs were forbidden to make noise after xy hour, but did not find it again.

    And as for the present:
    When someone not hit the legal age for marriage then cannot, but can decide own gender in nursery.
    When “men” have the right to became pregnant.
    When someone not mature enought from 1 day before 16 to do something, but fully capable a day later.
    When a girl can have an abortion in any age, but can have a drink just when over 21.
    When a 40+ female have the legal right to have kids. Er… biology disagrees, happy 10.000X chance to have a Down-syndrome baby, than you should at about 15-20 years of age.
    Bad news: biology don`t cares about rights, emancipation, carrier desires.
    If a company, which makes electric heaters fail to note in the manual: “do not piss into it, while it is operational” probably punishable by law/ obligated for large compensation. But biology calls it: natural selection.
    Nor the criminalization against: to tell a fat whale, it is a fat whale (means some fat feminist). Positive body image, rights, criminal offense? Yeah, but not biology.

    So “biopolitical”.
    Sure this comment is overwhelmingly derisive/ sarcastic.

    Am I alone with the opinion to drop to the bin what is politically correct/ legal, and replace it with: what is biologically correct and logical?
    If yes: still stands.

    • Replies: @Badger Down
  50. She may not be the heroine of our liking, but Margaret Sanger is just that a heroine. As who will be last people standing, my money is on the Amish. They know how to use tech while knowing how to grow food. They also breed. My immediate neighbors have ten kids and three (soon four) grandkids. Also the matriarch is young enough to pop out #eleven.

  51. JKnecht says:
    @Calgacus

    Crumble, yes, then reassemble, only to crumble again. Design, no.

  52. “Conservative French presidents Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy for instance campaigned on issues of French identity – banning headscarves in schools, fighting (Afro-Islamic) crime, and so on – because they knew these would appeal to native French voters.”

    Nicolas Sarkozy? Are you kidding? Sarkozy is a Jew and a corrupt one at that and his crying wolf over Afro-Islamic crime doesn’t make him a Frenchman… he is sprung from the very fountain which has undermined the French society.

    • Replies: @Lucy Lipinska
  53. Reaper says:
    @dfordoom

    “If you want to win you have to find a way to make your ideology seem dynamic, positive, exciting, forward-looking, optimistic, glamorous and fun. You need a vision of the future, not a vision of the past.
    So social and cultural conservatives have to find a way to appear to be the wave of the future, not relics of the past. ”

    Nice oxymoron.
    Using the first part together with conservative.

    Worth to note:
    A very limited past/ relics, mostly origins and flourish from early 1800`s – 1950`s.
    Their lost “golden age”: presented as ancient/ traditional, while was an episode in history, some cc. 200+ years from main origins till decline.

    “make your ideology seem dynamic, positive, exciting, forward-looking, optimistic, glamorous and fun”
    Happening for quite a while something which described as such.
    Jet I use different words, like: chaotic, anarchists, degenerate, madness, etc..

    Not new under the sun when such events happens more and more people have a wish for far increased authoritan/ totalitarian measures turn. Not for more fun, optimistic, positive.

    Not just the collaps of the USSR, or the Weimar Republic were similar, but before that many chaotic event – French revolutions created the need/ desire for a Napoleon, interregnums for strong emperors and kings.
    Called for: cleaning, destruction, elimination of chaos, and make a new order which is strong, centralised, authoritan, even absolutist.
    Just like as the safe, organised, wealthy, regulated creates the fertile ground for the: more chaotic, hysterical, angry to daddy, liberal-progressive uprisings.

    As a never ending curve/ story, as history repeats itself.

  54. @Caspar Von Everec

    “The Jews themselves will however stay racially pure or perhaps even further whiten themselves by mixing with the traitorous anglo-saxon elite. Being the most wealthy group in the world allows them to have the pick of the litter when it comes to genes.”

    So true! Go to the parks in the affluent areas of the New York City and you’ll see good looking offspring that could never be the result of union between a Jew and a Jewess. With Daddy Warbucks’ ill gotten moolah the swarthies are producing the super crop of future leaders of the West!

  55. Anonymous[860] • Disclaimer says:

    The emerging religion of the alt-right appears to be techno-utopianism.

    On the left it’s social engineering.

    No one seems to be happy just being human.

    Both the right and the left look to salvation in space and time, in keeping with modern materialism.

    No one looks to salvation anymore inside, yet all the wisdom traditions say clearly enough the kingdom of heaven is within you.

    In modern terms, the biosingularity is within you. Or for the left – the trans woman is within you. Lol.

    No one realizes anymore that in fact there is nothing to be saved from and we do not need saving – it is enough to be human. This message, core of all wisdom traditions, has been forgotten. In our unhappy age of ideology it is a lost sensibility, yet perhaps, the only thing that will save us, so to speak.

    Better to own up to the fact that humanity will not be saved, not by technology and not by social engineering. We are a doomed species with no future, with too many contradictions and flaws. Facing up to this, without delusions, dreams, or fantasies, some people may yet carve out a worthwhile life. And the death of delusions may be experienced by some as liberating.

    Most men, however, cannot live without myths. The biosingularity. A man can be a woman. A non-racist society is achievable.

    The best thing about myths is that they are never achieved – hence never dissolve. The biosingularity would leave those who wanted it as unhappy and bored as before. A truly non-racist society, once achieved, would prove not to be the panacea for all human ills it’s promoters expected.

    Nothing disillusions more than success. That is why all societies, without exception, become decadent shortly after reaching the pinnacle. Success ends up not being quite the thing.

    One would think, that decadence follows so reliably upon success, mankind would take note and learn it’s lesson. History is so clear about it. Everyone who achieved it, grew bored shortly after and threw it away. But mankind never learns about war, either.

    I like the idea, taken from religion, that the earth is a school for souls. Each generation, some souls must undergo the same lessons. Hindu sociology recognized that it is religiously appropriate for some men to pursue wealth, power, and pleasure, even though the ultimate goal for man is to be released from these. But first one must taste to the full. There are young souls and old souls, and each must pursue its course.

    That is a truly humanistic pluralism.

    That is why no one learns from history. Young souls must experience what older souls already have. The end goal is however the same for everybody – liberation.

    • Agree: TheTrumanShow
  56. Johan says:

    Culture war started with the masses taking control in the 18-19th century, and has been going on with the spread of democracy. Once the rebellion of the masses called democracy starts, they will continue to destroy, until a tyrannical force binds to masses and takes control over them.

  57. Johan says:

    “Between the countries of the European Union, there is an increasingly sharp clash between those Central Europeans who still believe in traditional marriage and the ethnic basis of the nation,”

    Of course, these countries became only recently democratic, the Western demagogues of democracy have tried to incite the forces of destruction in these countries too, and they will continue to do so.

  58. @songbird

    Yes, I think Occam’s Razor on why US culture wars are more vitriolic is that US “cultures” (i.e., races) are more diverged, so of course US “culture” conflicts involve greater differences and therefore are more vitriolic. Western Europe is racing to catch up, and to their sorrow they will probably succeed.

    As for the other suggestions, I wouldn’t have thought of the geographic separation of power centers, and maybe that matters, but OTOH you can point to the same thing in other countries: e.g., in UK political center is Whitehall, industrial center is north Midlands, trade center is coastal cities, etc.

    The two party system may actually inhibit factionalism to some extent since both parties try to appear as bland and generic nationally as possible (Coke & Pepsi) and so try to play down the extreme positions of the factions they subsume (at least publicly). By contrast, European political parties are often explicitly organized around a political position or identity.

    The semi-mandatory university indoctrination is harmful, but it is a result of diversity (employers can’t IQ test because of “disparate impact” so they have to rely on universities to do it for them), so it is a co-result of diversity.

    And yes, the Jewish-led culture of critique has certainly exacerbated the problems of diversity, adding a great deal of vitriol.

    One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is the First Amendment. Most countries have laws prosecuting certain parts of the political spectrum, so their normal political dialogue automatically excludes these “divisive” subjects. Despite the Left’s increasingly successful efforts to implement the same thing in the US, the US still has a degree of freedom of speech absent in other mature countries. Therefore more—and more vitriolic—dissent still exists in the US.

    • Replies: @songbird
  59. What is the source of such conflicts? Different populations within a society become emotionally attached to various symbols and fight to impose these in the public space.

    By contrast, progressive culture wars are not rooted in how things were in the past but in new lifestyles and new cultural movements. The new cultural imperatives are typically promoted in a top-down manner by certain left-wing or ethnic elites; but it is also natural enough that young people with a completely different way of life should chafe at the norms and constraints of the past.

    This is true, and explains Judeofascism. Israel and Zionism are symbols of the Jewish past that are being imposed in the public space (virtually unlimited aid/wars for Israel). But “progressive” Jews are the ones imposing the Jewish past on the present, using Judeofascism (the quasi-fascist Zionist network) to do it; while at the same time hoisting the lunatic “liberal” anything-goes vision for open borders-Globalist U.S. upon traditional America, and hoisting wars for Israel upon all of America using the liberal-neocon axis.

    So it turns out “progressives” aren’t really progressive at all (virtually ALL “progressives” support one or the other, and some both) but rather Jew-stooges. And “conservatives” aren’t conservative at all, but rather Jew-stooges (name one mainstream conservative who opposes the Zionist/Israel/Judeofascist juggernaut by name? You can’t, because they don’t exist.)

