The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Unz Archive
Incest Barriers and Litter Size
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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

While in college I had always believed that if I were somehow unable to pursue an academic career in theoretical physics, my next choice would have been evolutionary biology. As an indication of that interest, I briefly studied under Prof. E.O. Wilson at Harvard, and then a few years ago finally managed to write up and publish in more polished form one of the the papers I had written for him back in 1983 on the Social Darwinist implications of the traditional Chinese rural political economy.

I recently happened to be digging through my old files and came across another college paper I’d written in his seminar that might perhaps be worth republishing in its original form. This analysis suggested an obvious relationship between the typical litter size of a given species and the strength of its innate incest barrier, based upon the intuitive notion of an Effective Reproductive Value (ERV). At the time, Prof. Wilson thought my hypothesis seemed quite novel and something he hadn’t seen discussed elsewhere, and although I’d assume that the subsequent 38 years of academic scholarship in evolutionary theory has filled that gap, I’d certainly be interested if someone can provide some such source references.

Incest is an emotional and important topic among human beings. To a sociobiologist, this fact is not surprising: incest, being a subcategory of reproductive behavior, has a potent impact upon genetic fitness, hence the act and the emotions relating to it are shaped by powerful selective pressures.

Incest is also an important topic among sociobiologists. Incestuous matings greatly increase the probability that offspring will be homozygous in malfunctioning genes and therefore less likely to survive and reproduce.[1]For a discussion of the harms of inbreeding and a survey of the literature, cf. Dobzhansky (1962) 146-150; Wilson (1975) 78-80. A sociobiologist would predict the evolution of human behavioral mechanisms to suppress incest; and case studies of Israeli kibbutz children and Taiwanese child-brides have confirmed the existence of a strong innate (as opposed to cultural) aversion to sexual relations between children raised in the same family. This fact constitutes one of the strongest empirical validations of human sociobiological analysis, and serves to explain the strong incest taboo found in nearly all human societies as a cultural amplification of an innate biological mechanism.[2]For a discussion of this phenomenon, cf. Wilson and Lumsden (1981) 138-141.

Yet incest barriers remain a curiously ambiguous support for sociobiology. Incest is obviously genetically harmful to all organisms, not just humans; but, as any pet owner can testify, domestic dogs and cats have little if any aversion to mating with their parents, siblings, or offspring. The standard explanation presented by sociobiologists is that domesticity constitutes an unnatural environment in which behavior patterns sufficient to prevent inbreeding in the wild (such as the expulsion of adolescents from the family group) are unable to function.

This argument is weak on two grounds. First, it ignores the fact that canines and felines have been subject to domesticity for several thousand generations, long enough for new behavioral structures to have evolved. Second, it does not explain why incest barriers in humans should be so much stronger and more direct than those in dogs and cats. In the primitive state, young human males may have been subject to a certain amount of wanderlust, while young females may have been traded between bands; such mechanisms would prevent much inbreeding, and the need for an extremely powerful “hard-wired” barrier seems unclear. It is the purpose of this paper to suggest a more logical and more convincing explanation of this anomaly using the notions of effective reproductive value and litter size.

Effective Reproductive Value (ERV) and Litter Size

Having one child is good; having twenty is not twenty times as good. On this point, both human women and sociobiologists are in agreement. Past a certain point, each additional offspring means (for species with high post-natal parental investment, especially birds and mammals) just another helpless infant to feed and protect. Doubling the size of a litter may mean doubling the parental investment but actually decreasing the reproductive return if spreading too little food among too many hungry mouths results in general malnutrition, with few of the offspring surviving into reproductive maturity.[3]This whole issue is thoroughly discussed in Lack (1954); Daly and Wilson (1978) 26-29 contains a good summary of the argument and a survey of the literature.

This simple intuitive fact may be described more precisely by defining an “average net effective reproductive value (ERV)” function V as a function of litter size N. V(N) would be composed of a positive term proportional to the average number of offspring in the litter which reach sexual maturity and successfully reproduce, and a negative term which includes the cost to the parent of producing and caring for the offspring. A typical k-selected (high parental investment) net effective reproductive value curve might look like:

Horizontal axis is Litter Size and vertical access is Effective Reproductive Value
Horizontal axis is Litter Size and vertical access is Effective Reproductive Value

We would expect an organism to evolve towards producing a litter of size N.opt, the optimal value point or the point of diminishing returns. This hypothesis has been confirmed by a wide range of empirical studies.[4]Cf. Lack (1954); Daly and Wilson (1978) 26-29; Fuchs (1982).

One feature which we might expect to find in many such net ERV curves would be a near plateau in the vicinity of the central maximum due to the buffering effect of increased parental investment. For example, if a typical (hence optimal) feline litter contains five kittens of which usually only two survive to age six months, a four kitten litter might very likely also yield two survivors on average because of the increased food and care available to each kitten. Four kittens might have (say) 95% of the ERV of five kittens rather than the 80% a strictly linear value function would predict.

Obviously the above analysis is purely speculative and theoretical. The exact nature of a given species’ effective reproductive value function is generated by a complex interaction of environmental and biological factors, and can only be determined empirically. However, the logical case for a buffered plateau around the central maximum seems quite plausible.

More decisively, the existence of such a plateau is generally supported by the little empirical evidence available. Visible ERV plateaus seem to be present in the plotted data for the Boat-Tailed Grackle[5]Daly and Wilson (1978) 28. and the Great Tit,[6]Daly and Wilson (1978) 29. two bird species whose breeding success/clutch size characteristics have been numerically analyzed. Among other bird species such as hawks, owls, storks, crows, buzzards, and common swifts, it is the overwhelming rule for one or more nestlings (the “runts of the litter”) to die of starvation during most years (during years in which food is especially plentiful, they are raised to maturity); these appear to constitute a “reserve army” of offspring, to be supported during good years and cast-off to starve during average or bad. The presence of “throw-away” offspring implies the existence of an ERV plateau.

Among mammalian species, the evidence for an ERV plateau is also common. A study of the litters of laboratory Guinea Pigs shows that the average number of offspring weaned per litter of 3 is 80% of that per litter of 5 (the optimum), 36% higher than a simple linear ERV would predict. Furthermore, if we assume that average weight at weaning is proportional to future survival/reproductive success, then the ERV becomes virtually constant around the central plateau:[7]Lack (1954) 46.

Litter SizeNumber
Average Weight
at Weaning (gm)
Estimated ERV
(% of Maximum)

That such a smooth ERV plateau occurs under laboratory conditions is very remarkable. In the natural state, we would expect limited parental resources of food and security against predation to generate a much smoother ERV plateau among most species.

Controlled litter size experiments performed on house mice seem to yield similar results. Survivorship, weight at weaning, and future reproductive fitness of offspring all fall with increased litter size. Furthermore, in especially large litters, the rate of maternal infanticide and cannibalism of offspring rises dramatically; such behavior very likely serves to conserve maternal resources (and augment them by “recycling” surplus young).[8]Fuchs (1982) 40-43. All of these results are completely consistent with the existence of a broad ERV plateau, and indeed would probably be enhanced in the natural state.

From the above theoretical and empirical evidence, it seems likely that an ERV plateau is found in a wide range of k-selected species. Below, we shall see that such species would be considerably buffered against the deleterious effects of incestuous matings.

The Impact of Incest

The harms of incest are two-fold. There is some loss of genetic variation, which may make it less likely for future offspring to possess the genes necessary for success in a changed environment. But far more immediate and significant are the harms directly associated with homozygous gene pairs, sometimes relative to a superior heterozygous state (as in the case of sickle-cell genes)[9]In tropical regions, the heterozygous sickle-cell state is substantially superior to the normal state because it provides a degree of protection from malaria. Cf. Dobzhansky (1962) 152. but more often absolute (as in the case of individuals homozygous in a mutated and non-functional gene important to survival). Among humans, these direct harms may include increased likelihood of stillbirth, blindness, dwarfism, and severe deformities;[10]Cf. Wilson (1975) 78. and this is probably the same for most organisms. In the natural condition, an infant of any species born with such handicaps would have virtually no chance of surviving and reproducing.

To a species with a very small litter-size—notably homo sapiens with an average litter of one infant—incest is a true disaster. A study of the results of r=1/2 (parent-child or sibling-sibling) incest among human women showed that almost half of the infants born either died within the first year of life or exhibited crippling defects; children born to these same women through non-incestuous relations exhibited a (normal) 10% rate of early death or disability.[11]Cf. Wilson (1975) 79. Human incest therefore means a 50-50 chance that the infant produced will be defective and an entire reproductive cycle will have been wasted.

On the other hand, the negative consequences of incest will be substantially buffered in the case of a species with a large average litter size and a plateau in its effective reproductive value function. Losing several offspring very soon after birth would decrease the total ERV of the litter only slightly. This would be expecially true in those species (such as mammals) in which the bulk of the parental investment is post-natal and pro-rated: among house mice, the energetic cost of producing milk to feed a pup is over three times as great as the energetic cost of the producing the pup itself, hence losing a pup or two because of incest would mean only a very small lost investment.[12]Fuchs (1982) 49. Whether this argument applies to domestic canines and felines and explains their very weak incest barriers can only be determined by controlled breeding experiments (see following section); but it seems a plausible hypothesis.

Experimental Suggestions and Predictions

This section is perhaps the most important one. Far too much of modern sociobiology has been concerned with highly abstract (and suspect) theoretical reasoning unbuttressed by empirical evidence. Fortunately, the general predictions made in this paper should be fairly easy to confirm or contradict experimentally.

(1) Among most higher organisms there should be a loose inverse correlation between litter size and inbreeding aversion. In particular, very strong incest barriers should exist in species possessing the following characteristics: (a) an average litter size of one; (b) intelligence high enough for individual recognition to be possible; and (c) small family-groupings in which siblings remain together for at least several years and must be prevented from developing future sexual attachments. (Animals living in large herds or with very little sibling contact should exhibit weaker incest aversion, since the randomizing mating pattern would largely negate the risk of incest.) Prime candidates for high incest barriers would include elephants, bears, higher primates, and man.

(2) The net reproductive value of domestic feline and canine litters resulting from incest should be close to the net reproductive value of normal litters. This could easily be determined by very simple controlled breeding experiments.

(3) In general, it might be very enlightening to attempt to determine the nature of the effective reproductive value functions for canine, feline, and other species by removing selected numbers of offspring from normal litters and then recording the average number of remaining offspring that successfully reach maturity. It may be possible to establish some relation between these species-specific functions and general ecological or taxonomical characteristics.


The prediction of an inverse relationship between incest barrier strength and litter size, if confirmed by experimental data, should further establish the usefulness of the sociobiological analysis of animal behavior. Furthermore, the determination of species-specific effective reproductive value (ERV) functions might open new and interesting lines of sociobiological research.


M. Daly and M. Wilson, Sex, Evolution, and Behavior, 1978.

Dobzhansky, Mankind Evolving, 1962.

S. Fuchs, “Optimality of Parental Investment,” in Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, pp. 39-51, 1982.

D. Lack, The Natural Regulation of Animal Numbers, 1954.

E.O. Wilson, Sociolobiology, 1975.

E.O. Wilson and C.J. Lumsden, Genes, Mind, and Culture, 1981.


[1] For a discussion of the harms of inbreeding and a survey of the literature, cf. Dobzhansky (1962) 146-150; Wilson (1975) 78-80.

[2] For a discussion of this phenomenon, cf. Wilson and Lumsden (1981) 138-141.

[3] This whole issue is thoroughly discussed in Lack (1954); Daly and Wilson (1978) 26-29 contains a good summary of the argument and a survey of the literature.

[4] Cf. Lack (1954); Daly and Wilson (1978) 26-29; Fuchs (1982).

[5] Daly and Wilson (1978) 28.

[6] Daly and Wilson (1978) 29.

[7] Lack (1954) 46.

[8] Fuchs (1982) 40-43.

[9] In tropical regions, the heterozygous sickle-cell state is substantially superior to the normal state because it provides a degree of protection from malaria. Cf. Dobzhansky (1962) 152.

[10] Cf. Wilson (1975) 78.

[11] Cf. Wilson (1975) 79.

[12] Fuchs (1982) 49.

• Category: Science • Tags: Evolutionary Biology, Incest, Sociobiology 
Hide 153 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Anonymous[404] • Disclaimer says:

    Very interesting Mr Ron Unz wrote this type of article, gets the mind thinking especially a non-political/history/economic blogpiece out of left field. Fun read, good stuff.

    • Replies: @GMC
    , @Jim Christian
  2. Anonymous[145] • Disclaimer says:

    The Whitakers are an incestuous family in West Virginia:

  3. J says: • Website

    Interesting. The same kind of inhibition, if weaker, should exist for first-cousin pairing. Yet it seems to be the opposite, cousins are much attracted to each other.

  4. Worst part about incest: even when you break up, you still gotta see them at family reunions!


    Remember to tip your waitresses and bartenders, folks!

  5. First of all, very impressive for an undergraduate, but not surprising coming from the young Ron Unz.

    The photo caught the eye of this long-time dog-owner and trainer. (Yes, dog lover, we should say.)

    The intelligence and loyalty of certain breeds is amazing and touching, but I do remember how surprised I was when I caught my first dog trying to mate with his own mother, the family dog who had born him 5 years earlier.

  6. alethios says:

    Is the incest taboo weaker in societies practicing polygamy or polyandry?

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  7. It would be interesting to see the relative (no pun intended) distribution of negative effects as kinship decreases. Parent/child vs sibling vs first cousin, second cousin etc… does it drop off sharply or gradually, and at what point is it manageable or negligible?

    • Replies: @Svevlad
  8. Weaver says:

    Each time reading one of these articles on inbreeding at this website, I’m reminded of Anthony Ludovici : “Random breeding and mixed breeding do not eliminate bad hereditary factors from a stock, but merely cover them up.” Eventually harmful recessive traits are expressed if not selected against. It’s the selection that’s beneficial.

    Dangerous recessive traits that might be passed on if Icelandics continue to marry other Icelandics: Blonde hair, blue eyes.

    Inbreeding is harmful for social reasons. A son shouldn’t love his mother nor a father his daughter in that way, so forth. It destroys the family. Furthermore, a small race that separates from society could act against it, so could be dangerous to society in that way. Marriage within a nation unites that nation.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @wootendw
  9. Mefobills says:

    Is first cousin marriage enough gene introgression to overcome anamolous gene pairing?

    What is minimum colony size, say on Mars? What would be a reasonable public policy for a small colony that requires good genetic fitness?

  10. I was an English major in college, only to drop out due to the cultural marxism and postmodernism, and the general malaise that permeates contemporary English departments.

    Years later I become obsessed with evolution – I read Wilson, Dawkins, Stephen Jay Gould, David Buss, Matt Ridley, Robin Baker, Geoffrey Miller, and other books / lesser known writers.

    I remember thinking, “This is what I should have studied in college!” Alas, too late.

  11. Outside the royal harem there is scant evidence of sibling marriage in Ancient Egypt however, during the Roman era it did occur.

    According to official census returns from Roman Egypt (first to third centuries CE) preserved on papyrus, 23.5% of all documented marriages in the Arsinoites district in the Fayum (n = 102) were between brothers and sisters. In the second century CE, the rates were 37% in the city of Arsinoe and 18.9% in the surrounding villages. Documented pedigrees suggest a minimum mean level of inbreeding equivalent to a coefficient of inbreeding of 0.0975 in second century CE Arsinoe. Undocumented sources of inbreeding and an estimate based on the frequency of close-kin unions (corrected downwards to 30% for Arsinoe) indicate a mean coefficient of inbreeding of F = 0.15-0.20 in Arsinoe and of F = 0.10-0.15 in the villages at the end of the second century CE. These values are several times as high as any other documented levels of inbreeding. A schematic estimate of inbreeding depression in the offspring of full sibling couples indicates that fertility in these families had to be 20-50% above average to attain reproduction at replacement level. In the absence of information on the amount of genetic load in this population, this estimate may be too high.

    Parker’s review of the data concludes:

    However, we can say with confidence that the Roman Egypt case shows that contrary to the implications of the various speculative theories on the functions of the incest taboo, this society existed for a few hundred years in its absence. There is not a single mention in the evidence that links sibling marriage to negative genetic effects or unhappy marriages. Finally, the very unusualness of this marital institution underlines the plasticity of human nature (Parker 1996:373-374).

    • Replies: @Old Brown Fool
  12. Sean says:

    Quite impressive for its time. I believe there would be a lot more spontaneous abortions with extreme inbreeding. Despite this, mating a bitch with her grandsire is many professional dog breeders’ preferred mating. British anthropologists of the 19th century thought consanguineous marriage was the root case of backward societies. HBD Chick took that idea up with alacrity.

    Konrad Lorenz identified parallels between the changes he observed in animals as the result of their domestication and what he saw as the deleterious genetic effects of civilization. Among the traits shared by domesticated animals and city dwellers were… atrophy of the muscles, and an increase in sexual activity and fertility. These traits were not only dangerous signs of degeneration; they were also aesthetically displeasing. In …Domestication-induced disorders of species-typical behavior Lorenz presented a series of images of Roman sculptures, comparing the “beautiful” (an Olympian) with the “ugly” (a satyr or, even, a bust of Socrates).[…] . For Lorenz, the wild ancestor… were consistently deemed the more beautiful. This aesthetic response, Lorenz theorized, was also an inborn survival strategy.

    • Replies: @Checheno
  13. Anonymous[125] • Disclaimer says:

    All these sciency things are mere affirmations of the old wisdom of crowds. As in the “all stereotypes are true”. There is a reason the incest taboo exists in some form in most human societies. Because those that failed noticing the pattern are no longer much around. Accumulating mutational load is a bitch.

  14. GMC says:

    Totally agree with you – Mr Unz certainly can use his intellect to touch on almost any topic he desires, and certainly makes us think – or re read his paragraphs. . This article made me think of my years working on the Aleutian chain and taking note of all those little scrawny fox, that have been co- habitating for decades if not a century or two. They reproduce still, but how the species survives is pretty amazing. I never saw a large litter of pups – ever. Of course the size of the island and food source comes into play.
    The Aleut people prior to their semi genocide because of WW II, would have been a great study as the Yupik, Inuit, and the Athabaskan would be today. I spent decades along side these folks, and understand some, of what Mr. Unz was writing about. Thanks.

  15. Sean says:

    In Afghanistan the enemy’s consanguineous mating entailed a high birthrate and abundant cannon fodder. How could they fail to secure victory.

    The McCoys of the famous feud.

    Big litter. They are said to have had a genetic defect that made them short tempered. Moral: run when you hear the banjos.

  16. A midly interesting read. The main conclusion is NOT a conclusion, but an if-then-maybe speculation. If should be titled ‘summary’. Kudos to Mr Unz for digging this out, as a thought provoking piece.

    Anyway, I detect big gaps in the sociobiological view:

    1. Maybe there is a benefit to look at humans this way, but I suggest it is closely related to the Dawkins’ selfish gene ideas. To my mind this approach has been discarded a while back as a blind alley with very limited explanatory power.

    2. What happens to species which do not exhibit social behaviour? Maybe not the best example but think of the difference between dogs and cats i.e. leading pack vs individual lives.

    3. The biggest problem for me is that humans really NEED to start thinking at the whole geo/biosphere level. Everything in our cosmos is connected with everything else, even more so at our scales of existance.

    Anyway, on a slighlty different note, current thinking seems to suggest that physics and statistics are not good at answering basic questions about life and evolution. For those interested in this aspects of science check out Stuart Kauffman’s “A world beyond physics” – very interesting.

  17. Levtraro says:

    In humans, litter size is commonly 1 but there is a large variation in family size, number of children per women (i.e. fertility rate or FR), the offspring being born in rapid succession as in one very year or so. As recently as the 50s of the previous century world average fertlity rate was over 5 in humans.

    So FR may serve as an alternative measure to litter size in humans (and other species having one or a few offspring per reproductive event IF these offspring stay together for a long time as in human families).

    Assuming human FR can serve as an alternative to litter size for your hypothesis, was incest among humans more prevalent in the recent past when FR was much higher than today? FR was even higher before the 20th century. So for your hypothesis it would be interesting to look into the incidence of incest across time, centuries in the case of humans, and trying to find higher incidence as FR (and family size) increased to the past.

    FR also varies a lot in space. Africa (FR=4.6) and Israel (FR=3.0) currently have a much higher FR than Europe (FR=1.5):

    So is incest more prevalent in Africa than in Israel and in Israel than in Europe?

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  18. I think you are speaking about apples (numerous litters) and oranges (incest) here. The tacit proposition here is that if your offspring is of incest, it should be numerous in order to survive. In other words, you hope that the law of great numbers will provide healthy children out of incest.
    That overlooks the problem that offspring of incest is eliminated by a different mechanism than offspring of numerous litters.

    This could partly explain the observed phenomenon of having numerous children by aristocracy, despite such a practice creating often serious inheritance problems and strife, and sometimes people like Carlos II Habsburg. My broad impression as a student of history is that in such cases either the majority of children survives or the majority dies, regardless of their numbers.

    Incest is rare in animal kingdom, so studying incest among elephants or bears won’t be helpful. In herd animals, the strongest bull will never be a product of incest, which kind of eliminates incest as a form of propagation of genes; even if an accidental pairing of a bull with his sister happened, their offspring will never be deemed worthy of procreation by others.

    The Mouse Utopia experiment proved that the number of offspring is regulated by some unnamed satisfaction from life even among mice. The mice utopia, with abundant food, was almost-ideal environment for incest (closeness of brothers and sisters). And yet a mouse did not choose among brothers and sisters, which again proves that incest is not something natural. Even among humans it is a purely cultural practice, when it does appear. Well, how often do we hear complaints like ‘I am in love with my sister, but I cannot marry her’…? Rarely, very rarely.

  19. Tucker says:

    Do not overlook the role that jews have played in promoting every conceivable form of degeneracy, depravity and decadence – which includes, but is not limited to, homosexuality, homosexual marriage, bisexuality, lesbianism, reckless and irresponsible promiscuity, and now this disgusting and abhorrent trans-sexual agenda – even extending it down to our young and impressionable little children visi vi these tranny ‘story book’ hours.

    And, in each one of these new and destructive perversions – they started out by writing articles very similar to this one by Ron Unz. Pretending to perform an innocent and ‘thoughtful’ analysis of the newest perversion that they are planning to shove into the mainstream and then forcibly impose it upon our society. Incest seems to have been added to the list. Already, we are seeing pedophilia being gradually elevated into the mainstream discourse -and the tactics are following the exact same path that the jews used when they started -promoting the homosexual agenda and lifestyle, and also their promotion of the disgusting tranny agenda. Bestiality is also on their list of perversions that they will eventually attempt to mainstream and make acceptable – and they will use the same arguments and talking points that they’ve used for every other abnormal and destructive perversion that they’ve imposed upon Christian America.

  20. mcohen says:

    Great article.interesting you mention israel.One of most important breeding projects for the Jewish people is currently taking shape in Israel where ashkenazi and Sephardi jews are inter marrying.Add Ethiopian jews,Indian jews and israeli woman marrying non jews and you have a great diversity of genes.As israeli jews move out into other countries they bring a reinvigorated
    mobile gene pool with them.

    My version of the wandering jew

    There are those,who in times of plenty, make sacrifices to the corn god.
    these are the good years filled with the first and second rains.
    the rains cease and hunger and despair demand the sacrifices of human hearts to the god of blood and gold.
    then there are those who look to the skies and choose to follow the rains as they move across the earth.they make no sacrifices to the gods.

    they have no need for them

    • Thanks: Red Pill Angel
  21. JackOH says:

    My first thought on seeing the header photo? After luring us in with an epic examination of a criminally incorrigible America, Israel’s excesses, the true origins of WWII, Black hypercriminality, etc., we get to the heart of the Unz philosophy: Wazzup wid dawgs!

  22. MarkU says:

    It is my understanding that horses have no inhibitions about incestuous behaviour and they don’t have large litters. I am certainly prepared to believe that a species position on the r/K reproductive spectrum may be a factor in incest aversive behaviour but I suspect that the main reason for the human aversion to incest is that we are a fairly new species with a comparatively limited gene pool.

  23. Maybe it is just from reading too many racists, but I am under the impression that black American families have higher rates of incestual abuse, which accords to racialised R/K selection theories.

    The following text argues actually that “racism” based on blaming black family structures rather than racial oppression for black “social pathologies” has incentivised black victims of incestuous abuse to hide it. At the same time, it highlights the fact that black American literature, like Ton Morrison’s The Bluest Eye, has frequently detailed it. So maybe it isn’t racism.