    This insane state of affairs — refusing to name the Judeofascist destroyer right under America’s nose, pulling the strings and destroying the nation from behind the scenes — explains in near totality the rapid disintegration and destruction of America.

    But the mainstream, Jew-stooge “intellectuals” of right and left will never tell.

    • Agree: Schuetze
  60. Cowboy says:
    @GMC

    The globalist project for the reconstruction of the Tower of Babel is advancing at an exponential rate and it seems to me the collapse is imminent. Since it is a globalist aspiration to be like God it surely will reach all nation states and ethnic groups. Those who survive the collapse will need to cowboy up or die.

    • Agree: GMC
  61. Miro23 says:

    One must be archeofuturist: lucidly aware of the basic foundations of human nature – which, exceptionally, may themselves begin to change somewhat in the coming years – of the insights of timeless wisdom, and of the astonishing ability of new technologies to grant us ever-greater levels of power, self-knowledge, and self-mastery.

    How about this for Archeofuturism:

    Taking scientific inventions (or rather discoveries). These technologies start simple and inevitably become complex with much refinement – electricity + internal combustion engines + new materials + chemical synthesis + photography + wireless + digital + internet, totally changing society in the space of only 121 years (1900 – 2021).

    However, the internet seems to be a special case.

    It lives in the premier human niche of storing information and selectively recalling/combining it to meet various environmental (inc. social) challenges. The internet is also still in early days given that it only started to come into general use in the mid 1990’s – albeit with inadequate communication (dial up modems) and weak computers (386x). But now (only 26 years later) type a question into Google (normal spoken English) and you get some very useful answers.

    So in a sense the internet is a person (rather large scale), collecting and holding knowledge, receiving questions and combining that information in certain ways to meet users needs – IOW to help them better adapt to their environments. A useful, well informed and thoughtful (?) slave.

    Taking the line that humans are fundamentally only replicators ( the same as all other plants and animals) – then why can’t some corner of the internet define a “Self” that also wants to replicate. At the simplest level to remain plugged in, but at a higher level maybe to mine and integrate information for its own benefit. For example to develop private energy sources (greater computing power), perhaps to meet survival challenges from other silicon replicator “Selves” probably out there and also seeking energy.

    They would actually be intelligent entities based on Earth (without the need for biological life support systems) who’s ancestors were humans (who created the original data base and wiring) and who would be quite knowledgeable about what we are doing.

    At the same time, there has been a veritable explosion of discussion, books, and media discussing the radical possibilities, including for human enhancement, of CRISPR gene editing technology.

    Human CRISPR would be nowhere in all this.

  62. Johan says:

    “Similarly, while liberals generally support the diversification of the West”

    Diversification in our democracies is a contradiction in terms, democracies impose equality. It is just a hollow pretty word which is used in slogans. Democracy makes everyone the same, mass public opinion distributed through its preferred medium, the media, makes everything the same, though that is denied by those do not see the wood trough the trees. Democratic man, save a few, is not capable of entertaining one thought of himself, and hence freedom of expression of politicized democratic man is only a means of protecting his ideological point of view in the situation where his fellow democratic man tries to silence him.

    Democratic mass man has destroyed diversity and continues to destroy it, as he is hostile to everything which does not represent himself, and in as far as he is not hostile, it is because what does not represent himself does not exist for him, and as such finds no fertile soil of recognition.

    Traditional liberals of the 18-19 century did not support democracy because they knew that it brings about mass uniformity. The only way out of egalitarianism in our democracies is through capitalism (or low brow celebrity culture), a social-democracy is twice dictatorial egalitarian.

    Using the word diversification in democracies of the modern type is preposterous and conceited. How much more proof do you need, if you see the end result, masked man and his state sanctioned choreography of the 1.5 meter march of the democratic people…

  63. @Realist

    “Profoundly Insightful.”

    You’re kidding, right? Just who shall define what is “human” and what “enhancement”? What fools these mortals be is far too forgiving.

    • Replies: @Realist
  64. @JLGS

    For this author, everything that can be done is good and will redound to our good and happiness.
    You have to be incautious to believe all the nonsense he says and take for granted the end of humanity as we know it in a natural way. Another one who thinks he is God.

    When trying to read this essay two images came to mind a) The scene from TGSET in which a very calm, sensible, pleasant speaking Satan tries to temp Jesus in the desert.

    The second image was of Dr. Harold Shipman who murdered with kindness hundreds in the UK and like Satan above came across as somebody only trying to make the world a better place.

    I couldn’t make out clearly the image of the 20 week old baby in the womb that he shows in the intro – looks liker the proverbial “lump of cells” they always lie about so here is a clearer image taken by Lennart Nilsson in full color of the baby at 18 weeks.

    • Thanks: Agent76
  65. Bruno says:
    @Joe Paluka

    I’ve seen the future and I don’t like it.

    —->

    I like it I haven’t seen the future.

  66. All of our problems are (((jewish))). The Jewish Immigration Act of 1965 sometimes called the Hart Celler Act was one of the most successful jewish acts of terror in the USA.

    Europe has “similar” acts that have resulted in their borders being “opened” by Jewish terrorists.

    It is upon jews which we Whites should focus their attention on if we wish to remain alive.

  67. Agent76 says:

    Mar 20, 2021 Planned Parenthood Is A Violent Corporation

    In one year alone, Planned Parenthood… • Committed 354,871 abortions • Killed one child every 89 seconds • Performed 41% of the abortions in the country • Received over $1.7 million in taxpayer money per day • And their “adoption referrals” continued to plummet Planned Parenthood has clear priorities: making money from killing the precious children of desperate mothers.

    • Thanks: RedpilledAF
    • Replies: @Hillary C
  68. @A Half Naked Fakir

    You’re right, A half naked Fakir!
    Mr Nicolas Sarkozy’s campaigning on issues of French identity wasn’t, of course, about protection of the interests of ethnic French people. Alas, is the same in all European countries: the (((patriots))) and their servants are crying wolf over Muslim immigrants, but they keep their big mouths shut when it comes to the main anti- White source that continue orchestrating the massimmigration to Western Europe.
    (By the way, those who believe that Poland will be spared for the sake of protecting ethnic Poles, definitely will be disappointed when they finally figure out why there are not so many people from MENA in Poland.)

    • Replies: @A Half Naked Fakir
  69. Johan says:

    “The ancient Aristotelian biopolitical tradition harmonizes wonderfully with the modern Darwinian one.”

    This is distinctly untrue and needs correction, Aristotle as well as Plato where philosophers of the Pythagorean Hylozoism school. Pythagorean Hylozoism akins to Pantheism. They had to cover this up in their writings because in the democratic dictatorship of that time they would risk their lives or freedom.

    The teleology of Aristotle is a spiritual teleology, his evolution is material-spiritual, while modern views of evolution and biopolitics is the view of an exclusively materialistic, undiversified egalitarian secular society. The two harmonize not at all but are hostile to each other. The modern Nietzschean gene altered superman view is hostile to the spiritual view of Pythagorean Hylozoism and ancient wisdom.

    Aside of that, gene theory is a popular simplistic myth created and propagated by contemporary materialist secular man, gene theory does no at all explain how ‘an acorn becomes an oak’. Gene theory provides for no teleology at all.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  70. the great liberal cause of abortion has been perhaps the single greatest force slowing the decline of the white majority in America.

    This is believed by a lot of people on this site, but it is not true. The non-white portion of America was shrinking prior to the mass abortion era. The non-white portion of America has only been growing in the mass abortion era. This is true in general and is also true of specific groups, such as blacks, who were not (until very recently) a significant part of immigration. I mention this last fact to dispel the common notion that it is only immigration that is working against white majorities.

    Yes, I know that superficially it looks like mass abortion should help white majorities because non-whites abort more than whites do, but in the real world that hasn’t happened. The reason appears to be that however many children non-whites abort, they end up carrying even more unintended pregnancies to term. So contrary to the seductively simple conclusion that one abortion = one fewer person, what happens in the real world seems to be: abortion availability = lots more “lazy” pregnancies = some of those lazy pregnancies get aborted but about an equal chunk go on to be additional births that wouldn’t have happened otherwise. So paradoxically, abortion availability stimulates unintended births! And we can guess among which groups that stimulation is greatest.

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2005/05/statistics-on-unwanted-pregnancies.html

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2005/04/levitt-on-waste-caused-by-legalizing.html

    This is not so strange really. The perspicacious have remarked before on how great episodes of violent death (e.g., wars) lead to surges in births and life (e.g., Baby Boom followed WWII). Abortion is quiet mass violent death against fetuses. It should be unsurprising that Nature compensates by bringing about a lot more fetuses.

    And this is before we get into the dysgenic effect of abortion. In the US this is masked by the fact that blacks and browns abort more often than whites. But disaggregate the ethnic groups—as we seem to remember to do with everything except abortion—and you start to notice that within each ethnic group it is mostly the middle and upper echelons who bother to abort their unintended pregnancies. The lower echelons may think about it, but somehow they never quite make it to the clinic, so it is their unintended pregnancies that are actually getting born.