    At the conference, sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault, Norwood displays two current books: “No Secrets, No Lies: How Black Families Can Heal From Sexual Abuse” by Robin D. Stone, and “I Will Survive: The African-American Guide to Healing from Sexual Assault and Abuse” by Lori S. Robinson.

    “It’s really clear that African Americans are having a particular problem,” says Robinson, here from upstate New York to lead a workshop on confronting sexual violence in black and Latino communities. She asks for “culturally specific” reasons that black women remain silent.

    “The sisters don’t want to report the brothers because we know what’s going on in penal institutions,” says Terry L. Stevens, who works with the Family Service League in Waterloo, Iowa.

    The following paper astonishingly makes the case that father-daughter sexual abuse is common both in society in general, but racistly seen as normal in the black family, both by society and through the internalised racism of blacks themselves.

    I also notice that in all of these there is a focus on father-daughter relationships, but I have seen far more emotionally incestuous mother-son relationships, especially among single-parent mothers with only-children sons. I’d be surprised if this doesn’t concur with higher rates of physical abuse as well.

    People don’t like to talk about this stuff. For the victims, it can feel like it makes it “real”. For everyone else, discussing it can feel like spreading social contagion. Both are not unreasonable fears, but, for the victims, the inability to discuss or, at least, see their experiences reflected in a way which they can emotionally engage with, can lead to the defensive complexes which they developed to protect themselves in these situations dominating much of their decision-making for the rest of their lives. Freud thought such sublimation helped to build civilisation as it could encourage great productivity, but it also must be very painful for the individual. How many fantasy and science fiction supervillains were tortured as children and developed great power and ambition as a result?

    In looking up papers on this subject, I found that 95% of links offered by Google, even to the most innocuous search terms I could think of, were to porn videos. Clearly, the performers are not actually family, but clearly there is some dark stuff here. Can this really all be reduced to biology given the extremely long shadow our incest taboo seems to possess?

    The Kibbutz and Taiwanese bride arguments assume that such a desexualisation of relations comes from an anti-incest impulse, but there are other explanations. The study participants may simply be grossed out by intensely remembering each other as children and not be paedophiles. It also says nothing of parental abuse of children, which is just as genetically harmful. This is a big and challenging topic. It is interesting that it is one that society seems particularly loathe to confront, even though similarly challenging topics, like paedophilia, are frequently researched with the purpose of finding ways to mitigate the problem.

  24. This is the Ron Unz I like seeing in print, showing some of most interesting things about life. Thank you!

  25. Interesting. I’ll have to find time to think about this.

    On a minor side note, many animals with large litter sizes also possess the ability to carry from multiple fathers; dogs, cats and rats certainly do. Stray female dogs would do so most of the time if left alone. Hence in uncontrolled conditions 100% incest is somewhat unlikely to happen.

  26. @Sean

    I suspect that you are misconstruing the word ‘litter’, which means “the group of young animals born to an animal at one time” as the total offspring of that animal.

    • Replies: @Sean
  27. Anon[288] • Disclaimer says:

    Blond hair is not recessive, neither are blue eyes. Neither are harmful. Qhite benficial, actually, and heavily selected for globally given the popularity of blond sperm donors.,due%20to%20a%20single%20gene.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    , @Weaver
  28. The lack of natural abilities, so often in inbreeds, has to be countered by powerful ideology.
    This is usually an ideology of god-like character or origins, of lineage, of ‘who I am’, not ‘what I do’.
    It is kind of worship, which goes against the Second Commandment. Thus Lubavitcher Rebbe is a heretic for many Jews. Note: Lubavitcher Rebbe himself was a product of inbreeding.

    It is not Jews who brought about this ideology, though, but erev rav, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Babylonians…. people mentioned in Psalm 87.

  29. @alethios

    As for polygamy it seems to be a matter of refinement (“civilization”);
    in Chinese lore the Xiung-No (~ Huns) were Chinese princes expelled
    for recycling their dead fathers´concubines.
    Polyandry, though much beloved by second-wave feminists, is an extreme
    and exceedingly rare adaptation to lack of resources
    (limiting reproduction while maximizing available labor) only in some
    mountain valleys of the Himalaya and Andes
    (though the matrilocality spectrum is large, e.g. the Hakka).

    With some possible exceptions in the Amazon and south of Khartoum
    (and of course every leftard´s favorite the Bonobos – and Morgan Freeman) the taboo against
    PxF1 is almost universal; every breeder knows it is the quickest way to weed out recessive defects – are we therefore to assume Nature has a compelling interest in preserving near-neutral defects (“genetic load”) in hopes of future beneficial mutations –
    that she is dysgenic?

  30. An English writer named Anthony M. Ludovici discussed incest’s benefits and drawbacks. He noted that incest was practiced in ancient Egypt and dynasties lasted a very long time there. He suggested, if I recall correctly, that what was essential was to discard neonates (or children) bearing the injurious homozygous pairs. (He was firm and unemotional in his eugenics.) He argued that many good traits would be conserved by incest.

    • Replies: @Svevlad
  31. JackOH says:

    A145, I went to junior high with an Odie G. and his brother, whose name I don’t recall, and who may have been a twin. Obese, massively ugly, with expressions that, I suppose, might be described as gauche, naive, bumptious—something like the Whittakers, but in a different way. They weren’t violent, just very “slow”. I guess they were from nearby West Virginia.

    Stuffed in their pockets were dog biscuits, which they’d eat openly, accompanied by a big, gap-toothed, sloppy grin.

    I try to be generous, but I think I was shocked to see human beings at such a great remove from and with so little purchase on my idea of “human-ness”. I don’t like writing what I just wrote, but, there it is. FWIW–I wouldn’t want to get caught up in politics that would wish active harm to these poor people, but I think there’s a cautionary argument for eugenics from what I saw.

    • Replies: @Barbarossa
    , @Anonymous
  32. Svevlad says:

    it would sort of be like an inverse bell curve

    Too close is bad – but too far is also bad, if not as much

    Inbreeding will cause obvious and visible defects, but it seems extreme outbreeding causes more of a death by a thousand cuts sort of thing, particularly in a psychological sense – until there’s a stable genetic group of such outbred individuals that is.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  33. Svevlad says:
    @Tono Bungay

    This reminds me of a certain story, or dare I say, conspiracy theory, about a group of people who were stuck isolated for a very very long time due to an ancient climatic catastrophe, and basically proceeded to do incest on a mass scale, while doing that which Ludovici described.

    Apparently, over time they literally managed to rid themselves of all genetic defects, at the cost of basically everyone being almost a clone of each other, and having a single-digit amount of personality archetypes that would repeat ad infinitum.

    Wonder if that could happen realistically. Seems logically sound, but you never know.

    • Replies: @Maddaugh
    , @AnonFromTN
  34. @Anonymous

    Outta left field? Really! Just as the U.S. Is about to import 100,000 Afghanistan “refugees”? An incest article. Gee, I was taken aback!

    • Replies: @Maddaugh
    , @moi
  35. Bobjim says:

    Mr. Unz, anecdotal from a farmer and dog breeder, but inbreeding also seems to have the effect of increasing litter size as well. Among cows, twins and even triplets become much more likely the closer inbred the cattle are. When I have had dogs inbreed closely, it has usually resulted in slightly larger than normal litters.

  36. Trinity says:

    Wonder if crocodiles and alligators have a problem with inbreeding? Sheesh, how would they even recognize mom or dad?

  37. Maddaugh says:
    @Jim Christian

    Outta left field? Really! Just as the U.S. Is about to import 100,000 Afghanistan “refugees”? An incest article. Gee, I was taken aback!

    I dont know about others but this article was as irrelevant to me as whether a mouse can screw an elephant. With the issues facing this country and its impact on us all, given that few here on this site indulge in buffing our relatives, the article was misplaced. Like you I was astonished !

    However, I think I know the motivation Ron experienced in publishing this piece of scholarly work.
    1. He wants to show us how smart he was
    2. He wants us to make copies and distribute them to the arriving Afghans
    3. He wants us to anonymously mail them to a certain group who flog their mothers, daughters and sisters

    Where number 1 is concerned we encounter the ills of the present education system in that:
    a. They graduate top of the class in subjects that will get them a job at McDonalds
    b. Even when they graduate in some suitable field they turn up for work as dumb as a door knob. The old farts with high school diplomas have to teach them even how to sharpen a pencil.

    That said, we are glad that Ron pursued a different path and attained a reasonable level of success but there are times when we also hope he would stick to topics that plague us all and not those resulting from and confined to the sordid degeneracy of a few groups.

    • Disagree: Jim Christian
    • Replies: @Stonewall Jackson
  38. Maddaugh says:

    This reminds me of a certain story, or dare I say, conspiracy theory, about a group of people who were stuck isolated for a very very long time due to an ancient climatic catastrophe, and basically proceeded to do incest on a mass scale,

    That was no story, the author was referring to Washington DC

    Apparently, over time they literally managed to rid themselves of all genetic defects, at the cost of basically everyone being almost a clone of each other, and having a single-digit amount of personality archetypes that would repeat ad infinitum.

    One of the genetic defects they got rid of was the ability to use their heads !

    Wonder if that could happen realistically. Seems logically sound, but you never know.

    DUH ! Look around you and the truth will set you free ! LOL

  39. fnn says:

    This just popped up on my You Tube feed.

    Dr. Aaron J. Sams focused his presentation on research from observing dog health issues to better understand the distribution and impact of inbreeding in dogs using the genetic coefficient of inbreeding (COI).

    • Thanks: Agent76
    • Replies: @The Real World
  40. “ilhan omar”

    Making sure this brother-boinking muslim invader is still associated with incest.

  41. Trinity says:

    Whites should be buying guard dogs, watchdogs and even attack dogs. The Rhodesian Ridgeback is a formidable dog for all three jobs. Be a good choice. GSD rank among the best but with the popularity of the breed, “inbreeding” is a problem when acquiring German shepherds. My 3 little dachshunds are great for smelling a gnat farting across the street, huge bark for such a small dog and great watchdogs, I have a Johnson/Scott hybrid American bulldog for the grunt work if needed. The big boy’s nails alone would rip flesh if he jumped on you in attack mode. A formidable canine is a great thug repellent. So in a sense this article is relevant to current invents. Since the GSD is such a popular choice be very careful in selecting this great all around dog. The German shepherd ranks only behind the bloodhound, the basset hound, and beagle for sniffing ability, it has to be one of the smartest dogs around, one of the strongest bites in the dog world, even stronger than the pit bull and rottie, good around family, etc., just buy from a reputable breeder or someone you can trust. Best all around dog on the planet. My friend has a solid black GSD, a huge guy, 105lbs and no fat, lean and mean. A bite capable of taking off fingers for some fool trying to grab him. Hard to see the big guy if you are in a dark room. Imagine the look on an invading thug’s face seeing this black monster with flashing teeth coming at you.

  42. @Maddaugh

    Looks like Ronnie wants to change direction.

    The Unz Animal Husbandry Quarterly Review

    It’s his blog; this is sort of America for now. He can use his money for whatever he wants as long as Google allows… within that limit of course.

    At least he’s off of the Wuhan Biowarfare Ft Deterick stuff. Or the Failure of White Nationalism.

    On the subject of inbreeding… since not many of you are from flyover country… in the 70s we moved to the mountains of Virginia. You could see the effect of inbreeding back in those days in the school populations… you could see the close set eyes, the odd head shapes etc… Now with the opioid crisis, many of the inbred have died off… very different now with de-population….

    Not sure if Ron’s beloved cholos inbreed as much.. probably not. But boy some of the Central Americans you see in Northern Va are surely not the most attractive people in the world…

    If you are taking requests Ron… instead of this oddity, could you cover the reality of the financial world in the United States? When does the massive money creation and debt kill this stupid country?
    You are qualified to discuss this area with your background in finance and associated computer software.

    • Replies: @Trinity
    , @Maddaugh
  43. @Svevlad

    it seems extreme outbreeding causes more of a death by a thousand cuts sort of thing, particularly in a psychological sense

    Does extreme outbreeding cause genetic problems, or is it only a social issue (offspring not fitting into either parent’s “family”)?

    The genetics completely break down in cases of really extreme outbreeding (e.g. humans-chimps); the offspring aren’t viable at all. So I suppose it’s possible that in less extreme cases that are still within the same species there could be genetic effects that are less serious but still harmful. Has any research in this area been published?

  44. songbird says:

    I remember seeing small cats once in a rural area and being told by a farmer that they were not kittens (they looked half-mature) but rather were inbred.

    I wonder whether such miniaturization would have a temporary benefit in the context of domesticated living. Perhaps, such animals are more neotonous and would be favored for it, or require less food.

    • Replies: @LP5
    , @some_loon
  45. Pamela says:

    As a long time student of genetics [B.Sc.Hons. M.Sc.] and the various theories floated around it, I agree with one commenter that to compare inbreeding and litter size is a little like comparing oranges and cabbages. Humans of the English Victorian Age had big “litters” i.e. families. It was usual that it had a higher infant mortality. However this could have been due to many issues, for example reduced food availability, as the mere size. My Maternal Grandmother had 12 children, 3 of whom died in infancy, one in teens and one early 20’s. – all of lung weakness and asthma. Several died in 60’s of heart conditions. But unless we can compare this to the death rate across the nation and in smaller families, we have no idea if it had any link to family size.
    Re “incest” however, to decide to write this off as genetically driven to avoid the dangers associated with the homozygous recessive is a mistaken view.
    As has been pointed out, most homozygous recessives are harmless, as for example, blue eyes. Those that aren’t tend to die at an early age, i.e. prior to passing the gene on. There are variations, but not enough to affect the entire of humanity and all it’s racial groupings.
    One thing in this argument about incest {which I should add, is generally taken to mean a sexual pairing between parent and offspring, and siblings i.e. brothers and sisters with the same Father and Mother} which excludes cousins and half – siblings, is the previously little examined phenomenon of Same DNA Attraction.
    This was, actually, known about long ago, but little discussed. It has come from papers, and even in 1811 Jane Austen referred to it obliquely in her novel Mansfield Park.
    However, the modern phenomenon of Donated Sperm from sperm banks, where the same Man may well have donated DNA to many offspring, and such offspring may have met up, has brought this to light in modern times.
    The sexual attraction between such close relationship as half-brother/sister is noted to be extremely strong, but it’s conditional on one thing. That is that they have not met during early childhood. The association of even half-siblings during their formative years has the effect of dampening this attraction to normal sibling levels – i/e. highly rare.
    But there are quite a few of these unaware half-siblings, who meet accidentally after puberty, only discovering the genetic relationship after they have interacted, who report an attraction almost impossible to resist – and a level not only of sexual desire and satisfaction, but of emotional and mental closeness and understanding, which make trying to form a relationship with anyone else an impossibility for the couple involved.
    There was one case in UK of a Father and Daughter, who did not discover their genetic relationship until they had been a couple – and who fled UK, went abroad, changed names, and live incognito, rather than break the relationship because lawyers forbade it.
    Nothing in the propositions offered by Dawkins [an idiot much debunked these days], nor in Rons’ thesis, explains this. In fact, it supposes the opposite – that as the Universal Law of Like/Similar is most strongly drawn to and form the strongest bonds with Like/Similar tells us, in this case, once again, Like is strongly drawn to Like and that this is something Universal, and very very strong.
    Again, it would seem the Western Civilisation got this wrong, as so much else.

  46. Trinity says:

    In 1983, America was still at least 80% White. “Back To The Future,” anyone?

    • Replies: @moi
  47. W says:

    I assumed Unz was making a indirect case for race mixing, but with these people who knows?

    • Agree: loren
  48. Trinity says:
    @Stonewall Jackson

    How much inbreeding goes on with the uber wealthy like the Royal Family? hehe. I bet you a steak dinner more inbreeding goes on in the Middle East, Central and South America, Caribbean, Jewish community, the African American community, and in India than in Hillbilly central America.

    You have to wonder how much inbreeding goes on among “the elites.” Seriously, consider that a lot of these characters have some issues like Bill Clinton, that Prince whats his name, Bill Gates, Bidens, etc.

    • Agree: SaneClownPosse
  49. LP5 says:

    Some inbreeding resolves itself fairly quickly, as many cat owners can attest. Take mating cat siblings, where the offspring can all die within a few months from feline infectious pertitonitis. FIP is a cat variant of a feline coronavirus so could be in the news for various reasons.

  50. @Anon

    Blond hair is not recessive, neither are blue eyes.

    Here you are 100% wrong. Both traits are recessive: both are the result of the absence of pigment-making enzyme in those places. If you have one functional allele of that enzyme, you get a dominant trait, dark hair/eyes. Pigment-less eyes are not necessarily blue, they can be gray, green, etc. (these differences are determined by structure and consequent reflection of light, not by the innate color of the tissue).

    Neither are harmful.

    You are correct there: these traits are not harmful, they are biologically neutral.

    • Replies: @Weaver
    , @D guy jjjjj
  51. @Svevlad

    basically everyone being almost a clone of each other

    I’ve heard that Berbers are like that: look like clones. Don’t have first-hand knowledge, though, never was where Berbers live.

  52. Chris Moore says: • Website

    as any pet owner can testify, domestic dogs and cats have little if any aversion to mating with their parents, siblings, or offspring.

    I’ve always suspected the “Chosen-Elect” royalty were little better than beasts. The concept of watchful god is as alien to them as it is to dogs. And yet they go about posing as if they’re next to god; indeed, are gods.

    What happens when you’re society is led by Marxist and Neocon dogs posing as gods? Pretty much what is happening to the U.S.

  53. Chris Moore says: • Website

    Pretending to perform an innocent and ‘thoughtful’ analysis of the newest perversion that they are planning to shove into the mainstream and then forcibly impose it upon our society. Incest seems to have been added to the list. Already, we are seeing pedophilia being gradually elevated into the mainstream discourse -and the tactics are following the exact same path that the jews used when they started -promoting the homosexual agenda and lifestyle, and also their promotion of the disgusting tranny agenda. Bestiality is also on their list of perversions that they will eventually attempt to mainstream and make acceptable – and they will use the same arguments and talking points that they’ve used for every other abnormal and destructive perversion that they’ve imposed upon Christian America.

    There’s a fine line between intellectual inquiry and bestiality. The ((Jews)) have unabashedly crossed it, and in the process made themselves and everyone they infect sub-human.

    Add academia to the list of disciplines the ((Jews)) should be barred from. Unless you’re a Marxist or Neocon upright beast, in which case you’ll demand that they be running it.

  54. Not Raul says:

    The net effective reproductive value curve shown in the image resembles a bell curve. I suspect that the data, if more were gathered, would more closely resemble a Gamma distribution with 2<k<8.

    I hope that you continue your research. If you can afford it, you might even consider going to grad school.

  55. Thomm says:

    Since people usually married within communities, particularly if centered around a religious place of worship, a lot of people married their third and fourth cousins without knowing it, over the centuries.

    I doubt that most people have 128 unique ancestors at the GGGGG-GP level.

    It is virtually a mathematical certainty that almost no one (even if mixed-race) has 512 unique ancestors at the GGGGGGG-GP level.

    Lastly, there are certain facial features that seem pretty common in Canada, and similarly in Australia (but different between the two countries). This makes sense, given the relative inbreeding that may have occurred in both countries before modern times.

    For example, Amanda Crew and Evangeline Lily look quite similar (both Canadian) :

    Similarly, Cate Blanchette and Mandy Drury look similar (as do numerous other Australians I can list) :

    There are many such examples. But anyone who has spent time in either country will know what I mean.

    • Agree: Max Payne
    • Replies: @SaneClownPosse
  56. Schuetze says:

    The Rothschilds famously married only within the family for multiple generations.

    Before he died, Mayer Rothschild left strict instructions for his heirs on how they should handle family finances. He wanted to keep the fortune within the family and, as such, his will outlined a rigid patrilineal system of succession, whereby title and property could only pass through the male line and female descendants were excluded from any direct inheritance. This had the effect of encouraging marriages among family members.

    Between 1824 and 1877, there were 36 marriages of Mayer Rothschild’s male descendants. Of these, 30 married within the family. Most married first or second cousins. During this time, only four Rothschild women and two men married partners to whom they were not related

    On a higher level, all these Jewish banker families were intermarrying as well. The Belmonts, Warburgs, Schiffs and Rothschilds were all tied together, perhaps over multiple generations. Jacob Schiff, father of the Russo-Japanese war and WWI came from a family who had lived in the Rothschild manor in the Ghetto of Frankfurt.

    Edward Bernays was a “Double Nephew” to Sigmund Freud, and there were also other incestual links in that family.

    Recently I came to realize that the Roosevelt family of Crypto-jews also has a history of marrying cousins. Frank married his cousin Eleanor and the wedding was presided over by his Cousin Theodor.

    One of FDR’s biggest benefactors was Averell Harriman (of the Railroad dynasty) who was a great supporter of the New Deal and US ambassador in Moscow during WWII. He was a key player in Lend Lease which saved the murdering tyrant Stalin from destruction and directly led to the destruction of Eastern European culture. It turns out Averell Harriman also married a cousin.

    This pattern of Jews and Crypto-Jews marrying cousins appears to be something Talmudic. The purity of the blood of the Sanhedrin is also somehow preserved. Of course Jews do have their own specific genetic diseases, and I could go on for pages talking about quirks in Jewish personality and their vaunted “high IQ”.

    • Replies: @Weaver
  57. Weaver says:

    The other replier answered you, but I’ll clarify that I value blond/blue. I was making a point. In other words, some, not I, want Icelandics to outbreed away their distinction and heritage.

  58. Weaver says:

    I appreciate your replying to him. I hope at least you, or someone else, saw that I was making a point. Obviously, I want to preserve blond/blue. Ludovici’s article on this topic is about the only attempt brave enough to discuss it. The Faroes might have never been very distinct, but they’ve taken in immigrants. Iceland has too, but I don’t know if any have yet produced children.

    I don’t understand why foreigners are given citizenship to such places. Residency is different.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  59. Weaver says:

    Darwin’s Gentile family was similar.

  60. Maddaugh says:
    @Stonewall Jackson

    I dont think Latinos are into the incest thing. My observation is that there are more women than men and the men who want to keep their wicks wet can barely keep up.

    Not sure if Ron’s beloved cholos inbreed as much.. probably not. But boy some of the Central Americans you see in Northern Va are surely not the most attractive people in the world…

    I think this is the result of the Indian blood. Those Indian girls from the lower end of the spectrum are pretty up to say age 25 but after that the hard work, poor diet, general lack of caring for their bodies and something in the blood causes them to look worn out. Same thing with the men. The effects are even more astonishing when the mix includes Negro blood.

    Lets face it, the people from LAtin America flooding into the US are from the bottom spectrum of society in their own countries. You are not going to find too many middle class or upper class folks rushing to give up their lifestyle to live in the US. If they do, its generally to raise enough dollars and return home to buy a house cash, start a small business and have surplus money (or a US pension) to take things easy.

    As for the financial situation in the US I think we are headed for ruin. I am already making an inventory of all the doves, pigeons and squirrels visiting my back yard. Are coons edible ? Got to look that up !

    I am stunned at the disintegration at the hands of Joey and his Cabal in just 8 months. If this fellow continues for his full term I may well end up in Central America. It goes to show, its not that hard to turn a good thing into a disaster. Many friends and relatives who were Trump haters are quiet now. They have nothing to say. I counsel, who cares who runs the country as long as our personal lifestyle improves. They wanted Biden and that is what they got.

    As for Field MArshal Dustbin, as we all know, once you put a black man to run anything expect a fiasco. Miley must have some Congo in him too. He dont look or sound too smart. With these Three Stooges running the circus we can expect the house or rather the tent to come down on us all.

    Unless these idiots are removed soon, those with some coin better start prepping or immigrating.

    • Agree: moi
  61. Im not sure how pure white bloodlines run in Europe, Russia or US. But I can assure you that my genetic ancestors did not venture out from an African savanna via chimps and apes that eventually mated with horny Neanderthals, HomoGlobal, etc.
    In their quest to turn us into savage domestic terrorists, they first must make us into white Supremacists who rebel against invading hoards, turning civilization into warring clans and tribes in forever wars.
    They wouldn’t publicly announce a National threat by a white pushback and declaring us domestic terrorists if they didn’t believe we are a serious threat to their replacement agenda. This immediate flooding of refugees, illegals, Birther Tourism, anchor baby citizenship is happening too rapidly for it to be a coincidence.
    They really do hate us, and we really must pushback with whatever means necessary.

  62. @JackOH

    I’ve certainly seen similar myself. Personally, I don’t even see why there is an argument in public discourse whether eugenics is “real” or not. Any animal breeder can and does attest to it every day, and I see no reason that it would not hold similarly with humans.