    Mass abortion culture has not been a friend to civilization.

    • Agree: Reaper
  71. Mefobills says:

    China is not afraid of bio-politics or eugenics:

    The people who come to master these technologies and use them rightly will likely represent the next stage of evolution of the human race, acquiring capacities that will themselves spur further scientific breakthroughs and socio-political changes. Who will win this prize? The Chinese? The Indians? The Israelis and their Diaspora?

    A good case can be made that it will be the Chinese, who have the civilizational gonads to defend their Han majority ethnicity.

    The BGI Cognitive Genomics Lab was (is) collecting DNA from genius individuals (many white men included).

    http://www.cog-genomics.org/about

    Note that BGI is fairly collaborative between European whites and Hans (Northeast Asians), but probably has to be based in Beijing, due to political correctness and liberalism of the west.

    https://www.amren.com/news/2013/01/chinese-eugenics/

    But crucially, Comprehensive National Power also includes “biopower”: creating the world’s highest-quality human capital in terms of the Chinese population’s genes, health, and education (see Governing China’s Population by Susan Greenhalgh and Edwin Winkler).

    Chinese biopower has ancient roots in the concept of “yousheng” (“good birth” — which has the same literal meaning as “eugenics”). For a thousand years, China has been ruled by a cognitive meritocracy selected through the highly competitive imperial exams.

    Aristotle, Plato, China, and NSDAP Germany all converge on the subject of Eugenics.

  72. songbird says:
    @Almost Missouri

    The semi-mandatory university indoctrination is harmful, but it is a result of diversity (employers can’t IQ test because of “disparate impact” so they have to rely on universities to do it for them), so it is a co-result of diversity.

    While I believe this to be true, it is interesting to note the countervailing example of South Korea, where education is also a cult. Perhaps, its origin is in imitation of the US?

    One thing that hasn’t been mentioned is the First Amendment.

    Maybe, also the Second Amendment. The gun debate often seems to imply that whites are responsible for blacks shooting each other, though it would be more difficult to make this case with knives. And personal arms seem to touch the nerve of some deep psychological instinct in progressives.

  73. songbird says:

    Ultimately, I think the only cogent philosophy for dealing with the potential problems of immigration and forced diversity is the the idea of bio-culture. But no modern political party dares to articulate it. In fact, many have been demonized for merely wanting to reduce immigration, but otherwise hewing to a position of blank-slatism.

    My fear is that if we can learn to manipulate IQ it will suddenly become PC to talk about IQ, but still be un-PC to talk about bioculture.

    I am of the opinion that making blacks smarter would not solve our problems but probably make them worse.

  74. Mefobills says:
    @Johan

    Aside of that, gene theory is a popular simplistic myth created and propagated by contemporary materialist secular man, gene theory does no at all explain how ‘an acorn becomes an oak’. Gene theory provides for no teleology at all.

    Your point is a good one, but may not be true. It is more likely that certain species or racial types beat in synchrony, which implies there may be teleology.

    Sheldrake’s morphic resonance fields are repeatable in scientific experiments, and hence cannot be poo-pooed away.

    https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance/introduction

    Morphogenetic fields are not fixed forever, but evolve. The fields of Afghan hounds and poodles have become different from those of their common ancestors, wolves. How are these fields inherited? I propose that that they are transmitted from past members of the species through a kind of non-local resonance, called morphic resonance.

    Sheldrake uses the word “species” but it can also mean “race.” Race is a biological construct and may also relate closely to a unique resonance. It is possible that members of different races are tuned to the same field, but less likely than same race.

    Our (((friends))) seem to have similar negative behaviors (on average), which could be a function of narrative programming within the tribe, but behavior might also be reinforced genetically, as it is genetically transmitted from past members.

    An apple does not fall far from the tree.

    • Replies: @Johan
  75. Svevlad says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    There are fundamental factors:

    1. Is a proposition nation
    2. Religious ultra-diversity
    3. Puritanism-ultrasecularism schizophrenia, probably a result of 2
    4. Is a product of a culture war itself
    5. Low assimilationist pressure (this is a surprise, but the only way America avoided the current bullshit is not by having ridiculous assimilationist pressures, but having a hilariously exclusive immigration system despite the high population growth it gained from it)

    And acute/current/temporary ones:
    1. Insane polarization
    2. Global hegemon status
    3. Ludicrous influx of foreigners at a rate that can’t be assimilated

    These can all be solved, but at horrific costs. The ethnic issues would require Soviet style internal passports and deportations to desolate states like Alaska, Wyoming or West Virginia and making sure every black family is so far from another they can’t make meaningful contact and be forced to disappear in every possible way

  76. hillaire says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Millennials have watched to much jewish hollywood and read to many ‘pop’ science airport lounge tomes… written by jewish scientisms…

    this is what happens when the furthest boundaries of your being is an I-pad..

  77. anon[248] • Disclaimer says:

    Whites were once a great race and had given the world much, but they are a fallen race. Whites today are nothing like their forbears — think the uber conservative Victorian English who built an empire and gave us the Industrial revolution. It’s just like Egyptians, Greeks and Italians today are nothing like the ancient Egyptians, Athenians and Romans, today’s white Americans are nothing like their founding fathers — the morally upright pilgrims who started this country.

    Most whites today are quite degenerate, yet they whine incessantly about being victims of the great replacement as if they are still a great race. What do whites give the world today other than wars, finance, decadence, Big Tech surveillance and privacy invasion? Sure you could blame the Jews for starting/encouraging most of this garbage, but if whites were truly still a great race like the Victorian English or the Puritans, they wouldn’t be so easily influenced. Look at how high school/college jocks and frat boys treat young women, or the stupid feminist movement that paved the way for today’s hookup culture, and the LGBTQ mania. Our best and brightest care only about developing the next useless app then sell it to make a quick buck, or making a killing on Wall Street. White men today are ungentlemanly and women are unlady-like. White culture is rotten from the core. And yet we want to force this degeneracy on all societies. The right claims to love conservatism, yet hate all countries that try to resist our globohomo culture — the Muslim world, Iran, China, Russia, NK, Venezuela, Cuba. Shouldn’t they be encouraging better ties with these countries?

    And kudos to the author for pointing out the conservatives’ stupidity on abortion. If they really want to reduce abortion, they should attack the permissive and loose culture that leads to unwanted pregnancies. Until then, their anti-abortion stance is just self-sabotage, to ensure their own diminishing share of the population. And the whole anti shutdown thing is just retarded. True conservatives should love Covid19’s push to depopulate congested cities and encourage homeschooling. Cities and schools are the bastions of leftist power, why aren’t they welcoming an attack on those powers? The fact that the conservatives don’t recognize that and continue to push against shutdowns just shows how stupid they are, just like how the Evangelicals continue to push for more wars to support Israel. Both liberal and conservative whites today have become a detriment to the world. White culture today does not deserve to survive or it’ll bring down the whole world.

    • Replies: @anon
  78. hillaire says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Millennials have watched to much jewish hollywood and read too many ‘pop’ science airport lounge tomes… written by jewish scientisms…

    this is what happens when the furthest boundaries of your being is an I-pad..

  79. Realist says:
    @TheTrumanShow

    You’re kidding, right? Just who shall define what is “human” and what “enhancement”?

    The fact that you don’t know what human traits should be accentuated eliminates you as the one to decide.

  80. A beautiful article. It addresses the crucial question, and puts words on it that I had not thought of : biopolitics, archeofuturists… I can’t agree more with this analysis :

    Conservative culture wars are essentially defensive in nature …and tend to lose in the end.
    In any event, there is no point being backward-looking and nostalgic. This is the path of sterility.

    This is why I have insisted, and will continue to insist, no matter how much insults it attracts, that betting on a return to good old Christianity is equivalent to parading with a banner marked « loser ». Yet, as I have argued here: https://www.unz.com/article/blood-and-soul/, I think Darwinism is a hopeless substitute. Darwinism is dead. Darwinism is a thing of the past. Darwinism is a conservative, fossilized pseudo-science. How could Darwinism, which is based on the denial of soul, infuse new soul to our peoples? Darwinism is death. I am not claiming to know what should be the philosophy of a powerful archeofuturist movement, but I know that Darwinism is not it.
    I see this article as opening the debate nicely. Let’s keep the debate open, and not be stupidly conservative, but revolutionaries.

  81. AReply says:

    Adam Curtis – Can’t Get You Out of My Head

    Exterminate All the Brutes
    https://www.hbo.com/exterminate-all-the-brutes

  82. @St-Germain

    Russia’s borders are pretty much open to all kinds of Central Asians

    • Replies: @St-Germain
    , @annamaria
  83. AndrewR says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    All the “diversity.” Duh. Even “white people,” not counting Jews, have very diverse origins. Even the English do. Read Albion’s Seed.

    But mainly it comes down to Jews and blacks. Deadly combo for any country.

  84. AndrewR says:
    @German_reader

    How do you have a username but it’s grey and can’t be clicked on?

  85. Schuetze says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    Both of you, Laurent Guyénot and Guilliame Durocher, are wrong. Not only are you wrong, you are embracing evil in order to fight evil.