    Instead, it seems to me that the argument should be whether enacting eugenically based policies are intrinsically bad despite possible benefits. Personally, I would say so, as such “rationally managed” systems tend to gross inhumanity.

    This is where social mores and traditions come in so handy. They can help keep people from mucking it up too badly without resorting to oppressive top down measures. Regarding the case in point, I would rather see strong social taboo against incest any day rather than any “scientific” government effort.

    • Agree: JackOH
    • Replies: @JackOH
  63. moi says:
    @Jim Christian

    Those Afghans are not “refugees”–they are collaborators and turncoats.

    • Agree: Gordo, Jim Christian
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  64. . . case studies of Israeli kibbutz children and Taiwanese child-brides have confirmed the existence of a strong innate (as opposed to cultural) aversion to sexual relations between children raised in the same family.

    This sounds like the Westermarck effect :

    At the very bottom of this (wikipedia) page there is a fairly recent reference, “The architecture of human kin detection” that might interest you :

  65. moi says:

    The good thing is that in time very few non-Hispanic or black people will want to come to the US. After all, who wants to live with blacks and Hispanics.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  66. @Weaver

    Obviously, I want to preserve blond/blue.

    Personally, I agree that preserving blond/blue is important. Biologically, it means that blond/blue people should breed between themselves, as these traits are recessive.

    I don’t understand why foreigners are given citizenship to such places. Residency is different.

    I would like to point out that children can be conceived regardless of the official status of breeders. So, preservation of blond/blue depends only on breeding choices blond/blue men and women make. Let’s hope they aren’t “woke”, or at least the majority of them aren’t.

  67. @moi

    Those Afghans are not “refugees”–they are collaborators and turncoats.

    From Afghan viewpoint they are traitors/collaborators, as they worked for foreign occupiers. But said foreign occupiers might see them as “refugees”: they hired and used this scum, so in a way they are responsible for its survival.

    • Agree: Commentator Mike
  68. Gordo says:

    The current wave of Afghan invaders will no doubt provide fascinating subjects for research, sadly almost everyone will be scared to do it or publish it.

  69. Anonymous[634] • Disclaimer says:

    A145, I went to junior high with an Odie G. and his brother, whose name I don’t recall, and who may have been a twin. Obese, massively ugly, with expressions that, I suppose, might be described as gauche, naive, bumptious—something like the Whittakers, but in a different way. They weren’t violent, just very “slow”. I guess they were from nearby West Virginia.

    The Whitakers seem to be an extreme case where they can’t function at all and are completely debilitated.

    This woman is relatively lucid and articulate though obviously she’s cross-eyed and seems to have some physical issues. She’s from West Virginia and says that her parents and her great-grandparents were cousins:

    • Replies: @Weaver
  70. Monopduly says: • Website

    A far more important insight from evolutionary biology is found at the macro, human sub-group level, rather than in the somewhat marginal effects of cousin marriage (see Sailor, HBD Chick, etc.) Group co-evolutionary dynamics within species, may be entirely explanatory of human history including the cultural realm (not as Durkheim sees it as ‘super-organic’ but instead as an endogenous variable within the system). Values, whether religious or pseudo-religious, then may be seen as weapons in the so called ‘Red Queen’ dynamics of subgroup competition parallel to the Lokta-Volterra chaos of predator prey interaction, or in human terms, elite dominance-exploitation and Host evasion of social parasitism. Indeed, this mirrors the coercive equilibrium models of modern economic theory and specifically the historical ubiquitous, temporal and spatial, presence of serfdom, slavery, i.e., dulosis:

  71. Anonymous[398] • Disclaimer says:

    In Afghanistan the enemy’s consanguineous mating entailed a high birthrate and abundant cannon fodder. How could they fail to secure victory.

    But the Afghan National Army fighting the Taliban also recruited from large, consanguineous families. They were terrible soldiers.

    Vietnam had a fertility rate above 6 during the Vietnam War. But they did not have consanguineous mating:

    Vietnam’s ancient laws also forbade marriage between people of the same blood lines. Article 319 of Hong Duc Code stipulated: Those who get married with their aunts (their fathers’ sisters or their mothers’ sisters), their wives’ own daughters or other close relatives shall be considered having committed adultery and punished by law.

    In “Thien Nam du ha tap” (a book on the systematic legislation of the Le dynasty, 15th-18th centuries), it was stated that the marriage between people of the same family line, the first cousin was strictly forbidden, and that those who got married with their aunts, their sisters, their wives’ own daughters or next of kin would be punished for incest and adultery.

    So, under the Le dynasty’s legislation, people of the same spear-side relations, near or far, were forbidden to marry each other while for the spindle-side relations, only those who were close in blood were not allowed to marry each other.

    • Replies: @Sean
  72. @Thomm

    Promoted celebrities, actors, artists, authors, politicians, etc., are all Jewish, and related to each other through a few old line family names. Note the noses above.

    All US Presidents (and Vice Presidents) have been interrelated through the old families, and not coincidentally, either. From George Washington to Joseph Biden. Elections are meaningless, when selecting between Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum.

    Barack Obama’s mother’s full name is Stanley Ann Dunham. Stanley as in Lord Stanley.

    • Replies: @Thomm
  73. Humans wouldn’t be human if they’d inbred themselves into absolute biological parity with the rest of our mammal peers. Not even the most primitive tribes to be found in the tropical rainforests of South America, Africa and Asia practice inbreeding in any common fashion. The other great apes don’t tend to inbreed either, and that allows them to learn tool use and hunting strategy.

    But then global elites, especially the terrorist Ziocorporatist ones have, on the other hand, practiced it for a long time, so no coincidence this planet looks like it is being led by devolved inbred animals capable of tool, including plenty of millions of human tools/taxpayers, use; closer to chimps than bonobos, and hardly like humans.

    A half-breed human-chimp with a brain interface and supercomputer wouldn’t be coming up with much different models of socioeconomics and geostrategy than what we’ve got going on right now, or tribal flags for everything from religions, to fags to “galactic federations.”

    With lockdowns, mass hysterics, tales of overpopulation and climate change, etc., it seems some would like inbreeding to make a mainstream comeback rather soon so taxcattle fuck themselves into oblivion.

  74. Vigilius says:

    To summarize : Incest is pure , absolute evil !
    Effective reproductive value is irrelevant specially today with contraception
    and abortion available .
    It is not issue of reproduction – it is main ethical matter – it is pure evil punishable
    by God and by humans. ! Everywhere – from time immemorial .
    Between Humans and animals there is, in essential matters, Abyss, that can not be breached
    by humans.
    Only humans have freedom to decide between good and evil !
    So only humans do evil , not animals.
    To much of Pseudo Science and not enough of human ethics. .

    • Replies: @some_loon
    , @Jack McArthur
  75. A few hard numbers for the discussion. Parent (real, not official one) has 50% common genes with a child (guaranteed, no deviation there). Two siblings can have anywhere from zero to 100% common genes, the average being 50%. First cousins can have from zero to 50% shared genes, the average being 25%. So, if we go by averages, genetically parent-child crossing is comparable to sibling crossing, whereas first cousin crossing is less incestuous.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Anonymous Jew
  76. Excellent work, Ron, an interesting read. Your theory for varying rates of incest over mating species makes perfect sense in indicating the diminishing cost of incest with greater litter size.

  77. Anon[154] • Disclaimer says:

    I think it’s important to distinguish between fathers and mothers, even though both have 50% common genes with sons/daughters.

    Typically, by the time sons reach sexual maturity, their mothers will already be in menopause or headed there soon.

    Moreover, generally speaking, men are attracted to younger women while women are attracted to older men.

    Furthermore, by the time daughters reach sexual maturity, their fathers are still fertile.

    So father-daughter incest is a more natural and common form of incest than other kinds such as mother-son, even though technically fathers and mothers both may share 50% common genes with their children.

    This is why, for example, “daddy” is often used as a term by women to address their lovers in romantic and sexual contexts.

  78. some_loon says:

    I remember seeing small cats once in a rural area and being told by a farmer that they were not kittens (they looked half-mature) but rather were inbred.

    Quite curious.

    I worked at a place a few years ago where one of the former workers was living in his non-operative car on the same dead-end street as the business. His presence was tolerated. There was this orange cat that would hang around and Danny, the homeless guy, would feed her.

    Long story short, the cat had kittens, which Danny also fed. A few other cats came around, but it was mostly the momma-cat and her brood.

    The number of cats increased, mostly with orange and white fur. After five years or so, Danny is long gone but there are still cats around, mostly orange and white splotchy fur. They are all rather small and look young. The ur-cat was normal sized, I’d say about ten pounds.

    I have seen people feeding these feral cats, and while the area is suburban and by a major road, there are fields and woods near with small game for the cats.

    Maybe the farmer was right, or maybe they are just underfed.

  79. songbird says:

    I’ve often wondered if a good scent dog can detect relatedness independent of acquaintance.

    Almost seems as though the looks of the stranger-looking breeds are more profoundly affected in cases of incest. Are they that way because they are more inbred to start, or else because the development process is more complicated? Or maybe, a case of simple geometry? Their proportions allow symmetry to be more easily gauged.

    Maybe, that last is why certain facial traits are seen as undesirable in women.

  80. some_loon says:

    To summarize : Incest is pure , absolute evil !

    Maybe so, but it is legal in New Jersey and Rhode Island.

    • Replies: @AnonfromTN
  81. Weaver says:

    West Virginia has almost no immigration into most parts, only genetic drain outside it. So, what you’re left with are the increasingly weak and unfit. Selection is what rewards good genetics.

  82. @some_loon

    To summarize : Incest is pure , absolute evil !

    Maybe so, but it is legal in New Jersey and Rhode Island.

    One thing does not contradict the other. Say, lobbying is pure absolute evil, it is a crime in most countries, but it’s perfectly legal in the US. We see the results.

    • Agree: nokangaroos
    • Replies: @some_loon
  83. Trinity says:

    Is the Boston Terrier a poor man’s French bulldog?

    Has anyone came up with a fashionable hybrid featuring a mix between a Weimaraner and the Rhodesian Ridgeback? What about a Weimaraner and a Doberman? People will pay for mutts nowadays. Used to be a mutt was given away to happy campers.

    Being a mutt is now fashionable in the human world as well. Matter of fact I think people should boycott those dog shows. Those things are racist.

  84. Incitatus says:

    “While in college I had always believed that if I were somehow unable to pursue an academic career in theoretical physics, my next choice would have been evolutionary biology. As an indication of that interest, I briefly studied under Prof. E.O. Wilson at Harvard, and then a few years ago finally managed to write up and publish in more polished form one of the the papers I had written for him back in 1983 on the Social Darwinist implications of the traditional Chinese rural political economy.”

    We all shared similar aspirations.

    ‘Then, of course, you consulted your Harvard College Rolodex, discovered similar hapless HC chums, joined them at Moody’s to help defraud Americans by rating junk triple AAA (fish in a barrel). Long story short, millions earned without ever breaking a sweat, let along having to dip into “theoretical physics” or “evolutionary biology” You now host your own internet-ant farm (ultimate consolation).

    The emperor’s regrets, aside from missing clothes? None, really.

    “Incest is an emotional and important topic among human beings. To a sociobiologist, this fact is not surprising: incest, being a subcategory of reproductive behavior, has a potent impact upon genetic fitness, hence the act and the emotions relating to it are shaped by powerful selective pressures…”

    “Incest”? “Emotional and important?” Maybe in the Palo Alto Twilight Zone’ (given a few ‘litter size’ curves).

    Get help Ron. Really.

    • Replies: @Checheno
  85. HbutnotG says:

    White tail deer and feral cat mothers do have a tendency to kick the male offspring to the curb shortly after weaning, and far sooner than they part ways with their female offspring. You almost never see a young buck hanging out with the fawns and does after about mid-July. A rare young male buck attempting to herd with the fawns and does is visibly discouraged from doing so – sometimes forcefully chased away – something you never otherwise see does doing with their young. I think this is an inborn attempt to reduce incestuous mating, i.e., go find your own territory, away from here.

  86. One writer (don’t remember who) speculated that the mating of 3rd cousins produces the ideal offspring.

  87. Thomm says:

    Promoted celebrities, actors, artists, authors, politicians, etc., are all Jewish, and related to each other through a few old line family names. Note the noses above.

    You actually think Cate Blanchett, Evangeline Lily, and Amanda Crew are Jews?

    That is some paranoia there.

    Plus, given that the prevailing narrative around here is that Jews are non-white, it seems that your assertion conflicts with that.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman

    Highly recommend “Soft White Underbelly.”