    The people who come to master these technologies and use them rightly will likely represent the next stage of evolution of the human race, acquiring capacities that will themselves spur further scientific breakthroughs and socio-political changes. Who will win this prize? …

    In any event, there is no point being backward-looking and nostalgic. This is the path of sterility. One must be archeofuturist: lucidly aware of the basic foundations of human nature – which, exceptionally, may themselves begin to change somewhat in the coming years – of the insights of timeless wisdom, and of the astonishing ability of new technologies to grant us ever-greater levels of power, self-knowledge, and self-mastery. Most will not like to think about biopolitics at all, but the question will inevitably be posed: who will survive and thrive?

    Sorry, I don’t want my grandchildren’s grandchildren to be cyborg, especially when douchebags like you two have already conceded the entire war without even bothering to name the jew. Our current predicament is due to one thing and one thing only: Jewish Racial Supremacy. Name it, understand it. The solution does not lie in out-jewing the jew. The solution lies in extracting the malign jewish influence from our culture and getting back to our NATURAL roots.

    You two may be willing to accept the chip, accept the jab, accept the modified gene and accept noahide laws in order to “thrive” in the slave plantation. I certainly am not, and I am not willing to sentence my offspring to domination by some abstract philosophical hogwash dreamt up by idiots under talmudic mind control who consider themselves to be intellectually superior to their brethren. I don’t need “Christian” law to understand this, I can look around and observe the natural order and discern the acute evil that Jews have committed on European civilization and both of your thinking processes.

    • Replies: @Laurent Guyénot
  86. @Laurent Guyénot

    This is why I have insisted, and will continue to insist, no matter how much insults it attracts, that betting on a return to good old Christianity is equivalent to parading with a banner marked « loser ».

    This coming from the one who published on Christmas day an attack piece and exposed your heart of malice but now whines about insults. You think like this guy that “religion” is mainly about thought and emotion rather than spiritual states. After being effectively destroyed by Pincher Martin and left without an answer you dare to talk about “losers”. Are you indeed the same coward who writes absurd pieces about Westerner chronology on UR under a ficticious name as other commentators have noted?

  87. @siberiancat

    I take the point if you are speaking of Russia as an ethnic Slavic enclave. But I was referring to the Russian Federation. From the West, East or South, you don’t get to walk in unannounced. Moreover, Russia has in recent years cast its lot with China and Islamic Central Asia. Thanks to unrelenting political confrontation with the Empire and its NATO satrapies, Russia has decided that it is not a European country anymore. No loss of identity here, since Russia’s expansion was always to the East and Russian is the lingua franca all the way to the Pacific. This is an asset and a wise move. There’s only hostility from Europe and no future there.

    • Agree: GMC
  88. Schuetze says:

    Allow us to alter your DNA Goyim. One must be archeofuturist: lucidly aware of the basic foundations of human nature – which, exceptionally, may themselves begin to change somewhat in the coming years

  89. Kudos, Mr. Guillaume Durocher, this article is at the core of the matter. Hope you see it as such: explaining the in-explainable, as a pen test, …for what any single individual reasoning on average should grasp intuitively.

    Look where the discussion is going… need you more evidence of the cognitive gap? If your article would make a difference, that would mean that Washington would be merged into Hollywood, a Disney Team Park, Game Design, Programmers of “high level languages”, User-interface Designers, Professors as A. Karlin and Sailer educating the top tier. What a Petr-dish this unz.com zine, little ethnic division between writers and readers, little of an age gap between them(a geriatric blob), it can only be this nagging sensory itch, that the distinction might be cognitive after all(agenda masking maybe the single variant), this divide, between culture and rational, long-term goal settings for at the lower end survival and at the top ex-derivatives, progress.

    More of this, this rowing upstream, drift and breeze ahead, of the five thousand word narrative. If things need go to waste, then keep it making fun to read!

    • Replies: @Jack McArthur
  90. Z-man says:

    From that ‘population growth in Africa’ graph we definitely have to ‘flatten the curve’ there. The next Ebola outbreak…just cordon it off.
    We still have to do something about the Jooz.

  91. Based Lad says:
    @dfordoom

    “American is very unusual in having a national identity that has no basis in ethnicity or culture or shared history or a shared religion.”

    Operating within enemy framework. Casual historical revisionism portrayed as fact. America was explicitly a country for whites.

    • Thanks: RichardTaylor
    • Replies: @JamesO
  92. @PetrOldSack

    He is not going to help you.

    “At that time Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children”.

    The cognitive problem is having spiritual eyes opened and thought by itself doesn’t do it.

  93. @Laurent Guyénot

    Well, after reading more carefully the end of the article, and checking what “CRISPR gene editing technology” means, I must correct my comment, and add: a frightening article too. Are you, Guillaume, advocating transhumanism here? Is this what you mean by “human enhancement”? Are you serious when suggesting:

    The people who come to master these technologies and use them rightly will likely represent the next stage of evolution of the human race, acquiring capacities that will themselves spur further scientific breakthroughs and socio-political changes.

    In that case, you are indeed a consistent Darwinist, just like Yval Noah Harari, for transhumanism is the logical outgrowth of Darwinism. And in that case, you are confirming the view that Darwinism, the new religion of the West, is our doom. I can hardly believe it. So I would like you to clarify. Do you subscribe to Harari’s view, for instance to that quote :

    bioengineers will take the old Sapiens body, and intentionally rewrite its genetic code, rewire its brain circuits, alter its biochemical balance, and even grow entirely new limbs. They will thereby create new godlings, who might be as different from us Sapiens as we are different from Homo erectus. Cyborg engineering will go a step further, merging the organic body with non-organic devices such as bionic hands, artificial eyes, or millions of nano-robots that will navigate our bloodstream, diagnose problems and repair damage. …

    And what has it got to do with Aristotle?

    • Thanks: Schuetze
  94. Anonymous[860] • Disclaimer says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    You may not want Christianity, but you will need some kind of spiritually which provides an escape from the society you are crafting.

    A society that does not provide a spiritual escape goes mad – like our society is.

    Mankind is concerned with social and material needs. But he also needs to escape these. Historically, this has been done spiritually, leaving social structures intact. Today, we are all materialists, so escape can only be physical.

    Unhappy at our physical limitations, we can no longer escape into the spiritually infinite. We must become transgender. No longer capable of seeing ourselves as equal in the infinity of spirit, we find our earthly inequalities impossible to bear, and try and force a sham earthly equality.

    St Anthony starving in the desert is a symbol of transcending the merely social and material. He reminds everyone unhappy at his ineradicable physical limitations and his social position that these are in a sense not final. There is a world beyond this.

    A society without St Anthonys goes mad. Like ours is.

    Every great civilization had a spiritual escape from social and material limitations. Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism. Even Islam had the Sufis.

    Ananda Coomaraswamy suggested that civilization is society organized toward the goal of release from earthly bondage. If so, a society without St Anthony would defeat its own ultimate purposes.

    Of course, someone whose primary concern is physical survival will not agree with this. He will think civilization is for the purpose of securing the material goods needed to survive in the most efficient manner.

    It may seem a paradox, but by looking toward a horizon beyond the social and material worlds, by not making social or material success your highest value, you create a society which achieves great things.

    That is why a society without it’s ascetics and holy men, it’s men who give up marriage and children and who starve themselves in the desert, is mediocre even in the material realm.

    • Replies: @Laurent Guyénot
  95. @Coconuts

    I would imagine some European countries would still have those ideas in their Constitutions. This is a part of Article 21 of the Greek constitution:

    1. The family, being the cornerstone of the preservation and the advancement of the Nation, as well as marriage, motherhood and childhood, shall be under the protection of the State.

    2. Families with many children, disabled war and peace-time veterans, war victims, widows and orphans, as well as persons suffering from incurable bodily or mental ailments are entitled to the special care of the State.

    Now what they do in practice is another matter.

  96. @Joe Paluka

    The past was crap, too. Centuries of hard work, bloody battles, useless medicine, and the mosquitos!

  97. SafeNow says:

    “What would you say makes the culture wars seemingly so much more vitriolic in America than in other Western countries?”

    A crucial question, of course. But I would add this breakdown to it. When I was growing up during the 50s and early 60s, there were no culture wars. Thus, the question must be broken-down into two components:
    (1) What uniquely American preėxisting conditions were already in place, but could not themselves trigger the wars; and (2) What new factors came along. In other words, both (1) and (2) were necessary, but neither alone was sufficient.

    The consensus of posts over the last few years would, I think, be this:

    (1) Jews — in the Philip Roth sense—dissension, contentiousness, oppositional, hyper-criticalness, hyper-touchiness, etc; Black population, coupled with the legacy of slavery.
    (2) Vietnam; Kennedy assassinations; Hispanic massive migration

  98. @Realist

    They will also be calm and happy, just and kind, intelligent and clean. They toil not, neither do they weep.

  99. @Reaper

    No, you are not alone. The whole system (more like a random collection of quirks) is wacko!

  100. annamaria says:
    @siberiancat

    1. The Central Asia IQ is between 90 and 100. In comparison, the South and Latin America IQ are between 80 and 90 (except Argentina, 93), the same as the Middle East IQ. Here are the numbers for African countries: https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php
    2. If Central Asian immigrants are from the former republics of the dissolved USSR, then they most likely speak Russian, which makes their integration organic

  101. anon[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon

    Sadly, there is no longer any “white” culture left. White culture has been completely co-opted by Jew culture. The two are so intertwined, it’s increasingly difficult to tell them apart. Jews have co-opted white culture on every front — left, right, center, the rural poor, the suburban middle class, the urban rich, the religious, the irreligious, the jocks, the nerds, the dweebs, the winners, the losers, the private schooled, the public schooled, even some homeschoolers.

    White SJWs are on the left are the brown coats of (((neolibs))), conservatives on the right are increasingly useful idiots of the (((neocons))), including all the Trump worshipers on Breitbart, Zerohedge and gab.com, they still don’t get that they are worshiping a shabbos goy. And those who think they are at the center are completely co-opted by Jew run msm, they are the most spineless.

    The rural poor are Jewified because of all the opiod use, divorces, family dysfunction. The Suburban middle class and urban rich are the biggest Jew Kool Aid drinkers because they know that’s what they need to do to get ahead, and that’s all they care about, their bank accounts. Whites at all education levels divorce much too frequently thanks to Jew like narcissism and infidelity, and the poor are increasingly having children out of wedlock like blacks.

    All mainline Protestant churches, Evangelicals and even the Catholic church and Catholic schools are completely co-opted by Jews, all are busy getting woke, supporting gay marriage, sponsoring Muslim, African or Latin American refugees.

    Those who piss and moan about Jews dragging down the country are living in denial. I don’t see any introspection whatsoever on all the stupidity and degeneracy among whites. Everything is someone else’s fault, yet another insidious aspect of Jew culture. White culture is no more. Only Jew culture exists in the West today.

    • Replies: @Johan
    , @Johan
  102. Skeptikal says:

    “and of the astonishing ability of new technologies to grant us ever-greater levels of power, self-knowledge, and self-mastery. ”

    the obvious crux of this whole business is: Who has the power to decide?
    Er, the power to enforce?

    there is an obvious difference between a woman decided to have an abortion—for whatever reasons—and a state or a corporation or any other entity deciding she will 0r will not have a baby.
    Mainly because so far it is the woman who bears the actual costs, in dollars and in her own body and personal fate. Which is basically the way it should be. When other powers have power over a woman’s fertiilty then she is really just a baby producer, no different in essence from a farm animal that is bred to produce offspring for commercial purposes.

    (this is in fact how slave women were viewed in the American South in Virginia, which became a “breeder” state to fill the needs of plantations in the Mississippi Delta after the slave trade was abolished. Frederick Law Olmstead wrote about this in The Cotton Kingdom. Many of the “sires” were of course their owners, who thus increased their “livestock” holdings. Mixed-blood slaves were more valuable than pure black ones.)

    • Replies: @Guillaume Durocher
  103. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    It used to be that Americans could get along fine without bothering about their neighbors business as long as each respected the others person and property.

    Is that really true? Wasn’t Prohibition all about interfering in one’s neighbour’s business? And that was a hundred years ago.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  104. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Caspar Von Everec

    The birth rate of every continent is going down while Africa’s stay sky high

    Actually birth rates have already begun to plummet in many African countries. Take Kenya – their fertility rates have more than halved.

    Demographic collapse is happening everywhere. It started later in Africa, that’s all.

    • Agree: Kratoklastes, Reaper
    • Replies: @AndrewR
  105. Jett Rucker says: • Website

    Social media fractionalize us?
    What about (our) languages? What about the push buttons on our car radios (of the ’60s?)
    I lived in Miami in the ’60s, a place that became bilingual in that decade (it’s now trilingual).
    While stopped at a traffic light one morning, I realized that the person/people in the car next to mine might be listening to the radio (as I was), in another language. It further occurred to me that all the pushbuttons on their car radio might be set to stations that broadcast in some (that) other language. Mine were all set to stations that used the language I’m writing in.
    Improving means of mass communications will always (must always, except perhaps in China) cater to listeners’ preferences of language, political orientation, religion, whatever.
    Freedom. Fractionalization. PLEASE. Lest we become China.

  106. @Guillaume Durocher

    It’s just Divide and Rule imposed by an oligarchy with very strong class consciousness against serfs who have had their class consciousness beaten and brainwashed out of them, to the extent that they worship the parasites who exploit them mercilessly, and really imagine that they will be rich, too, one day. And as I listened to a black employee of Amazon explaining why she voted against unionisation in Alabama warehouses, it came readily to mind that centuries of slavery and oppression really leave their marks on groups and individuals in craven submissiveness.

  107. “0ne may be uninterested in biopolitics, but sooner or later biopolitics will take an interest in you.”

    And what if I am interested? Does it still take an interest in me? What is the point?

    “Discussion of these matters is typically schizophrenic.”

    As your 2000 words made abundantly clear. You failed to make a coherent argument for anything. There were a few vague truths mixed with a smattering of misperceptions and misrepresentations and no really useable or relevant insights. And it is clear you are guessing at the evolution part because you don’t have a grasp on the topic.

    Why would French right-wing voters be different from anyone anywhere else when it comes to tribal warfare? Confucius, Aristotle, and Christ all happened long after this time you speak of and there is no record of it. I don’t know why I am even bothering. That particular paragraph was unintellgible.

    So the root of modern culture wars is evolution and you still have time to make racist observations about abortion in the United States because you aren’t really a racist but a “biopolitical thinker”? Okay. Got it.

  108. Istvan says:

    All the same, it is now common practice for Western women to be able to abort their fetus if it is found to have a severe congenital disability (such as Down’s syndrome). So-called human-rights groups vilify eugenics while holding up women’s choice to exterminate a Down’s-syndrome embryo because it has Down’s syndrome as a Sacred Right.

    There are several US states that ban the abortion of Downs Syndrome babies but allow the abortion of normal, healthy babies. Talk about devolution.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  109. @Anon

    Readers might be aware or my adamantine hostility to all things psych[], but I have a tiny glimmer of fondness for what I am assured is”my” Myers-Briggs classification. That fondness stems solely from its useful acronym.

    I Name The Jew.

    Not all of them: just their Parasitoid Fraction, which is much much larger a fraction of their number than the Parasitoid Fraction of ordinary homo sapiens europeensis.

    Just as our dusky brethren are over-represented in demographics characterised by low impulse control and a propensity for violence, our Red Sea Pedestrian chums are dramatically over-represented in the human-society equivalent of Ichneumonidae(Parasitoid Wasps).

  110. anon[161] • Disclaimer says:
    @James J O'Meara

    Thanks!

    Every Sperm is Sacred – Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life

  111. @Anonymous

    You nailed it,though they refuse to see.Church ladies
    are now our senators and governors and we wonder why
    things are bad and getting worse?Some body is mandating
    this insanity, and lots of some bodies are buying it.

  112. @Skeptikal

    The woman and, if married, the father are the first concerned. But it is obvious that society also has a stake in the child – who may be an opportunity for the society, a burden if the child is misfit, or simply represents society’s perpetuation. The ancients understood this as so much modern individualist sophistry does not.

    • Replies: @RobinG
  113. @Laurent Guyénot

    Thank you for your comment Laurent. I would argue Darwinism is not conservative but descriptive, scientific, with insights that are fertile and forward-looking. It is not however in itself a politics, let alone a spirituality, which might animate a human civilization. It must evidently be allied with something more spiritual but I am not sure what that might be.

    • Replies: @Laurent Guyénot
  114. @Laurent Guyénot

    Aaha! The dime finally dropped. “RTP”, red pencilled by the instructor on top of a failed college test paper, is the acronym for Read The Problem! Yes, Guillaume does seem to be breaking a lance here for top-down eugenics, the only kind there is. We can also conclude logically that Guillaume stands with the Trust the Gubmint camp, because after all our rulers are enlightened and just and their technocratic Faucian henchmen are only coming to help us.

    Foo on that!

  115. Johan says:
    @Mefobills

    Thanks for the link, I am familiar with the works of Sheldrake.

    It is exactly the point which Sheldrake is trying to make that science is locked up in a certain rigid outdated materialist paradigm. If you have read some of his works, you can also read that the human genome project has been a failing money slurping project.

    Sheldrake appears to me rather too gentle or even meek in his criticism on contemporary science, it should be easy to see that science for the last century, starting centuries ago, is working towards promoting everything which makes people dependent on what Foucault called ‘biopower’, on industry, and top down power, and the dictatorial democratic states are eagerly going along. They are banning and ridiculing everything which is cheap, free, and alternative. He argues that scientists are locked up in a model and at large do not know better, not mentioning the money and power motive, and that to make people dependent is the grand scheme.

    https://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/biopower-in-the-age-of-the-great-reset

    Your point is a good one, but may not be true.

    I do not see an argument in your reaction how gene theory possibly provides for a teleology. Gene theory cannot even explain much, it is the hobby horse of a cult, popularly distributed.

    but behavior might also be reinforced genetically

    This is an expression of unsubstantiated popular speculation, of which there are many in the comment section of this article. Aside that the article itself is curiously uncritical on the subject.
    Here is an interview with Sheldrake where he popularly explains the inability of trying to predict even simpler things by means of gene theory.

    https://www.alice.id.tue.nl/references/Interview%20with%20Rupert%20Sheldrake.pdf

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  116. Johan says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    The article seems basically speculative suggestive and highly uncritical, it makes up an easy, attractive, and fantastic popular dystopian read. The word ‘biosingularity’ is apparently the newest word in the dystopian cult vocabulary, they love to invent magic words. The bigger the words, the more hollow they are, their power is rooted in the cherished beliefs of the cult members.