    I’m a longtime viewer…..some truly horrifying stories regarding the devastation whites are facing…..and nobody cares.

  89. JLK says:

    I consider E.O. Wilson to be one of the great minds of the 20th century, you were truly privileged to be able to study under him.

  90. @fnn

    The cookies on your computer are doing a bang-up job of correlation and sourcing. That’s one of the reasons they are there.

  91. Taxi says:

    Thanks for sharing your fascinating paper, dear Ron. You most certainly have a most versatile and well-reasoned intellect. Thanks again.

  92. @Sean

    I couldn’t reach a conclusion about the studies you linked to, and to be honest don’t understand what you are implying at. Anyway, the McCoys, judging from their children’s years of birth, had at most one twin couple, Bill and Trinvilla, born in 1868.

  93. JackOH says:

    FWIW–I wouldn’t want to get caught up in politics that would wish active harm to these poor people, but I think there’s a cautionary argument for eugenics from what I saw.

    Barbarossa, we’re in a kind of a mess:

    (1) We have one large group of Americans that typically does poorly in school for reasons of motivation and poor genetic ability, and also, in the main, has significant behavioral problems. That group is, nonetheless, feted with school budgets twice that of other Americans (at least in my area) who are academically motivated, do have good genetic ability, and far fewer behavioral problems.

    We bang on about America’s Blacks here all the time.

    (2) We have many talented Americans with good academic backgrounds, work motivation, international experience, and bourgeois personal deportment who are, nonetheless, regarded by our moneyed masters as no better than fungible commodities within world labor markets, the equivalent, maybe, of the Whittakers, but with cleaner fingernails and the ability to show up on time.

    I don’t how you could talk about eugenics and dysgenics, which I think are worth talking about, without stepping right away on someone’s political minefield.

    Is there an academic reading this thread who knows whether it’s possible to talk about eugenics and dysgenics at all? Without getting slammed as a nut job? Without getting used as a puppet intellectual?

  94. Sean says:


    ut the Afghan National Army fighting the Taliban also recruited from large, consanguineous families. They were terrible soldiers

    Against their own blood relations? Anyway, the Afghan security forces were the Taliban in a great many cases . Suicide bombers seem to be most common where cousin marriage is most common.

    The Viet Cong had very powerful outside assistance that included regular army units from the North, and the wherewithal of the USSR and China, which supplied the North with a quarter of a million Chinese labourers.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  95. JessicaR says:

    What a fascinating paper. One of the arguments Richard Dawkins uses to argue that humans have somehow transcended biology is that humans practice birth control. ERV shows why using birth control may very well enhance genetic fitness.

    • Replies: @Old Brown Fool
  96. @Jack McArthur

    South Indian societies that allow cross- cousin marriages have existed for thousands of years now. Not much damage that could be attributed exclusively to inbreeding is seen; before 1900, almost 60% marriages were within cross cousins (but then, to be accurate, they do not distinguish between blood sibling and first cousin, so, “brothers” is actually an array of first and second cousins, and similarly “cross- cousins” are also a similar array; even those who do not share grandparents could be classified as “brothers”; so , a cross -cousin marriage could be between second or third cousins too).

  97. @JessicaR

    A lot of animal species practice birth control, including spontaneous abortions. What I always wonder about is the inbuilt taboo against killing another human; tigers and lions, for example, do not have such scruples about killing another of their species. How come humans have such a strong taboo against homicide, then?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    , @Dave Bowman
  98. @Old Brown Fool

    What I always wonder about is the inbuilt taboo against killing another human

    If there were such a taboo, there would be no wars. Yet human history is basically a history of wars and mass murder. Where is the taboo?

    • Agree: JackOH
    • Replies: @Old Brown Fool
  99. @AnonFromTN

    First cousin is 0-50% with the average 12.5 percent. Niece/nephew – uncle/aunt is 25%, as is grandparent – grandchild

    • Replies: @Weaver
    , @AnonfromTN
  100. @Levtraro

    So is incest more prevalent in Africa than in Israel and in Israel than in Europe?

    I’m not a scientist. And I guarantee it.

  101. @Vigilius

    If you are a bible believer then this wrong. The religions of the book all declare that humanity springs from Adam and Eve therefore the god of the bible in his omnipotence sanctioned incest in order that this original couple could go forth and multiply. That much later a prohibition is introduced does not detract that incest was by no means always an evil.

  102. @moi


    I rather think you are chronically over-estimating the intelligence of Blacks and Hispanics.

    Many do that.

  103. @AnonFromTN

    Murderers suffer about killing other humans. It is well recorded. The whole conflict of serving in the armed forces is that we have an inherent abhorrence of homicide, and the society reinforces it; but suddenly when someone is an adult, he needs to be reprogrammed into killing others.

  104. some_loon says:

    One thing does not contradict the other.

    Who says that they do? I do not even propose there is tension between the two propositions, that it is legal someplace and that it is evil.

    The two examples I cite, the only ones of which I am aware, would seem to be cases where the individual legislators would very much oppose the practice, or at least claim to, but see insufficient need to legislate.

    It may be a sufficiently distasteful topic to most that most prefer not to bring it up, at least not without some publicized incident.

    And in the current environment, it may be that incest is the next taboo to be treated as a matter of civil rights.

  105. Weaver says:
    @Anonymous Jew

    If marrying within a small population, wouldn’t the average percentage be much higher, even if not marrying close kin?

    Historically, human populations were smaller, more divided, and less transient. I don’t think almost anyone is looking at the actual percentage overlaps that we’d see. A fourth cousin in Iceland might have tremendous overlap if all of the ancestors on both sides trace to Iceland for hundreds of years.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
  106. Anonymous[404] • Disclaimer says:

    Afghans in general are terrible soldiers. Suicide bombings are not effective military tactics; they’re terrorist attacks. Your suggestion that inbred Afghans somehow make good soldiers is mistaken.

    The VC and NVA also faced much looser rules of engagement from the US with its saturation bombing, search and destroy missions, and focus on kill counts. They also had to actually fight the skirmishes and battles and move the equipment down the Ho Chi Minh trail. I don’t know what your point is.

    Apparently you think inbred Afghans are supersoldiers or something.

  107. @Thomm

    It isn’t …

    … the prevailing narrative around here… that Jews are non-white…

    Read – if you can read – The Thirteenth Tribe, by Arthur Koestler (an Ashkenazi Jew, in case you didn’t know). He lays it all out quite nicely.

    But in fact, he was not actually the first person in history to say precisely that. I’ll leave you to do a little research of your own.

    Yes, I know you won’t.

    • Replies: @Thomm
  108. @Anonymous

    Whitaker family – white privilege.

  109. @Old Brown Fool

    Leaving aside the fact that there are very few people who would consider (involuntary) “spontaneous abortion” to be a form of (voluntary) “birth control” in the animal kingdom, I thought I was hallucinating for a few minutes with this:

    … the inbuilt taboo against killing another human… humans have such a strong taboo against homicide…

    Really ? I mean… REALLY ?


    Does the term “Islamic suicide bomber” mean anything to you ? Jew-run Gulags, perhaps ? Or perhaps the Jew Bolshevik slaughters of 30 million White Russian Christians between 1917 and 1937 ?

    I seem to remember something happened in Rwanda in 1995, which involved half a million dead in a few weeks, and a novel use for machetes.

    Mao Tse Tung’s many gifts to the planet ? Pol Pot’s best work for Cambodia ? Stalin’s countless millions of dead, labelled “political opponents” ? Idi Amin’s dungeons, just for fun ? The psychopathic head-chopping butchers of ISIS, across the Islamic utopia ?

    Ohh… and… err… the sanctioning of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, of course. Pens actually signed papers for that one. Whole dozens of political and Army staff made the decision to wipe out two cities – so we can’t even blame any one individual outlying lunatic.

    And I don’t have either the time or the inclination to even think about going back further in history.

    But over and above all of that tedious nonsense, to bring you right up to date – if you really want to get down and dirty with “the inbuilt taboo against killing another human… ” you might want to consider the deliberate, pre-meditated, predominantly Black hand-to-hand gun and knife crime – on the streets of almost every major city in the western world, every single night of the week – never mind what they get up to in their African homelands.

    Then you might perhaps be able to re-think your view on “… the inbuilt taboo against killing another human.”

    Please leave. You are lowering the average IQ of this forum.

    • Agree: Mike Fridelle
    • Thanks: JackOH
    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  110. @Weaver

    Exactly. That’s why so many Muslim populations have significant health problems from generations of first-cousin marriage. If you have a family with no history of first-cousin marriage, it’s unlikely to cause serious health problems for the first generation. Usually it just creates mild inbreeding depression (you lose an inch of height and a few IQ points but the offspring are more or less healthy). With many generations of first-cousin marriage you have a situation like the Pakistani in the UK – something you see all over the Middle East (but it’s better documented when these populations move to the West).

    Also, throughout most of human history you had much higher infant mortality. Survival of the fittest, literally.

    • Replies: @Weaver
  111. Thomm says:
    @Dave Bowman

    er…. Many of the commenters on this website go to great lengths to assert that Jews are not white. That is not some big secret.

    One wonders how you reconcile that with SaneClownPosse’s assertion in Comment #74 that actresses like Cate Blanchett, Evangeline Lily, and Amanda Crew are Jews.

    Do you not see the contradiction here? I realize that you are a low-IQ person, but still.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  112. @Anonymous Jew

    First cousin is 0-50% with the average 12.5 percent.

    How did you come up with this number? I can explain how I came up with my 25%: siblings on average share 50% of their genes, each of them passes exactly half of his/her genes to children, so average first cousins would share 0.5×0.5=0.25, i.e., 25%. Am I missing something? To be honest, I had my last course in genetics >30 years ago.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
  113. @AnonfromTN

    You have half your mom’s genes. Half of the genes you share with your mother are, in turn, shared with her siblings and her parents. So you get 25% shared with your aunt (50% divided by 2) Of the 25% you share with your aunt, half – 12.5% – are passed on to her children – ie your first cousins.

    Same goes for siblings. Your get half your mom’s genes and half your dad’s genes. Of the 50% you share with your dad, half of those are also passed on to his other children – your siblings. Same with your mother. So you share 25% of your dad’s genes AND 25% of your mom’s genes with your full siblings > 25% + 25% = 50%. With a half sibling you only share one parent, so that gives you 25%.

    50% = full siblings, parents, children
    25% = half siblings, aunts/uncles, grandparents/grandchildren
    12.5% = first cousins, grandparents’ siblings, great grandparents/great grandchildren
    6.25% = parents’ first cousins, first cousins’ children, great grandparents’ siblings, great-great grandparents etc.

    And so on and so on…

    It’s hypothetically possible (and statistically nearly impossible) that your aunt and mother share 100% of their genes. And it’s hypothetically possible that you and your first cousin both get the same 50% of those 100% shared genes. But those are nearly impossible odds – like winning two Powerball Lotteries in a row. So first cousin probable range is 0 – 50% gene sharing, with an average of only 12.5%.

    • Replies: @Corrupt
  114. Excellent article Mr. Unz. Human Evolution and Genetics fascinate me.

    The more hominids were connected to the forces of untamed nature the more likely incestuous offspring with mental and physical mutations would DIE OFF. The shallow end of the Gene Pool always remained shallow. Incest was nothing to worry about back in our hunter/gatherer days. Mother Nature rewarded the strong and killed off the weak, regardless of bloodlines. Who cares if fur-covered homo sapiens mounted the rear haunches of their mother or sister in some dark, urine-soaked cave? Could their offspring fight, kill, process meat and make tools and defend the tribe.

    Biblical truths boil down to simple arithmetic. Adam, Eve and one surviving son, the psychopath Caine (smashed his brother’s brains out with a rock). Logic tells us that Caine must have been fucking his mom and his dad was a cuck. Is all of mankind the offspring of a murdering psychopath?? That explains everything. Keep in mind, back in the biblical day’s Lot survived the drone strike of Sodom and Gomorrah (via divine intervention) – held up in a cave, got drunk and his filthy slag daughters took turns raping him. So we are all descendants of INCEST —If you believe your Creator. “Only Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives were safe on the Ark. Except these 8 people [1 Peter 3:20], every other person died.” Hmmm….so at the very minimum we had a great deal of First Cousin fuckery going on to repopulate the earth.