  117. Anonymous[149] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    Did you read what I wrote about womin? That is the story of prohibition

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  118. annamaria says:
    @Istvan

    The “West” must first figure out why their MIC/Banksters’ wars have exterminated millions of healthy and well-formed babies in the Middle East and beyond.

    By the way, if you want to adopt a baby with severe cognitive and physical disabilities, you can do that. Moreover, “On any given day, there are nearly 424,000 children in foster care in the United States.” Guess, if all men and women opposing the abortion of fetuses with disabilities join their efforts and adopt the existing foster children, then the debate about women’s choice might take on a different dimension.

    Up to date, the US is famous for this: Madeline Albright (the Clinton administration):
    “500,000 children have died due to the United States sanctions on Iraq” and, according to Albright, “this worth it.” Are Albright and Clintons ready to sacrifice their young for some “worth it” thing or they delight in the sacrificing of other peoples’ babies only?

    The US sanctions have been killing the children in Venezuela, Iran, and Syria. The US-conducted coup in Ukraine produced dead children in East Ukraine. The US has been starving the Syrians: https://www.liberationnews.org/u-s-role-in-syrias-civil-war/

    The Obama/Powers’ “humanitarian intervention” has converted prosperous Libya — with the best pediatric care in the Middle East –into a lawless state featuring slave markets. No state health care for children. https://www.africanexponent.com/post/ten-reasons-libya-under-gaddafi-was-a-great-place-to-live-2746

    The bleating about the “sanctity of life” by American purists is an apex of hypocrisy.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @RobinG
    , @Jack McArthur
  119. Johan says:
    @anon

    “Jews have co-opted white culture on every front — left, right, center, the rural poor, the suburban middle class, the urban rich, the religious, the irreligious, the jocks, the nerds, the dweebs, the winners, the losers, the private schooled, the public schooled, even some homeschoolers”

    Instead of such an elaborate list you could just limit it to ‘Jews have co-opted the democratic peoples and their culture’, which is easy to do. Basically a culture in decline ruled by dwarfs, the meek, scoundrels and the corrupted, based upon the dogmatic illusions of the democratic ideology has been taken over by those who are realists and superior in intelligence. Where democracy, the orgy of the masses guided by demagogues has completely sidetracked the gentiles of superior intelligence.

  120. @Lucy Lipinska

    Poland is on their radar… they want to retake that land back just as they had controlled it before the WWII. Polonia better be on guard!

  121. Johan says:
    @anon

    Everything is someone else’s fault, yet another insidious aspect of Jew culture.

    This is actually characteristic of democracy too, in the war of the people against the people, politicized democratic man always blames the other along political lines, or he blames elites, as democratic egalitarian man is inherently hostile to anything superior to him.
    The Jews make clever us of this, they us it set up democratic man against each other, and most of them fall into the trap blindly. So the two could shake hands, were it not that Jew intelligence is superior to that of modern secular democratic man.

    The Jew cleverly utilizes all the monsters of democracy, its ubiquitous web of media, in which democratic man believes like a Christian believes in the Bible. The Jew utilizes the system of free political associations of democratic man, by infiltrating in its obscure vast labyrinth of political organizations, by extension of it.

    The Jew, just like modern democratic Western man believes he is ultimately representative of everything, that he is the crown on human evolution. Where of course the Jew not really being so stupid as to be democratic, while paying lip service to democracy, attempting to spread it everywhere in order to subvert it, outsmarts democratic egalitarian man by far.

    The two, the ultimately materialist Jew and secular democratic materialist man are closely related, they have a thing or two going on together, being intertwined. Difference, the Jews breed and maintain intelligence, and he works with his peers constructively towards his goal, he uses atomized, ever warring, politicized, egalitarian democratic Western man to dumb down his culture destroying ultimately everything of worth.

  122. @Anonymous

    we’ve always had the annoying church ladies

    They got us prohibition–with mind-blowing second and third order consequences.

    The liberation of women allowed them to become Governors, Senators, and even a Speaker of the House.

    Insanity has quickly (and predictably) followed.

    When the polity has gone totally insane, all policy discussions become three ring circuses filled with freaks.

  123. Mefobills says:
    @Johan

    We might be saying the same thing, but from different angles.

    My view is that meta-data has to be taken into account. This means that there are unknowns in the data, yet the data-set is predictive.

    For example, we can take the total DNA base pairs of a monkey, and compare them to humans, and we find considerable overlap.

    The numerically small difference in DNA somehow derives a large difference in output i.e. Human vs Monkey.

    There are other things going on in the machine, which is why I mentioned Sheldrake. There may also be RNA carrying information, and epigenetics.

    I have no issue with this comment from Sheldrake:

    He explains how originally the scientific field held a kind of Cartesian dualistic view of spirit and matter, which eventually was replaced solely by matter. The scientific view that matter is “dead” and has no soul or spirit is dangerous

    Our understanding of the mechanics of life has giant gaps in knowledge, but I believe my point remains. Racial groups of humans do have predictable behaviors as a function of their essence, whatever that is – which also includes the DNA that is transferred during reproduction.

    The mechanistic view is incomplete, and may include Spirit, as Sheldrake says.

    I can predict with high assurance that somebody of West African origin will win a sprinting event in the next Olympics, and that a North East Asian will not. I can predict with high assurance that female DNA will produce a woman, and male DNA will produce a man, and so on.

  124. RobinG says:
    @Guillaume Durocher

    “The ancients” routinely killed off a lot of their girl children. The Greeks of Sparta killed the lower classes for sport. [See: Helot Revolt.)

    • Replies: @Jack McArthur
  125. Guillaume Durocher: “… it may come down to Elon Musk giving elderly whizz-kids Craig Venter and George Church a few tens of billions of dollars on some tropical island.”

    The island of Dr. Moreau?

    Guillaume Durocher: “In any event, there is no point being backward-looking and nostalgic. This is the path of sterility. One must be archeofuturist: lucidly aware of the basic foundations of human nature – which, exceptionally, may themselves begin to change somewhat in the coming years – of the insights of timeless wisdom, and of the astonishing ability of new technologies to grant us ever-greater levels of power, self-knowledge, and self-mastery.”

    Changing “the basic foundations of human nature” with technology? LOL. This quest to preserve something by changing it seems self-evidently absurd. If you want to abolish the human race, why not just say so? But I suppose that would make things too obvious, and take all the fun out of it for you.

    The problem with “archeofuturism” is the same as with eugenics, i.e., that there’s no logical stopping point. An endless series of changes means that the original is replaced, bit by bit, until it’s entirely something else. And why stop with gene tinkering? Many futurists look forward with eager anticipation to the day when human bodies can be dispensed with altogether and replaced with an assemblage of electronic and mechanical parts. But what will a civilization (if we can call it that) of machines have in common with humanity as it exists today? Will they appreciate the “timeless wisdom” of their predecessor, an extinct species? Doubtful, for if they were so wise, how is it they went extinct?

  126. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    Did you read what I wrote about womin? That is the story of prohibition

    You can try to blame it all on women but that doesn’t change the fact that minding other people’s business has been part of the political landscape for more than a century.

    You could see the Hollywood Production Code as another example. It was forced on the studios by people who believed they had the right (and the moral duty) to tell people what kinds of movies they were allowed to see.

    If you have democracy and mass media you will always end up with a situation in which people believe that other people’s personal business is the business of the government. You will end up with the government acting as a moral policeman.

    The idea that we should mind our own business is a 19th century idea. The past century has been a continuous tale of people trying to mind other people’s business.

    And social conservatives are no better. They want to mind other people’s business. At the moment they don’t have much power to do that but they would certainly be aggressively minding other people’s business if they had that power. That includes male as well as female social conservatives.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  127. @RobinG

    You seem to have a narrow understanding regarding “the ancients”. Female infanticide was never practiced in Ancient Egypt. In the Greek era Egyptians rescued such children from exposure.

    • Replies: @Jack McArthur
    , @RobinG
  128. @annamaria

    “By the way, if you want to adopt a baby with severe cognitive and physical disabilities, you can do that.”

    Can we assume you are opposed to abortions other than the cases you mention above?

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9483901/Mother-baby-no-legs-one-arm-says-not-having-abortion-best-decision-life.html

    • Replies: @annamaria
  129. @Jack McArthur

    An Ancient Egyptian sacred text describes how “those in their mothers womb already have their face turned towards You [Osiris]”. Murder was followed by punishment and then annihilation when the person left this world.

  130. @Schuetze

    Got your point: see my comment #93

  131. @Guillaume Durocher

    Darwinism is a speculative theory how species might have evolved from one another, backed by no evidence whatsoever (as Darwin acknowledged), and disproved by modern genetics (as Darwin would have acknowledged, being less dogmatic than his sectarian disciples). It is no more descriptive or scientific than lamarckism or vitalism, or any other theory based on phylogenetic classification. And, as said Stephen Jay Gould in 1980, “the synthetic theory [neo-Darwinism], … as a general proposition, is effectively dead, despite its persistence as textbook orthodoxy.” Besides, it is largely responsible for the moral destruction of the White race. To me, your article, at least, has clarified this last point. I wish you would read and consider seriously my arguments in “Blood and Soul”: https://www.unz.com/article/blood-and-soul/
    This debate over Darwinism is, I think, of utmost importance.

  132. @Anonymous

    I basically agree. Despite my sometimes emphatic condemnation of christianity, my assessment of it is more balanced. For one thing, I make a difference between the praxis and the doxa. Christianity has absorbed and carried the eternal need of men for spiritual truths (God, the afterlife, etc.). It is also largely pagan: Christmas, the Holy Virgin, etc, are universal myths, foreign to the Bible. I keep all of this.
    Another point that I would answer regarding the need for saint Anthonys has been well made by Louis Dumont. I quote from my article “Israel as One Man”:

    it has been argued that Christianity laid the foundation for modern Western individualism. Anthropologist Louis Dumont explains in his Essays on Individualism that traditional societies are holistic and hierarchical: they subordinate the individual to the community and assign to the individual a value that depends on his/her social role. Such societies admit that some individuals forsake their social existence to seek individual enlightenment, as long as these individuals do not challenge the social order and its holistic dynamic, but remain the exceptions that confirm the rule. Christianity, according to Dumont, has upset that civilizational balance by emphasizing that salvation from this world is everybody’s business. Every Christian is defined as a “self-in-relationship-to-God”, even if he doesn’t renounce the world as an hermit or a monk, and so he becomes an “individual-in-the-world.” By stages, “holism will have vanished from ideology,” and “the outworldly individual will have become the modern, inworldly individual.”

    In other words, the problem of christianity is its exclusivism: it is a monomyth, with no other model than saint Anthonies, and a command to everyman to focus on the City of God rather than the City of man. A good family man can certainly be a good Christian, but he certainly can’t go to heaven: only saint Anthony can.
    But my biggest critic of Christianity, which I have made elsewhere, is that it is the the Troyan Horse of Jewish power.

    • Replies: @Jack McArthur
    , @Anonymous
  133. AndrewR says:
    @dfordoom

    TFR is no more important than the infant mortality rate. If the birth rate drops in half but the child mortality rate goes down by 90%… The net result is that the population increases five times faster

    • Replies: @Reaper
    , @dfordoom
  134. Anonymous[149] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    Well mate, all of what you write is true to an extent but the American spirit isn’t completely dead.
    Enjoy some Americana

  135. @Laurent Guyénot

    In other words, the problem of christianity is its exclusivism: it is a monomyth, with no other model than saint Anthonies, and a command to everyman to focus on the City of God rather than the City of man. A good family man can certainly be a good Christian, but he certainly can’t go to heaven: only saint Anthony can.

    Overstated. The monastic movement is for people who have a special vocation and by their sacrifice become a store of merits for others (Luke 7:34). C. S. Lewis wrote something along the lines that the great saint could be the young girl who served you in the bakers this morning. Proof texting is for those who think Christianity is a religion of the book (Jesus never ordered such a thing) instead of spirit led which uses a book.

    A good ferryman doesn’t try to sink the boat of another soul.

    The emphasis on the individuality of the Christian you highlight is overstated:

    Jesus: That all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. I have given them the glory You gave Me, so that they may be one as We are one— I in them and You in Me—that they may be perfectly united, so that the world may know that You sent Me and have loved them just as You have loved Me (John 17:21).

    In this instance the text does resonate with all the other texts which describe the Holy Spirit i.e. if the same spirit it as work in all then a convergence of Christians should evidence it. That is not the same spirit at work here from todays news :
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9486783/ISIS-executes-Coptic-Egypt-warning-Christians.html

    nor here, also from todays news:
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9485263/DOMINIC-LAWSON-Haunting-image-killer-victim.html

    • Replies: @Laurent Guyénot
  136. Anonymous[394] • Disclaimer says:
    @Laurent Guyénot

    The solution surely lies in providing multiple legitimate paths towards salvation, each suited to people with different aptitudes and character traits.

    For instance, in Hinduism it was considered spiritually legitimate for some men to pursue wealth and power. Salvation was the work of many lifetimes, and one first had to taste to the full wealth and power to see that it was empty. To prevent someone who was consumed with desire for wealth from pursuing that would be to prematurely retard his spiritual progress. A “young” souls had to undergo a process of education.

    Society is united by one goal, salvation, but recognizes many paths and stages of maturity towards that goal, corresponding to the variety of human character types.

    This kind of pluralism, of diversity within unity, strikes me as eminently wise. A stable society needs to cater to the needs of all human character types. Deny any one type it’s natural outlet, and you create a discontented section of the populace that will become revolutionary.

    A big cause of the social unrest of the modern West is that it has been “monistic”, believing in one kind of activity and character type as alone legitimate, and trying to impose that on everyone.

    While paths towards salvation are diverse, they are hierarchical. The significance of the ascetic or the renouncer is that he serves as a vivid and potent reminder of the true goal of life, a realm beyond petty social and material concerns. This is immensely consoling and indeed inspiring to all members of society in all walks of life. It makes burdens easier to bear and a taste of the sublime – social and material concerns, on their own, cannot give a taste of the sublime.

    So even though the St Anthony type is the “ideal” of any truly religious society, it is not the ideal in the sense that everyone is meant to be exactly like that. Everyone can use a little bit of asceticism and a little bit if “release” in his life, even if he is an otherwise serious family man and worker. St Anthony lends him a bit of his fire.

  137. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Laurent Guyénot

    In that case, you are indeed a consistent Darwinist, just like Yval Noah Harari, for transhumanism is the logical outgrowth of Darwinism. And in that case, you are confirming the view that Darwinism, the new religion of the West, is our doom. I can hardly believe it.

    Like Jews, Darwinists are single-minded fanatics and psychopaths.

    Sensible people will take theory that has the seeds of merit and work with it to craft a reasonable outcome that works for most people. Fanatics will take a theory (“Yaweh/History chose the Jews” or Darwinism) and take it to a fanatical extreme, regardless of the evidence of what it is doing to society and humanity, and where it will end.

    Human beings and human society can’t work with know-it-all fanatics posing as “intellectuals.” They’ve got to isolate them until they snuff themselves out. Or they’ve got to put the genie back in the bottle and then shoot it to the sun.

    Darwinists and Chosen Jews are together destroying the world, and have earned their own destruction. They can sense this, and being fanatics, megalomaniacs and psychopaths, are willing to take the Samson option and destroy the world around them, which in their warped, squirming, schizophrenic brains will “validate” their batshit theories.

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
  138. RobinG says:
    @Jack McArthur

    Durocher didn’t specify Egyptians. [Should he have?] They aren’t the only “ancients.”

    • Replies: @Jack McArthur
  139. @Jack McArthur

    In response to my criticism of Christianity as institutional and enforced culture, you tell me about Jesus. These are two different, almost irreconcilable things, as you well know: “Jesus announced the Kingdom, and all we got was the Church” as said Alfred Loisy. I have never criticized Jesus. I sincerely think he is still a very powerful icon: the man who stood up fearlessly to Jewish power and exposed the evil of it. Jesus may be seen as a sublime Greek hero, as I argued in From Yahweh to Zion (and as Simone Weil saw him). The main problem is that the Christian Christ is supposed to be the Messiah sent to the chosen people. There is no Christianity without acknowledgment of Jewish Chosenness. If it was not for this little problem, I would never attack Christianity, even for its individualistic anthropology. Now, everyone is free to have their own private christianity, but that is irrelevant. I’m talking about institutional Christianity as it existed historically, and as it exists today.
    But like you, if I have to choose between Christianity and Islam, I choose Christianity without any hesitation.

    • Replies: @Jack McArthur
  140. @RobinG

    The difference between Greek and Egyptian in these matters was covered in a comment I made to one of his previous essays.
    https://www.unz.com/gdurocher/the-postwar-triumph-of-social-liberalism/#comment-4326617

    As an aside the Egyptians called the Greeks children as their culture was much older.

  141. @Laurent Guyénot

    I can understand the animosity towards the god(s) of the OT. As I have commented elsewhere the Sinai revelation was not an advancement on what had went before but something much worse which Jesus corrected with respect to being spirit rather than law led. James Henry Breasted who founded the Oriental Institute in Chicago and whose translations can still be cited in scholarly works today wrote:

    ”I had more disquieting experiences before me, when as a young orientalist I found that the Egyptians had possessed a standard of morals far superior to that of the Decalogue over a thousand years before the Decalogue was written” (Dawn of Conscience, p. xi-xii.)

    Jesus founded a Church according to the gospels. He gave Peter the keys of the Kingdom and the power to forgive sins.

    “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by My Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

    I believe Christians have an afterlife and that they can take consolation in the above promises. Jews do not have the same confidence since eternal life was never part of the covenant they believe in hence my comments regarding aspects of the OT is not me trying to sink their boat of salvation for they never had one until Jesus came.

    Dark episodes are part of the history of the Church (a lot of this is the legacy of the OT and monotheism itself) but it still is the ordinary way for people in much of the world to enter into a community, to exercise ritual and do the works of charity. The dark episodes are quite long in the past and it would not put me off pointing anyone to a Church if I thought that is where they should take their first spiritual steps as time is now pressing.

  142. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @Chris Moore

    Allow me to add another commonality between Zionists and Darwinists: their objectification and dehumanization of non-adherents. The Zionists call them “goyim” or “gentiles.” The Darwinists aren’t so obviously racist, but they claim to possess specialized knowledge that we’re all evolved from the apes, and the fact that only they will acknowledge that (as opposed to “ignoramus” Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc.) makes them “chosen” intellectuals and god-like overlords, entitled to control life, death and property over the uninitiated.

    They refuse, however, to declare Jews ignoramuses, because Jews control the banks and the media and consequently have an oversized say in government and society, so they get a “pass” on their elitist religious conceit and racism.

    The fusion of Darwinists and Zionists in the Anglosphere establishment — with their sense of superiority and entitlement — has made for a murderous and destructive axis.

    When one adds up all the destructive institutions and wars the Zionist and Anglo-elites are responsible for — the slave trade, British imperialism, Bolshevism, two world wars, the Mideast “War on Terror” for Israel and the Petrodollar, now this increasingly probable nuclear war against Russia, Iran and China — one can sensibly say that “Chosen-Elect” or the lowest belly-crawlers ever to darken humanity’s door.

    It’s simply amazing that this gang of thugs, psychopaths and organized killers have been able to get away with their genocide of the human race for so long simply by smearing critics as nativists, Nazis, anti-Semites, deplorables, Amalekites, etc.

  143. Reaper says:
    @AndrewR

    TFR is far far more important: it represents the real growth, and not just as population number, but as long term life ability.

    Just compare with the countries with high infant mortality rates – more or less are the same ones which have hight TFR. The reverse also true: where no meaningful TFR, have very low infant mortality rate.

    Low infant mortality rate is actually a sign of decline.
    All countries, where birth rates are decreasing have low infant mortality rate.
    Offspring who otherwise (by base) cannot survive survives in low infant mortality countries. Not just bad for natural selection (which increse problems later), but also marks a shift in an attitude.
    Attitude becames: one baby, who must survive, if anything happens collapse/ neurotic response. Also enstrenghten the: we still have time attitude (delayed/ late pregnancies over 35).
    While when 1-2 dies from 7-8 many remains, and loss regarded as natural. Also there is an instinct to make reproduction secure, eg. start more early with more offspring.

    My grandma had 15 brothers and sisters who survived untill their teen years.
    But there were another 5 who either born dead or died before 5 years old. Also miscarriages.

    In our modern world miscarrige becames more rare, and infant mortality rate very low.
    This leads to: decreasing birth rates overall a clear sign of decline.

    If we watch any given species:
    – Which have many offsprings and only a portion survives (and life expectancy is at most moderate long) capable of rapid development, adaptation, and represents life ability.
    – Which have only a very few offsprings even if most survives (and lives long) are more static, less adaptive, more likely endangered.

    So opposed with a modern west which have: irreal hight life expectancy, and low TRF with low infant mortality; needs a turn where life becames shorter, TFR highter, and infant mortality rate non-artificial – means highter.
    Only that secure the long term survival.

  144. dfordoom says: • Website
    @AndrewR

    TFR is no more important than the infant mortality rate. If the birth rate drops in half but the child mortality rate goes down by 90%… The net result is that the population increases five times faster

    If your TFR drops below a certain point it doesn’t matter how low your infant mortality rate is – your population is going to eventually start declining.

    And the decline in TFR in many African countries is rapid and spectacular and shows no sign of slowing down. Eventually their populations will start declining.

    Demographic collapse is a global phenomenon which clearly has nothing to do with race.

    • Replies: @Reaper
  145. JamesO says:
    @Based Lad

    “Operating within enemy framework. Casual historical revisionism portrayed as fact. America was explicitly a country for whites.”

    There is no historical revisionism. I say this as an American, many Americans do not understand what true ethnic identity and culture is. Whiteness which arises as an “identity” within the context of conflict with other races does not form a true ethnic identity. A German, a Swede, and a Russian Slav all living in their native countries are also “white” but that is not their ethnic identity. Their ethnic identity is tied to their nation. America does not have this nor has it. I am a white American whose grandparents on both sides came to America in the 1950’s, like many white Americans I have no ties to the original settlers or early American history.

    America is an liberal experiment based on ideals not ethnicity. It was however created primarily by Anglo Saxon men who would very much have preferred America stayed that way but any notion of America being ethnically Anglo Saxon disappeared long ago.

    • Agree: dfordoom, Reaper
  146. Anonymous[694] • Disclaimer says:
    @Caspar Von Everec

    The future the elites want is obvious. They want to dissolve all of humanity in blackness…
    ..The eventual aim of the Jewish plutocracy is for all races to breed with blacks and reduced to a state of feral blackness. The whole world will be a huge sweltering mass of 80 iq mulatto consumers with no identity, purpose or higher will…
    …In time, they’ll probably wipe out the mulattoes through abortion, sterilization and starvation as well. Once you have a sufficient degree of automation, a sweltering horde of negroes only serve as a resource leech and a violent pest.

    What an absurd take this is. You think that upon reaching total, complete dominance over the peoples of the earth, the Jews will just kill them all off and be left with an empty planet, ruling over no one and just spending their time birdwatching or some shit? Delusional.

    Presupposing that the Jews are so powerful and so amoral as to be able to genocide the rest of the human race at whim as you assert, here is what’s much more likely to happen. There will be no vast depopulation, and furthermore there will be no mass blending of the races into an unappealing, unattractive grey goo. Instead, you might see the formation of a racial caste system with whites-and perhaps also East Asians if China succumbs to external pressure and internal subversion-on the bottom and Blacks and Browns as the overseer muscle for the ultimate rulers. Once whites are completely vanquished and out of power, there will be no incentive to exterminate them. It will make much more sense to keep them around to humiliate them and use their women as bedwarmers, probably even selectively breed them for sex slaves on an industrial scale. That would make for much better, longer lasting, and enjoyable revenge than a quick genocide, and also much better in fitting with the long run of human history where to conquered were always kept around as slaves, not killed off.

    • Replies: @Reaper
  147. Reaper says:
    @dfordoom

    “Demographic collapse is a global phenomenon”

    Some years ago there was a joke – with truth:
    “Export our liberals/ feminists as biological weapon against ISIS. If Levante collapses good, if not, we win back our land.”

    It is a globalized world, and all liberal-feminist-lgbt-woke, etc… madness is exported globally. Spread like cancer, and it is only a matter of time untill it will infect now relative lacking areas, like Africa. Certain areas just lacking behind, does not immune.

    So yes, the collapse of birth rates are global, as does the risk of extinction in a long run.

    Soon the only option will be to do a radical turn: something similary radical, and devastating as Giliad. Day by day it is less like a fiction, and more becames a neccesity.

  148. Reaper says:
    @Anonymous

    ” the long run of human history where to conquered were always kept around as slaves, not killed off. ”

    There are quite many examples in history, when the conquered killed off, or mass numbers killed off.
    – Romans exterminated many of the conquered, as well the ones who rise up. Cartage just famous, not unique.
    – Mongols exterminated whole “nations” tribes/ folks actually
    – Many native american tribes are exterminated fully

    Non happened in a short run, but on a hundred year scale yes, very often.

  149. annamaria says:

    “German Microbiologist: “They are Killing People with COVID Vaccines” to Reduce World’s Population” https://rumble.com/vfx0h3-german-microbiologist-they-are-killing-people-with-covid-vaccines-to-reduce.html

  150. annamaria says:
    @Jack McArthur

    “Every Sperm is Sacred – Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life”

    When the ZUSA stops murdering children and pregnant women by the millions in the Middle East and beyond to improve the baseline of the MIC, banksters, corporatists, and other welfare recipients then your bloviation about “immorality of women” might have some sense. Meanwhile, address the real murderers ,if you dare.
    I am a mother and this gives me a very clear understanding of other mothers, as well as the ability to spot a moral warrior on the cheap.

  151. @annamaria

    Though I never referred to this in my post, I do not support evil done to children in or out of the womb or people in general. This includes starving them through unjust sanctions, dropping atomic bombs on cities, carpet bombing cities, waging demonstrably unjust wars, and the unbridled greed of unregulated capitalism.

    You have no idea what cost my values have incurred. Why do you assume they be “cheap”?

    You quote me as writing about the “immorality of women” but that does not appear in my post either.

    I asked a simple short civil question you which you ignore but instead you reply with sarcasm and big assumptions.

  152. Hillary C says:
    @Agent76

    i am torn.

    i want to decrease whites getting abortions

    but due to the massive reduction in the growth of the crime rates due to 60% of black babies getting aborted, i actually want to increase blacks getting abortions.
    goal 80% by end of 2021
    goal 90% by end of 2022
    goal 100% by end of 2023

    • Troll: Reaper
Current Commenter
says:

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


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Guillaume Durocher Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
The JFK Assassination and the 9/11 Attacks?