    Now mankind has moved from caves and lives in megacities with social services, insane asylums, halfway houses, salvation army, church outreach, homeless shelters, social security, Medicaid, and medicare. A cripple, mental or otherwise, can live a long happy life and possibly even get laid and pass on their genes.

    The good news is that our incest lineage continues to produce genetic mutations –producing a never-ending stream of psychopaths and sociopaths keeping our political positions fully staffed with people fucked up enough to dispassionately cull the herd when needed, via endless wars. Again, mother nature reveals herself as a bloody bitch.

    Mutations = Evolution = Progress and possible advancement of the species in the wild. Most mutations in nature are immediate death sentences. The rare ones evolve us.

    Man is at a crossroads. No longer subject to the evolutionary forces of Mother Nature, man can now design and reinvent man. We can choose our evolutionary next leap.

    I think the next gigantic leap will be discovering the gene sequence that turns off the aging clock. Think about that. Imagine the very wealthy having access to gene therapy that stops or even reverses the aging process?

    Immortality awaits us all. As far as we know, no other animal species is conscious or sentient. No other species has the foreknowledge of their own gradual decay and inescapable death. No other species ponders the death of their loved ones. No other species is locked inside a meat suit with a trillion nerve endings all recording the aches and pains of a decomposing body and mind –yet tortured by memories of our youth. We are all dead men walking. Some walks are very short, some a little longer —the worms feast on us all in due time.

    Imagine being free of that death sentence by slow decomposition. Imagine living forever at the ripe age of 28.

    I for one hope to see this in my lifetime. All you old fuckers on this feed will be long dead.


  115. Checheno says:

    Hi Sean. I’m sorry to totally change the subject and be impertinent, but you said a long time ago that Hitler criticized the Protestant Reformation, if it is not a big problem, what is the source of that?
    I have read almost all the published biographies of the Führer and have found no such thing. Irving in his last book provides very interesting facts about Hitler’s Catholicism. In Giesler’s memoirs there is a vague mention of this.


    Toland mentions that Hitler was critical of the Los-von-Rom-Bewegung movement. Volker Ullrich mentions that Hess believed that Hitler was a “good Catholic” in the early days of the NSDAP. On top of that, he distances himself from Ludendorff’s attacks on the Catholic Church.
    Brendan Simms, from my point of view, presented selective and decontextualized sources to try to make Hitler look like some kind of anti-Catholic scientistic. Stolfi is more moderate on this.

    It is a shame that to this day all Hitler biographers ignore recent research by Derek Hastings, Kevin Spicer, and many German authors on the NSDAP and Catholicism. Today, even pathetic slanderers like Kershaw accept that the idea of ​​a “occultist” Third Reich was the product of revisionism by the Jesuits and Christian Democrats to hide their churches’ support for the Neues Deutschland.
    Hitler is known to despise the occultism, even saying that Rosenberg’s book was rubbish. Not to mention that anthroposophist groups suffered persecution from 1941. As early as 1935 theosophical pamphlets were banned, in 37 Freemasonry was banned. The Flight of Hess had a great weight when starting the chase against these idiots.

    Peter Staudenmaier argues that the only occult influence that remained in the Third Reich after 1941 was biodynamic agriculture. I agree, but I think that the Reich’s agricultural policy is more of a mixture of social Darwinism and Haeckel’s ecology, that Darré and Ohlendorf were attracted to this, does not mean that they support the occult. In fact, he would say that this was very scientific.

    I recommend reading too

    Anthroposophen in der Zeit des Nationalsozialismus: (1933-1945) – Uwe Werner

    Anthroposophie in Geschichte und Gegenwart – Rahel Uhlenhoff

    • Replies: @Sean
    , @Patrick McNally
  116. Checheno says:

    Dude, you are a pathetic nerd who keeps arguing on a supposedly hating website. Why don’t you try to get a pussy?
    Or maybe it’s too late for that, because you’re an obese boomer with schizophrenia lmfao
    It’s over for you, the future will be National Socialist.
    Heil America First!

    • Replies: @Incitatus
  117. Anon[352] • Disclaimer says:


    Truth is only hated by Liars, and those that fear Truth being promulgated.

    So why, do you suppose, my wholly Truthful examination of the Jews’ 45 centuries of inbreeding, with the resulting very Truthful (actual) imagery of several Jewish persons demonstrating the effect, in a comment right here, would be suppressed by none other than… Ron Unz.

    So… does Mr. Unz hate Truth as well?

    Seems to be the case, in this instance, as well as others.

    Go ahead and suppress this too, Mr. Unz. Register yourself in the Book of Life as one who hates Truth, or it’s revelation.

    The Spirit of Truth (AKA the Holy Spirit, 3rd person of Trinity) notes all such persons. You can hide yourself on earth, only from those that cannot see. The Holy Spirit sees all, and records it.

  118. @Dave Bowman

    Konrad Lorenz elaborated at length on this (“Das sogenannte Böse“, recommended).


    – As it is counterproductive to kill your own, all armed critters (the original wehrhaft is impossible to translate in this context) have developed mechanisms to curb it – “ritualized” fighting ending with surrender, with death only accidental i.e. doves caged together kill each other while wolves never do. That lions taking over a pride kill the young has a very specific purpose: The dames are ready and willing much quicker that way, and life is short 😀 (bears do the same). Lorenz argues that man has neither antlers nor fangs so not much need for an unconditional killing inhibition (like wolves) and that our technical (“extrasomatic”) evolution has left the reflexes necessary to control it in the dust. Otto Koenig (whom I had the honor of hearing before the feminists got him in an early grave) put it thusly: “We are 10,000 generations paleolithic and 200 since; what did you expect?”

    – But even if our killing inhibition is largely conditioned it is hard to overcome; this is where “dehumanization” (“goyim, Krauts, barbaroi, hajjis, gooks etc.”) and “distancing” come into play. How many of your noble drone operators can kill a baby with their hands? Hell, they´d freak out at the mere suggestion – never mind what they are doing is objectively worse (and even blacks prefer guns when available). The need for War-as-video game is testament the inhibition is the normal.

    – The anthropologists tell us war as we know it started with agriculture i.e. investment in turf (nomads simply move on when confronted by stronger opposition); the closest to “ritual” war came the ancient Greeks (among themselves) – outside the planting season, short, decisive, with no unnecessary casualties or undue disturbance of the infrastructure. The opposite philosophy (from Samson´s foxes to David´s use of unfair weapons) prevailed.

    But I digress 😉 . Ad hominem and anecdote get us nowhere – a simple “OT” would have sufficed.

    • Replies: @Dave Bowman
  119. JackOH says:

    T-shirt for the Million Geek Silent March in DC and NYC:


    (Use a compensated actor’s likeness. Rube expression; right hair and make-up; good studio photog.)

    Purpose? Political experimentation.

    Is solidarity-building even possible among folks, such as those commenting here, who broadly agree there are serious problems here in America, but disagree on much else?

    By Silent March, I mean rhetorical minimalism as a foundational principle in organization and in communications with the media. No articulated grievances, no bullet-pointed programs, etc.

  120. @Thomm

    … That is not some big secret…

    1) I did not suggest at any point that anything was a “big secret”. You have entirely misunderstood the point of my comment. The purpose of my comment was to point out that there is a perfectly valid REASON why most commenters here take the view that Jews are NOT White. You appear to have completely ignored that information.

    … how you reconcile that with SaneClownPosse’s assertion…

    2) I have no interest in “reconciling” SaneClownPosse’s – or anyone else’s – assertions. I have no idea what SaneClownPosse is talking about. I did not respond to his comment – you did. None of the named individuals are Jews. As far as I can see, there is nothing else to say.

  121. Weaver says:
    @Anonymous Jew

    You understand, harmful recessive traits are only removed if selected against. That can’t happen if they aren’t expressed. Eventually, they surface regardless.

    Some Muslims and Jews both seem to marry close kin, which seems to have a negative impact, but they likely aren’t selected against. If a weak child is born, he’s protected in those cultures. Iceland, again, is an easy example of where we do not see genetic problems from close marriage. Iceland, presumably, has a history of selecting against harmful traits when they arise. Iceland might also select in favour of beneficial traits.

    It’s an interesting topic with regard to identity, specifically whether ethnic groups should remain separate from others or not. Historically, human groups were likely more like Iceland. Today, there are many more humans, a great deal more transience.

    You join in attacking Muslims, but Jews have an even greater reputation for inbreeding. Jews kept separate from the rest of Europe for hundreds of years, in sometimes tiny communities, with sometimes with very high birth rates.

    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
  122. @nokangaroos

    Since not a single word of your – or Konrad Lorenz’s – comments addresses a single element of any part of my previous comment – my response to OldBrownFool containing proofs against his nonsensical claim about the “human taboo against killing” – you’ll excuse me if I simply ignore yours.

  123. Sean says:

    Pages 98, 102, 503 in Hitler: Only The World was Enough by Professor Brendan Simms

    Hitler’s parents had to get special permission for their consanguineous marriage. Charles Darwin was remarkably inbred too. I am backing off from internet commenting so forgive me if I don’t continue to engage. In his book Humankind Bregman says the key to the fighting power of the German army was Kameradschaft

    in German means a bond between soldiers or those who have similar opinions and are in friendship. The word is similar to comradeship, camaraderie or fellowship

    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
  124. Incitatus says:

    “Dude, you are a pathetic nerd who keeps arguing on a supposedly hating website. Why don’t you try to get a pussy?
    Or maybe it’s too late for that, because you’re an obese boomer with schizophrenia lmfao
    It’s over for you, the future will be National Socialist.
    Heil America First!”

    That you preface your rant with “Dude” says all that needs be said of you.

    Get a life, troll.

  125. @Weaver

    Jews and Muslims aren’t analogous regarding inbreeding. Modern Jews – like other modern Westerners – don’t practice first cousin marriage. Ashkenazi Jews don’t have the rampant medical issues you see in Pakistanis, Emirati et al. Jews are more similar to the Amish, Icelanders, rural Italian populations and many others that are relatively genetically uniform/isolated but not suffering from inbreeding depression or harmful recessive traits.

    Ashkenazis do have certain unique genetic diseases, but it’s not from first-cousin inbreeding and instead is caused by something altogether different. See here for a full explanation:

    • Replies: @Weaver
  126. @Checheno

    Regarding Hitler’s views on Christianity, the 2 people who played the greatest role in fashioning Hitler’s thinking were George Schoenerer and Karl Lueger. George Schoenerer was a fanatical ideologue focused heavily on race, while Karl Lueger was a crafty narcissist who used Christianity as a marketing tool. Originally Lueger had joined up with an atheist society and was looking at that as a way of promoting his career. After some thought Lueger decided that becoming a Christian would sell better and he went with that. Lueger never tried to make too much of marking himself as Catholic versus Protestant but instead crafted a message which could appeal to a mass-audience.

    This was exactly what appealed to Hitler about Lueger. He saw Lueger as the first man of the Right who understood the concept of a mass-movement. On all fundamental ideological questions Hitler affirmed Schoenerer’s general stance, but saw Schoenerer as naive building a movement. Hitler actually took a soft stance towards Schoenerer’s most devastating errors, indicating his overall sympathy with Schoenerer’s viewpoint. But he saw Lueger as a necessary corrective to Schoenerer.

    It was Schoenerer who brought the Pan-German League into alliance with the break-from-Rome movement which had been started by Protestants. Schoenerer himself was completely contemptuous of Protestants and Catholics alike, but felt that it would be politically useful if all Austrians abandoned Catholicism in favor of Protestantism. Bismarck had specifically avoided bringing Austria into the Second Reich because Prussia was markedly Protestant, Austria distinctively Catholic, while the other German states such as Bavaria had more of mixed set of influences. So it was easier for Bismarck to establish Prussia as the leader of a collection of German states which excluded Austria.

    The Pan-German League in Austria was heart-broken over this decision of Bismarck’s and longed for a way to bring Austria into the German Reich. Schoenerer’s alliance with the break-from-Rome movement among the Protestants was an amateurish attempt to facilitate this which blew up badly. Not only did Schoenerer alienate all of the Catholics who had previously supported him, but he came off badly with the Protestants as well. It was obvious to everyone that Schoenerer simply viewed the Protestants as a political football to be used against Catholicism.

    Nowhere does Hitler indicate the slightest theological dispute with Schoenerer on these issues. Hitler’s assessment of Schoenerer on this can be paraphrased as “It was worse than a religious sin, it was a political snafu.” Lueger was of interest to Hitler precisely because he knew how to avoid such political snafus. It’s noteworthy that Hitler’s criticisms of Lueger focus instead Lueger’s willingness to support Jewish conversions to Christianity. Hitler is here much closer to Schoenerer than to Lueger.

    But Lueger is not really someone who one would be drawn if one had a real theological interest in Christianity. Lueger’s skill which Hitler praises him for was simply in being able to play off of the Christian sentiments which were already there among the masses while guiding people into a new kind of political movement. Lueger himself was viewed with some suspicions by the Catholic Church in Austria because they recognized him as a political operative first and foremost of all, one who had even begun his career as an atheist and then flipped over inexplicably. For Hitler all of this was fine except that Lueger occasionally took his own Christian message a bit too literally when he accepted the conversions of Jews.

    Hitler was certainly never a Christian of any type, neither Catholic nor Protestant. One statement from the Table Talk which occasionally draws scorn from people who claim that Hitler was a Christian is where Hitler asserts that Christianity will probably die out within a century or two and that he looks forward to that. Contrary to what is sometimes claimed, this statement is fully compatible with Mein Kampf (where discusses Schoenerer and Lueger as 2 guiding influences). If the Table Talk presented Hitler as announcing an imminent shutdown of Christianity then that would be dubious.

    From Hitler’s comparative discussion in Mein Kampf of Schoenerer and Lueger it is obvious that Hitler viewed Christianity as a long term problem which was not to rushed but kept soberly in mind. For the immediate future in the 1940s it would have been politically reckless to exert an overt pressure for shutting down Christianity. But when mapping an arc which goes a century or two into the future then this idea of Christianity eventually disappearing would square very well with Schoenerer’s view, which was Hitler’s view too.

    Hitler certainly was not interested in any occult ideas per se. All of Hitler’s core beliefs were about race, as was true with Schoenerer. Any other kind of mystic mumbo jumbo was to be evaluated upon political utility alone. In this respect Lueger’s approach to using Christianity as a tool was far more pertinent than any other kind of pagan occult muck.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  127. wootendw says:

    Dangerous recessive traits that might be passed on if Icelandics continue to marry other Icelandics: Blonde hair, blue eyes.

    Blond hair, blue eyes and fair skin are not dangerous. People with those traits produce more Vitamin D from less sunlight and are thus better protected from many pathogens, both viral and bacterial. Vitamin D also protects people from many forms of cancer, although fair skinned people are more susceptible skin cancer.

    • Replies: @AnonfromTN
    , @Weaver
  128. @wootendw

    Blond hair, blue eyes and fair skin are not dangerous

    Fair skin is an evolutionary adaptation to low sunlight, to produce enough vitamin D, as you say. Humans are the only apes living in higher latitudes, so we are the only ape species who need fair skin. All other apes live in tropics and have blackish skin, which is OK for vitamin D production only when you get lots of sunlight.

    To the best of my knowledge, blue (and other non-black/brown, i.e., pigment-less) eyes and blond hair are evolutionary neutral. At least, our cousins apes have hair of different colors, from black (chimps, bonobos, young gorillas) to red (orangs) and silver (mature gorilla males).

  129. Weaver says:

    I appreciate the reply. I was making a point.

    In other words: The reason we keep seeing articles against incest is I suspect some here (not Ron Unz specifically) want northwest Europeans to marry unrelated humans and so eliminate the distinction and heritage of northwest Europeans. We do see recessive genes express eventually; they aren’t removed unless selected against. Within a small nation, you would see such expression fairly often until removed.

    So, the point of my post, if it wasn’t blatantly obvious by now, was to defend the existence of northwest Europeans. By extension, I want other groups in the world to be distinct, be from somewhere. I think it gives people pride, a sense of worth, rootedness, and belonging.

    I’m very much against inbreeding but for social reasons.

    If genetic technology allows for the identification of harmful genes, after they’re known to be harmful, then it might be positive to select eggs/sperm where those genes weren’t passed down. So, instead of having to express and select against genes, it might be possible to select before they’re expressed.

    But mistakes/abuse would inevitably happen with such tech. Some genes would be declared harmful that aren’t, and so forth.

    I think in Western societies, we have few children, and even the weak survive to reproduce, if they so choose. So, there is very weak selection here. Also, the wealthy in the West seem corrupt. Perhaps in every large society they’re corrupt, but if reproduction is aligned solely with wealth, as Social Darwinists wish, we could see a race of vampyres spawn.

  130. Weaver says:
    @Anonymous Jew

    Ty, I’ll read the article, have only skimmed it, but the idea seems to be that Jews have diseases tied to higher intelligence. In other words, they have genes that are both harmful and helpful.

    I certainly don’t expect modern Jews to marry first cousins, but I also suspect modern Jews are losing their edge, which is more than just genetic.

    One quote from the article: “The second is that the Ashkenazim experienced very low inward gene flow, which created a favorable situation for natural selection.” So, you have similar gene overlap, just not from inbreeding. That’s been my whole point really. In a small population group, where you have “low inward gene flow,” you’re going to have expression of recessive traits, just as with inbreeding.

    If those same high IQ Jews marry others who don’t overlap, their children might lose some of those genes for intelligence. They’d still be there, but recessive, assuming some are recessive.

    I’ll drop the topic, but no one seems motivated to follow what I’m saying. I have heard of the article you link. If I’ve read it before, I hadn’t read it recently, will read it.

  131. Anonymous[365] • Disclaimer says:

    As said before, reed Ludovici.

    It’s a matter of hygiene.

  132. jxh says:

    Obviously inbreeding is a problem, but probably as drastic as is perceived (i.e. the effects of cousing inbreeding is vastly less than sibling crossing ). Animal breeders generally use a calculation producing ‘coefficient of inbreeding). Here are some examples:

    Parent/offspring: 25%
    Full sibling: 25%
    Grandparent/grandchild: 12.5%
    Half sibling: 12.5%
    Great grandparents/great grandchild: 6.25%
    First cousin: 6.25%

    It’s my guess that the cultural/religious prohibitions of incest have to do with the psychological fault lines it introduces into the family and the tribe (the same reason that adultery traditionally a big deal, even though it causes no real genetic issues). Groups that were constantly fighting each other over mates were at a strong disadvantage against more cohesive groups.

  133. JackOH says:
    @Patrick McNally

    Patrick, can you suggest any reading that sums up German diplomacy from Bismarck to Ribbentrop? I’d be interested especially in an author with academic credentials writing for the general-interest, reasonably educated reader. Maybe it’s too much to ask, but also someone who can keep his biases in check, or at least acknowledge them in front matter.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  134. @JackOH

    I don’t know that I could think of anything offhand which covers such a scope from Bismarck to Ribbentrop. Just in relation to the much more narrow issues which I had been mentioning above I would think of:

    Andrew Whiteside, The Socialism of Fools: Georg Ritter von Schonerer and Austrian Pan-Germanism

    John Boyd, Political Radicalism in Late Imperial Vienna: Origins of the Christian Social Movement, 1848-1897; Culture and Political Crisis in Vienna: Christian Socialism in Power, 1897-1918

    The first by Whiteside is obviously about Schoenerer and his movement while the 2-volume work by Boyd deals with Lueger and his work. These are more relevant for describing the origins of Hitler’s primary thinking at the abstract level, personal idiosyncrasies aside (Hitler certainly had many of those too).

    • Thanks: JackOH
  135. TREG says:

    Im interested to learn if there is a sexually attractive preference bias in humans. My guess is there are 2 major sexually attractive preferences within human nature…..
    A) an “in-family/Tribe group bias” vs …
    B) a rarer “out-family/Tribes group bias.

    Those in A) can also be divided still further into those 1) who just find the opposite sex sexually attractive in own family/Tribe sexually attractive..(English guys find English girls attractive, German guys find German girls attractive,etc)… and 2) those that look for similar features of themselves reflected in the opposite sex as sexually attractive. I call this the ‘Nelson Effect’ after a tall very attractive man i knew in college who lighted up when there was a “female version” of himself was around. Comments such as “gee you two look like you could be brother and sister” and “Are you two cousins?” did not bother him, but delighted him and usually her as well.

    I myself found myself leaning towards B), sexually attracted to the out family/tribe group. Being in this group is certainly a minority. People in this group only light up when they are “far from home” and in another country- but a country that is not “that far” from being related.

    Even in this group we can see a difference between those that like and prefer those still distantly related family/tribe to family/tribe, …. . like Greek to Italian, or Spaniard to French, or Bulgarian to Pole… vs …. the very rare person whose sexual preference jumped to a major racial group, like Orientals to African, or white to African.

    • Replies: @AnonfromTN
    , @littlereddot
  136. @TREG

    or white to African.

    In fact, white guys are attracted to oriental girls about 100 times more often than to African girls.

  137. @Sean

    Exactly. That probably goes a long way to explain why fighting units of the German ground forces were largely composed of soldiers from the same cities/towns/cantons.

  138. @Mefobills

    Asking for friend? Or a relative?

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  139. @AnonFromTN

    The COLORING is not recessive, nor is the TRAIT, strictly speaking, but the GENES for them are.

    Blond and blue traits could certainly be helpful, harmful, or neutral depending on the environment. Certainly, light skin is disadvantageous where the sun burns, and light skin where sunlight is weaker. There are pros and cons to any traits and genes.

  140. @Sean

    Why mention the McCoys? The McCoys weren’t the Jukes or Kallikaks, and neither were the Hatfields. Actually, neither were the Jukes or Kallikaks.

    I have never come across credible or reliable allegations of incest among the McCoys, so how are they relevant to this subject? I suppose any Southern or Appalachian people are inbred hayseeds, in your imagination, but the pseudonymous Jukes and Kallikaks were from New York, New Jersey, and New England.

  141. I think its quite obvious that domesticated dogs and cats actually benefit from incest.
    Traits, previously unwanted, such as dwarfishness, or pointed ears, or other strange features, will cause a breeder to focus on that animal, and that animal will have more offspring as a result.

    Thus a dog will be more inclined to mate with its relations rather than other dogs.

    For the most part humans have a strong dislike of incest, but there are still cases where incest is common, for example in the rich: they stop wealth from bing spread and increase the chance of the survival of their line by marrying in.

  142. Mefobills says:
    @D guy jjjjj

    Cousin marriage or closely related relations were the norm for most of history. Humans were hunter gatherers and there is only so far you can walk per day to court a female.

    My question is legitimate with regards to small populations.

  143. @Anonymous

    In defense of the male Whittakers…maybe their sisters were hot….

  144. @Mefobills

    The minimal colony size on mars is clearly zero, because that is all we have there now.

    Never mind a public policy for good genetic fitness. If we do ever send anyone to mars, we’ll make sure(as we have begun to do everywhere else), that we send the least genetically fit.

  145. Corrupt says:
    @Anonymous Jew

    “It’s hypothetically possible (and statistically nearly impossible) that your aunt and mother share 100% of their genes”

    Unless they’re twins (identical)?

    • Replies: @Anonymous Jew
  146. That is sure one handsome Rhodesian Ridgeback in the picture. Whenever I see one in person I always consider them to be the most regal of dogs.

  147. @Anonymous

    Looks like the British Royal family.

  148. @Corrupt

    Yes, of course. I’ve always been fascinated by identical twins. If your mom has an identical twin sister then, genetically speaking, your aunt is also your mother and your cousins from your aunt are genetically your half siblings.

  149. Anon[497] • Disclaimer says:

    This college essay of Mr. Unz’ reminds me of NONE of my college papers.

    No wonder today he’s influencing a good chunk of Western civilization, whereas I’m a retired drone sitting around my apt. reading his amazing stuff.

    Regarding the topic at hand, I have a typically low-IQ response: incest is definitely a distasteful subject, but I doubt I’d feel that way if my sister were Pamela Anderson…

  150. @TREG

    There is a cultural aspect to this too. In Indian culture, fair skin is strongly correlated to social status. So Indian men have a strong preference for women who will bear them lighter skinned children.

    So here in Singapore, it is a common thing for Indian men to go after yellow skinned ethnic Chinese women. But very very few would go for brown skinned Malay/Austronesian women.

  151. @Tucker

    with the advent of robots doing human work, driverless cars and more, the need for genocide likely has caught up and passed the introduction of itemized, sequential perversions. They are forced to reduce population before incest and bestiality are normalized into routine sexual behavior.

    It is at least time to break up the media monopolies…all of them

    (Though I must note: incest in Japan has been legal for a long time with a short break a while ago. I don’t know that the Khazars had anything to do with that)

Current Commenter

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 Ron Unz Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings